JFK Conspiracy Theories IV: The One With The Whales

[MicahJava]

No, you didn't.

Far more interesting is the fact that you have claimed to be new to all of this, to be a few weeks at all of this, to be six months at all of this and to be years at all of this.

These claims of yours cannot all be true, can they?

Couple to that your proclivity and familiarity with wholesale spammage and one begins to wonder.

Unless you are willing to claim, which I doubt you so wish, to be an utterly gullible noob taken in by those wishing to shill a few bucks from you, something seems not quite right about your story.

So which is it? New, weeks, months or years? It can't possibly be all of them yet you have variously claimed them all.

Step up.

Okay, you caught me. I'm a paid shill of the JFK conspiracy community.

 

[abaddon]

Okay, you caught me. I'm a paid shill of the JFK conspiracy community.

That is not an answer.

Try again.

 

[MicahJava]

That is not an answer.

Try again.

My shill handlers are a balding man in his late 40's and a no-nonsense woman in her thirties.

 

[abaddon]

My shill handlers are a balding man in his late 40's and a no-nonsense woman in her thirties.

That's imaginary and still not an answer.

Try again.

 

[Tomtomkent]

My shill handlers are a balding man in his late 40's and a no-nonsense woman in her thirties.

Given your claims to be presenting your case to convince readers of this thread who are not participating, would it not be in your interest to offer an honest answer?

 

[HSienzant]

And so him and Robinson or David Lifton are in cahoots about the fragments being stored in a tiny test tube?

Dennis David makes up stuff. That's how one inserts oneself into the story, read the Warren Report, find something that's apparently unexplained, and explain it by inserting oneself into the story. Please don't attack straw men of your own creation and avoid my point.

I meant during the autopsy. I'm not in limousine territory.

I know. But the two large fragments, contrary to Dennis David's story, were recovered from the limo, not during the autopsy. That is documented fact. And like I said, this is where the people who attempt to insert themselves into the story get tripped up. By the documented record.

You were attempting to salvage Dennis David's claim about the two large fragments found at the autopsy, and the supposed note he typed up for the FBI man who he thought might have been Sibert with a reference to the "official story":

Officially, the story is two large fragments and several tiny pieces of one single bullet.

But the official story - documented with a paper trail and testimony - is those two fragments were recovered from the limo, so they offer no support to Dennis David's story.

I was asking you or anyone else here. If you think it's nothing, OK but it seems like kind of a coincidence.

No, you claimed to be referencing some experts:

It is my understanding that some experts have said that the dark tadpole-looking line on the right side of the neck could represent the track of a missile.

I asked you what experts. I also pointed out that the true experts, the autopsy doctors who examined the body and the forensic pathologists who reviewed the extant autopsy materials said nothing like that, as far as I know.

Actually, the autopsy doctors and others seriously considered that the throat wound could be anything but an exit from the back shot. One of the earliest explanations for the throat wound was a fragment wound from the head. It definitely doesn't look like the doctors always thought the throat wound was a tracheotomy.

Now you're back to arguing at cross-purposes, contradicting yourself again, and ignoring the point about what the true experts found. You previously argued that Lipsey said the bullet that struck JFK in the back didn't exit. Now you're arguing for an exit wound in the throat, and arguing that the autopsy doctors thought it wasn't always a trache, contrary to the testimony of Dr. Humes.

Mr. SPECTER - Did you have occasion to discuss that wound on the front side of the President with Dr. Malcolm Perry of Parkland Hospital in Dallas?
Commander HUMES - Yes, sir; I did. I had the impression from seeing the wound that it represented a surgical tracheotomy wound, a wound frequently made by surgeons when people are in respiratory distress to give them a free airway.
To ascertain that point, I called on the telephone Dr. Malcolm Perry and discussed with him the situation of the President's neck when he first examined the President, and asked him had he in fact done a tracheotomy which was somewhat redundant because I was somewhat certain he had.
He said, yes; he had done a tracheotomy and that as the point to perform his tracheotomy he used a wound which he had interpreted as a missile wound in the low neck, as the point through which to make the tracheotomy incision.
Mr. SPECTER - When did you have that conversation with him, Dr. Humes?
Commander HUMES - I had that conversation early on Saturday morning, sir.
Mr. SPECTER - On Saturday morning, November 23d?
Commander HUMES - That is correct, sir.

You appear to be conflating two different sets of doctors. The doctors at Parkland trying to save JFK's life knew it wasn't always a trache because they saw a bullet wound there, and performed the trache through it (or more accurately, Dr. Perry saw this, and performed it). Those doctors conjectured one shot doing all the damage, with an entry to the throat hitting the spine and deflecting upwards, out of the head. To the autopsy doctors at Bethesda, the wound looked like a trache, and that's what they thought it was. They determined otherwise on Saturday morning.

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

Ladies and gentlemen, I just got HSienzant to admit that Kennedy was sitting upright at z222-224.

Ladies and gentleman will note you ignored the entire point of my post. JFK is seen sitting in the limo until he is struck in the head in frame Z313. You conjecture a shot that damaged his cerebellum five seconds before that. Yet the cerebellum controls posture and balance:

http://www.healthline.com/human-body-maps/cerebellum
The cerebellum receives information from the sensory systems, the spinal cord, and other parts of the brain and then regulates motor movements. The cerebellum coordinates voluntary movements such as posture, balance, coordination, and speech, resulting in smooth and balanced muscular activity. It is also important for learning motor behaviors.

Try to deal with the points I make, rather than running off in a different direction. I'm getting tired of having to repeat my points multiple times.

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

We know there was a shot at z190-z224, that's necessary. I don't see many good reasons to think there was a loud shot before that.

Except you're conjecturing two shots in that range. Not one. Isn't that right?

Try reading the entire interview, or even better listen to the audio. Lipsey is talking about the back wound being shallow, not exiting, and apparently not existing within the body;

So where'd it go, if not out the throat? Is this your magic bullet?

a bullet entering low in the head and exiting from the throat, and a tangential wound on the head.

Yes, I know. That's three shots to hit the President, and that's not what the experts who actually examined the body or the extant autopsy materials determined. Please give me a good reason to disbelieve everything the experts determined, and believe some recollections from some random non-medical person at the autopsy.

Where does the 'ten or twelve seconds' reference come from, again?

John Connally. Your search function doesn't work?

Let's say we allow frame z351 to represent the maximum time for the strong possibility of a loud shot shortly after z313

So now you're arguing John Connally WASN'T a good witness. He said the head shot at Z313 was the last shot he heard. You need to make up your mind, and stop cherry-picking the good bits out of the witness testimony. He's a good witness when you like what he said, he's a poor witness when you don't like what he said.

or for the sound of the shot from 313 to dissipate. 351 - 190 = 161. 161 divided by 19 (for the zfilm fps) is 8.47368421053 (seconds between z190 and z350). Meh, close enough to ten.

You're fudging the numbers by adding 38 frames onto the end of the shooting sequence. That's not a coincidence. Oswald's rifle could be recycled in 2.25 seconds, or 41.2 frames between shots. If you had added 42 frames and made it Z355 instead of Z351, then Oswald could be responsible for both shots. You apparently want to force a conspiratorial conclusion, so you select a range just below the minimum time for Oswald to work the bolt and fire twice.

Moreover, you're arguing with your own witness now. You brought up Connally, it's his recollection that the head shot was the third and final shot. You want to prolong that on the far end to Z351 to bring Z190 into a reasonable range.

But Connally's estimate was 10-12 seconds for three shots. One before he was hit, and one after he was hit. And he was certain Z313 - the head shot - was the last of the three he heard. That means the first shot, by his testimony, is in the range of frames 93 - 130. Nowhere as late as 190 as you'd like to pretend.

No, Burkley said that the possibility of two shots could be eliminated if the brain had been properly examined. He also said several times that he believes that it is physically impossible for LHO to do all of the damage to JFK.

I remind you that YOU provided this quote from Burkley:

HSCA even wrote an affidavit to the HSCA along with his statement, stating:
"Had the Warren Commission deemed to call me, I would have stated why I retained the brain and the possibility of two bullets having wounded President John F. Kennedy's brain would have been eliminated."

I am arguing that Connally did not perceive the last two shots close together, as most witnesses did.

So you're arguing the witness you cited was wrong about the number and sequence of the shots. You're arguing above for FOUR shots, at a minimum. The one at Z190, at Z222, Z313 and one more, shortly before or after Z313.
Right?

I think that some of the two-shot witnesses maybe thought that the last two shots were really one shot because the two were so close together.

So those witnesses, according to you, heard two of the minimum FOUR shots you conjecture. Right?

The one that hits Connally at z222 could be a subsonic bullet, therefore he could mean a completely different thing when he says that the first two shots were very close together.

So yet another shot in addition to the four? Or what? Can you be precise in exactly what you think the shooting sequence was?

I don't know, man. Something about a protein or a clock or something.

For some reason the link got split into two lines.

This should work: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11561311&postcount=1905

Hank

 

[Axxman300]

Do you dispute that the damage is consistent with a subsonic bullet penetrating the EOP and hitting the base of the skull? What else would you expect?

I dispute it 100%

Why? The shooter would have had tp be standing on the street, not behind a fence, not in a building - right there on Elm Street where the entire world would see him.

If you can't bother to learn about guns and ballistics there is no way you can hope to tackle medical evidence.

 

[abaddon]

I dispute it 100%

Why? The shooter would have had tp be standing on the street, not behind a fence, not in a building - right there on Elm Street where the entire world would see him.

If you can't bother to learn about guns and ballistics there is no way you can hope to tackle medical evidence.

In a single word...

Welrod.

 

[Axxman300]

In a single word...

Welrod.

And Jackie was the shooter.

 

[abaddon]

And Jackie was the shooter.

Silly. It was Marilyn Monroe hiding in the trunk.

 

[BStrong]

snipped...


Do you dispute that the damage is consistent with a subsonic bullet penetrating the EOP and hitting the base of the skull? What else would you expect?

snipped

Other than your assertion and wish fullfillment, where is the evidence for a subsonic projectile?

 

[MicahJava]

Dennis David himself posted on the JFK education forum about ten years ago:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=7471

I do not buy that he "wrote himself into the story". He seems like a normal person who understands the importance of facts over an interesting anecdote.

 

[MicahJava]

Silly. It was Marilyn Monroe hiding in the trunk.

No, Marilyn Monroe was, you know, crouching in the back seat of the limousine... in front of Kennedy. The top of her head was barely obscured by the limousine doors. Need I say more? He ordered the bubble top removed because he thought it would be deliciously naughty to do that in front of the whole world. Roy Kellerman thought he cried out "My God, I'm hit!" when actually he said "My God, I'm lit!". That's what pissed Jackie so much, because according to some of her biographies, Kennedy was a two-pump chump. He can get lit with Marilyn but not with her? Jackie wasn't having it.

 

[BStrong]

Dennis David himself posted on the JFK education forum about ten years ago:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=7471

I do not buy that he "wrote himself into the story". He seems like a normal person who understands the importance of facts over an interesting anecdote.

Other than your assertion and wish fulfillment, where is the evidence for a subsonic projectile?

 

[MicahJava]

I dispute it 100%

Why? The shooter would have had tp be standing on the street, not behind a fence, not in a building - right there on Elm Street where the entire world would see him.

If you can't bother to learn about guns and ballistics there is no way you can hope to tackle medical evidence.

Are you sure you have the right idea?

 

[MicahJava]

Other than your assertion and wish fulfillment, where is the evidence for a subsonic projectile?

Let's give three off the top of my head:

1. The evidence for a loud report at around z190, which is over 1 1/2 seconds before the z222-224+ reactions.

2. The evidence for a shallow back wound

3. The nature of the small head wound and the damage in that area of the head.

 

[BStrong]

Let's give three off the top of my head:

1. The evidence for a loud report at around z190, which is over 1 1/2 seconds before the z222-224+ reactions.

2. The evidence for a shallow back wound

3. The nature of the small head wound and the damage in that area of the head.

You're 0 for 3 and you still dodged the question "Where is the evidence for a subsonic projectile?"

There is no proof that the reactions you cite resulted from the report of a weapon being fired.

The shallow back wound you cite isn't supported by the WC evidence.

You have not produced evidence that the head wound is any different from any other projectile wound.

 

[MicahJava]

Ladies and gentleman will note you ignored the entire point of my post. JFK is seen sitting in the limo until he is struck in the head in frame Z313. You conjecture a shot that damaged his cerebellum five seconds before that. Yet the cerebellum controls posture and balance:

http://www.healthline.com/human-body-maps/cerebellum
The cerebellum receives information from the sensory systems, the spinal cord, and other parts of the brain and then regulates motor movements. The cerebellum coordinates voluntary movements such as posture, balance, coordination, and speech, resulting in smooth and balanced muscular activity. It is also important for learning motor behaviors.

Try to deal with the points I make, rather than running off in a different direction. I'm getting tired of having to repeat my points multiple times.

Hank

1. The back brace could have kept him sitting upright.

2. If you interpret Kennedy's arm movements at z224+ to be reaching for the throat, he certainly seems very disoriented. It's like he was suddenly stinking drunk while trying to touch his nose. This is a known symptom of cerebellum/flocculus damage.