JFK Conspiracy Theories IV: The One With The Whales

[Axxman300]

Just a while ago, one of you guys tried to claim that a subsonic bullet entering the EOP would exit out of the face, but of course there are penetrating fractures (and one could argue that the fractured base of the skull could represent an exit). Now you're trying to to tell me that a subsonic bullet entering the EOP wouldn't even have the energy to send a fragment out of the throat. Meanwhile, Carcano rounds apparently have every magic ability that fits the circumstances of the shooting.

See, if you understood the basics of ballistics (and that's all I understand), which are bullet size, speed, range, kinetic energy, penetration, and cavitation so many of your questions would be easily answered.

The list of calibers that can pass through a skull from one side to the other is not all that long*, and no subsonic round is exiting the skull fired from any of the theoretical sniper locations (even from the 6th floor). The most common round would be the .306 (.762 NATO), and had Oswald gone with a Garand there might be something to talk about since .306 rifles would have been in thousands of homes in Texas in 1963.

But Oswald but a Carcano that fired the 6.5×52mm round.

It's not magic - it's a canon.

The 6.5×52mm is fast, has a high rate of spin making it accurate, and can pass through multiple human bodies with spectacular effect.

Of all the witnesses, not one saw the President get hit in the head before the Kill-shot. It's one thing to play "What If?" with the acoustical issues, but fabricating a 4th bullet, one that struck the President in the head prior to the 6.5×52mm makes zero sense based on the obvious facts.

Or to put it another way, I'm not the one making things up.

*I'm talking about rifle calibers fired from a range up to 306 feet, that you wound have found in US gun shops in 1963.

 

[MicahJava]

See, if you understood the basics of ballistics (and that's all I understand), which are bullet size, speed, range, kinetic energy, penetration, and cavitation so many of your questions would be easily answered.

The list of calibers that can pass through a skull from one side to the other is not all that long*, and no subsonic round is exiting the skull fired from any of the theoretical sniper locations (even from the 6th floor). The most common round would be the .306 (.762 NATO), and had Oswald gone with a Garand there might be something to talk about since .306 rifles would have been in thousands of homes in Texas in 1963.

But Oswald but a Carcano that fired the 6.5×52mm round.

It's not magic - it's a canon.

The 6.5×52mm is fast, has a high rate of spin making it accurate, and can pass through multiple human bodies with spectacular effect.

Of all the witnesses, not one saw the President get hit in the head before the Kill-shot. It's one thing to play "What If?" with the acoustical issues, but fabricating a 4th bullet, one that struck the President in the head prior to the 6.5×52mm makes zero sense based on the obvious facts.

Or to put it another way, I'm not the one making things up.

*I'm talking about rifle calibers fired from a range up to 306 feet, that you wound have found in US gun shops in 1963.

Yes, Carcano rounds can penetrate through more than one human being, as can other rounds. It depends. Maybe something like that happened with a projectile that exited the throat from the bullet that hit the EOP. If you think that's anything other than trivia, you're using a logical fallacy. If you think that means the simplest explanation is the single bullet theory, you are using a logical fallacy.

 

[MicahJava]

Why do you expect there would be?

http://studydroid.com/imageCards/0m/s2/card-23988899-back.jpg

Edited by Agatha: 

Edited for rule 5

 

[Tomtomkent]

[qimg]http://studydroid.com/imageCards/0m/s2/card-23988899-back.jpg[/qimg]

Yes. I understand the location. But, why do you expect more damage than that already described in the autopsy?

Is there a reason you limit yourself to incomplete arguments?

 

[Axxman300]

Yes, Carcano rounds can penetrate through more than one human being, as can other rounds. It depends. Maybe something like that happened with a projectile that exited the throat from the bullet that hit the EOP. If you think that's anything other than trivia, you're using a logical fallacy. If you think that means the simplest explanation is the single bullet theory, you are using a logical fallacy.

No, I'm just making a logic evaluation based on what the Carcano round can do, and actually did in Dallas.

Before you can rule in a conspiracy you have to rule out the Carcano...and you can't.

 

[Tomtomkent]

For those who are interested we can look at the ARRB testimony about the autopsy.

We note that Boswell sees no damage and states the brain was intact.
But Humes clarifies that there no abrasions (which fits the trajectory), but the cerebellum was "disrupted" by the pressure of the trauma. Which again, is to be expected. The cerebellum is a jelly mass in a dural compartment.

But once again. Like the review board we can see the photographs and see if we would expect more damage to there cerebellum than was reported or not. We can see that the wound to the brain is consistent with the bullet wound being described.

The review board goes into the following details:

Color transparencies and prints Nos. 46,47, 48, and 49 and black and white prints Nos. 19, 21, and 22 reveal the inferior aspect of the brain, with extensive fragmentation and laceration of the right inferior cerebral hemisphere, some loss of cerebral substance on the inferior surface of the left temporal lobe, and scattered areas of subarachnoid hemorrhage in the underlying cortex. The right sylvian fissure shows dark red-brown to black discoloration suggestive of blood clot. The surface of the midtemporal region is lacerated and depressed. The cerebral peduncles are likewise lacerated. The panel notes that the posterior-inferior portion of the cerebellum virtually intact. It certainly does not demonstrate the degree of laceration, fragmentation, or contusion (as appears subsequently on the superior aspect of the brain) that would be expected in this location if the bullet wound of entrance were as described in the autopsy report

Hence my earlier question as to WHY we would expect there to be more.

I am going to see this as further evidence that MichaJava hasn't actually discovered what the autopsy, and those who perform it, have to say, before asking questions he thinks are significant.

We can even take a good guess at why he would suggest there should be more. Given his "only" sources were conspiracy books, three gets you seven that the big revelation on the way is:
"Parkland doctors saw the cerebellum was damaged, hence the autopsy is inaccurate, and blah blah, some other wound was there the autopsy did not describe."

Yeah... The autopsy doctors were the ones able to remove the brain and examine it. The Parkland doctors were busy trying to save a life. They had different priorities and one could be more accurate than the other, as it was limited by the need to keep the patient alive and functional.

What happened when Pepper Jenkins was shown the autopsy records, photos, and x-rays decades later? Mcadams has a handy quote:

I did say cerebellum in my first official report. And the cerebellum ordinarily is in a posterior part. And here I know very well that the wound was more anterior than that, but there was a portion of the brain that looked like it had a stalk, and is convoluted to look like what I thought was cerebellum.

Understandably mistaken, given what he could see, and what he was trying to do at the time.

 

[MicahJava]

Tomtomkent - Wow, your posts are such butchery. I am arguing from the perspective of the official story on the condition of the brain being true (i.e. no cerebellum protruding from an exit wound in the back of the head). The autopsy doctors said the cerebellum was slightly damaged from the bullet entering the EOP. We've been over this.

Take the diagram I posted above and use MS Paint to draw a hypothetical bullet trajectory connecting the EOP to the top-right side of the head without damaging the cerebellum beyond grazing it. If you can not, it looks like more than one bullet entered the head.

 

[Axxman300]

Take the diagram I posted above and use MS Paint to draw a hypothetical bullet trajectory connecting the EOP to the top-right side of the head without damaging the cerebellum beyond grazing it. If you can not, it looks like more than one bullet entered the head.

Fun story...

My friend was a Marine who fought in Fallujah, and he talked about bullets coming thought the walls, and cyber blocks shattering sending chunks of concrete through the air fast enough to cut people's cheeks.

A skull is not as dense as concrete, and the X-rays show JFK's skull had shattered FROM THE LONE ROUND. Skull fragments are going to have sharp edges that shred parts of the brain due to the force of the impact, and penetration.

You can't draw that with MS Paint.

The other problem is that you need an oblique view of the skull and brain from the top-down.

 

[MicahJava]

Fun story...

My friend was a Marine who fought in Fallujah, and he talked about bullets coming thought the walls, and cyber blocks shattering sending chunks of concrete through the air fast enough to cut people's cheeks.

A skull is not as dense as concrete, and the X-rays show JFK's skull had shattered FROM THE LONE ROUND. Skull fragments are going to have sharp edges that shred parts of the brain due to the force of the impact, and penetration.

You can't draw that with MS Paint.

The other problem is that you need an oblique view of the skull and brain from the top-down.

You have a small hole 2 centimeters to the right and just above the EOP, and a large hole on the top-right side of the head. The trajectory of the bullet was downwards and your subject was sitting upright. Connect the dots without having a lot of damage to the cerebellum. If you can not, the damage was caused by separate bullets.

 

[MicahJava]

No, I'm just making a logic evaluation based on what the Carcano round can do, and actually did in Dallas.

Before you can rule in a conspiracy you have to rule out the Carcano...and you can't.

That's why we have autopsies. And the autopsy doctors never seriously considered the back wound as having anything to do with the throat wound. And believe me, they thought of everything and tried to make it work. They didn't just probe the back wound with their fingers, they probed it with a rod meant for the purpose. Humes may have even gotten an X-ray made of a rod shoved from the back wound through throat wound, but that film is inexplicably missing. If it was a Carcano round, it was defective, as Paul O'Connor said.

Is it me, or is "the autopsy was botched" narrative a creation of the lone nutters rather than the conspiracy theorists?

 

[Regnad Kcin]

You have a small hole 2 centimeters to the right and just above the EOP, and a large hole on the top-right side of the head. The trajectory was downwards and your subject was sitting upright. Connect the dots without having a lot of damage to the cerebellum. If you can not, the damage was caused by separate bullets.

That's nice.

See, you have to prove something you assert (such as by offering physical evidence of those bullets, for starters), not just leap from an assertion to a conclusion. You won't because you can't because there was only Oswald.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Coming up on 53 years, everybody! Hold steady, the conspiracy will be confirmed any minute now.

 

[MicahJava]

That's nice.

See, you have to prove something you assert (such as by offering physical evidence of those bullets, for starters), not just leap from an assertion to a conclusion. You won't because you can't because there was only Oswald.

Knock yourself out, Regnad Kcin.

 

[MicahJava]

Coming up on 53 years, everybody! Hold steady, the conspiracy will be confirmed any minute now.

Yes, and I'm sure when that happens you'll be hearing about it all over the news, there will be riots in the streets.

 

[HSienzant]

A lot of people here stalling and underhandedly arguing like a Stormfront poster.

When I started posting to this thread is around when I started researching. My only sources are basically Barry Krusch's book, Pat Speer's book, Jim Dieugenio's book Reclaiming Parkland, and Doug Horne's presentations.

So four conspiracy theorists, and no non-conspiracy books.

May I suggest - again - that you start with reading the actual testimony of everyone involved for yourself, instead of getting it interpreted through a conspiracy theorist?

Hank

 

[MicahJava]

So four conspiracy theorists, and no non-conspiracy books.

May I suggest - again - that you start with reading the actual testimony of everyone involved for yourself, instead of getting it interpreted through a conspiracy theorist?

Hank

I have, and feel free to point out where I have made any distortions.

 

[HSienzant]

If the Z film is authentic, I think it probably shows a tangential wound at frame 313.

Nobody who saw the skull said the cracking extended that far down.

Seriously, nobody cares what you think. You're not a recognized expert in anything.

And in fact, experiments were performed and carcano rounds were determined to cause massive damage to human skulls.

Mr. SPECTER, Dr. Olivier, in the regular course of your work for the U.S. Army, do you have occasion to perform tests on reconstructed human skulls to determine the effects of bullets on skulls?
Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; I do.
Mr. SPECTER. And did you have occasion to conduct such a test in connection with the series which you are now describing?
Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; I did.
Mr. SPECTER. And would you outline briefly the procedures for simulating the human skull?
Dr. OLIVIER. Human skulls, we take these human skulls and they are imbedded and filled with 20 percent gelatin. As I mentioned before, 20 percent gelatin is a pretty good simulant for body tissues.
They are in the moisture content. When I say 20 percent, it is 20 percent weight of the dry gelatin, 80 percent moisture.
The skull, the cranial cavity, is filled with this and the surface is coated with a gelatin and then it is trimmed down to approximate the thickness of the tissues overlying the skull, the soft tissues of the head.
Mr. SPECTER. And at what distance were these tests performed?
Dr. OLIVIER. These tests were performed at a distance of 90 yards.
Mr. SPECTER. And what gun was used?
Dr. OLIVIER. It was a 6.5 Mannlicher-Carcano that was marked Commission Exhibit 139.
Mr. SPECTER. What bullets were used?
Dr. OLIVIER. It was the 6.5 millimeter Mannlicher-Carcano Western ammunition lot 6,000.
Mr. SPECTER. What did that examination or test, rather, disclose?
Dr. OLIVIER. It disclosed that the type of head wounds that the President received could be done by this type of bullet. This surprised me very much, because this type of a stable bullet I didn't think would cause a massive head wound, I thought it would go through making a small entrance and exit, but the bones of the skull are enough to deform the end of this bullet causing it to expend a lot of energy and blowing out the side of the skull or blowing out fragments of the skull.
. . .
Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you a photograph marked as Commission Exhibit 861, move its admission into evidence, and ask you to state what that depicts.
Dr. OLIVIER. This is the skull in question, the same one from which the fragments marked Exhibit 857 were recovered.
Mr. SPECTER. And what does that show as to damage done to the skull?
Dr. OLIVIER. It blew the whole side of the cranial cavity away.
Mr. SPECTER. How does that compare, then, with the damage inflicted on President Kennedy?
Dr. OLIVIER. Very similar. I think they stated the length of the defect, the missing skull was 13 centimeters if I remember correctly. This in this case it is greater, but you don't have the limiting scalp holding the pieces in so you would expect it to fly a little more but it is essentially a similar type wound.
Mr. SPECTER. Does the human scalp work to hold in the human skull in such circumstances to a greater extent than the simulated matters used?
Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; we take this into account.
Mr. SPECTER. I hand you Commission Exhibit 862, move its admission into evidence, and ask you what that depicts?
Dr. OLIVIER. This is the same skull. This is just looking at it from the front. You are looking at the exit. You can't see it here because the bone has been blown away, but the bullet exited somewhere around---we reconstructed the skull. In other words, it exited very close to the superorbital ridge, possibly below it.
Mr. SPECTER. Did you formulate any other conclusions or opinions based on the tests on firing at the skull?
Dr. OLIVIER. Well, let's see. We found that this bullet could do exactly--could make the type of wound that the President received.
Also, that the recovered fragments were very similar to the ones recovered on the front seat and on the floor of the car.
This, to me, indicates that those fragments did come from the bullet that wounded the President in the head.


Commission exhibits 861 and 862:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0440b.htm

You would know this if you actually read the testimony like I keep suggesting instead of relying on conspiracy theorists for your [cough] facts. Remember, you're entitled to your own opinion. You're not entitled to your own facts.

Hank

 

[MicahJava]

Seriously, nobody cares what you think. You're not a recognized expert in anything.

And in fact, experiments were performed and carcano rounds were determined to cause massive damage to human skulls.

Mr. SPECTER, Dr. Olivier, in the regular course of your work for the U.S. Army, do you have occasion to perform tests on reconstructed human skulls to determine the effects of bullets on skulls?
Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; I do.
Mr. SPECTER. And did you have occasion to conduct such a test in connection with the series which you are now describing?
Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; I did.
Mr. SPECTER. And would you outline briefly the procedures for simulating the human skull?
Dr. OLIVIER. Human skulls, we take these human skulls and they are imbedded and filled with 20 percent gelatin. As I mentioned before, 20 percent gelatin is a pretty good simulant for body tissues.
They are in the moisture content. When I say 20 percent, it is 20 percent weight of the dry gelatin, 80 percent moisture.
The skull, the cranial cavity, is filled with this and the surface is coated with a gelatin and then it is trimmed down to approximate the thickness of the tissues overlying the skull, the soft tissues of the head.
Mr. SPECTER. And at what distance were these tests performed?
Dr. OLIVIER. These tests were performed at a distance of 90 yards.
Mr. SPECTER. And what gun was used?
Dr. OLIVIER. It was a 6.5 Mannlicher-Carcano that was marked Commission Exhibit 139.
Mr. SPECTER. What bullets were used?
Dr. OLIVIER. It was the 6.5 millimeter Mannlicher-Carcano Western ammunition lot 6,000.
Mr. SPECTER. What did that examination or test, rather, disclose?
Dr. OLIVIER. It disclosed that the type of head wounds that the President received could be done by this type of bullet. This surprised me very much, because this type of a stable bullet I didn't think would cause a massive head wound, I thought it would go through making a small entrance and exit, but the bones of the skull are enough to deform the end of this bullet causing it to expend a lot of energy and blowing out the side of the skull or blowing out fragments of the skull.
. . .
Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you a photograph marked as Commission Exhibit 861, move its admission into evidence, and ask you to state what that depicts.
Dr. OLIVIER. This is the skull in question, the same one from which the fragments marked Exhibit 857 were recovered.
Mr. SPECTER. And what does that show as to damage done to the skull?
Dr. OLIVIER. It blew the whole side of the cranial cavity away.
Mr. SPECTER. How does that compare, then, with the damage inflicted on President Kennedy?
Dr. OLIVIER. Very similar. I think they stated the length of the defect, the missing skull was 13 centimeters if I remember correctly. This in this case it is greater, but you don't have the limiting scalp holding the pieces in so you would expect it to fly a little more but it is essentially a similar type wound.
Mr. SPECTER. Does the human scalp work to hold in the human skull in such circumstances to a greater extent than the simulated matters used?
Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; we take this into account.
Mr. SPECTER. I hand you Commission Exhibit 862, move its admission into evidence, and ask you what that depicts?
Dr. OLIVIER. This is the same skull. This is just looking at it from the front. You are looking at the exit. You can't see it here because the bone has been blown away, but the bullet exited somewhere around---we reconstructed the skull. In other words, it exited very close to the superorbital ridge, possibly below it.
Mr. SPECTER. Did you formulate any other conclusions or opinions based on the tests on firing at the skull?
Dr. OLIVIER. Well, let's see. We found that this bullet could do exactly--could make the type of wound that the President received.
Also, that the recovered fragments were very similar to the ones recovered on the front seat and on the floor of the car.
This, to me, indicates that those fragments did come from the bullet that wounded the President in the head.


Commission exhibits 861 and 862:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0440b.htm

You would know this if you actually read the testimony like I keep suggesting instead of relying on conspiracy theorists for your [cough] facts. Remember, you're entitled to your own opinion. You're not entitled to your own facts.

Hank

Yes, I've seen the pictures of the test skulls. Now time for you to demonstrate, with evidence, that the damage was consistent with a bullet entering the EOP and exiting out of the top-right side of the head. If there wasn't major damage to the cerebellum, why wasn't there?

 

[HSienzant]

That's why we have autopsies. And the autopsy doctors never seriously considered the back wound as having anything to do with the throat wound. And believe me, they thought of everything and tried to make it work. They didn't just probe the back wound with their fingers, they probed it with a rod meant for the purpose.

Not according to the autopsy doctors. Here's Humes testimony to the ARRB:
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/humesa.htm


Q. Do you know what the standard autopsy protocol is for gunshot wounds and autopsy of the neck?
A. Well, no. I haven't seen that in--what you say, standard, I mean, many times if you have a track of a missile, it's helpful to take a long
probe and put it in the position. It can tell you a lot of things. If you know where the point of entrance and the point of exit are, it's duck soup. But for me to start probing around in this man's neck, all I would make was false passages. There wouldn't be any track that I could put a probe through or anything of that nature. It just doesn't work that way.
Q. Was any probe used at all to track the path--
A. I don't recall that there was. There might have been some abortive efforts superficially in the back of the neck, but no.
And if there's a standard protocol, I don't know where you'd find it, to tell you the truth.

Humes may have even gotten an X-ray made of a rod shoved from the back wound through throat wound, but that film is inexplicably missing.

Here's a thought: Maybe it's missing because it never existed. Where's the evidence of this supposed x-ray you reference?

If it was a Carcano round, it was defective, as Paul O'Connor said.

I was unaware Paul O'Connor was an expert in ballistics. Can you cite his background?

Is it me, or is "the autopsy was botched" narrative a creation of the lone nutters rather than the conspiracy theorists?

It's you. Conspiracy theorists either allege the autopsy was a fabrication from start to finish, the autopsists lied, or the body was altered before the autopsy so as to fool the autopsists.

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

I have, and feel free to point out where I have made any distortions.

You just told us you hadn't. That your sources were four conspiracy theorists.

When I started posting to this thread is around when I started researching. My only sources are basically Barry Krusch's book, Pat Speer's book, Jim Dieugenio's book Reclaiming Parkland, and Doug Horne's presentations.

You referenced the actual testimony of the eyewitnesses and the expert witnesses not at all.

So I pointed out - again - that you should read that testimony.

And now you're claiming you have.

Which is it?

Hank