Cont: JFK Conspiracy Theories V: Five for Fighting

[Axxman300]

The HSCA alleged that you can see the beveled cowlick entry on the skull photographs. For that to be true, they would have to piece together the upper back of the skull.

You probably CAN see the hole in some of the photographs, just not the low resolution B&W version you've posted. This is not only your failing but every hack who's taken a swing at the handful of pictures and x-rays available to the public - there are over 40 more photographs that the public has not seen. This makes all arguments based on the photographs fallacies.

 

[abaddon]

How would you remove the brain without also removing the portion containing the purported entry wound on the upper back of the head?

By removing the brain, duh.

This is for the sake of discussion,

No we all know exactly what it is for and it is not discussion

because any such entry wound would also have to be separated because it was right beside the large defect on the top-right side of the skull which was so shattered that virtually no sawing was needed to remove the brain.

Now the hole was too big to remove the brain? and little or no sawing was needed to not remove the brain.

It is to laugh.

Rollin' rollin' rollin' see those goalposts rollin' RAWHIDE.

 

[BStrong]

snipped

Subsonic bullets often do not cause extensive fractures when entering the head. Also, there is evidence for fractures on the floor of the skull, where the EOP bullet could have encountered after entering.

Could you please explain how a subsonic projectile doesn't cause fractures when penetrating the head but causes fractures elsewhere in the skull?

 

[Tomtomkent]

I don't know, ask Dr. Humes. That's what he said. Forensic pathologist Dr. Finck arrived to the autopsy after the brain had already been removed, so there is n detail from him about that in his statements.

How does a bullet follow the path you describe, without trauma radiating outward from the wound path?[/QUOTE]

Subsonic bullets often do not cause extensive fractures when entering the head. Also, there is evidence for fractures on the floor of the skull, where the EOP bullet could have encountered after entering.[/QUOTE]

So... Your “arguments” about the skull and brain cavity keep going back to the testimony of somebody NOT there to witness key moments in the autopsy.

And when asked how a bullet can avoid causing trauma to the brain, you carefully avoid talking about the bullet passing through the brain at all. Obviously it has dawned on you that regardless of damage to the skull, the path you described a bullet taking would not have to touch areas of the brain we know to be undamaged for the trauma to effect them.

In point of fact, we can largely ignore your fantasy, because the damage described to the brain best fits a higher entry point causing trauma within the brain, exactly as bullets are known to do.

 

[Tomtomkent]

Could you please explain how a subsonic projectile doesn't cause fractures when penetrating the head but causes fractures elsewhere in the skull?

Or how they fail to cause a “bow wave” effect in a brain, in a sealed skull.

 

[HSienzant]

How would you remove the brain without also removing the portion containing the purported entry wound on the upper back of the head? This is for the sake of discussion, because any such entry wound would also have to be separated because it was right beside the large defect on the top-right side of the skull which was so shattered that virtually no sawing was needed to remove the brain.

You just answered your own question!

The skull was so shattered that virtually no sawing had to be done to remove the brain.

That would include the back of the head, regardless of where you want to move the wound.

 

[HSienzant]

For one, any explination of the jacket and shirt bunching issue is timeless. It shows that the back wound was lower than the throat wound.

We were talking about your claim about how Mark Lane was more accurate than any government investigation.

I documented that he was completely unreliable and showed how he begged the question in his chapter "Why Was Oswald Wanted?" You ignore the points I make entirely, quote nothing from Mark Lane, and then you change the subject!

Quote what Mark Lane said about JFK's suit jacket, and defend it, otherwise you're just changing the subject.

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

Again, this has nothing to do with the post you're replying to. You've made it clear that you consider the suggestion absurd that a section of skull can be anything other than fixed rigidly in place or completely detached, so you're incapable of understanding the answer you've requested. You've employed the classic conspiracy theorist's tactic of demanding the correct answer be excluded before asking the question.

Dave

 

[HSienzant]

What do you think I'm getting wrong here? Do you think the skull photographs were taken with previously-removed skull fragments placed back?

Already expounded at length on what you're doing wrong.

Immediately above, you're begging the question that anything was removed other than the brain. Where does it say that in the autopsy report?

Hank

 

[bknight]

You just answered your own question!

The skull was so shattered that virtually no sawing had to be done to remove the brain.

That would include the back of the head, regardless of where you want to move the wound.

I don't know, ask Dr. Humes. That's what he said. Forensic pathologist Dr. Finck arrived to the autopsy after the brain had already been removed, so there is n detail from him about that in his statements.

MJ is attempting to point out that the hole could not have been viewed as a whole, because of the shattering. Total speculation on his part, especially since he wasn't present during the autopsy.

 

[HSienzant]

Could you please explain how a subsonic projectile doesn't cause fractures when penetrating the head but causes fractures elsewhere in the skull?

And this would be after either the bullet fragmented or slowed down, or both!

Hank

 

[MicahJava]

You probably CAN see the hole in some of the photographs, just not the low resolution B&W version you've posted. This is not only your failing but every hack who's taken a swing at the handful of pictures and x-rays available to the public - there are over 40 more photographs that the public has not seen. This makes all arguments based on the photographs fallacies.

It's probably not the front of the head at all. Those photographs probably show the back of the head.

Something like this, but with the chin resting on the chest:

 

[MicahJava]

Could you please explain how a subsonic projectile doesn't cause fractures when penetrating the head but causes fractures elsewhere in the skull?

"Fracture" in this case means any break in the skull bone caused by the bullet.

 

[MicahJava]

You just answered your own question!

The skull was so shattered that virtually no sawing had to be done to remove the brain.

That would include the back of the head, regardless of where you want to move the wound.

Incoherent.

The EOP wound was low enough in the back of the head to not be separated from the skull during the brain removal procedure.

 

[MicahJava]

Or how they fail to cause a “bow wave” effect in a brain, in a sealed skull.

Incoherent, as is typical. What do you mean by "bow wave", why do you think it should have happened, and why do you think it didn't happen before frame 313?

 

[Axxman300]

"Fracture" in this case means any break in the skull bone caused by the bullet.

Dodge.

Didn't answer the question.

 

[Axxman300]

Incoherent.

The EOP wound was low enough in the back of the head to not be separated from the skull during the brain removal procedure.

You weren't there, you have not seen all of the autopsy photos, thus you cannot make this claim, nor any others pertaining to your fantasy head wound.

 

[Axxman300]

Incoherent, as is typical. What do you mean by "bow wave", why do you think it should have happened, and why do you think it didn't happen before frame 313?

If you have to ask you're not doing your homework.

 

[HSienzant]

The HSCA alleged that you can see the beveled cowlick entry on the skull photographs. For that to be true, they would have to piece together the upper back of the skull.

Still begging the question.

Who said they had to piece anything together?

Tell us what the dotted line above the right ear signifies.

Hank

 

[Tomtomkent]

Incoherent, as is typical. What do you mean by "bow wave", why do you think it should have happened, and why do you think it didn't happen before frame 313?

When a bullet passes through a medium such as tissue, or brain matter, the displacement of matter ahead of the bullet, just like the bow wave ahead of a ship, causes trauma far beyond the diameter of the bullet.

In the case of the JFK assassination, we know, from descriptions of damage to the brain, that the bullet entered at the point you keep calling "the cowlick", and caused massive trauma, ahead of the bullet's passage, that exploded out of the side of his head.

You keep claiming that the bullet entered lower, and travelled downwards.

You seem not to grasp that areas of the brain you claim were undamaged, should have been effected by the trauma wave, ahead of the bullet, as it passed downwards.

The bullet missing them is not, and has not been, the point, but you refuse to address or explain this anomaly.

How can the bullet pass downwards, without causing trauma to the lower reaches of the brain?

It makes no sense. You can try and deflect, by talking about skull fractures, and the like, but sooner, or later, you are either going to have to address the trauma issue, or stop pretending you are the one who knows what they are talking about with respect to the wound.