Ever wonder why the hardcore CT's try to create doubt about the Zapruder Film?

[Fergus O'brien]

ive seen many many LN say CT cant offer a credible theory . but even if a so called CT did just that what would happen ? . what do LN call people with opposing views to them ? , what do they call people who for valid reasons dont accept the official version of events ? . they call them conspiracy THEORIST .they attack them for being conspiracy THEORIST . then LN complain that these same people havent , cant , did not ow will not offer them a THEORY .one does not require any theories to argue intelligently and indeed knowledgeably that there are serious problems with the official version of events . it is done here every day . but LN dance around that , ignoring what they dont care for and demanding theory when there are many facts that can be talked about . there is a lot that can be both proven or disproven and all without a need for a theory .all that said the theories here started in 1964 not with CT but with Arlen specter . and despite LN criticisms of CT they (LN ) continue 60 years later to cling to that theory despite science , and fact telling them that the theory was flawed at the least and also based on deception .

[Jim Hawthorn]

My favorite CTer take is when they claim the Z-film is faked but without missing a beat cite the content as evidence of a conspiracy.  The "fake" evidence presumably to implicate Oswald actually does the opposite and proves their subjective conclusion that Oswald was framed.  And on and on it goes.   It has become a bore.  In the years that I've been on this forum, I've not read a single credible theory much less credible evidence that supports a conspiracy.  Not one.  Just a lame reiteration of long debunked theories or a scatter gun approach like playing an endless game of whack-a-mole (what about this, what about that) while ignoring the mountain of evidence and circumstances implicating Oswald.  Most CTers have apparently recognized the futility of even trying to prove a conspiracy.   They play defense attorney taking individual items of evidence out of context and desperately trying to create any doubt by nitpicking witness testimony or conflating their own subjective interpretation of words and events with reality.  Repeat endlessly.

Well I've come to realise that the only explanation for the discrepancies between the LN and the CT scenarios is that the two plots were going on simultaneously and were totally unconnected with each other. Both parties were completely surprised and both were firing from the rear.

[Steve Barber]

Explain.

  Hi Jim.

 In the Z frame where you have the words "But gone here"  with an arrow pointing towards JFK. what you are pointing to is Mrs .Kennedy's houlder, not JFK's head. 

[Royell Storing]

Well I've come to realise that the only explanation for the discrepancies between the LN and the CT scenarios is that the two plots were going on simultaneously and were totally unconnected with each other. Both parties were completely surprised and both were firing from the rear.

   Knott Labs Laser 360 SCIENCE has proven the SBT "IS IMPOSSIBLE". This eliminated the LN scenario.   

[Jim Hawthorn]

  Hi Jim.

 In the Z frame where you have the words "But gone here"  with an arrow pointing towards JFK. what you are pointing to is Mrs .Kennedy's houlder, not JFK's head.

Exactly! That's exactly what I'm saying!
In the previous frame, we can see that the upper cranium is still in place after the first head shot. A few frames later,... it's gone.

So this can only be one of two things:

1. Proof of a second bullet impact to the head, immediately after the first.
2. A botched retouch of the Zapruder film.

[Jim Hawthorn]

   Knott Labs Laser 360 SCIENCE has proven the SBT "IS IMPOSSIBLE". This eliminated the LN scenario.   

I know that but the LNers here dispute the Knott Lab. model because of the assumptions they made about the body positions of Kennedy and Connally at the moment the back/neck shot. I proposed that they write to the  Lab, to get things settled.

[Dan O'meara]

Explain.

The top picture is really blurry.
The bottom picture is really clear.

Next!

[Dan O'meara]

image uploading

Frame 337.
I've drawn in a red outline to highlight the state of JFK's head at this point.
Earlier frames show skull and brain matter being blown out of the top of JFK's head.
The image above shows a massive crater in the top of his head.
The autopsy pictures show the top of JFK's head missing.

The problems arise because the true nature of JFK's head injury is little understood. In the picture above I have pointed out a large section of JFK's skull bone clearly visible on the side of his head. His skull is supposed to be on the inside, not the outside.
The red mass surrounding the bone is the inside of JFK's scalp, to which the bone is still attached.
As the pieces of skull are blown out of the top of his head, the scalp is ripped open. The pressure (due to cavitation) causing JFK's head to 'explode' blows a massive piece of scalp over the right side of his head. The inside of this piece of scalp with a bone attached is clearly visible.
However, the scalp is still attached to the head near the ear. This attachment acts as a hinge. On the way to the hospital Jackie tries to put her husband's head back together. She takes the large piece of scalp and places it back where it should be. When JFK arrives at Parkland this massive piece of scalp is back in place. This is why many of the doctors who work on JFK at Parkland are unaware of the full extent of the injury to his head. To them it looks like the injury is located only at the back of the head when in fact the injury takes up nearly the whole side of the upper right side of his head from front to back.
When JFK's body arrives at Bethesda, Jenkins describes taking the wrappings off JFK's head and the massive piece of hinged scalp that came away with the wrappings but could be put back in place, hiding the full extent of the injury.

For the undoubted authenticity of the Zapruder film read the Roland Zavada report. It is a truly comprehensive investigation of every single aspect of the film by one of the men who led the team which invented Kodachrome II, the film Zapruder used.

The only problem I have is with the way the bullet behaved upon impact. Is anyone else aware of an example of the type of bullet supposedly used in the assassination fragmenting in such a way. Any re-enactments I've seen show the bullet for the head shot staying in one piece.. Can such a bullet leave a trail of fine, metallic dust as it travels through JFK's head?
It seems a bit dodgy to me, but I'm no ballistics expert..