Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: More H&L Evidence -- Oswald was missing a MOLAR, but his exhumed body was not!  (Read 1032 times)


Offline John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2491
If anybody is interested, I have posted the evidence on Education Forum:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/24626-more-evidence-for-harvey-lee-oswald-was-missing-a-molar-but-his-exhumed-body-was-not/





Hi Sandy, I haven't had time to go through your entire ED Forum thread yet but it does look interesting and you appear to have put a lot of work into it, which is a nice change from the CT pissweak threads we get here.
Anyway here's a comparison between dug up Oswald and Marine Oswald and as far as I can tell we see the same teeth, at the same angles with comparable wear in both photos.





JohnM

Offline Sandy Larsen

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 25



.... here's a comparison between dug up Oswald and Marine Oswald and as far as I can tell we see the same teeth, at the same angles with comparable wear in both photos.

JohnM


Hi John,

Thanks for taking an interest in my presentation.

I wrote my presentation from the point of view that two Oswalds are suspected, but not specifically the two boys we label as HARVEY and LEE. Since I repeatedly show a Marine Corps x-ray of only one Oswald, the presentation may leave the impression that only that particular Oswald -- not the exhumed one -- had served in the Marine Corps. For those of us who believe the Harvey & Lee theory, we know that BOTH Oswalds served in the Marines.

The Marine Corps x-ray I examine in the presentation is of LEE's teeth.

The photo of Oswald you show above is definitely HARVEY, the Oswald killed by Ruby. I can tell by that fleshy area between his left eyebrow and his eye. The exhumed Oswald was, of course, also HARVEY. And so it is to be expected that the teeth of the helmeted Oswald above match those of the exhumed Oswald. They are the same person.

The other Oswald, LEE, is the one who was missing the molar. He was also missing one or two front teeth, due to being hit in the mouth as a teenager. In contrast there are no missing teeth on the exhumed body at all. (Not counting wisdom teeth. Which I am ignoring for now as I study the teeth.)

BTW, I will soon be presenting another discovery I've made regarding the teeth. It's going to make the hard-core closed-minded H&L critics look like fools IMO. (Nothing wrong with being a critic, of course. But being closed minded about it and constantly treating believers like kooks and cult members *is* bad.)
« Last Edit: February 07, 2018, 12:03:45 PM by Sandy Larsen »

Paul McBrearty

  • Guest
What's important to note here is that the trained experts determined from their examinations that the post-mortem and ante-mortem dental radio-graphs of Lee Harvey Oswald were authentic and consistent with each other. Based upon the consistency of the the dental records, dental charting, the dental radio-graphs, and the lack of any unexplainable, inconsistent items, positive dental identification was determined.

The theory of the two Oswald's is another complete conspiracy myth.


Offline Sandy Larsen

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 25
What's important to note here is that the trained experts determined from their examinations that the post-mortem and ante-mortem dental radio-graphs of Lee Harvey Oswald were authentic and consistent with each other. Based upon the consistency of the the dental records, dental charting, the dental radio-graphs, and the lack of any unexplainable, inconsistent items, positive dental identification was determined.

The theory of the two Oswald's is another complete conspiracy myth.


Oh really? Then explain this INDISPUTABLE PROOF that Oswald was missing a FRONT TOOTH, but his exhumed body was not:


http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/24630-indisputable-evidence-for-harvey-lee-oswald-was-missing-a-front-tooth-but-his-exhumed-body-was-not-new-evidence-found/



 

Mobile View