• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

JFK Conspiracy Theories IV: The One With The Whales

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah, the nine members of the forensic pathology panel agreed that the depressed cowlick fracture on the X-Ray was an entry wound, but this finding is intertwined with the belief that the red spot on the BOH photographs must be an entry wound. As I have pointed out several times, this belief is based on taking the BOH photographs out of context. You must believe that the autopsy doctors (and John Stringer, who took those photographs) are completely clueless about the body they spent hours with.

The HSCA report also explains the concept of beveling, with a diagram of what typical or "ideal" beveling should look like. Is it my untrained eye, or does the depressed cowlick fracture on the X-ray not look particularly "beveled" in either direction? And on the fragment trail, people like David Mantik have pointed out that the emperor is wearing no clothes- the fragment trail does not correspond with the cowlick fracture besides one fragment placed a whole centimeter beside and under it.

I posted plenty of experts who weren't too crazy about the X-ray showing an entry in he cowlick. This just looks like a case of connecting the dots where they don't belong. Wecht also sticks to the belief that the autopsy doctors were very incompetent- he still enjoys telling the story about how they missed the bullet hole in the throat.

And above you have proof the HSCA panel didn't consider the possibility of a missile entering the original EOP location and going under the cerebellum without severely damaging it.
 
Last edited:
MicahJava said:
Yeah, the nine members of the forensic pathology panel agreed that the depressed cowlick fracture on the X-Ray was an entry wound, but this finding is intertwined with the belief that the red spot on the BOH photographs must be an entry wound. As I have pointed out several times, this belief is based on taking the BOH photographs out of context. You must believe that the autopsy doctors (and John Stringer, who took those photographs) are completely clueless about the body they spent hours with.
Click to expand...

No. We just find your interpretation to be...flawed.
 
MicahJava said:
Yeah, the nine members of the forensic pathology panel agreed that the depressed cowlick fracture on the X-Ray was an entry wound, but this finding is intertwined with the belief that the red spot on the BOH photographs must be an entry wound. As I have pointed out several times, this belief is based on taking the BOH photographs out of context. You must believe that the autopsy doctors (and John Stringer, who took those photographs) are completely clueless about the body they spent hours with.

The HSCA report also explains the concept of beveling, with a diagram of what typical or "ideal" beveling should look like. Is it my untrained eye, or does the depressed cowlick fracture on the X-ray not look particularly "beveled" in either direction? And on the fragment trail, people like David Mantik have pointed out that the emperor is wearing no clothes- the fragment trail does not correspond with the cowlick fracture besides one fragment placed a whole centimeter beside and under it.

I posted plenty of experts who weren't too crazy about the X-ray showing an entry in he cowlick. This just looks like a case of connecting the dots where they don't belong. Wecht also sticks to the belief that the autopsy doctors were very incompetent- he still enjoys telling the story about how they missed the bullet hole in the throat.

And above you have proof the HSCA panel didn't consider the possibility of a missile entering the original EOP location and going under the cerebellum without severely damaging it.
Click to expand...

The more you post, the more it becomes obvious that your opinions are far removed from reality. Do you have anything else to offer besides your incorrect lay opinions on matters outside of your sphere of knowledge?
 
HSienzant said:
It's 40.2" as measured after the assassination. :)

Mr. EISENBERG - Have you measured the dimensions of this rifle assembled, and disassembled?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, I have.
Mr. EISENBERG - Could you give us that information?
Mr. FRAZIER - The overall length is 40.2 inches. It weighs 8 pounds even.

Jack White computed the length of the rifle in the backyard photos and got different lengths. It was shown he didn't know JackWhite about computing lengths in photos.

Hank
Click to expand...
You guys are actually a lot fun, so let's go down this path.

When did Klein's receive the shipment that had the 40.2" rifles that you say LHO received in March?
 
No Other said:
You guys are actually a lot fun, so let's go down this path.

When did Klein's receive the shipment that had the 40.2" rifles that you say LHO received in March?
Click to expand...

You don't get it. The length of the rifle doesn't matter. What does matter is the unique serial number.
 
RoboTimbo said:
The more you post, the more it becomes obvious that your opinions are far removed from reality. Do you have anything else to offer besides your incorrect lay opinions on matters outside of your sphere of knowledge?
Click to expand...

The experts who were there recording the facts in real time?
 
No Other said:
You guys are actually a lot fun, so let's go down this path.

When did Klein's receive the shipment that had the 40.2" rifles that you say LHO received in March?
Click to expand...

What evidence do we have for a 36" MC with serial #C2766?

What evidence do we have for a 40" MC with serial #C2766?

What did Robert Frazier testify to the WC about duplicate serial numbers on like weapons?

Seriously, I'm trying to help you out here.
 
RoboTimbo said:
What evidence do we have for a 36" MC with serial #C2766?

What evidence do we have for a 40" MC with serial #C2766?

What did Robert Frazier testify to the WC about duplicate serial numbers on like weapons?

Seriously, I'm trying to help you out here.
Click to expand...
I have responses for the above, I first want my question answered.
 
No Other said:
When did Klein's receive the shipment that had the 40.2" rifles that you say LHO received in March?
Click to expand...

You seem essentially to be insisting that someone on this forum explain a factual anomaly (if it really is that) by producing some sort of documentation or paperwork from Klein's or Crescent Firearms that would resolve the anomaly in favor of the WC's conclusion. You're shifting the burden of proof again. Please don't. If you feel that the 40-inch MC rifle somehow upsets the large cluster of evidence pointing to LHO and to him alone as the purchaser, owner, and user of the rifle found in the TSBD, then you have the burden of coming forward with that evidence. Asking us to explain the 40-inch rifle isn't enough.

Nevertheless, Hank has offered a very reasonable explanation of the anomaly: Klein's ran out of 36-inch MCs and shipped LHO a 40-inch MC just as Klein's was changing its ads to reflect that stock. You seem to reject that explanation, but you don't show why it isn't adequate. You become huffy when someone calls you a CTist, but I have to say that this insistence on ironclad documentary or testimonial evidence for every factual detail is very CT. CT rarely holds itself to such an unrealistically high burden of proof.
 
Last edited:
RoboTimbo said:
Then you should have answered them the last few times they were asked and you ran away from them.

Answer the questions.
Click to expand...
Don't confuse my dislike for bombarding of questions at a rate of 5 to 1 with running away; I do not park myself on this site so the continuity is not as robust as others. I actually do like to discuss this topic but here it lowers itself to ridicule.
 
No Other said:
Don't confuse my dislike for bombarding of questions at a rate of 5 to 1 with running away; I do not park myself on this site so the continuity is not as robust as others. I actually do like to discuss this topic but here it lowers itself to ridicule.
Click to expand...

You've already lost this one.
 
RoboTimbo said:
Also interesting that you say "responses" rather than "answers". Typical CT.
Click to expand...
Then I will amend the word "responses" to "answers". I am not wordsmithing. I guess you like the others in fast load of quips... my mistake, I thought you had discussion points instead of labeling.
 
No Other said:
Then I will amend the word "responses" to "answers". I am not wordsmithing. I guess you like the others in fast load of quips... my mistake, I thought you had discussion points instead of labeling.
Click to expand...

The questions will remain until you can face answering them honestly.
 
I will just put it out there:

http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=45&relPageId=215&search=feldsott

The President of Crescent Firearms provided a sworn affidavit for the Warren Commission, in short, he says that Crescent Firearms provided to Klein's a rifle with the serial number C2766... on June 18, 1962. This makes the claim of the 40.2" ever having the C2766 go into question. Since this event took place prior to LHO/Hidell placing the order with Klein's and prior to Klein's buying the 40.2" MC, the C2766 belongs to the 36" rifle. The barrel does make a difference if you wish to insist the serial number is unique.
 
No, it isn't me insisting on the serial number being unique. Who do you think does say that?

What evidence do we have for the existence of a 40" MC with serial number C2766?
 
No Other said:
I will just put it out there:

http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=45&relPageId=215&search=feldsott

The President of Crescent Firearms provided a sworn affidavit for the Warren Commission, in short, he says that Crescent Firearms provided to Klein's a rifle with the serial number C2766... on June 18, 1962. This makes the claim of the 40.2" ever having the C2766 go into question. Since this event took place prior to LHO/Hidell placing the order with Klein's and prior to Klein's buying the 40.2" MC, the C2766 belongs to the 36" rifle. The barrel does make a difference if you wish to insist the serial number is unique.
Click to expand...
Excuse me, but the President of Crescent Firearms does not swear to any length of barrel just the serial number. You may try to dress this pig up and put on lipstick, but it is just a pig. You still don't get it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom