Cont: JFK Conspiracy Theories VI: Lyndon Johnson's Revenge

[RoboTimbo]

They are hardly moving, packed together queuing up to the intersection. The ”blob” is moving at a considerable speed, and its shiny white, and, its ONE blob, not half a dozen.

You can do better than this.

You haven't made your case yet. Keep trying.

Be specific.

 

[manifesto]

You're funny.

It's your claim J.C.Day's initials are not there, and you're now trusting a branch of the Federal Government not to lie to you, after claiming:


NARA is part of US "officaldom" [sic].

1. The high resolution photographs from all angles confirms their stated non-finding.

2. US officialdom isn’t water tight. There is good info now and again slipping through the cracks.

3. There is no conseivable reason for US officialdom to lie against its own interest.

Why should the staff at NARA lie in this case?

I think you need to make up your mind whether NARA and "US officaldom" [sic] is trustworthy or not. If you're going to trust NARA, why not the Warren Commission?

No, I think you need to know that you are exposing yourself for who you really are. Desperatly construing strawmans out of contrived interpretations of my statements. Out of context. Out of thin air.

Out of sterile nothingness.

And you still need to prove J.C.Day's initials are not on the shells (which is the claim you made and I asked you to prove), instead of shifting the burden of proof and asking us to establish they are.

If NARA couldn’t find them, who could? CIA’s Office for the Paranormal?

Ask them.

You made the claim. You can prove it, can't you? You don't have to take the word of a branch of the federal government for it, do you?

Hank

PS: Again, if you had read the thread, you'd know exactly where this would end up. You're playing the standard CT hand, and we can all see your cards.

I know that Krusch tried to debate the shells in this forum. I know why he gave up. More and more people are being aware of what you are really doing in this forum.

It’s always about critical mass, isn’t it, Hank?

Sooner or later, Hank?

 

[traxy]

They are hardly moving, packed together queuing up to the intersection. The ”blob” is moving at a considerable speed, and its shiny white, and, its ONE blob, not half a dozen.

You can do better than this.

I don't see any evidence that the blob is anything at all, let alone what you claim it is. It could just as easily be the sun reflecting off of the windshield of any one of the follow-up cars approaching the intersection, or a bystander running along the sidewalk on Houston street, or an imperfection on the film.

How about the figure approaching the Houston-Elm intersection at Dorman frame 456. Would you agree this figure is a Dallas motorcycle officer?

https://imgur.com/a/nTCXaRn

 

[RoboTimbo]

More and more people are being aware of what you are really doing in this forum.

Yes, turning CTs inside out and making them chase their own tail. He's doing a fine job of it with you. You make it seem as if you know nothing about the subject of the thread.

Your one CT website didn't tell you that the acoustical recording stuff had been debunked, did it? You were left looking foolish about that. Among so many other things.

 

[manifesto]

I don't see any evidence that the blob is anything at all, let alone what you claim it is. It could just as easily be the sun reflecting off of the windshield of any one of the follow-up cars approaching the intersection, or a bystander running along the sidewalk on Houston street, or an imperfection on the film.

No, a windshield would be to low and the speed is to high for a car so close to the intersection. A running bystander would move up and down while running, so, no.

Anything else?

How about the figure approaching the Houston-Elm intersection at Dorman frame 456. Would you agree this figure is a Dallas motorcycle officer?

https://imgur.com/a/nTCXaRn

Of course it is. Why do you ask?

 

[RoboTimbo]

No, a windshield would be to low and the speed is to high for a car so close to the intersection. A running bystander would move up and down while running, so, no.

That doesn't make any sense. Try again. You still haven't made your case.

Didn't your one CT website tell you how to extricate yourself from your mistake?

 

[traxy]

No, a windshield would be to low and the speed is to high for a car so close to the intersection.

Incorrect.

The top of the windshield would be roughly the same height as the helmet on a motorcycle officer.

Here is the complete stabilized Hughes film. The cars approaching the intersection proceed at a steady pace throughout the entire film, including the section where HB McLain rides into view.

So much for that.

Of course it is. Why do you ask?

Great, so we agree that there is a motorcycle officer approaching the Elm Street intersection post assassination in the Dorman film.

HB McLain is riding along the left side of Camera Car 3 and just ahead of Congress 1 in the motorcade procession as seen in the Hughes film before the shots were fired. Where would you place the motorcycle officer in the Dorman film in the motorcade as he is approaching the Elm Street intersection? Here is a visual aid in case you need some context.

https://imgur.com/a/sWVkp80

 

[manifesto]

Incorrect.

The top of the windshield would be roughly the same height as the helmet on a motorcycle officer.

No, it’s roughly a head lower.

Here is the complete stabilized Hughes film. The cars approaching the intersection proceed at a steady pace throughout the entire film, including the section where HB McLain rides into view.

So much for that.

Forgot the link?

Great, so we agree that there is a motorcycle officer approaching the Elm Street intersection post assassination in the Dorman film.

HB McLain is riding along the left side of Camera Car 3 and just ahead of Congress 1 in the motorcade procession as seen in the Hughes film before the shots were fired. Where would you place the motorcycle officer in the Dorman film in the motorcade as he is approaching the Elm Street intersection? Here is a visual aid in case you need some context.

https://imgur.com/a/sWVkp80

It completely depends on how fast the cars in the motorcade on Houston was going and how fast McLain was going on said street.

Do you (Myers) know this?

 

[traxy]

No, it’s roughly a head lower.

Not from what I can see.

Either way, quibbling over 8 inches or a foot isn't going to do any good since you have no way of knowing the actual height of the blob in your clip. Anything you could offer would just be guesswork and I'll ignore it.

Forgot the link?

Yes I did. Apologies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kA0t5zvaW70

It completely depends on how fast the cars in the motorcade on Houston was going and how fast McLain was going on said street.

Do you (Myers) know this?

That's not what I was asking. What I was asking was where the Dorman Dallas motorcycle cop was within the motorcade procession. Which car is he riding alongside? Which car is he in front of? How does he compare to where HB McLain is viewed in the Hughes film when he makes his turn on to Houston street?

McLain's initial speed is known. It's 14.7mph as he makes the turn onto Houston Street. Camera Car 3 was estimated at 7.9mph while making the turn from Houston to Elm a few hundred feet further down the road.

 

[Axxman300]

1. The high resolution photographs from all angles confirms their stated non-finding.

The initials JD are visible at the top (the skinny part) of the shell:


https://catalog.archives.gov/id/305148

The other two casings aren't mounted with the initials in view, but you've failed again.

 

[Axxman300]

They are hardly moving, packed together queuing up to the intersection. The ”blob” is moving at a considerable speed, and its shiny white, and, its ONE blob, not half a dozen.

You can do better than this.

McLain's testimony includes pictures:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo2/jfk5/hscamcla.htm

Knock yourself out. He wasn't where the "Scientists" said he was.

 

[OKBob]

If ”consilience” (lol) is built on none and/or fabricated evidence, of course I do.

If you don't know or care what consilience is, why should we continue this discussion with you?

If you know what consilience is but believe that it can be discredited by pointing vaguely to "fabricated evidence," why should we continue this discussion with you?

 

[bknight]

First. Do you agree that the ”blob” have to be a white MC-helmet?

It's all in imagination there isn't anything there.

 

[manifesto]

Not from what I can see.

Either way, quibbling over 8 inches or a foot isn't going to do any good since you have no way of knowing the actual height of the blob in your clip. Anything you could offer would just be guesswork and I'll ignore it.

I knew before I posted Robertsons video that you would never accept it as evidence of a motorcycle or that it was McLains motorcycle.

I know it is McLain on his motorcycle with a stuck mike picking up the sound from the first shot. Lets leave it at that until further notice.

Yes I did. Apologies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kA0t5zvaW70

No worries. What is it that your video supposedly show? Is it supporting some argument?

That's not what I was asking. What I was asking was where the Dorman Dallas motorcycle cop was within the motorcade procession. Which car is he riding alongside? Which car is he in front of? How does he compare to where HB McLain is viewed in the Hughes film when he makes his turn on to Houston street?

I’m not really sure what you are asking here so just spell it out. You are saying that the Dorman cop is McLain. How do you come to this conclusion?

The ”white ticket book” was not unique for McLain so that duck is gone.

Anything else?

McLain's initial speed is known. It's 14.7mph as he makes the turn onto Houston Street.

Yes and as you probably know if you have driven heavy motorcycles, in order to keep the balance one usually accelerate out from a tight curve.

Camera Car 3 was estimated at 7.9mph while making the turn from Houston to Elm a few hundred feet further down the road.

Estimated by whom and how?

 

[manifesto]

The initials JD are visible at the top (the skinny part) of the shell:


https://catalog.archives.gov/id/305148

The other two casings aren't mounted with the initials in view, but you've failed again.

Lt. Day’s tag was ”DAY”. And no, I saw no ”DAY” in your photos and no ”JD” neither.

Maybe you should have a look at the high resolution photos from all angles taken by NARA a couple of years ago? Let me know if you can detect any ”DAY” on them. NARA couldn’t.

If you do, there is a 100 000 dollars reward: http://www.krusch.com/jfk/

The photos: http://www.krusch.com/jfk/Shells_National_Archives.zip

 

[manifesto]

If you don't know or care what consilience is, why should we continue this discussion with you?

If you know what consilience is but believe that it can be discredited by pointing vaguely to "fabricated evidence," why should we continue this discussion with you?

I know what it means. Here is a definition from Wiki:

In science and history, consilience (also convergence of evidence or concordance of evidence) refers to the principle that evidence from independent, unrelated sources can "converge" on strong conclusions. That is, when multiple sources of evidence are in agreement, the conclusion can be very strong even when none of the individual sources of evidence is significantly so on its own. Most established scientific knowledge is supported by a convergence of evidence: if not, the evidence is comparatively weak, and there will not likely be a strong scientific consensus.​

Tell me now how this apply to the claim that Oswald killed JFK.

 

[bknight]

manifesto, you call into question Myer's "faulty" science and then you trot out this video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_2xe86zxTQ&app=desktop

That allegedly shows a helmet and wheels, what a fabrication. I see nothing of this blob or wheel. Now lets examine some still from the Hughes and Zapruder film. On page 34 we see a MC rolling past his view. But look ahead. The ere is a white vehicle that is about to start turning onto Elm. The same vehicle is on the Zapruder film again not turning yet but about to. Now if you look at the Zapruder film both on page 34 of Myer's report. Now look at the the film you linked It also show the with vehicle with the "MC" either alongside or slightly behind. Do you see how far the MC is from that car in Hughes still about 180' behind. Now how does the officer go from being 180' behind to beside or slightly to the rear?

You bought into this fabrication hook line and sinker. As yo9u posted garbage in garbage out.

 

[Axxman300]

Lt. Day’s tag was ”DAY”. And no, I saw no ”DAY” in your photos and no ”JD” neither.

Of course you didn't see them. You know everything yet see nothing.

Example, those links you posted from that conspiracy loon? They're the same picture I linked to from the National Archives, which includes a nice zoom tool, where you can see initials scratched into the casing.

 

[traxy]

I knew before I posted Robertsons video that you would never accept it as evidence of a motorcycle or that it was McLains motorcycle.

Just as you'd never accept such a lame, shoddy attempt if I presented it as evidence of something going against the conspiracy narrative.

You know you wouldn't.

I know it is McLain on his motorcycle with a stuck mike picking up the sound from the first shot. Lets leave it at that until further notice.

You don't know anything. You choose to believe it based on nothing at all because it reinforces your chosen conclusion, which is exactly why you suck at this so badly.

Take a look back through this thread and see what standard of proof you hold for everyone else's arguments compared to your own. You've been provided with reports, studies and facts from multiple posters and none of it was ever good enough for you because it challenged your preconceived conclusions. You'll accept FAR less from yourself though, which should embarrass you.

Look at our current conversation regarding McLain's position. I've provided a 192 page annotated and sourced study with screen captures, figures, measurements. You've countered with a couple frames of a shapeless blob and somehow think you are on even footing.

You aren't.

I’m not really sure what you are asking here so just spell it out. You are saying that the Dorman cop is McLain. How do you come to this conclusion?

I'll dumb it down for you.

Which 2 cars is McLain riding between and on what side of the street in the Hughes film?

Which 2 cars is the Dorman figure riding between and on what side of the street in the Dorman film?

The ”white ticket book” was not unique for McLain so that duck is gone.

OK, so which other Dallas PD motorcycle officer with a white notepad clipped to his windshield is shown in the Dorman film?

Estimated by whom and how?

Dale Myers in the study I presented. Jump in at page 123.

 

[RoboTimbo]

I know what it means. Here is a definition from Wiki:

In science and history, consilience (also convergence of evidence or concordance of evidence) refers to the principle that evidence from independent, unrelated sources can "converge" on strong conclusions. That is, when multiple sources of evidence are in agreement, the conclusion can be very strong even when none of the individual sources of evidence is significantly so on its own. Most established scientific knowledge is supported by a convergence of evidence: if not, the evidence is comparatively weak, and there will not likely be a strong scientific consensus.​

Tell me now how this apply to the claim that Oswald killed JFK.

How do you think it applies? Use your own words.