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

[manifesto]

I'm shocked. just shocked. I listened to that track and could never hear a gunshot, just a bunch of garbled noises, but then I could never see badge man or hard hat man at the grassy knoll.

No, you are completely ignorant of the subject at hand. No one have said that the dictabelt contain gunshots audible to the human ear.

Sensimetrics software confirms the HSCA acoustic evidence with a perfect match, when runned with the correct speed.

They knowingly used a faulty speed (5%) in order to refute the acoustic evidence as part of the ongoing black propaganda covering up the real facts behind the assassination of JFK.

 

[traxy]

He had scientific training, but that is not the point. The point is that you need to adress his scientific findings, not him as a person.

Done in the rebuttal published in Science and Justice magazine.

Also done in the photographic evidence that we've laid out for you.

no, they do not succeed in refuting neither the HSCA acoustic evidence or Thomas refined presentation of it.

The study has been refuted in its own journal. It's refuted by the photographic evidence. It's refuted by the witness testimony.

 

[bknight]

1. Officer McDonald did 3-4 different contradicting statements regarding the incident. Which one of these have you found especially truthful?

2. How do you know that the same gun allegedly used by Oswald when arrested, was the same gun allegedly used by same Oswald when allegedly killing Tippit?

Ballistics perhaps?

 

[manifesto]

Done in the rebuttal published in Science and Justice magazine.

Also done in the photographic evidence that we've laid out for you.

Good. Show me how they did it.

The study has been refuted in its own journal.

No. It was published with a rebutal. Do you claim that said rebutal refuted Thomas findings?

Show me how this was done.

It's refuted by the photographic evidence.

No. Myers is eye-balling the photographic record and calling it ”epipolar geometry”. That is scientific fraud, and is the opposite of a refutation.

It is like shooting yourself in the foot and calling it a great victory.

It's refuted by the witness testimony.

McLain’s? The same McLain that is a proven liar claiming he was both at the intersection AND still standing halfway through Houston, at the same time, when seeing Mrs. Kennedy on the limo trunk?

You are not particularly good at judging caracter, are you?

 

[traxy]

Good. Show me how they did it.

Already have, several times over. Not bothering again.

No. It was published with a rebutal. Do you claim that said rebutal refuted Thomas findings?

Show me how this was done.

Already did. Posted the full article and their dismantling of Thomas's objections to it. Not bothering again.

McLain’s? The same McLain that is a proven liar claiming he was both at the intersection AND still standing halfway through Houston, at the same time, when seeing Mrs. Kennedy on the limo trunk?

I've posted McLain’s house testimony and his quote from the book you reference. Neither of them say what you're claiming.

You're the liar.

 

[manifesto]

Already have, several times over. Not bothering again.

Where? Link.

Already did. Posted the full article and their dismantling of Thomas's objections to it. Not bothering again.

I know of the crap article, but that was not my request. Show me how YOU found anything of value in it.

I've posted McLain’s house testimony and his quote from the book you reference. Neither of them say what you're claiming.

You're the liar.

1. McLain claims he is the Dorman cop, arriving at the Houston/Elm intersection when Mrs. Kennedy is on the limo trunk.

2. McLain claims he was standing still halfway through Houston Street seeing Mrs. Kennedy on the limo trunk.

Two contradicting testimonies = McLain is lying.

 

[jeffas69]

How long was she on the trunk? Or how long could she have appeared to be on the trunk from that vantage point?

 

[manifesto]

Here is another ”refutation” of the HSCA acoustic evidence ending up corroborating it instead.

Larry Sabato, when doing his research for his book, The Kennedy Half-Century, hired the firm, Sonolyst, to reexamine the DPD dictabelt recording in order to refute or confirm the HSCA acoustical evidence.

They tried to measure the dB-levels of the engine and thereby see if they could match the infered speed with the known aproximate speeds the bike with the mike had to have traveled in different parts of the recordings in order to match the shooting sequence.

They found no match and therefore concluded that the acoustical evidence had to be wrong.

Problem is that they meassured the bikes (infered) movements, not against the timeline established by the HSCA acoustical investigation, but with RNC’s timeline which is claiming that the five detected impulse patterns had to have been recorded a full minute after the actual shooting sequence and therefore refuting said patterns being five rifle shots.

When moving the plotted dB from the RNC’s timeline to the timeline actually under investigation, HSCA’s, everything falls in place with a perfect match.

Here is a short and very entertaining presentation by Donald Thomas.

Enjoy. https://youtu.be/7W_qgeHG7bw

 

[traxy]

Where? Link.

This thread. Go back 20 pages and start reading.

I know of the crap article, but that was not my request.

That "crap article" is the rebuttal of Thomas's study.

1. McLain claims he is the Dorman cop, arriving at the Houston/Elm intersection when Mrs. Kennedy is on the limo trunk.

2. McLain claims he was standing still halfway through Houston Street seeing Mrs. Kennedy on the limo trunk.

McLain says he got stopped on Houston street.

Coulson corroborates that statement. Ergo the statement is true.

McLain says he looked up the street when he heard a shot and saw pigeons flying off of the roof of the depository. This statement is consistent in both his testimony and the quote in the book. It is also corroborated by Marion Baker who was his partner riding in the motorcade and saw the same pigeons from the same vantage point. Ergo the statement is true.

McLain says he rolled toward the intersection of Houston and Elm after he heard the shot. The Dorman film shows that to also be true, well after the shooting.

The cop in the Dorman film did not clear the retaining wall until Zapruder frame 431, well after Jackie Kennedy had already climbed back into the limo. If McLain saw her on the back of the limo, it was well before then.

 

[RoboTimbo]

2. How do you know that the same gun allegedly used by Oswald when arrested, was the same gun allegedly used by same Oswald when allegedly killing Tippit?

How do you think everyone else knows and you don't?

 

[RoboTimbo]

the HSCA acoustic evidence

Rebutted profoundly and thoroughly several times. You really know nothing about those rebuttals? Do you know anything about the assassination at all beyond what mindless CT websites have told you to think?

Which one told you to just deny everything over and over?

 

[manifesto]

Rebutted profoundly and thoroughly several times.

No, it has not. Never. Why are lying, RoboTimbo? Do you like lying?

You really know nothing about those rebuttals?

I know everything about those rebutals.

Do you know anything about the assassination at all beyond what mindless CT websites have told you to think?

You are the one thinking what you are told. Hiding behind the concept of ”scientific skepticism” doing the opposite.

Which one told you to just deny everything over and over?

I’m presenting evidence supporting my claims and arguments over and over. You are stalking me with ad hominem nonsense because you have nothing else to say.

That is the way it goes when letting your master doing the thinking for you.

Suprise me. Say something of substance. Anything.

 

[smartcooky]

How long was she on the trunk? Or how long could she have appeared to be on the trunk from that vantage point?

She began climbing onto the trunk at about Z-356, and remained on the trunk until at least Z-466 before the limo disappeared under the triple underpass.

466 - 356 = 110 frames at 18 fps = 6.1 seconds. That is an eternity in this context; McLain could have stopped on Houston half-way between Main and Elm, looked to his left and seen Jackie start to climb onto the trunk (the 6.1 seconds begins) and then kicked off and accelerated to the corner of Elm to see Jackie still on the trunk.

Of course, manifesto handwaves all this away; he calls Mclain a liar and he casts undue doubt on the synchronisation of the Hughes and Zapruder films, so he subsequently ignores the actual film of Mclain coming around the corner of Main and Houston because it doesn't fit in with his pet fantasy. He needs Mclain to be a long, long way ahead of where he said he was and where the video evidence shows he was, so that he is in position with his alleged open microphone to record gunshots. The facts clearly show that there simply was not enough time for that to happen.

You have to understand that we are dealing with a CT here exhibiting CT101 behaviour....

a. NEVER alter or amend your theory.
b. ALWAYS ignore, dismiss or attack facts that contradict your theory.
c. Make up falsehoods from whole cloth.
d. Tell outright lies and keep repeating those lies in the hope that someone, anyone might believe them.

 

[manifesto]

This thread. Go back 20 pages and start reading.

Where? Link.

That "crap article" is the rebuttal of Thomas's study.

Is it? Show me.

McLain says he got stopped on Houston street.

Stopped by whom?

Coulson corroborates that statement. Ergo the statement is true.

Does he now? Where?

McLain says he looked up the street when he heard a shot and saw pigeons flying off of the roof of the depository.

Does not contradict the acoustic evidence, no.

This statement is consistent in both his testimony and the quote in the book.

Is it? Explain.

It is also corroborated by Marion Baker who was his partner riding in the motorcade and saw the same pigeons from the same vantage point. Ergo the statement is true.

Is it? Explain.

McLain says he rolled toward the intersection of Houston and Elm after he heard the shot.

Does not contradict the acoustical evidence, no.

The Dorman film shows that to also be true, well after the shooting.

Only IF the Dorman cop is McLain. You can prove this is so?

The cop in the Dorman film did not clear the retaining wall until Zapruder frame 431, well after Jackie Kennedy had already climbed back into the limo. If McLain saw her on the back of the limo, it was well before then.

The Dorman cop is clearing the retainig wall in between 4-6 seconds after the fatal shot. Mrs. Kennedy is on the limo trunk 3-5 seconds after said shot.

How can McLain be both the Dorman cop and standing still halfway through Houston at exactly the same time?

Explain.

 

[traxy]

Is it? Explain.

No, I don't think I'm going to bother.

Read back through the thread, it's all there. Images, studies, testimony, articles. All laid out.

I've given you the information a dozen different ways, you choose to ignore it every time. I'm not playing your game anymore. The last time anyone paid attention to Don Thomas was 12 years ago. Suffice to say his attempt at rewriting history didn't change any minds.

 

[Major Major]

As I said the last time he was posting, he's Juror Number Eight from Twelve Angry Men:

Someone's been seeing Twelve Angry Men too much, wanting to be Heroic Juror Number Eight valiantly proposing alternative explanations for every bit of evidence, and since there's an alternative explanation, therefore Reasonable Doubt and Not Guilty.

Juror Number Eight couldn't prove any of his alternative explanations, and indeed, he was arguing the defense's case instead of basing his deliberations on the eveidence that was actually presented by the defense.

 

[Axxman300]

1. Officer McDonald did 3-4 different contradicting statements regarding the incident. Which one of these have you found especially truthful?

2. How do you know that the same gun allegedly used by Oswald when arrested, was the same gun allegedly used by same Oswald when allegedly killing Tippit?

The wound to the webbing of his hand would be all the proof an honest person would need.

The gun was tested, the bullets matched the ones pulled from Tippit , and the hammer strikes on the casings matched.

Oswald would have fried based on this evidence alone.

 

[manifesto]

She began climbing onto the trunk at about Z-356, and remained on the trunk until at least Z-466 before the limo disappeared under the triple underpass.

466 - 356 = 110 frames at 18 fps = 6.1 seconds. That is an eternity in this context; McLain could have stopped on Houston half-way between Main and Elm, looked to his left and seen Jackie start to climb onto the trunk (the 6.1 seconds begins) and then kicked off and accelerated to the corner of Elm to see Jackie still on the trunk.

Of course, manifesto handwaves all this away;

The Dorman cop arrives at the intersection at the same time Mrs. Kennedy BEGINS climbing up on the trunk. Maybe you should actually think before posting next time?

No?

he calls Mclain a liar

Willfully changing his sworn testimony after realizing it supports the HSCA acoustical evidence and therefore is evidence of a conspiracy, is lying in any known definition of the word, yes.

and he casts undue doubt on the synchronisation of the Hughes and Zapruder films,

No, I am pointing out that Myers ”epipolar geometry” is nowhere to be found and that his synchronisation of Zapruder and Hughes therefore is founded on simple, line of sight.

1. To state a scientific method used when not so is, scientific fraud.

2. There is enough wiggle room between Hughes last frame and the first shot in order for McLain to reach the critical spot for the first shot.

so he subsequently ignores the actual film of Mclain coming around the corner of Main and Houston because it doesn't fit in with his pet fantasy.

No. I state that there is not sufficient secured data to make a definitive exact synch between Hughes and Zapruder. There is no overlapping sequence and therefore no secured point of referense.

You are saying that ”eye-balling” is enough. Well, it clearly isn’t.

He needs Mclain to be a long, long way ahead of where he said he was

Which version are you refering to here? The Dorman cop at the intersection? The still standing cop in the middle of Houston Street? Spooky action at a distance?

and where the video evidence shows he was,

What video evidence are showing him to be where exactly when?

so that he is in position with his alleged open microphone to record gunshots. The facts clearly show that there simply was not enough time for that to happen.

Keep repeting your eye-balling as a scientific fact doesn’t make it so. Sorry dude, that is magic thinking.

You have to understand that we are dealing with a CT here exhibiting CT101 behaviour....

No, you are dealing with science in a forum for scientific skepticism.

a. NEVER alter or amend your theory.
b. ALWAYS ignore, dismiss or attack facts that contradict your theory.
c. Make up falsehoods from whole cloth.
d. Tell outright lies and keep repeating those lies in the hope that someone, anyone might believe them.

This is just a bunch of lies. And you know it. Trash.

 

[manifesto]

No, I don't think I'm going to bother.

Read back through the thread, it's all there. Images, studies, testimony, articles. All laid out.

I've given you the information a dozen different ways, you choose to ignore it every time.

No. You have stated that McLain had only half a second to reach the spot for the first shot. In respons I have showed you that, no, Myers doesn’t use ”epipolar geometry” in his meassurements, he uses, line of sight.

That is the difference between using science vs. using guesstimates tailored to confirm pre concived ideas.

- No secured position of Hughes.

- No secured frame in Zapruder for the first shot.

- No secured position of car-5 in the critical time sequence.

- No secured speed of car-5 in the critical time sequence.

- No secured common point of reference for secured synch between H-film and Z-film.

No way to secure exactly how many seconds McLain had to reach the spot to pick up the sound of the first rifle shot = no secured refutation of the HSCA acoustical evidence.

The evidence stands.

I'm not playing your game anymore. The last time anyone paid attention to Don Thomas was 12 years ago. Suffice to say his attempt at rewriting history didn't change any minds.

When HSCA announced that the dictabelt had recorded four rifle shots = conspiracy, the FBI made a statement shortly afterwards that it was bogus. Without even having read the report.

After that a long row of proclaimed ”debunkings” has created the illusion of sound scientific refutation of the findings, while none of it has actually done so.

THAT is interesting.

 

[Axxman300]

No, you are completely ignorant of the subject at hand. No one have said that the dictabelt contain gunshots audible to the human ear.

Sensimetrics software confirms the HSCA acoustic evidence with a perfect match, when runned with the correct speed.

They knowingly used a faulty speed (5%) in order to refute the acoustic evidence as part of the ongoing black propaganda covering up the real facts behind the assassination of JFK.

He's not ignorant, he's just intellectually honest.

The HSCA went looking for a conspiracy, as did the researchers who did the dictabelt work, and essentially manufactured their own evidence.

The voice communications alone should be enough to invalidate the dictabelt nonsense since we know what was said, and when it was said in relation to the shooting. A valid scientific acoustical requires many more control tests, and must be conducted under the exact, or as close to exact environmental conditions to the day of the shooting.

Can you show me what the weather was like during the HSCA's test, and how does it compare to 11/22/63? What were the relative temperatures, and most important - humidity? If either are off by ten degrees then you have no ball game for this kind of forensic work. Sound is dependent on atmosphere, this is why you just can't record instruments just anywhere with a live microphone. With 1963 police transceiver technology the conditions would have to be as close to exact as possible.

The radio was likely a Motorola, with basic sound transmission quality for the time, which means that the farther away from the sound source the less the microphone picked up, and in 1963 that wouldn't be more than ten feet since they were designed for hand-held voice communication. Sure, they could pick up background noise and that's why you held the transceiver close to your mouth.

Here's the main problem; the Grassy Knoll is over 90 yards from Huston street, but from where McLain turned from Main Street onto Huston Street is just over 100 yards with the distance decreasing to 36 yards at the corner of Huston and Elm Streets. At the corner of Huston and Elm the distance is just over 80 yards, and like on Houston Street this distance shrinks as he progresses.

Yet the "gunshots" never louder.

Doesn't matter if you think Oswald did it, or your CIA bogey man behind the fence did it, that final shoot should be loud and distinct...and it just ain't.

So what's the problem?

Either the test conditions didn't match the weather of 11/22/63.

Or...

The microphone was incapable of receiving and transmitting the sounds from those distances.

Or...

It wasn't McLain's radio on the recording.

Any one of these three invalidate the test.

Thanks for playing.