Moderated JFK conspiracy theories: it never ends III

[Robert Harris]

You're discussing your interpretation that the reactions were startling reactions.

That is not true.

I am discussing verifiable facts and empirical evidence, which proves that some of Kellerman's reactions were classic, textbook startle reactions.

And the verifiable fact that all of these visible reactions began in the same 1/6th of one second of one another and Zapruder's reaction, as confirmed by a Nobel prize winning physicist (the Zapruder reaction).

And the verifiable fact, that most of the people who heard those shots reported the final ones being closely bunched.

Since we all know by now (I hope) that this was not caused by a slowdown, what are the remaining alternatives?

I am pointing out that there are other more plausible reasons for the reactions we see

Well then, let's talk about them. I have spent a lot of time, researching alternative explanations, but haven't had any luck finding anything that was consistent with the known facts.

If you have, we need to talk about it.

reasons that don't require unevidenced gunmen

Yes, gunshots require gunmen, and it doesn't mean much that they were "unevidenced", since the Daltex was never searched, and there is evidence that two rifles were found in the depository.

In addition to the usual arguments about the identification of the rifle, ex ATF agent, Frank Ellsworth had some interesting things to say, about his experience, assisting in the search of the Depository. This is from "Oswald Talked", by Ray and Mary La Fontaine.

Former ATF agent Frank Ellsworth, who
participated in a second search of the Book Depository
conducted after 1:30p.m. on November 22, 1963, confirms that
the Mannlicher-Carcano was found by a DPD detective on the
fourth or fifth floor of the building, "not on the same floor
as the cartridges". He adds: "I
remember we talked about it, and figured that he (Oswald) must
have run out from the stairwell, to the lower floor and
dropped it as he was running downstairs."

I don't consider this absolute proof, but the source was a federal agent, and his recollections are consistent with the possibility that the first rifle found, was actually a Mauser.

It is also consistent with other witnesses who claimed to have seen another sniper on the same floor Oswald was on.

My opinion is that all the reactions we see from the secret service agents - including Greer's deceleration/braking - were due to them reacting to the commotion in the back seat, where two men had just been shot.

Your opinion is inconsistent with what Greer said.

He said he heard two, near simultaneous gunshots and that he felt the "concussion" of the first of them. Obviously, a shot like that would be quite startling.

Furthermore, he said that he was turned around when he heard that shot. He was not turned around at 160 or 223, but he was a 285.

Also, Dr. Alvarez, who did an indepth analysis of the Zapruder film, suggested that Greer was reacting to a loud noise at frame 285. He was later corroborated by the similarly qualified, Dr. Michael Stroscio, who only disputed Alvarez's speculation that the noise was a siren. He stated,

"The association of the blast of a siren with the angular-acceleration episode that begins at frame 290 was made by Alvarez but he stated clearly that he was not sure this assignment was correct. Indeed, as correctly pointed out by Alvarez, most eyewitnesses claimed that siren sounded after the fatal wound to President Kennedy's head. These witnesses held that the siren first sounded well after frame 313 and the siren could not be responsible for the angular-acceleration episode that began at frame 290. Alvarez points out that eyewitnesses frequently have flawed memories of stressful events, but it is difficult, indeed, to understand why many witnesses would make the same error."

In another paper, he added,

..it may be that the jerking episode starting at frame 290 is associated with the bullet which caused the fragment that struck James Tague in the cheek. In fact, since James Tague was standing near the triple underpass on the west side of Dealey Plaza, it is certain that he was struck by an object traveling west on Elm Street.

I fully agree with Stroscio on that, and in fact, Tague testified that although he wasn't entirely certian, his recollection was that it was the second shot that caused his minor wound,

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you hear any more shots after you felt yourself get hit in the face?

Mr. TAGUE. I believe I did.

Mr. LIEBELER. You think you did?

Mr. TAGUE. I believe I did.

Mr. LIEBELER. How many?

Mr. TAGUE. I believe that it was the second shot, so I heard the third shot afterwards.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Since we all know by now (I hope) that this was not caused by a slowdown, what are the remaining alternatives?

You've not made your case for a suppressed rifle.

 

[Robert Harris]

You've not made your case for a suppressed rifle.

This shot was not fired from a suppressed rifle. It was obviously, quite loud and startling.

But if you wish to discuss the question of whether suppressed shots were fired, prior to 285, then you will need to explain why only one of those shots was heard by most witnesses and why none of them provoked reactions similar to the ones following 285 and 313.

 

[RoboTimbo]

This shot was not fired from a suppressed rifle. It was obviously, quite loud and startling.

But if you wish to discuss the question of whether suppressed shots were fired, prior to 285, then you will need to explain why only one of those shots was heard by most witnesses and why none of them provoked reactions similar to the ones following 285 and 313.

Nor have you made a case for a shot at 285.

 

[Robert Harris]

These are the questions I've been hounding Sandy to answer. Please answer them, if not openly, then privately. What makes Mrs. Connally such a valuable witness, is not that she was any more reliable than anyone else. It is that we can see her then and match up her statements with her actions.

Mrs Connally testified that she heard one shot and then looked back and saw JFK with his hand raised up to the level of his face.

She said that some time after that she heard a second shot which she thought, wounded her husband and that she immediately turned to him and pulled him back to her.

1. When do you see her look back at JFK?

2. When do you see her turn to her husband as she said she did, in reaction to that second shot?

3. Do you see anyone else reacting then?

 

[ComfySlippers]

...the slowdown would have to have been substantial and easily seen in this panoramic view of the Zapruder film. ...

While the panoramic version is cleverly done it doesn't really add anything of relevance. In fact it distracts from what is happening in the real frame and paints a somewhat false record of the live action occurring outside of that frame for obvious reasons.

Here is a vid with audio synced from Police radio. It is the first minute of the vid.




ETA: Pasted the wrong YouTube clip Link. Amended.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

No, I think YOU can see when the car slowed down and when it didn't.

Absolutely. Like I said, I can see the initial lurch as the driver lifts off the gas. The same event which you want to interpret as everyone flinching at the sound of your phantom gunshot.

 

[RoboTimbo]

These are the questions I've been hounding Sandy to answer.

Attempting to switch the burden of proof.

 

[Robert Harris]

While the panoramic version is cleverly done it doesn't really add anything of relevance.

Of course it does. I have argued with alterationists who claimed that there is no visible slowdown in the Zapruder film as there is in the Tague film. Of course there is, but that's because in the Tague film, we are looking at a smaller limo in a much larger background.

So, when we see the panoramic view of the Zapruder film, we are seeing it surrounded by a much larger background, like the Tague film. That's why the slowdown is so much easier to spot than in normal copies of the film.

In fact it distracts from what is happening in the real frame and paints a somewhat false record of the live action occurring outside of that frame for obvious reasons.

If you want to see more detail in the film, I will steal a line from Apple. "There's a GIF for that"

I present the panoramic view for the solitary purpose of demonstrating that the slowdown began after the reactions. I have others, including some which zoom in on the President and those closest to him, in very good detail.

Here is a vid with audio synced from Police radio. It is the first minute of the vid.

No sir, it is not. That video is fraudulent. The sounds on the original dictabelt, were tiny pulses that were unaudible to the naked ear and they certainly didn't sound like actual gunshots. In fact, the HSCA people discovered 17 such pulses and then picked among them to try to match the photographic panel and other wierd conclusions they came up with.

And Steve Barber confirmed years ago, that the dictabelt pulses actually occurred sometime, well after the shooting had ended.

 

[Robert Harris]

Attempting to switch the burden of proof.

No sir. I asked him to prove NOTHING.

Granted, we both knew that he would, if he answered the questions honestly, but that had nothing to do with burden of proof.

And BTW, I notice that no one else has posted answers to those questions, either.
I sincerely hope that the skeptics here would never evade questions, because they thought the answers might contradict their beliefs.

 

[Robert Harris]

Absolutely. Like I said, I can see the initial lurch as the driver lifts off the gas.

And where do you see that? In the first segment or the second?

 

[Sandy McCroskey]

No sir. I asked him to prove NOTHING.

Granted, we both knew that he would, if he answered the questions honestly, but that had nothing to do with burden of proof.

Have you considered the possibility that someone could honestly disagree with you?

 

[ComfySlippers]

Of course it does. I have argued with alterationists who claimed that there is no visible slowdown in the Zapruder film as there is in the Tague film. Of course there is, but that's because in the Tague film, we are looking at a smaller limo in a much larger background.

So, when we see the panoramic view of the Zapruder film, we are seeing it surrounded by a much larger background, like the Tague film. That's why the slowdown is so much easier to spot than in normal copies of the film.

I'll give you the one about the dictabelt audio. Both my included links were not the ones I intended to post. My mistake.

The Panorama view, however, helps only in that it creates a freeze frame of the areas outside the realtime frame view and gives a bit of an idea of the layout of the area.

 

[Robert Harris]

Have you considered the possibility that someone could honestly disagree with you?

Of course.

But how could they disagree, since I've never posted answers myself

 

[Sandy McCroskey]

Of course.

But how could they disagree, since I've never posted answers myself

Their interpretation could be different from the one you are holding so close to your chest.

 

[Robert Harris]

I'll give you the one about the dictabelt audio. Both my included links were not the ones I intended to post. My mistake.

The Panorama view, however, helps only in that it creates a freeze frame of the areas outside the realtime frame view and gives a bit of an idea of the layout of the area.

No sir, it also gives us a different perspective. The wide background makes it much easier to spot the slowdown than normal copies of the film, in which the entire or almost entire, horizontal field of view is dominated by the limo.

You can prove that yourself, by comparing the second animation with your regular copy of the film. Do you see the deceleration circa frame 300 in your copy of the film, as well as you do in mine?

If you can, you are sharper than most. It is very difficult to spot.

 

[Robert Harris]

Their interpretation could be different from the one you are holding so close to your chest.

Someone might disagree? Damn! I could never handle something like that

You're beating up a straw man Sandy. I never asked you or anyone else to agree with me on those questions.

I only asked for an honest answer; actually, I only asked for an answer.

 

[ComfySlippers]

No sir, it also gives us a different perspective. The wide background makes it much easier to spot the slowdown than normal copies of the film, in which the entire or almost entire, horizontal field of view is dominated by the limo.

You can prove that yourself, by comparing the second animation with your regular copy of the film. Do you see the deceleration circa frame 300 in your copy of the film, as well as you do in mine?

If you can, you are sharper than most. It is very difficult to spot.

The perspective created by the Panoramic view is not real. Surely you understand why?

 

[Belz...]

That is not true.

I am discussing verifiable facts and empirical evidence, which proves that some of Kellerman's reactions were classic, textbook startle reactions.

Robert, you have not demonstrated that they are startle reactions. You have asserted this. Please demonstrate that they are.

 

[Sandy McCroskey]

Someone might disagree? Damn! I could never handle something like that

You're beating up a straw man Sandy. I never asked you or anyone else to agree with me on those questions.

I only asked for an honest answer; actually, I only asked for an answer.

Actually, you said that if I were "honest," I would agree with your interpretation.
"I asked [Sandy] to prove NOTHING. Granted, we both knew that he would, if he answered the questions honestly."