Let's backtrack a bit.
In the prior thread, you argued here:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11847719&postcount=3845
For this:
One autopsy conclusion was that there was a small wound devoid of scalp and skull approximately 2.5 centimeters to the right and slightly above the external occipital protuberance. If you can think of a way this wound could have any relation to the large head wound, be my guest.
If the wound was devoid of both scalp and skull, what was the wound IN?
Please note the original autopsists had no problem thinking of the way that wound could have a relationship to the large head wound... they determined the small wound was the entrance and the large wound was the exit.
Tell us on what basis you think they are not related. Cite the evidence, not your opinion of the evidence. That means quoting the actual experts for their opinions, not telling us what you think they missed, what you think they should have done, or what you think they should have thought.
We're looking for evidence from qualified medical professionals here.
The cerebellum would be more damaged if a 6.5 round had entered near the EOP.
The small head wound was low enough that it could be preserved on the intact portion of the cranium after it had already been opened up to remove the brain?
What part of "evidence from qualified medical professionals" did you not understand? I didn't ask for your opinion. I asked you to cite the evidence. And you're responding to a different issue than was originally raised by you in any case ("
If you can think of a way this wound could have any relation to the large head wound, be my guest"). Let's pretend you didn't run away again, shall we?
And despite changing the subject, your own argument about the damage to the cerebellum eliminates the EOP wound, because we know a 6.5mm round caused the head damage.
How do we know? Let's look at some of the evidence.
(a) Numerous witnesses pinpointed the SE corner window on the sixth floor of the Depository as the source of the shooter.
(b) A rifle that fired 6.5mm bullets was found on the same sixth floor of the same building that the witnesses saw the shooter.
(c) Three 6.5mm shells were found in the SE corner by the window on the sixth floor of the Depository.
(d) Two fragments from a 6.5mm round were found in the limo, forward of JFK and consistent with a shot from behind striking JFK in the head.
(e) Those fragments were traceable to the weapon mentioned in (b).
(f) A nearly whole 6.5mm bullet was discovered in Parkland Hospital, where the victims were taken.
(g) No other shooter, weapon, ammo, or bullet fragments traceable to another weapon was ever seen in Dealey Plaza, or recovered from the limo or the Hospital.
(h) All the experts who examined either the body or reviewed the extant autopsy material determined JFK suffered one bullet strike to the head. One.
All that evidence, taken together, not only eliminates a second shooter firing a smaller caliber weapon, it also eliminates the EOP as the entry wound, according to your own argument above that a 6.5mm round would have caused more damage to the cerebellum than the autopsists noted in the autopsy.
I listed points (a) to (h) in favor of 6.5mm ammo hitting JFK in the head. Show us the list of evidence you've compiled in favor of any other bullet striking JFK.
You don't have any. We covered this ground previously.
The best you could do was an unseen gunman shooting an unseen weapon firing ammunition that struck nothing and left no trace of itself behind. Almost like he didn't exist. In fact, exactly like he didn't exist.
Hank
