Cont: JFK Conspiracy Theories V: Five for Fighting

[MicahJava]

There was no "purported fragment" in JFK's neck. Only your CT's Wecht has ever mentioned it, and no one agrees with his guess. You fail again.

Edited by kmortis: 

Removed to comply with Rule 12 & Rule 0

The best way to confirm or deny whether the upper neck fragment is real would be to differentiate between dense fragments and artifacts on the X-ray film.

 

[HSienzant]

Somewhere there should be photographs or some documentation for how the FBI inadvertently produced a dented shell. What is your source's source?

And the source's source's source? And ad infinitum.

Are you questioning Champagne's testimony? One what basis?

You haven't shown this dented shell is at all an abnormal occurrence of any kind when ejected from the rifle.

You already conceded your conspiracy theorist also reproduced one dented lip on a shell on one of his earliest trials.

You admit that the HSCA produced one dented lip on a shell out of four test bullets fired.

You admitted it's possible - even likely - that the mechanism produces dented shells.

Why would I presume that researching this and determining Champagne's source and providing it to you will end this line of argument by you? We both know it won't.

Where do you propose we go from here?

Hank

 

[MicahJava]

Micah Java:

Given two separate facts, I am wondering if you can tell us the most reasonable conclusion.

Now, I am not looking for the most outlandish conclusion, the conclusion that most points to a lone shooter, or to a conspiracy.

Just the most reasonable.

Assume for the sake of discussion these two facts are true:

1. 90% of the Dealey Plaza witness stated heard exactly three shots, no more, no less.
2. Three shells were recovered from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository about 45 minutes after the shooting.

What is the most reasonable conclusion you can come up with here?

Hank

Dealey Plaza witnesses were around 50/50 or 40/60 on whether the three gunshots sounded like they came from the Depository or the knoll. The HSCA roped off Dealey Plaza in the 70's and fired gunshots from the sniper's nest and the knoll and had two observers stand around in several places and report their perception of the shots. They were about 90% correct in reporting the direction of the shots. This study have have even somehow been conducted firing real rounds, as they also have a portion where they test a "subsonic pistol".

This experiment should be replicated factoring in everything we know about the conditions at the time of the assassination (crowd noises, motorcycle backfire, firing real rounds into gel, more observers). But for now, what does the evidence show us? If we abandon the idea that a Carcano shooting from the sixth floor could cause half of 100+ witnesses to report shots coming from the knoll, then there are a few options:

1. There were shots from the knoll.

2. There was a diversion like a firecracker on the knoll.

3. Shots were fired from behind using a supersonic ammunition in conjunction with a noise-suppressor, which can create the auditory illusion that the gunfire originates from the opposite direction.

#3 sounds the most likely, but there are another couple of innocent explanations I've heard before:

The sound of the round colliding with Kennedy's skull created a noise almost as loud as an actual gunshot.

And also, Lillian Rogers' allegations of a seeing a woman's small child near the "black dog man" location throwing a glass coke bottle against the stockade fence.

 

[HSienzant]

Edited by kmortis: 

Removed to comply with Rule 12 & Rule 0

The best way to confirm or deny whether the upper neck fragment is real would be to differentiate between dense fragments and artifacts on the X-ray film.

At what point did the response argue for a LIE?

Just another straw man argument by you.

Hank

 

[MicahJava]

And the source's source's source? And ad infinitum.

Are you questioning Champagne's testimony? One what basis?

You haven't shown this dented shell is at all an abnormal occurrence of any kind when ejected from the rifle.

You already conceded your conspiracy theorist also reproduced one dented lip on a shell on one of his earliest trials.

You admit that the HSCA produced one dented lip on a shell out of four test bullets fired.

You admitted it's possible - even likely - that the mechanism produces dented shells.

Why would I presume that researching this and determining Champagne's source and providing it to you will end this line of argument by you? We both know it won't.

Where do you propose we go from here?

Hank

I already said it sounds like it's probably right, but is there no surviving copy of the "federal tests" Champagne was referring to?

 

[bknight]

Edited by kmortis: 

Removed to comply with Rule 12 & Rule 0

The best way to confirm or deny whether the upper neck fragment is real would be to differentiate between dense fragments and artifacts on the X-ray film.

You are implying that I said Wecht was lying, no such evidence in my statement, as Hank points out just begging the question again and again and again. Stating it over and over in this thread will never make it true. No other competent forensic pathologist has noticed a fragment in the neck. And that would be because there was never a fragment, just CT's imagination.

I would be careful implying anyone in this discussion is a child, for it is you who continually posts nonsense when those post have been destroyed. Look into the mirror.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Dealey Plaza witnesses were around 50/50 or 40/60 on whether the three gunshots sounded like they came from the Depository or the knoll. The HSCA roped off Dealey Plaza in the 70's and fired gunshots from the sniper's nest and the knoll and had two observers stand around in several places and report their perception of the shots. They were about 90% correct in reporting the direction of the shots. This study have have even somehow been conducted firing real rounds, as they also have a portion where they test a "subsonic pistol".

Now you just need evidence for any shots having come from anywhere other than the TSBD, fired from any weapon other than Oswald's rifle and the three shots he fired. When will you be starting on that?

This experiment should be replicated factoring in everything we know about the conditions at the time of the assassination (crowd noises, motorcycle backfire, firing real rounds into gel, more observers).

Yes, you and your one CT source should do that.

But for now, what does the evidence show us?

Oswald fired three shots from his M/C from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository, two shots hitting Kennedy with Connally as collateral damage. One would have to be a fool to abandon the idea that Oswald didn't shoot his Carcano from there.

If we abandon the idea that a Carcano shooting from the sixth floor could cause half of 100+ witnesses to report shots coming from the knoll, then there are a few options:

1. There were shots from the knoll.

2. There was a diversion like a firecracker on the knoll.

3. Shots were fired from behind using a supersonic ammunition in conjunction with a noise-suppressor, which can create the auditory illusion that the gunfire originates from the opposite direction.

Now you just need evidence for any of those.

#3 sounds the most likely,

Well, no. That's actually one of the goofier made up WAGS that CT loons have put forth over the decades, still with not a scintilla of evidence for it. Did your one CT source suddenly have the brilliant idea that there was a conspiracy to frame Oswald and the conspiricists thought it would be a good idea to use different ammunition? No wonder you have no idea what a "gun" is, your one CT source doesn't either.

but there are another couple of innocent explanations I've heard before:

The sound of the round colliding with Kennedy's skull created a noise almost as loud as an actual gunshot.

And also, Lillian Rogers' allegations of a seeing a woman's small child near the "black dog man" location throwing a glass coke bottle against the stockade fence.

 

[Dave Rogers]

If we abandon the idea that a Carcano shooting from the sixth floor could cause half of 100+ witnesses to report shots coming from the knoll, then there are a few options:

One might think that the options to choose are ones that could cause the other half of 100+ witnesses to report shots coming from the book depository. The idea of an alternative theory is that is has greater explanatory power than the conventional one, not that it fails to explain a different subset of the results.

Dave

 

[MicahJava]

You are implying that I said Wecht was lying, no such evidence in my statement, as Hank points out just begging the question again and again and again. Stating it over and over in this thread will never make it true. No other competent forensic pathologist has noticed a fragment in the neck. And that would be because there was never a fragment, just CT's imagination.

I would be careful implying anyone in this discussion is a child, for it is you who continually posts nonsense when those post have been destroyed. Look into the mirror.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11862646&postcount=127

Here's a direct link to the issue of Forensic Science, read for free: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/030094327490020X

 

[MicahJava]

One might think that the options to choose are ones that could cause the other half of 100+ witnesses to report shots coming from the book depository. The idea of an alternative theory is that is has greater explanatory power than the conventional one, not that it fails to explain a different subset of the results.

Dave

I'm afraid mumbo jumbo won't make the grassy knoll go away. No amount will. People hear about how half the witnesses heard shots from the knoll, see the pictures of people running up there. You can't just ignore that half.

 

[bknight]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11862646&postcount=127

Here's a direct link to the issue of Forensic Science, read for free: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/030094327490020X

No other competent forensic pathologist has noticed a fragment. And that would be because there was never a fragment, just CT's imagination.
Cite another report that substantiates his fragment.

 

[MicahJava]

Apparently RoboTimbo can't grasp the concept of a shooter hiding his weapon and picking up his shell casings.

And why didn't we hear about any possible bullets recovered from the limousine? Why not start with the fact that the limousine was a notoriously botched forensic investigation. Two FBI guys only went so far as to tell the Warren Commission that they cleaned up the guys and tried to see if anything felt like a bullet. What about John Connally's Mexican peso cuffing? And a Secret Service memo from days later mentioned that the limousine still had brain and skull fragments.

 

[MicahJava]

No other competent forensic pathologist has noticed a fragment. And that would be because there was never a fragment, just CT's imagination.
Cite another report that substantiates his fragment.

I think we have a case of denial here and it's kind of hilarious. This article was also co-written by Robert P. Smith, Office of the Coroner, Alegheny County, Pittsburgh PA.

 

[bknight]

I think we have a case of denial here and it's kind of hilarious. This article was also co-written by Robert P. Smith, Office of the Coroner, Alegheny County, Pittsburgh PA.

Ok, you have shown one more and I stand corrected. And among all the others?

 

[Dave Rogers]

I'm afraid mumbo jumbo won't make the grassy knoll go away. No amount will. People hear about how half the witnesses heard shots from the knoll, see the pictures of people running up there. You can't just ignore that half.

Desperate evasion noted.

Dave

 

[HSienzant]

Dealey Plaza witnesses were around 50/50 or 40/60 on whether the three gunshots sounded like they came from the Depository or the knoll. The HSCA roped off Dealey Plaza in the 70's and fired gunshots from the sniper's nest and the knoll and had two observers stand around in several places and report their perception of the shots. They were about 90% correct in reporting the direction of the shots. This study have have even somehow been conducted firing real rounds, as they also have a portion where they test a "subsonic pistol".

This experiment should be replicated factoring in everything we know about the conditions at the time of the assassination (crowd noises, motorcycle backfire, firing real rounds into gel, more observers). But for now, what does the evidence show us? If we abandon the idea that a Carcano shooting from the sixth floor could cause half of 100+ witnesses to report shots coming from the knoll, then there are a few options:

1. There were shots from the knoll.

2. There was a diversion like a firecracker on the knoll.

3. Shots were fired from behind using a supersonic ammunition in conjunction with a noise-suppressor, which can create the auditory illusion that the gunfire originates from the opposite direction.

#3 sounds the most likely, but there are another couple of innocent explanations I've heard before:

The sound of the round colliding with Kennedy's skull created a noise almost as loud as an actual gunshot.

And also, Lillian Rogers' allegations of a seeing a woman's small child near the "black dog man" location throwing a glass coke bottle against the stockade fence.

You didn't answer my question whatsoever.

From the two facts presented, and only those two facts, what is the most reasonable conclusion?

Try to answer without avoiding the question and introducing a bunch of spurious side issues.

Here's the post in question again. I bolded the question you're supposed to be answering.

Micah Java:

Given two separate facts, I am wondering if you can tell us the most reasonable conclusion.

Now, I am not looking for the most outlandish conclusion, the conclusion that most points to a lone shooter, or to a conspiracy.

Just the most reasonable.

Assume for the sake of discussion these two facts are true:

1. 90% of the Dealey Plaza witness stated heard exactly three shots, no more, no less.
2. Three shells were recovered from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository about 45 minutes after the shooting.

What is the most reasonable conclusion you can come up with here?

Hank

Hank

 

[RoboTimbo]

I'm afraid mumbo jumbo won't make the grassy knoll go away. No amount will. People hear about how half the witnesses heard shots from the knoll, see the pictures of people running up there. You can't just ignore that half.

Running towards an active shooter? Does this pass for CT thinking?

 

[RoboTimbo]

Apparently RoboTimbo can't grasp the concept of a shooter hiding his weapon and picking up his shell casings.

Hilarious. You've been schooled on every issue you've brought up from CT land. You apparently can't grasp the concept of evidence for your CT WAGS. Are you at all upset that you haven't gotten one thing right?

Why were you afraid to quote the actual post I wrote where you were asked for evidence?

 

[HSienzant]

I already said it sounds like it's probably right, but is there no surviving copy of the "federal tests" Champagne was referring to?

They went back and looked at the actual shells retained in evidence.

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

I'm afraid mumbo jumbo won't make the grassy knoll go away. No amount will. People hear about how half the witnesses heard shots from the knoll, see the pictures of people running up there. You can't just ignore that half.

Nobody is ignoring that half. We can discuss the validity of the side issues you're attempting to introduce into the discussion separately (and in fact, we have already discussed most or all of those issues already, and shown why they aren't worthy of consideration).

You were asked to provide the most reasonable conclusion from two facts, and two facts only.

Instead, you brought in some other very debatable issues that aren't facts, and then derived your conclusion from those very debatable claims.

Again:

Given two separate facts, I am wondering if you can tell us the most reasonable conclusion.

Now, I am not looking for the most outlandish conclusion, the conclusion that most points to a lone shooter, or to a conspiracy.

Just the most reasonable.

Assume for the sake of discussion these two facts are true:

1. 90% of the Dealey Plaza witness stated heard exactly three shots, no more, no less.
2. Three shells were recovered from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository about 45 minutes after the shooting.

What is the most reasonable conclusion you can come up with here?

Hank