Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10
31
1. McLain's bike was too far back.
2. According to the bike expert and actual rider, McClain, he said motor sound on the dictabelt is from a three wheeled bike.
3. Sheriff Bill Decker saying "hold everything secure" in the exact place where the shots supposedly occurred. Yet Decker was known to have said "hold everything secure" about a minute after the real shots in Dealey Plaza.

Once again you are years behind the information curve. Every one of those claims was refuted years ago.

Steve Barber as seen below is the actual expert on the dictabelt evidence and Steve's initial interest came from when he heard the "hold everything secure" from a recording of the dictabelt and these words were proven to have come way after Dealey Plaza! Go Steve, Go!

So Steve Barber, a drummer, is your "actual expert" on the acoustical evidence?!

How about the HSCA's acoustical experts: BBN's Dr. James Barger, Dr. Jared Wolf, Dr. Scott Robinson, and Dr. Edward Schmidt, and Queen's College's Dr. Mark Weiss and Professor Ernest Aschkenasy? How would you compare Barber's credentials in acoustical science with those of the six HSCA acoustical scientists?

Barber's responses to Dr. Don Thomas's articles on the acoustical evidence are downright laughable.

How about BBN acoustical scientist Dr. Richard Mullen? Dr. Mullen did new research on the acoustical evidence at the request of Dr. Josiah Thompson and proved conclusively with pattern-cross-correlation (PCC) analysis that the Decker "hold everything" transmission is not crosstalk but is an overdub created during the copying process, rendering it irrelevant, and that the Fisher "I'll check" transmission is genuine crosstalk, which proves the gunshot impulse patterns were recorded during the assassination.

Dr. Thompson devotes over 100 pages to this historic new research in his 2020 book Last Second in Dallas. Dr. Mullen wrote Appendix B, ​"Signal Processing Results for Both DPD Audio Files," in the book. Dr. Barger wrote Appendix A, "A​ Quantitative Analysis of Crosstalk Found in Audio Recorded During the JFK Assassination," in the book.

I have pointed out all these facts to you in other threads, but you just ignore and repeat your outdated claims about the acoustical evidence.

The following passages come from Reclaiming History and McClain the actual man behind the supposed Dealey Plaza recording, strongly refutes this deceptive "audio evidence".[SNIP]

Bugliosi blundered all over the place because he didn't understand what he was reading and was determined to reject the acoustical evidence no matter what.

You realize that not one of the members of the NRC/NAS panel that critiqued the acoustical evidence was an acoustical scientist, right? Right?

You realize that the NRC/NAS panel admitted that there's a 93% probability that the timing-movement correlations identified by the BBN scientists between the dictabelt and the recording of the test firing in Dealey Plaza occurred because the dictabelt recorded gunfire in Dealey Plaza, right?

You realize that the NRC/NAS panel admitted there's a 77.7% probability that the 144.9 impulse pattern, identified by Weiss and Aschkenasy as gunfire from the grassy knoll, was in fact gunfire from the knoll, right?

All of this, and much more, flew right over Bugliosi's head, or he just chose to ignore it, just as you keep doing.

For those who want to read the other side of the story on the acoustical evidence, I highly recommend Dr. Thompson's book, and also the following online articles:

"The HSCA’s Acoustical Evidence: Proof of a Second Gunman in the JFK Assassination," by yours truly.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KvdvH8gTqFgMn-2vTI5ppg_egWxRKg9U/view

“Debugging Bugliosi,” by Dr. Don Thomas, https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Essay_-
_Debugging_Bugliosi.html.

“Overview and History of the Acoustical Evidence in the Kennedy Assassination Case,” by Dr. Don Thomas
https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Essay_-_Acoustics_Overview_and_History.html
https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Essay_-_Acoustics_Overview_and_History_-_part_2.html
https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Essay_-_Acoustics_Overview_and_History_-_part_3.html

“Sabato, Sonalysts, and Sophistry,” 2014, by Dr. Don Thomas
https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Essay_-_Sabato_Sonalysts_Sophistry.html.

Another excellent analysis of the acoustical evidence is Dr. David Kaiser's lengthy discussion on the subject in his highly acclaimed book The Road to Dallas (pp. 377-387).
32
Rod Stewart had a hit song titled "Reason to Believe". CTs should have an anthem titled Reason to Disbelieve. They seem to have no interest in figuring out who was responsible of the JFKA . Their whole focus seems to be on coming up with reasons not to believe the WCR. That's why we have so many inanities like Prayer Man, One Glove Cop, Huge Gates, etc. They search High and low for things for which there is no apparent explanation and to them, that is reason enough to dismiss the WC finding that Oswald fired the shots that killed JFK and that there was no credible evidence he had even a single accomplice. It's like they're panning for gold and they get really excited when they find one shiny little yellow flake, not realizing it is fool's gold.

What I never quite "get" is that there seems to be some unwritten rule whereby, no matter how wacky someone and his arguments may be, one must attempt to logically counter those arguments for the 494th time when the appropriate response is "That's absolute nonsense. If you believe that, there is something wrong with your cognitive faculties. You are NOT THINKING CLEARLY AND RATIONALLY." Yes, that does kind of shortcircuit the discussions, but many of them should be shortcircuited. Instead, the absolute worst nonsense, such as Royell's and even MTG's stuff, is humored to the tune of hundreds of responses. I guess that's the "game," and both sides must enjoy it or they wouldn't perpetuate it, but it's truly weird. "Let's go down to the institution and try to convince Fred he's not really Napoleon for the 494th time because ... well, because we have nothing better to do, I guess?" A grasp of the basics of epistemology, logic and logical fallacies, and the psychological literature regarding the conspiracy-prone mindset would make 97% of what CTers say on forums such as this simply go poof. The absurdity is that, just like Napoleonic Fred, they insist YOU are the one who can't think clearly and see the deep truths they see - even though this too is symptomatic of the conspiracy-prone mindset. I think I've now actually said all this 494 times! What the hell is the matter with ME???  :D
33
Just this year, the Patterson film has been pretty thoroughly debunked, to the extent that even True Believers have lot faith:

https://skepticalinquirer.org/exclusive/documentarys-devastating-bigfoot-debunking/

Cryptozoology, as it's called, is one of the areas of weirdness that just never captured my attention.
34
Did the independent witness who thought all the shots came from the GK corroborate the other independent witnesses who thought all the shots came from the GK.
You need to provide a specific example to determine if there is a common observation.  From what I have seen there was no clear observation by anyone who reported the knoll as the source of the shots. They reported confusion as to the direction of the source of the shots.  For example Mary Woodward and Austin Miller are often listed as GK ear-witnesses, but here is what they actually said:

Mary Woodward (24 H 520):



Austin Miller s(6 H 225):



Are you seriously asking if Miller corroborates Woodward or vice-versa?
35
While reviewing some footage of the Dallas motorcade this morning, I came across more footage that shows JFK's tie knot was centered in the middle of the collar band. I'm referring to the AMIPA slow-motion version of the Yeargan film, from 00:53 to 00:56 in the film.

This is important evidence because Yeargan filmed JFK's limo shortly before it turned onto Houston Street and only about 80 seconds before it turned onto Elm Street.

His tie knot comes into clear view in the Yeargan film starting at 00:53 in the AMIPA version, after he has finished looking and waving to his left. Notice that the turning and the waving did not cause his tie knot to move from being centered in the middle of the collar band.

The issue of the position of JFK's tie knot is crucial, actually do-or-die, for the single-bullet theory (SBT). The SBT says that its alleged magic bullet exited the shirt slits below the inside collar band of JFK's shirt. The Warren Commission (WC) claimed that the SBT bullet exited “immediately behind” the tie. Any number of photos prove that the top of the shirt slits was at least at the level of 1/3 of the way up the tie knot from the bottom of the knot. Thus, there is no way the bullet could have avoided tearing through the bottom half of the tie knot if it had exited the shirt slits. 

Given the position of the tie knot in the collar band, there is also no way the alleged SBT bullet could have magically, like a guided missile, weaved its way around the body of the knot and nicked the top surface of the knot inward[/u] from the knot's left edge.

I have added screencaps from the Yeargan film to my article "Why JFK's Tie and Shirt Slits Destroy the Single-Bullet Theory," which is a supplement to my article "JFK's Clothing Proves the Single-Bullet Theory Is Impossible."

"Why JFK's Tie and Shirt Slits Destroy the Single-Bullet Theory"
https://sites.google.com/view/jfkshirtandtiedestroysbt/home

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

Here's a link to the AMIPA slow-motion version of the Yeargan film's segment showing JFK in the limo before the limo starts to turn:


36
It appears from his testimony that he hadn't really thought about which shot hit him, other than recalling that it wasn't the first.  When asked about it whether he heard a shot afterward, he thought and said he did recall hearing a shot after the shot that hit him. Since he heard only three shots, he said it must have been the second that hit him. 

But I agree, by itself it is not reliable.  What makes it much more reliable is the rest of the evidence. 

According to the shot pattern observed by over 40 witnesses, the last two shots were close together and after the midpoint between the first and third shots.  That means that JFK was struck by the first shot (as about 25 witnesses reported) and the second was after z255. The second shot struck JBC in the wrist and sent numerous flecks of lead into the wrist and made a long jagged hole in the french cuff but a non-jagged hole in the jacket pocket and jacket cuff.  That is not only consistent with a fragmenting bullet, but also with the fragments deflecting away from the point of contact with the radius.  The orientation of the wrist up near his chest exit wound after z240 means the fragments would have deflected up.

Greer said that he sensed a "concussion" from something impacting in the car on the second shot. The damage to the windshield frame was just above his right ear. He reported no impact sound from the other shots.  Greer said the second shot was almost simultaneous with his first turn to the rear (z281) when he saw JBC falling back.  We know that on one of the shots fragments struck the windshield and windshield frame. It is at least interesting that the left sun visor appears to move forward between z271 and z272:



A fragment striking the windshield and frame and at least one fragment going a bit higher and striking the road and curb near Tague is consistent with the second shot fragmenting and deflecting upward off the wrist. 

It is not impossible that Tague was wrong in thinking he heard a shot after he was hit, but that would mean that he was hit by a fragment from the head shot. The only problem with the head shot causing the damage to the windshield and a fragment going up over the windshield is that I don't see that it struck anything hard that could have deflected it.  It likely fragmented upon striking the back of the head but that did not change its direction. The bullet or bullet fragments passed through the head and exited on a downward trajectory from the SN.  So I don't see what hard impact would have caused a fragment to deflect upward after that.


Tague seems pretty clueless to me. He is all over the place. In his book he is adamant that the third shot missed. I personally have no problem discounting his ideas enough to believe that an early first shot could have been the one that missed.

BTW, here is what DPD motorcycle officer Stavis Ellis told Larry Sneed as shown on page 144 of his book “No More Silence”:

“We came west on Main Street to Houston Street and took a right, facing right into that building. The building with the window was looking right at us as we came up to Elm Street and made a left, heading back toward the Triple Underpass. Midway down Elm I remember waving at my wife’s niece and nephew, Bill and Gayle Newman, who had apparently come out to see the President. About the time I started on a curve on Elm, I had turned to my right to give signals to open up the intervals since we were fixing to get on the freeway a short distance away. That’s all I had on my mind. Just as I turned around, then the first shot went off. It hit back there. I hadn’t been able to see back where Chaney was because Curry was there, but I could see where the shot came down into the south side of the curb. It looked like it hit the concrete or grass there in just a flash, and a bunch of junk flew up like a white or gray color dust or smoke coming out of the concrete.




I drew a yellow circle around the location of the manhole cover apron (where it is believed that a bullet ricocheted) on the south side of Elm Street. I also drew a dashed yellow line to show that Curry’s car would have been close to the line of sight of Ellis trying to look back at the area of the limo where Cheney was. This is around the time that I believe an early first shot might have occurred. Stavis Ellis (-5 character in the animation) is just approaching the entrance to the triple overpass.
38
Rod Stewart had a hit song titled "Reason to Believe". CTs should have an anthem titled Reason to Disbelieve. They seem to have no interest in figuring out who was responsible of the JFKA . Their whole focus seems to be on coming up with reasons not to believe the WCR. That's why we have so many inanities like Prayer Man, One Glove Cop, Huge Gates, etc. They search High and low for things for which there is no apparent explanation and to them, that is reason enough to dismiss the WC finding that Oswald fired the shots that killed JFK and that there was no credible evidence he had even a single accomplice. It's like they're panning for gold and they get really excited when they find one shiny little yellow flake, not realizing it is fool's gold. 
39
DUH!!!!!!
40
Why would anyone be "genuinely interested in the issue of Prayer Man". When he CTs obsess over something this inane, we know the carcass of the JFKA conspiracy "research" has been picked clean to the bone. There's obviously nothing important left that is worth talking about.

There's better evidence for that right here on this forum. I give you:

1. Fake Shelley and Fake Lovelady (the supposed "fakery" being by the leading exponent of Prayer Man, irony of ironies!).
2. The Impoounded Getaway Car.
3. The Huge Gates.
4. One Glove Bogus Imposter Haygood Cop.
5. The Mysterious Black Thing on Top of the Huge Gates.

Hence my futile efforts to talk CTers off the ledge of craziness and get them to focus on things that at least have some level of possibility if not plausibility. Hell, no - anything that has some level of possibility, and perhaps even plausibility, looks way too much like the LN narrative to satisfy the elaborate complexity that the lunatic fringe craves like a drug addiction.

That's the problem with all JFKA discussions: they are little more than diehard defenders of the LN narrative playing Whack-a-Mole with absolute crazies. One who is neither a diehard defender of the LN narrative nor an absolute crazy can only observe in wonderment and try to have some fun with it.

My favorite analogy for JFKA "discussions" -

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10