Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
21
"Modern scholars" do no such thing. You're talking about "modern" believers in the single-bullet theory (SBT), not "modern scholars" in general, because plenty of modern scholars view the SBT as a silly myth, and for good reason.

For one thing, in 2023, the most sophisticated, data-intensive SBT trajectory analysis ever done proved the SBT is impossible. It proved that JFK and Connally were never in a position to allow a trajectory back to the sixth-floor window. I refer, of course, to the 2023 SBT trajectory study done by the respected forensic engineering firm Knott Laboratory.

Knott Lab's experts conducted a high-definition laser scan of Dealey Plaza to generate a point cloud of up to 2 million points per second, to accurately measure point-to-point anywhere in the scene. Using a 3D laser scanner (Leica RTC360), Knott Lab's experts did 36 laser scans of Dealey Plaza, producing a digital reconstruction of the plaza that has 851 million data points. No other SBT trajectory analysis has included such a detailed digital model of the plaza and of JFK's and Connally's positions in the limousine.

FYI, Knott Lab's SBT trajectory analysis has been endorsed by the the Henry C. Lee Institute of Forensic Science and the journal Forensic. Indeed, Forensic did their own documentary on the JFK case using Knott Lab's SBT trajectory study.

Finally, it bears repeating that we now know that the back wound had no exit point, that there was no hole through JFK's tie, that there was no nick on either edge of the tie knot, and that numerous photos show that JFK's tie knot was neatly centered in the middle of the collar band during the Dallas motorcade.

JFK's Clothing Proves the Single-Bullet Theory Is Impossible
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MAgWA0frOLVeWY6ok9nzdrgpRN4Wv1AL/view

The SBT was destroyed way back when we learned that there was no hole through the tie and no nick on the tie knot's left edge. Poof, there went the SBT up in smoke right then and there. But you SBT believers, acting curiously like Flat Earthers or 9/11 Truthers, simply refuse to process cold hard fact that abjectly refutes your theory.

Hey, Einstein. If the back wound had no exit and the throat wound had no exit, there should have been two bullets in the body. There were zero.
22
The first image comes from the HSCA analysis and they have the SBF happening at about Z190 but modern Scholars have the SBF occurring as Kennedy emerges from behind the Stemmons sign from Zapruder's POV.

"Modern scholars" do no such thing. You're talking about "modern" believers in the single-bullet theory (SBT), not "modern scholars" in general, because plenty of modern scholars view the SBT as a silly myth, and for good reason.

For one thing, in 2023, the most sophisticated, data-intensive SBT trajectory analysis ever done proved the SBT is impossible. It proved that JFK and Connally were never in a position to allow a trajectory back to the sixth-floor window. I refer, of course, to the 2023 SBT trajectory study done by the respected forensic engineering firm Knott Laboratory.

Knott Lab's experts conducted a high-definition laser scan of Dealey Plaza to generate a point cloud of up to 2 million points per second, to accurately measure point-to-point anywhere in the scene. Using a 3D laser scanner (Leica RTC360), Knott Lab's experts did 36 laser scans of Dealey Plaza, producing a digital reconstruction of the plaza that has 851 million data points. No other SBT trajectory analysis has included such a detailed digital model of the plaza and of JFK's and Connally's positions in the limousine.

FYI, Knott Lab's SBT trajectory analysis has been endorsed by the the Henry C. Lee Institute of Forensic Science and the journal Forensic. Indeed, Forensic did their own documentary on the JFK case using Knott Lab's SBT trajectory study.

Finally, it bears repeating that we now know that the back wound had no exit point, that there was no hole through JFK's tie, that there was no nick on either edge of the tie knot, and that numerous photos show that JFK's tie knot was neatly centered in the middle of the collar band during the Dallas motorcade.

JFK's Clothing Proves the Single-Bullet Theory Is Impossible
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MAgWA0frOLVeWY6ok9nzdrgpRN4Wv1AL/view

The SBT was destroyed way back when we learned that there was no hole through the tie and no nick on the tie knot's left edge. Poof, there went the SBT up in smoke right then and there. But you SBT believers, acting curiously like Flat Earthers or 9/11 Truthers, simply refuse to process cold hard fact that abjectly refutes your theory.

23
It's called waving. After Z195 he stopped waving and began lowering his right arm, a movement he continued until Z226 when both arms suddenly raised dramatically. I don't see anything odd about it.
So after smiling and waving, he assumed the grimace just for Zapruder at z225 and not an 18th of a second earlier?:



How do you know that the movement of his arms at z226 is immediately after he is shot?  Is it not possible that his sensation of something being wrong might have occurred in two stages - the second being when he found he couldn't breathe normally?

There is definitely a change in his hand, arm and head between z187 and z207:
24
For those who want to view the HSCA's skull-damage diagrams, they are as follows: HSCA Exhibit F-58, HSCA Exhibit F-66, HSCA Exhibit F-65, Figure 29 (7 HSCA 125), Figure 30 (7 HSCA 126), and Figure 31 (7 HSCA 127).

HSCA Exhibits F-58, F-65, F-66 were not published in the HSCA volumes but were placed in the National Archives. John Hunt scanned them at the National Archives. They can be found in Hunt's article:

https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/ADemonstrableImpossibility/ADemonstrableImpossibility.htm#_edn38

https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/ADemonstrableImpossibility/images/fig_h8_lrg.jpg

https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/ADemonstrableImpossibility/images/fig_h16_lrg.jpg

https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/ADemonstrableImpossibility/images/fig_h4_lrg.jpg

HSCA Figures 29, 30, and 31 were published in Volume 7 of the HSCA volumes and can be found here:

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0068a.htm

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0068b.htm

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0069a.htm

You can see that these diagrams depict no missing frontal bone, except for an extremely small defect consisting of half of the small hole that straddles the coronal suture about 2.5 cm/1.0 inch above the squamous suture.

Even Dr. McDonnel's analysis of the enhanced skull x-rays describes far more missing frontal bone than this, not to mention his analysis of the unenhanced skull x-rays, which describes even more missing frontal bone. The FPP simply ignored both of Dr. McDonnel's analyses regarding the amount of missing frontal bone.

Dr. Angel correctly identified the large triangular skull fragment as frontal bone, whereas the FPP unbelievably said it was parietal bone. This is especially curious because Dr. Angel was much more qualified in this area than any of the FPP members. Dr. Angel's diagrams show that part of the missing frontal bone extended nearly to the hairline.

Dr. David Mantik has removed all reasonable doubt, if there ever was any, about Dr. Angel's identification of the triangular skull fragment as frontal bone, proving that it can only be frontal bone:

https://themantikview.org/pdf/Robertson.pdf 

You can find Dr. Angel's diagram of the missing frontal bone in Hunt's article and in 7 HSCA 230:

https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/ADemonstrableImpossibility/images/fig_h12_lrg.jpg

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0120b.htm

Anyone who wants to read about the medical and scientific evidence of a frontal shot to the head should read Dr. Mantik's paper "The Medical Evidence Decoded," from which I quote the following excerpt:

Tom Robinson, the funeral home employee who restored JFK's head, described a wound, about 1/4 inch across, above the right eye, near the hairline, where he had to place wax to disguise it. He added that this wound was so close to the hairline that the hair could easily cover it, which may explain why more witnesses did not see it. And Joe O'Donnell [White House photographer], who viewed autopsy photographs within the first week, witnessed an obvious wound above the right eye in a photograph, which he interpreted as the entry for the bullet that had caused the large hole at the right rear.

But the most objective evidence for precisely such a frontal shot lies on the skull X-rays. It should first be noted that the trail of debris obviously does not match a bullet entry near the external occipital protuberance (EOP), the site preferred by the pathologists. . . . (My own view is that one headshot did enter near the EOP, just as the pathologists said, but that there was also a subsequent, frontal shot.)

Instead current, lone-gunman advocates now necessarily support the HSCA's much higher entry wound (the red spot).But this does not work, either. First, the lateral x-ray (Figure 11) shows the 6 .5 mm fragment lying one centimeter below the "entry" site (which lies where the skull has been fractured), but the trail of debris is noticeably higher than even this "entry" site and even higher than the 6.5 mm object. No lone-gunman supporter has ever explained this discrepancy: it is simply ignored.

Even worse, though, the Warren Commission claimed (17 H 257) that the nose and tail of this bullet were found inside the limousine, meaning that this supposed bullet cross section must have come from inside the bullet (sic). Although no ballistics expert has ever seen a cross section from the outside of a bullet deposited at an entry site, the Warren Commission has done better than that. By placing an internal cross section not at the entry site (but one centimeter inferior to the entry site), they have surpassed all prior case in two separate measures at the same time, a truly remarkable achievement.

Although no proposed, posterior entry site matches this trail of metallic debris, on the other hand, a bullet that entered the right forehead, near the hairline, directly over the outer edge of the right eye socket, would match this bullet trail with remarkable precision. Furthermore, a close look at the frontal view on the diagram that Boswell drew for the ARRB (Figure 9A-D) shows a notch in the frontal bone at just this site (where the bullet entered).

As further confirmation that this notch is no accident, examine Boswell's sketch from the night of the autopsy (Figure 4A). The notch is also there!

When I examined the frontal x-ray, I used a bright light to highlight the outside of the skull. I could then easily see the top edge of the remaining frontal bone (high in the forehead).

Furthermore, with the optical densitometer, I measured the transmission of light above and below this edge over a long distance. The area above the (supposed) bone edge was darker (and the optical density values higher), implying less bone, whereas the area below it was lighter (the optical density values were lower), which implied residual frontal bone.

These measurements therefore verified what I had seen with my naked eyes with the bright light: I had identified the edge of the frontal bone. I could now trace the remaining frontal bone with good accuracy. This sketch is shown in Figure 12, the same sketch that was published in 1995, well before Boswell made his sketch for the ARRB. The same notch is also shown in my x-ray based sketch. This notch is therefore a critical piece of evidence: the frontal bullet knocked out a small fragment of bone here.

In summary, the X-rays, especially in conjunction with Boswell's sketches, provide powerful confirmation of a shot from the front. Five lines of evidence support such a frontal shot, near the hairline, above the outer border of the right orbit:

1. A wound was seen in the scalp (attested to by Kilduff, Crenshaw, Stewart, McClelland, Akin, Kantor, and O’Donnell).

2. The notch in the frontal bone was still recalled by Boswell for the ARRB.

3. The notch is actually seen on the X-rays.

4. The trail of metallic debris on the X-rays is more consistent with such a frontal shot than with it is with any posterior shot proposed to date.

5. Close examination of fragments in this debris strongly suggests that, overall; the larger ones are located closer to the rear. This would be expected for a shot from the front (but not for a shot from the rear) because the larger ones initially contained more energy (energy is proportional to mass); they should have traveled farther. (pp. 35-38)
25
The JFK Assassination - Discussion & Debate / Re: The First Shot
« Last post by Andrew Mason on Today at 05:23:05 PM »
Andrew has painted himself in to a corner by fully committing to z312/313 as being the final shot of the three, clearly audible shots reported by over 160 witnesses.
JFK's reaction to being shot through the throat (and Brachial Plexus) is for his hands to fly upwards, towards his chin, at an incredible speed. It is clearly a neuromuscular/reflex reaction.
This indicates he was shot milliseconds before this movement.
The first reliable visible signs of this movement are seen in z225, so the shot passed through JFK only 2 or 3 Z-frames before this (z222/223).
The problem for Andrew is that there is a shade less than 5 seconds between z222/223 and z312/313.
He believes there was a significant gap between the first and second shots (and that the second and third shots were close together) - shot, pause, shot, shot.
This is impossible if you accept that the head shot was the last shot. There would be no time for a pause between the first two shots.

How does he overcome this problem?
By using the worst methodology possible.
He fixes the last shot at z312/313 then uses the time it takes to get off a shot with the MC (around 2.5 seconds ish) and calculates his way backwards from z312/313.
He then has his Z-frames (first shot z190, second shot z272, third shot z312/313)

After he has got his Z-frames he then, and only then, looks for evidence to support his calculations!!
Not quite.  I was just following the evidence and looking at the zfilm to see where the second shot fit.  The key is the shot pattern - the second being after the midpoint between 1 and 3. With a first shot just before z202 and the third at z312-313, the midpoint would have been around z256.  JBC starts laying back onto Nellie by z280. The shot had to be perceptible amount of time after the midpoint for so many people to recall the difference in spacing. So that pretty much leaves the high z260s to the mid z270s. That fits with the evidence of Altgens, Hickey, Greer, Gayle Newman, Powers.  Based on the change in JBC's motion (Nellie recalled that he recoiled from the shot) which starts at z271-272 and the change in position of the wrist/hat between those frames, supported by the movement of the left sunvisor between those two frames, that is where I put the second shot.  It may have been just before z271 or between z271 and z272. If it was just before z272 was exposed and the third shot was just before z313 was exposed, that puts the two shots 41 frames apart, which is 2.24 seconds apart.

Quote
He doesn't use the evidence to reach a conclusion.
He already has his conclusion and then cherry-picks evidence to support this conclusion.

It is a doomed method that led to a doomed theory.
However, this has not stopped him from constantly promoting this dead theory. It is his creation, after all.
I didn't have to cherry pick the shot spacing evidence or the evidence that JFK was struck by the first and third shots.  You have ignored the evidence that the last shot was the head shot and base your conclusion on the few witnesses who thought there may have been a shot after the head shot. That is not cherry-picking?
26
The JFK Assassination - Discussion & Debate / Re: The First Shot
« Last post by Andrew Mason on Today at 05:03:32 PM »
Well, you're half right about that.
If doesn't matter whether JFK moved or not. Oswald would have to re-aim the rifle because the recoil of the rifle would have taken the rifle off target. He would have had to reacquire his target in the scope and place the cross hairs on his intended target before squeezing off the subsequent shots. 2.3 seconds between shots is the theoretical minimum required for an aimed shot. In reality, Oswald would likely have taken more time. 4-5 seconds between shots seems quite reasonable.
So are you saying a missed aimed shot followed rapidly by a shot without further aiming also has to miss? Why?   Any scenario that happens is always improbable.  The evidence tells you whether it happened. The evidence says that JFK was struck by the first shot; that the last two shots were closer together and the head shot was the last shot. 
27
Translation: "I still don't care, or at least I say don't care, because I have no idea how to explain the evidence that you're presenting.

I'm not presenting the medical evidence. That's your gig. You did write in the last line of your previous post in this thread the following:

"Notice that the WC believers who are posting in this thread are making no attempt to explain the evidence I'm presenting."

So once again you are trying to shift the burden to ME to explain the assertions YOU made.

The simple fact of the matter which I have explained to you many times is that I am not qualified to interpret the medical evidence from the autopsy which is why I don't try. I leave it to the qualified people to do that and then cite the findings of those people. You aren't qualified to interpret the medical evidence either but that doesn't stop you from trying. .
28
Where does one find these polls on "Europeans"?

Once again, the HSCA said that Oswald fired the shots that killed JFK (you don't believe that) and that:



"Probably" a conspiracy is not demolishing the lone assassin theory. You don't believe "probably" either.

It's amazing how you promote conspiracy beliefs like the HSCA that contradict your other stated beliefs. And then promote another set that contradict those. You explanation is a mish mash of theories that are all at odds with each other. You don't make any sense even if "the Europeans" say so.

One recent example of MTG's duplicity is his endorsement of the HSCA's acoustical evidence that indicated a missed shot was fired from the GK, but then he turns around and tells us that shot didn't miss but hit JFK in the throat.

I wonder if MTG is also a proponent of the headshot coming from the front. That would be interesting given he supports the acoustics panel which concluded only one shot was fired from the GK and three were fired from the TSBD.
29
And still nobody cares.

Translation: "I still don't care, or at least I say I don't care, because I have no idea how to explain the evidence that you're presenting. I know it's ludicrous to claim that three autopsy pathologists, plus the radiologist, 'missed' the high fragment trail or mistook it for the low fragment trail. Of course I know that's preposterous, and I know there's not even a remotely plausible innocent explanation for the fact that there's no low fragment trail on the skull x-rays, but I can't admit these things without demolishing my position on the JFK case.

"And, yes, I know the FPP said the brain photos undeniably refute the EOP entry site, and I know the EOP site must be wrong if the brain photos are authentic, and I know the skull x-rays show far more missing brain than the tiny amount of missing brain shown in the brain photos, but I don't dare admit that the brain photos are fake, even though the autopsy photographer said he did not take them. Come on. We both know that I don't dare admit these things because this would demolish my position on the JFK case.
"


30
Yes, of course. Since the substantial majority of Americans, and also Europeans, reject the lone-gunman theory, well, you know, they just must not know the facts; they must not be informed enough about the case; etc., etc.

Uh-huh. It just can't be that they recognize the lone-gunman theory for what it is: an untenable, implausible theory that was cooked up by a government commission in 1964 to placate the public, whose key findings were rejected by a congressional select committee in 1979, and whose key findings were utterly demolished by previously sealed documents that were released by a federal records review board in the 1990s.
Where does one find these polls on "Europeans"?

Once again, the HSCA said that Oswald fired the shots that killed JFK (you don't believe that) and that:



"Probably" a conspiracy is not demolishing the lone assassin theory. You don't believe "probably" either. And they said they couldn't determine who the conspirators were. You also don't believe that. The BYP are authentic, the X-rays and autopsy photos real and on and on and on.....None of which you believe.

It's amazing how you promote conspiracy beliefs like the HSCA that contradict your other stated beliefs. And then promote another set that contradict those. You explanation is a mish mash of theories that are all at odds with each other and change every other day. You don't make any sense even if you believe "the Europeans" say so.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10