Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10
71
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Summary of Some of the Major Problems with the JFK Medical Evidence
« Last post by John Corbett on Yesterday at 07:30:09 PM »
Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on Yesterday at 06:48:26 PM
You look for any excuse to avoid dealing with evidence you can't explain.

I keep telling you this but it's like talking to a wall. I don't need to explain the medical evidence. I leave that to people who are qualified to do that. That doesn't include you, but that doesn't stop you from throwing your amateurish two cents into the conversation.
Quote

Obviously, Hay was summarizing the findings of Dr. Joseph N. Riley, a neuroscientist who specialized in neuroanatomy and neuropathology and who determined from the autopsy materials that two bullets hit JFK's head. Dr. Riley had several papers published in peer-reviewed scientific journals dealing with neuroscience. He was a professor of neuroscience at the University of Florida. He wrote two articles that presented evidence that two bullets struck Kennedy's head.

You love to cite people who offer opinions outside their area of expertise. None of the people you cite are forensic medical examiners which is a specific branch of medicine which requires skill sets outside of the area of radiation oncology or neuroanatomy. Neither of these fields involve the examination of gunshot wounds or more specifically, gunshot wounds to the head. How many medico-legal autopsies has Dr. Mantik performed. How many has Dr. Riley performed. Without even looking it up I'm going to take a flyer and say combined, the total number is less than one.
Quote

Your side has never had anybody with Dr. Riley's qualification in neuroscience,

Why would my "side" need or want such a person?
Quote

just like your side has nobody with Dr. Mantik's qualifications in the science of optical-density analysis of skull x-rays,

Dr. Mantik is a radiation oncologist. That is quite different from a radiologist who is an expert in reading x-rays. In fact, a radiation oncologist will often consult with a radiologist in determining the best treatment for a cancer patient under their care. Cancer care is Mantik's area of expertise. The field of medicine has many different specialties and being an expert in one does not make one an expert ina another. You are always citing people offering opinions outside their area of expertise. When your toilet gets clogged, do you call in an electrician?
Quote

nor anybody with the qualifications of the HSCA's seven acoustical experts in acoustical science (an additional BBN acoustical scientist wrote one of the appendices for Dr. Josiah Thompson's 2021 book Last Second in Dallas). 

It never surprises me when a CT clings to the discredited acoustical analysis since they have no real evidence on their side.
Quote

Speaking of the NAS/NRC panel, are you aware that Dr. Thompson reveals in his book that when the NRC/NAS panel sent BBN acoustical scientist Dr. James Barger a draft of their report, Dr. Barger replied with an 8-page critique, but the panel declined to publish his critique and did not address, or even mention, his objections in their report? Humm. . . .

Barger's team only concluded there was a 50% probability that the recording showed a shot from the GK and that the impulses on the tape could not be proven to be gunshots. That's based solely on the acoustics and doesn't take into account the cross talk from channel 2 which indicated the shots were not made during the recording or the photo evidence that there was no motorcycle at the spot on Houston St. that Weiss and Aschkenasy presumed the motorcycle had to be.
72
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Summary of Some of the Major Problems with the JFK Medical Evidence
« Last post by Michael T. Griffith on Yesterday at 06:48:26 PM »
Quote from: John Corbett on June 20, 2026, 04:39:13 PM
Since you have identified him as a research and not an expert in forensic pathology, I am going to assume he is not the latter. That means he is no more qualified to discuss the medical evidence than you or I.

You look for any excuse to avoid dealing with evidence you can't explain. Obviously, Hay was summarizing the findings of Dr. Joseph N. Riley, a neuroscientist who specialized in neuroanatomy and neuropathology and who determined from the autopsy materials that two bullets hit JFK's head. Dr. Riley had several papers published in peer-reviewed scientific journals dealing with neuroscience. He was a professor of neuroscience at the University of Florida. He wrote two articles that presented evidence that two bullets struck Kennedy's head.

Your side has never had anybody with Dr. Riley's qualification in neuroscience, just like your side has nobody with Dr. Mantik's qualifications in the science of optical-density analysis of skull x-rays, nor anybody with the qualifications of the HSCA's seven acoustical experts in acoustical science (an additional BBN acoustical scientist wrote one of the appendices for Dr. Josiah Thompson's 2021 book Last Second in Dallas). 

Speaking of the NAS/NRC panel, are you aware that Dr. Thompson reveals in his book that when the NRC/NAS panel sent BBN acoustical scientist Dr. James Barger a draft of their report, Dr. Barger replied with an 8-page critique, but the panel declined to publish his critique and did not address, or even mention, his objections in their report? Humm. . . .


73
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Passing of Former HSCA Chief Counsel G. Robert Blakey
« Last post by Michael T. Griffith on Yesterday at 06:17:18 PM »
Quote from: Benjamin Cole on Yesterday at 01:22:28 AM
MTG--

You make good points.

True, LHO attended the air-school run by Ferrie. But after that, no firm evidence they knew each other.

Actually, we have good evidence that they associated with each other long after they met in the Civil Air Patrol. See the research of the HSCA, Dr. David Kaiser, Anthony Summers, Dr. David Scheim, Lamar Waldron, etc. etc.

Quote from: Benjamin Cole on Yesterday at 01:22:28 AM
I have to concede, Ruby was a low-level mob guy, who had run guns to Cuba.

He did a lot more than just run guns to Cuba, although that was no small thing.

Quote from: Benjamin Cole on Yesterday at 01:22:28 AM
Ruby waxing LHO remains a fishy event.

It was clearly a Mob hit to silence a major loose end.
74
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Undeniable Proof of Fraud: The Impossible JFK Autopsy Brain Photos
« Last post by Michael T. Griffith on Yesterday at 05:56:29 PM »
Two important facts should be kept in mind: One, the four radiologists consulted by the HSCA medical panel (FPP) were unable to identify an exit point for the head shot on the autopsy skull x-rays. Two, the FPP claimed the x-rays show no missing frontal bone, but the evidence is clear that they were wrong. The issue of the damage to the frontal bone has a direct bearing on the authenticity of the autopsy brain photos.

Lone-gunman theorists have virtually ignored the telling fact that the HSCA's four radiology consultants were unable to identify an exit point on the skull x-rays. The consultants were Dr. Gerald M. McDonnel, Dr. Norman Chase, Dr. William Seaman, and David O. Davis.

If anyone doubts this, they can read the findings that the radiologists presented to the FPP. Here are links to them:

McDonnel (https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0114a.htm)
Chase (https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0146a.htm)
Seaman (https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0166b.htm)
Davis (https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0116b.htm)

Renowned researcher John Hunt commented on this important point:

Four radiologists were consulted by the FPP over a six-month period beginning in February 1978. None reported an identifiable exit point. The closest an HSCA radiology consultant came to claiming to identify an outshoot point was Dr. David Davis, who reported:

"It seems apparent that explosive impact occurred in this calvarium. It also seems reasonable to assume that the exit point is near the coronal suture on the right side, about 5 or 6, or perhaps slightly more, cm above the pterion. (7 HSCA 224)"

Why it “seem[ed] reasonable” to Davis “to assume that the exit point” was anywhere is left entirely to the imagination of the reader, for Davis never explained the rationale upon which he based his assumption. Davis’ unsupported and equivocal speculation not withstanding, the x-rays did not reveal any outshoot points. ("A Demonstrable Impossibility: The HSCA Forensic Pathology Panel’s Misrepresentation of the Kennedy Assassination Medical Evidence," https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/ADemonstrableImpossibility/ADemonstrableImpossibility.htm#_edn2)

The FPP ignored this fact and claimed to have located the outshoot point in the frontal bone.

Also, incredibly, the FPP's final report claimed that no frontal bone was missing. They most likely made this claim (1) because JFK's forehead and the area just behind his front hairline appear intact in the autopsy head photos, and (2) because the autopsy brain photos do not show the damage or missing tissue that would have been caused when the bullet blew out a large piece of frontal bone. However,

-- Dr. McDonnel said the x-rays show missing frontal bone, observing that "a portion of the right frontal bone" is missing (7 HSCA 218, 228).

-- Dr. Lawrence Angel, a forensic anthropologist who advised the FPP on the placement of the skull fragments, said frontal bone was missing. In fact, Dr. Angel said that the Delta skull fragment, i.e., the large triangular-shaped skull fragment, is "clearly frontal bone" (7 HSCA 229, 239).

-- Dr. J. Thornton Boswell, one of the autopsy doctors, diagrammed a sizable portion of missing frontal bone in his autopsy face sheet (17 H 46, CE 397, https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0036b.htm).

-- Dr. Pierre Fink, the only one of the autopsy doctors who was a certified forensic pathologist, stated in his report to General Bloomberg that frontal bone was missing (see MD 28, p. 5, https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/master_med_set/md28/html/Image04.htm).

-- Dr. John Lattimer, the first independent doctor to be allowed to see the autopsy x-rays and photos at the National Archives, said the x-rays show a large portion of the right frontal bone to be missing ("Observations Based on a Review of the Autopsy Photographs, X-rays, and Related Materials of the Late President John F. Kennedy, Medical Times, 1972, 100:6, p. 53.)

-- Dr. David Mantik and Dr. Michael Chesser have confirmed that the skull x-rays show a sizable amount of missing frontal bone.

When the bullet blasted out the Delta fragment from the frontal bone, it would have had to tear through the righthand side of the frontal lobe and naturally would have blasted out part of the right frontal lobe in the process. But, the brain photos show no missing issue in that area of the frontal lobe (nor in the lefthand side of the frontal lobe).




75
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: When Was JBC Hit?
« Last post by Dan O'meara on Yesterday at 05:02:26 PM »
Quote from: John Corbett on Yesterday at 01:05:12 PM
It's the best I need in this case.
Yes I did. I noticed Sitzman was behind Zapruder.
So you think sound only travels in a vector?
Oh, goody. Another version of what happened from an ear witness. Just how many different ways do you think the JFKA happened?
Eye and earwitness accounts don't prove anything unless you can prove the witness' account is accurate. I trust people's observed reactions far more than I trust their recollections. The Newmans, who were not far from Zapruder reacted by pushing their kids on the ground and shielding them with their bodies.
You're so gullible you think one witness undermines a wealth of evidence which is contrary to their account. I always get a chuckle when somebody starts and argument with, "So-and-so said....." as if what so-and-so said. People choose to believe the witnesses who support what they want to believe. Because there are so many differing versions of what happened, it's not hard to find a witness who will support your argument. I don't accept any witness' account that can't be corroborated through other evidence. We have visual evidence that Zapruder's camera shook noticeably 7-8 frames after the second shot was fired and 7-8 frames after the third shot was fired. Is that just a coincidence? It would have taken about 4 frames for the sound of the muzzle blast to reach Zapruder's ears which leaves another 3-4 frames for a startle reaction, about what that should take.
That is one of the dumbest things I have read on this forum. It is silly to think the sound of the muzzle blast would have dissipated in just 90 yard. You want to be all your eggs in the Sitzman basket as if her account is the definitive story of the JFKA. Foolish.
Funny how his vertigo only kicked in 7-8 frames after the second and third shots.
As expected, a witness gives evidence undermining your naive understanding of this issue and she is totally dismissed.
This is no great shock.
Your post is full of the usual lunacy but this cannot be ignored:

You're so gullible you think one witness undermines a wealth of evidence which is contrary to their account.

The issue at hand is whether or not the sound of the shots were loud enough to startle Zapruder at his location and create 'jiggle' in the Z-film.
My approach has been to take the witness testimony of someone stood right next to Zapruder. This witness reports the sound of the shots was "far off" and a "far away sound". They were certainly not enough to create 'jiggle' in the film.
The distant nature of this sound might explain why neither Zapruder or Sitzman could confidently recall how many shots they heard.
This is evidence directly contradicting the reliability of Jiggle Analysis regarding the Z-film.
However, you insist there is a "wealth of evidence" countering Sitzman's testimony. This is utter nonsense. It's a falsehood. An untruth.
There is not a single scrap of evidence that the shots were loud enough to create a startle reflex at Zapruder's location - not a single scrap!

The problem is your delusion - you believe you are right no matter what. You believe this "wealth of evidence" must exist because you sooo believe you are right
But it does not.
There is not a chance in hell that you will retract the falsehood you have posted, which will make it a deliberate falsehood - a lie.

Please provide this "wealth of evidence" that the sound of the shots was loud enough to create a startle reflex from at Zapruder's position.

76
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: The Tippit Shooting At 1:15-1:16, FACT
« Last post by Lance Payette on Yesterday at 04:46:27 PM »
Quote from: John Corbett on Yesterday at 03:49:56 PM
Official time of death is not always stated precisely as evidenced by JFK's official time of death as 1:00pm CST. The priests who entered the ER to administer the last rights before that time said he was already covered with a sheet when the last rights were administered to the body.

The only reason that I know of why a precise time of death might be important is the provisions of some wills. As executor of my father's will, I know there was a provision that excluded the named heirs in the event they preceded him in death. It also stated that if the order of their deaths could not be determined, it was to be presumed they preceded him in death. I think it would be highly unusual that such a provision would come into play. Perhaps if the people question were both killed in a car or plane crash and both were declared dead at the scene. Hard to say from just a few examples but it looks to me like it might be a common practice to round off the time of death to the nearest 15 minute time frame.

Typically in wills we say "If my beloved but ne'er-do-well son Filbert does not survive me by 120 hours, then his share shall pass to my lovely but morally bankrupt daughter Gwendolyn" or something to that effect, which makes the exact time of death less critical. Some wills specify much longer periods - even up to a year. Almost all states have the Uniform Simultaneous Death Act whereby "if the devolution of property or donative provision in a governing instrument depends on one individual surviving another, and it cannot be established by clear and convincing evidence that the individual survived by 120 hours, such individual will be considered predeceased." It would be rare that the 120 hours would come down to the exact minute, but I suppose it could happen. That will be $342, please.
77
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: The Tippit Shooting At 1:15-1:16, FACT
« Last post by Lance Payette on Yesterday at 04:35:05 PM »
Say what you will about Harvey and Lee, the John Armstrong Collection at Baylor is a goldmine. The snippet I posted above is actually a transcript of an interview with Methodist Hospital ER nurse Lottie Thompson conducted by Earl Holz of the Dallas Morning News. The full transcript is here:

https://digitalcollections-baylor.quartexcollections.com/Documents/Detail/tippitt-shooting-nov.-22-1963-d.o.a.-at-methodist-hospital/690058?item=690059

78
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Video: Rare Film & Part Audio Narration From Dallas Press Photographer Tom Alyea
« Last post by Charles Collins on Yesterday at 04:23:05 PM »
Does anyone know who the interviewer that keeps interrupting Tom Alyea with all kinds of questions? That’s so annoying when they won’t let the interviewee say much of anything before they interrupt again and again…
79
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: The Tippit Shooting At 1:15-1:16, FACT
« Last post by Martin Weidmann on Yesterday at 04:01:54 PM »
Quote from: John Corbett on Yesterday at 03:49:56 PM
Official time of death is not always stated precisely as evidenced by JFK's official time of death as 1:00pm CST. The priests who entered the ER to administer the last rights before that time said he was already covered with a sheet when the last rights were administered to the body.

The only reason that I know of why a precise time of death might be important is the provisions of some wills. As executor of my father's will, I know there was a provision that excluded the named heirs in the event they preceded him in death. It also stated that if the order of their deaths could not be determined, it was to be presumed they preceded him in death. I think it would be highly unusual that such a provision would come into play. Perhaps if the people question were both killed in a car or plane crash and both were declared dead at the scene. Hard to say from just a few examples but it looks to me like it might be a common practice to round off the time of death to the nearest 15 minute time frame.

Official time of death is not always stated precisely

That's probably true, but it doesn't mean that the official time is always wrong.

80
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: The Tippit Shooting At 1:15-1:16, FACT
« Last post by Lance Payette on Yesterday at 03:55:32 PM »
I found on Facebook this snip of the supposed HSCA interview or testimony of Methodist Hospital nurse Thompson (Lotti or Lottie). I'm mystified as to why I can't seem to locate the document itself.

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10