New Article by Steve Barber on the Dictabelt Tape

[Jerry Freeman]

I took the dead horse gif based on Steve Barbers own article....

I?m not sure how many ways it can be said or how many times I have to explain it, but there is nothing to the recent allegations that the acoustics evidence offered by the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) in 1979 as scientific proof of conspiracy is somehow valid - again.
[The NAS had all this equipment..Steve used his ears]
The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) cut the legs out from underneath that horse a long time ago (I should know, I helped them) and continuing to beat that horse isn?t going to make it get up and gallop away.

[Colin Crow]

Well, it appears no CT is impressed with the Dictabelt acoustic evidence either. At least no one has made any posts claiming the acoustic evidence is anything but a ?dead horse?. Perhaps no CT wishes to debate Steve Barber on the issue.

Seems like you passed wind and left the room. Are you not able to answer the question about Thomas' claim of multiple examples of crosstalk?

[Joe Elliott]

Seems like you passed wind and left the room. Are you not able to answer the question about Thomas' claim of multiple examples of crosstalk?

You cannot avoid insulting someone who did not insult you?
Actually, Steve Barber is our expert on the Dictabelt recording. I think I can give good estimates on the speed of the limousine at any time, and the angular speed of the target from the sniper?s nest or anywhere else. But I don?t know a lot about the Dictabelt recordings.
My impression is that cross talk was not uncommon. So, I don?t see the relevance of Thomas claiming multiple examples of crosstalk.
Now, if Thomas can point out a single instant where a Channel 1 recording was offset by a minute from the Channel 2 recording, that would be of interest. That could explain why the ?gunshots? seemed to have been recorded a minute after the real assassination.
Question:
Has Thomas found such a case?

And just a few quibbles I have about the acoustic case.
The Dictabelt recording system was still in use in the 1970?s when the acoustic experts ran their tests at Dealey Plaza. They could have had a motorcycle recording the recreations of the shots as they were recorded on the Dictabelt machine. Recreating what they alleged happened in 1963, a motorcycle with a stuck button in Dealey Plaza (and not somewhere else, like the Trade Mart Center) recorded the gunshots.But the acoustic experts failed to do so.
Had they done so, we would have Dictabelt recordings of the gunshot recreations.
I always found it strange that the Dictabelt did not record audible gunshots. Yes, I know the experts claim that we should not expect to, because the system was not designed to do this. Had the acoustic experts done this, we would not have to wonder if it would record audible shots or not. We would definitely know. However, I am expected to give the acoustic experts the benefit of the doubt and assume that the Dictabelt would not record audible gunshots, when it is their fault that we do not have definitive proof.
Also, making a Dictabelt recording may have shown that the gunshots recorded on one Channel could be offset from the other Channel by up to a minute. Had the acoustic experts utilized the Dictabelt system, we might know for certain that the gunshots could be offset by a minute from other simultaneous voice recordings. However, once again, I am expected to give the acoustic experts the benefit of the doubt and assume that the two Channels could be offset by up to a minute, when it is their fault that they bypassed a chance to prove this assertion.
And it should be noted, that some of the Dallas police recalled that the Dictabelt system did record audible gunshots during the acoustic tests of the 1970?s. But for some reason did not in 1963. Which is yet another reason to have severe doubts about the acoustic findings.

[Colin Crow]

You cannot avoid insulting someone who did not insult you?
Actually, Steve Barber is our expert on the Dictabelt recording. I think I can give good estimates on the speed of the limousine at any time, and the angular speed of the target from the sniper?s nest or anywhere else. But I don?t know a lot about the Dictabelt recordings.
My impression is that cross talk was not uncommon. So, I don?t see the relevance of Thomas claiming multiple examples of crosstalk.
Now, if Thomas can point out a single instant where a Channel 1 recording was offset by a minute from the Channel 2 recording, that would be of interest. That could explain why the ?gunshots? seemed to have been recorded a minute after the real assassination.
Question:
Has Thomas found such a case?

And just a few quibbles I have about the acoustic case.
The Dictabelt recording system was still in use in the 1970?s when the acoustic experts ran their tests at Dealey Plaza. They could have had a motorcycle recording the recreations of the shots as they were recorded on the Dictabelt machine. Recreating what they alleged happened in 1963, a motorcycle with a stuck button in Dealey Plaza (and not somewhere else, like the Trade Mart Center) recorded the gunshots.But the acoustic experts failed to do so.
Had they done so, we would have Dictabelt recordings of the gunshot recreations.
I always found it strange that the Dictabelt did not record audible gunshots. Yes, I know the experts claim that we should not expect to, because the system was not designed to do this. Had the acoustic experts done this, we would not have to wonder if it would record audible shots or not. We would definitely know. However, I am expected to give the acoustic experts the benefit of the doubt and assume that the Dictabelt would not record audible gunshots, when it is their fault that we do not have definitive proof.
Also, making a Dictabelt recording may have shown that the gunshots recorded on one Channel could be offset from the other Channel by up to a minute. Had the acoustic experts utilized the Dictabelt system, we might know for certain that the gunshots could be offset by a minute from other simultaneous voice recordings. However, once again, I am expected to give the acoustic experts the benefit of the doubt and assume that the two Channels could be offset by up to a minute, when it is their fault that they bypassed a chance to prove this assertion.
And it should be noted, that some of the Dallas police recalled that the Dictabelt system did record audible gunshots during the acoustic tests of the 1970?s. But for some reason did not in 1963. Which is yet another reason to have severe doubts about the acoustic findings.

Calm down Joe, it was a metaphorical fart reference. Your original post refers to an article by Steve Barber. I assumed you read it. I also assumed you were aware of Dr Thomas' recent presentation that refers to the crosstalk issue and its implications for the offset.

Thanks for your reply.

I shall await for further developments.

[Joe Elliott]

Calm down Joe, it was a metaphorical fart reference. Your original post refers to an article by Steve Barber. I assumed you read it. I also assumed you were aware of Dr Thomas' recent presentation that refers to the crosstalk issue and its implications for the offset.

Thanks for your reply.

I shall await for further developments.

We should hear from Steven Barber at some point on your question.

On another issue, it should have been obvious to the HSCA acoustic experts that people would doubt that the sound impulses were recordings of gunshots, because they don?t sound like gunshots. Other recording devices record the sound of gunshots and the recordings do sound like gunshots or at least audible bangs. And none of these recording devices were designed to pick up the sounds of gunshots, but they still do so with no problem.
Question:
Why didn?t the acoustic experts use the Dictabelt system to record the sounds of their acoustic tests back in the 1970?s, when they could have done so?
Had they do so, we would know, beyond all doubt, that the Dictabelt system would only record sound impulses, but not audible bangs.

Question:
Have the acoustic experts ever given an explanation on why this was not done?

[Steve Barber]

 If I may, I refer all to this article published on Dale Myers' website, I put Don Thomas' theory to rest, and not only did Dale publish this article, Vincent Bugliosi published a piece I submitted to him (and broke the story) in Reclaiming History in 2007, in the End Notes, which are a part of the CD-Rom included in the book. The Chapter titled "Other Investigations" under "Acoustics".  Scroll up to find the beginning of the acoustics chapter to read(even though the entire section on the acoustics is not available within this link to Google Books) I am providing links to both the book and my piece.   I clearly point out that Thomas' claim that there is a segment of "crosstalk" just 3 seconds before the first BBN "gunshot" is false, and a desperate attempt to keep the acoustics experts' findings alive fails largely.
I also put the theory of there having been a "carillon bell" recorded on the Dictabelt recording to rest. 

 https://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2007/07/of-crosstalk-and-bells-rebuttal-to-don.html


 https://books.google.com/books?id=q1VJAgAAQBAJ&pg=PT2453&lpg=PT2453&dq=Reclaiming+History+Vincent+Bugliosi%2BSteve+Barber+acoustics&source=bl&ots=6BU8W1UGrh&sig=ACfU3U3xUWWIaK4utjyPkPRY8sKNHJOtoQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi6iKm56aHpAhWBGM0KHeE8BikQ6AEwAHoECAoQAQ#v=onepage&q=Reclaiming%20History%20Vincent%20Bugliosi%2BSteve%20Barber%20acoustics&f=false

 



 

[Richard Rubio]

If the dictabelt issue is beating a dead horse, perhaps the whole issue of the JFK assassination could be called that. I'd welcome all discussions on pertinent issues related to the assassination.  And sure, some angles of the assassination I'd believe have been largely discussed but I don't speak for all people. 

This forum serves as a databank too, I may not be interested in one topic today but I might be in six months, hence, I can search the forum for any issue.

[Richard Rubio]

Colin Crow snapped at me for no reason and insulted me, rude response. All he/she offers are obscure late night comedians. I'd not worry about this.  And maybe some sort of software that works on photos.