Moderated JFK conspiracy theories: it never ends III

[RoboTimbo]

Then we need to fix the "way it works".

I will present my case and you may present yours, if you wish.

Mine is already presented. Not sure why you aren't getting that.

If you refuse to do that, then you are only confirming that you have no evidence to prove that Oswald acted alone. But everyone already knows that, so I guess it doesn't matter.

LOL. And the desperation continues.

What baffles me though, is why you guys are so much more concerned about your artificial rules than you are about getting to the truth of this thing.

Ok, be truthful then. What is your alternative hypothesis that is true to all of the evidence?

Instead of ranting on and on about these ridiculous rules, why don't you address the evidence I presented? Let's talk about when the shots were fired and whether it was possible for Oswald to have fired all of them.

If it was not, then the conspiracy debate is over.

Why can't CTists ever present their alternative hypothesis and then show how it addresses all of the evidence?

I just posted more evidence related to the early shots and the fact that one of them wasn't heard by almost anyone, while neither of them were loud enough to provoke startle reactions like the ones we see following the shots at 285 and 313.

Perhaps you would prefer to make up another silly rule so that you don't have to deal with reason and empirical evidence, but I do hope for your own edification, that you address these issues and give them some objective thought.

Where did those shots come from?

 

[Robert Harris]

Well, you are trying to show that the timing of the second and third shots were closer together than normally considered.

Actually, I am showing that they were as close together as the people who heard them, said they were.

I was simply trying to tie that to your point about the slowing down of the limo. At the time you hadn't put forward your other assertion of the quiet second shot.

The slowdown had nothing to do with the second shot. That was just a fact which suggests that the shooter would not have rushed his final shot.

So yes, parts of your argument are about the shot timing, specifically the second shot. Which we have covered here before.

Well, if you have already covered this same issue, then it should be easy to refute me. Just do a little cut 'n pasting.

As I said above, Mrs Connally heard three.

Yes, so did almost everyone else.

150-160, 285 and 313.

Also I think a majority of ear witnesses heard three.

That is absolutely correct.

 

[Robert Harris]

Mr. Harris, any chance at all you'll get around to answering the question with respect your contention that there were elements of the assassination that needed there to be an accomplice?

I don't recall ever saying that there "needed" to be an accomplice.

In fact, one good shooter probably could have done it alone.

 

[Robert Harris]

Mine is already presented. Not sure why you aren't getting that.

Are you saying that you have proven that Oswald acted alone?

 

[abaddon]

Mr. Harris, any chance at all you'll get around to answering the question with respect your contention that there were elements of the assassination that needed there to be an accomplice?

Nope.

 

[abaddon]

Are you saying that you have proven that Oswald acted alone?

Nope.

 

[Tolls]

Actually, I am showing that they were as close together as the people who heard them, said they were.

As some of the people who heard them thought they were, after a stressful event.

So yes, it is about shot timing...and number of shots perhaps?

The slowdown had nothing to do with the second shot. That was just a fact which suggests that the shooter would not have rushed his final shot.

Your raising of the slowdown of the limo lost a couple of posters here as you hadn't explained your point. So, in terms of your theory, the timing of the second shot is important, especially when you relate it to that slowdown.

Well, if you have already covered this same issue, then it should be easy to refute me. Just do a little cut 'n pasting.

Or, you know, you could actually do a search?

Yes, so did almost everyone else.

150-160, 285 and 313.

So it is the number of shots and their timing if you are alledging a silenced shot.

 

[abaddon]

Mr. Harris, any chance at all you'll get around to answering the question with respect your contention that there were elements of the assassination that needed there to be an accomplice?

Nope. Still wrong. See if you can figure out why?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

YES!

So did most other witnesses. They heard the shot at app. 150-160, followed by the shots at the end, at 285 and 313. She never heard the 223 shot, which wounded John Connally and JFK, and she thought that the 285 shot was the one that hit her husband.

In their testimonies, she and John had one important disagreement. She said,

I recall John saying "Oh, no, no, no, no". Then there was a second shot, and it hit John...

But her husband knew better, since he was the one who got shot.

...I immediately, when I was hit, I said, "Oh, no, no, no"

The 223 shot was silent or very close to silent. No one in the limo heard. JBC only "felt" it.

Nellie Connally was an incredibly valuable witness - not because she was any more reliable than the others, but because we can see her in the Zfilm and match up her actions with her testimony. I do that in this brief presentation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ql6VqZDiC6s

So - pardon my naivity with ballistics - your unheard frame 223 shot was presumably subsonic, otherwise it would have been heard. Is that correct?

 

[Robert Harris]

As someone who hasn't spent years going around and around analysing the Zapruder film, my main impression is that none of the three people you say "all began to duck" actually ducks. The two women each lean in toward their respective husbands and the secret service agent, having turned around in his seat, turns back again. None of them act in a way that suggests to me they are flinching at a startling sound and none of them was sitting still up until the moment you have selected to claim they all began moving in unison. For that matter, it doesn't seem obvious to me that the photographer shook his camera in a way that indicates he flinched either.

Well, you are certainly entitled to your subjective opinions. But the objective fact is, that those 5 reactions all began at 290-292, while Alvarez concluded that Zapruder reacted at 290-291.

To say that it was improbable that this was coincidental, is probably the understatement of the millenium.

 

[Robert Harris]

So - pardon my naivity with ballistics - your unheard frame 223 shot was presumably subsonic, otherwise it would have been heard. Is that correct?

Yes, it would have to have been.

 

[BStrong]

No sir.

Donahue demonstrated that he could fire three shots in 5.6 seconds. The first doesn't count, so he required 2.8 seconds per shot.

That is not at all the same as firing the fatal headshot with no more than 1.5 seconds, which would be required to fire shots at 285 and 313. In fact, Donahue was taking almost twice that amount of time.

Please read the article I linked. It explains all this in detail.

I see where you're going and it's a dead end.

You wish to assert that the there was a second shooter based on your interpretation of the time line in the Zapruder film.

The established evidence does not support your theory, and wishing for something to be true does not an defensible argument make.

 

[BStrong]

Yes, it would have to have been.

Hmmmm...

So, we have LHO in the TSBD w/ his Carcano, John Doe # 1 w/ a suppressed firearm.

Where does JD #1 shoot from, and what type of firearm is JD using in your scenario?

 

[abaddon]

So - pardon my naivity with ballistics - your unheard frame 223 shot was presumably subsonic, otherwise it would have been heard. Is that correct?

In much the same way that I freely admit total ignorance of open heart surgery, JFK nuts will claim the exact opposite. My very own deceased mother had no less than two open heart surgeries and lived on for ten years. I would certainly not claim to be any colour of expert. I might perhaps claim a little familiarity. Maybe. The resident crackpot on the website of your choice will claim immediate expertise in everything.

 

[Pooneil]

Excellent question.

He couldn't have fired more than one.

Only one of the early shots was heard by most witnesses and neither of them provoked visible startle reactions. So neither of them could have come from an unsuppressed, high powered rifle.

He might have fired either the shot at 285 or the one at 313, but he couldn't have fired both. They were too close together.

So where were the other two fired from?

 

[Robert Harris]

As some of the people who heard them thought they were, after a stressful event.

No, I said "most", which is exactly what the WC said,

..a substantial majority of the witnesses stated that the shots were not evenly spaced. Most witnesses recalled that the second and third shots were bunched together.

At one point during the hearings, Warren Commissioner Allen Dulles noted the overwhelming consistency of these witnesses, when he described the ratio of those confirming that shooting scenario in comparison with others,

There has been a certain amount of testimony indicating there was a longer pause between the report of the first shot... and the second and third shots, that is not absolutely unanimous but I would say it is something like 5 to 1 or something of that kind.

So yes, it is about shot timing...and number of shots perhaps?

Shot timing, yes. Number of shots, no.

Your raising of the slowdown of the limo lost a couple of posters here as you hadn't explained your point. So, in terms of your theory, the timing of the second shot is important, especially when you relate it to that slowdown.

Do you mean the shot at 223, or the perceived second shot at 285? Both are important to the overall picture.

Or, you know, you could actually do a search?

I am not the one claiming that I have been refuted. You bear the burden of proving that.

So it is the number of shots and their timing if you are alledging a silenced shot.

You terrify me with this paraphrasing.

Let's be specific. I'm saying the shots at app. 150-160 and 223, could not have come from Oswald, since only one of them was audible to most people and neither of them were loud enough to provoke the kind of reactions we see following 285 and 313.

I am also saying that the shots at 285 and 313 were too close together for Oswald to have fired both.

 

[Robert Harris]

So where were the other two fired from?

Good question. I would bet that the early shots came from the Daltex and bet a lesser amount that the other loud shot came from another shooter in the TSBD.

There are other possibilities for either of course.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Well, you are certainly entitled to your subjective opinions. But the objective fact is, that those 5 reactions all began at 290-292, while Alvarez concluded that Zapruder reacted at 290-291.

To say that it was improbable that this was coincidental, is probably the understatement of the millenium.

Only improbable if you have reason to suppose that each of their movements represents some commonality of behaviour with no common cause. You claim they have that - a gunshot - my impression is they each act quite independently and none in a way which obviously marks a sudden reaction to a loud report.

Looking at the whole clip, Mrs Kennedy puts her hand on her husband's elbow as if unsure why he seems to be offering it to her but then she leans in as if she has now realised that there's something wrong and he's clutching his throat. Mrs Connally looks from her husband to the president, to the driver, back to the president and then at last begins to lean in toward her husband who presumably within the last second or two has uttered his "oh, no, no...". The secret service agent shifts in his seat to turn around just briefly to see the president leaning forward with his hands to his throat and the first lady looking at her husband but not yet having moved in close to him, then the agent turns back to face forward again.

I just don't see what you say you see. It barely feels as if we are looking at the same film. There's that old cliche about "if it looks like a duck" Well in this case it doesn't look like anyone ducks.

 

[Robert Harris]

Hmmmm...

So, we have LHO in the TSBD w/ his Carcano, John Doe # 1 w/ a suppressed firearm.

Where does JD #1 shoot from, and what type of firearm is JD using in your scenario?

Please check my most recent reply to Pooneil. I answered that same question for him.

 

[Ranb]

That's not surprising, since Oswald's rifle was tested by the HSCA and proven to generate a 130 decibel shock wave, emanating directly from the bullet, followed almost instantly by a muzzle blast that was almost as loud. Other rifles are 2-3 times louder than Oswald's.

I've never heard of these claims before. How were the noise levels measured and what equipment did they use to measure it? 130 decibels for the muzzle blast seems to be rather low. They must have used equipment that was not up to the task of capturing an adequate amount of the very brief impulse noise from the muzzle and bullet flight.

Look here for some data using the right kind of meter and microphone. http://www.silencertalk.com/results.htm You can see that a suppressed rifle is about 130 decibels and an unsuppressed rifle will be around 160 depending on the caliber and ammo used.

Since the witnesses, including all of the surviving limo passengers also reported hearing no more than one early shot, I don't think it's unreasonable to consider that this one was fired from a suppressed rifle of some kind.

Of some kind? You should do better than that. What kind of suppressed rifle is going to make those kinds of holes in a person at that range and also be inaudible to those nearby? I'm very familiar with rifles and silencers; I've been making them as a hobby for 12 years now and know that a high powered rifle like a 6.5mm Carcano can't be completely suppressed by a portable silencer. Even one using subsonic ammunition will produce muzzle blast.

If the assassin wants to use similar ammunition, how will they ensure that it performs as intended if the bullet is reduced to subsonic speed? Don't want to risk two different kinds of bullets being found at the scene if only one guy is being held responsible do we? There are yaw and accuracy problems when a rifle uses ammunition that is much slower than the standard ammunition intended for it.

Ranb