Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: A straight line  (Read 111890 times)

Offline Jack Trojan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 833
Re: A straight line
« Reply #440 on: March 25, 2018, 10:04:00 PM »
Advertisement
The angle? Alice, there was more than one angle for the shots. Simply stating that the angles don't match wont suffice. You're going to have to explain using numbers.

Do you really want the MB numbers or are you just brushing off Alice's argument because she's not an expert? If it's the former, then do a simple re-enactment experiment for yourself then post your results. CTs can't demonstrate how a straight line trajectory was impossible. That's trying to prove a negative. The onus is on you LNers to show that it was possible.

I have posted several times before how laymen can demonstrate with expert precision how the SBT was feasible via a re-enactment experiment using 2 lasers pointed at each other.



Orient yourself between the 2 lasers so that the low laser strikes your throat and the high laser strikes your back as per the (dubious) autopsy photos of JFK. We can discuss whether the photos make sense once you establish whether there was a straight line path for the MB thru JFK coming from the TSBD. But the big question is whether JFK's body orientation matched the -17 deg pitch and -7 deg yaw angles, and whether there was a straight line path thru JFK from his back to throat that missed his spine at T1.

The fact that not a single LNer has reported the results of this exp says the following:

1) They did the exp and wish they hadn't and pretend they didn't
2) They don't give a rat's ass about the truth so why do the exp?
3) They're too committed to the LNer cause to admit they're wrong whether or not they did the exp
4) Too cheap or lazy to do the exp

Otherwise, any LNers that did the exp with results that support their claims would shirley have posted them instead of the myriad of CGI graphics that tell us squat.

« Last Edit: March 25, 2018, 10:59:02 PM by Jack Trojan »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A straight line
« Reply #440 on: March 25, 2018, 10:04:00 PM »


Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1824
Re: A straight line
« Reply #441 on: March 25, 2018, 11:17:28 PM »
Do you really want the MB numbers or are you just brushing off Alice's argument because she's not an expert?

Alice hasn't really made an argument here. She made a claim and failed to provide any support for it.

Quote
If it's the former, then do a simple re-enactment experiment for yourself then post your results. CTs can't demonstrate how a straight line trajectory was impossible. That's trying to prove a negative. The onus is on you LNers to show that it was possible.

I have posted several times before how laymen can demonstrate with expert precision how the SBT was feasible via a re-enactment experiment using 2 lasers pointed at each other.



Orient yourself between the 2 lasers so that the low laser strikes your throat and the high laser strikes your back as per the (dubious) autopsy photos of JFK. We can discuss whether the photos make sense once you establish whether there was a straight line path for the MB thru JFK coming from the TSBD. But the big question is whether JFK's body orientation matched the -17 deg pitch and -7 deg yaw angles, and whether there was a straight line path thru JFK from his back to throat that missed his spine at T1.

The fact that not a single LNer has reported the results of this exp says the following:

1) They did the exp and wish they hadn't and pretend they didn't
2) They don't give a rat's ass about the truth so why do the exp?
3) They're too committed to the LNer cause to admit they're wrong whether or not they did the exp
4) Too cheap or lazy to do the exp

Otherwise, any LNers that did the exp with results that support their claims would shirley have posted them instead of the myriad of CGI graphics that tell us squat.

It's already been demonstrated how a straight line trajectory was possible. I don't accept your opinion as being authoritative on the matter. You've claimed numerous times that this "simple two laser experiment"  would settle the matter once and for all. and yet you've failed to provide us the results of your own study. Why is that?

The fact that you have failed to report the results of this experient says the following:

1) You did the experiment and wish you hadn't and pretend you didn't
2) You don't give a rat's ass about the truth so why do the experiment?
3)You're too committed to the CT cause to admit you're wrong whether or not you did the experiment.
4) You're too cheap or lazy to do the experiment.

Offline Jack Trojan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 833
Re: A straight line
« Reply #442 on: March 25, 2018, 11:48:16 PM »
It's already been demonstrated how a straight line trajectory was possible.

BS

Quote
I don't accept your opinion as being authoritative on the matter. You've claimed numerous times that this "simple two laser experiment"  would settle the matter once and for all. and yet you've failed to provide us the results of your own study. Why is that?

No, it's because you don't understand the physics, evidence, facts, proof and logic to form conclusions.  If I posted a few photos of my exp you would dismiss them for whatever reason. Rightly so, because I can't prove that the SBT was impossible. FYI, you can actually prove a negative but it is beyond the scope of this case.

So get off your cheap, lazy ass and do my laser exp!
« Last Edit: March 25, 2018, 11:50:12 PM by Jack Trojan »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A straight line
« Reply #442 on: March 25, 2018, 11:48:16 PM »


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: A straight line
« Reply #443 on: March 26, 2018, 12:36:00 AM »
Alice, The evidence establishes beyond any reasonable doubt that Oswald alone assassinated Kennedy.

Alice, no it doesn?t.

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: A straight line
« Reply #444 on: March 26, 2018, 12:38:28 AM »
Right. Oh yeah, and then he left immediately afterward, took a bus but decided it was too slow so he went home in a taxi (not responding when the driver said "I wonder what the hell is the uproar", which he obviously knew what it was about since he had figured work was shut down for the day because of it), picked up his revolver and left quickly on foot, shot Officer Tippit for no apparent reason seconds after the officer got out of his patrol car, ran down an alley and slipped into the Texas Theater without paying, pulled his gun out when police arrested him in the theater and tried to shoot the arresting officer saying "well, its all over now".

Isn?t story time fun? There isn?t any solid evidence to support any of the claims made in this narrative.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A straight line
« Reply #444 on: March 26, 2018, 12:38:28 AM »


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: A straight line
« Reply #445 on: March 26, 2018, 12:40:28 AM »
Actually, there really isn't any evidence on which an unreasonable person could infer that Oswald assassinated JFK? And I don?t see how there could be.

?Infer? all you like, Joe, but don?t go calling it ?reason?.

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: A straight line
« Reply #446 on: March 26, 2018, 12:42:08 AM »
What do you mean by "fate and lady luck" ??? I'm confused.

In Bill?s mind, Oswald did it because Oswald did it.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A straight line
« Reply #446 on: March 26, 2018, 12:42:08 AM »


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: A straight line
« Reply #447 on: March 26, 2018, 12:46:25 AM »
Alice hasn't really made an argument here. She made a claim and failed to provide any support for it.

You mean the way you guys constantly do?

At least Alice admits it when she doesn?t have proof.