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

[RoboTimbo]

tomtomkent, nobody denies the official x-rays and photographs show that some of the forward half of the scalp and skull was part of the large defect. So what are you even talking about?

NSFW, autopsy photos: https://imgur.com/a/ADjaOpv

Reminder: the official government HSCA theory is that the entry was in the parietal bone, not the occipital bone like the autopsy doctors always said.

Wouldn't it be cool if there was actual evidence for more shots than Oswald's?

 

[Axxman300]

Axxman, I am not technically denying that a Carcano bullet struck the head from behind, especially with the fragments in evidence that were found to contain blood and tissue. The discussion here is about where the small head wound was situated, and a Carcano round entering the EOP could not replicate the wounds shown on the x-rays and brain photographs.

And I am simply pointing out that the Carcano round was not only capable of causing all of the damage to the head -IT WAS UNIQUELY CAPABLE OF CAUSING THE WOUNDS WE SEE.

This is why you fail.

The 6.5x52mm has more in common with a canon ball than a .762 bullet. It's a pocket freight train, a portable space shuttle in relative power.

Where it entered in the back of the skull doesn't really matter because what nobody can predict nor replicate is what that bullet will do once inside the brain case. You can fire 100 rounds into 100 heads and get 100 different outcomes; some will vary slightly while others will vary dramatically. The reason being that everyone's skull thickness is different, and the thickness of the one can vary in the same region of a single skull. What the bullet does is dependent on where it smashes into the bone.

Maybe the bullet fragments like it did in Dallas. Maybe it fragments differently causing even more damage upon exit. Maybe it doesn't fragment at all.

The Carcano rifle has a barrel with a 1:8" twist ratio (the M-16 has a 1:7").
The 6.5x52mm round Oswald used was 160 grains.

That is a lot of energy focused upon an impact zone a little smaller than your pinky-tip.

The official story, as dictated by the HSCA forensic pathology panel is that Kennedy's whole brain was removed through a five inch skull cavity. I am the one saying the skull cavity must have been larger.

Doesn't matter what the HSCA said. Humes said he cut the skull cap off. Plus I'm sure you've misread their conclusions per usual.

You either have virtually zero grasp of the JFK forensic evidence, despite claiming you understand this subject and despite being repeatedly reminded in this thread, OR you have chosen to use your time playing the human version of Lenny the automatic telemarketing company harasser.

I'm not a doctor, I'm certainly not a pathologist. The autopsy report is full of big Latin words I have to look up. You, sure as hell, are no medical expert.

The difference between you and I is the ability to count to 1. One bullet struck JFK in the back of the head, one bullet did all of that damage.

I don't know pathology or neurology but I know enough about bullets. Oswald shot JFK twice with his 6.5x52mm Carcano. The Carcano is the smoking gun

 

[HSienzant]

What do you think it means?

Asked and answered.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12297809&postcount=3417

It's still your problem. You tell us what it means to you.

And then fit that information about the incisions in the coronal plane in with the comminuted fractures reference, and you'll understand why your arguments about the intact skull needing the skullcap removed to remove the brain have been wrong since at least the last thread.

Or you can do what you've been doing - ignoring all the information that doesn't fit with your preconceived conspiracy conclusion.

Have you been making any headway with that approach? From here, you appear to be spinning your wheels, covering the same ground you covered nearly a year ago. Not sure why you would expect a different outcome. We weren't convinced back then, and repeating those same arguments doesn't appear to be able to change the outcome any.

Do you have anything new to offer, or is repeating last year's arguments going to be your mode of operation moving forward?

All the best,
Hank

 

[Steve]

Tag team match. Manifesto gets suspended, Micah Java comes back.

They both claim to have solved the case, although they never argue the same points.

Curious isn't it?

Hank

Manifesto's suspension ended yesterday. He has not jumped back into this thread yet. Seems he doesn't want to interfere with Micah Java's sparkling commentary.

 

[HSienzant]

The difference between you and I is the ability to count to 1. One bullet struck JFK in the back of the head, one bullet did all of that damage.

I always get a kick out of the conspiracy experts that try to lecture about what the autopsy established, and their argument that they are using the autopsy to establish the conspiracy -- then wind up with two bullets to the head contrary to what the autopsy doctors determined.

They come here pretending to be able to understand the autopsy, but then reach a conclusion diametrically opposed to the findings of the autopsy.

And somehow they expect us to accept their arguments and discard those of the actual expert pathologists who had the body in front of them.

As you note, all it takes is the ability to count to one - as in, one bullet struck the bullet in the head.

Hank

 

[smartcooky]

Reminder: the official government HSCA theory is that the entry was in the parietal bone, not the occipital bone like the autopsy doctors always said.

Irrelevant.

The parietal bone and the occipital bone are one above the other, adjacent and joined at the lambdoid suture....

You cannot "feel" the lambdoid suture; it is nigh on impossible to tell for sure where it is without removing the scalp and cleaning the tissues from the bone, and it often does not show up in x-rays photographs (I can't see it on any of the copies of the JFK x-rays photographs have seen). Ergo, an error of a few millimetres in estimating the entry wound could put it in the parietal or occipital bones, and you would not know until you removed the scalp.

 

[Axxman300]

I always get a kick out of the conspiracy experts that try to lecture about what the autopsy established, and their argument that they are using the autopsy to establish the conspiracy -- then wind up with two bullets to the head contrary to what the autopsy doctors determined.

They come here pretending to be able to understand the autopsy, but then reach a conclusion diametrically opposed to the findings of the autopsy.

And somehow they expect us to accept their arguments and discard those of the actual expert pathologists who had the body in front of them.

As you note, all it takes is the ability to count to one - as in, one bullet struck the bullet in the head.

Hank

Not just one bullet, but the type of bullet is the key.

Had it been any other rifle round there would be a semi-valid argument to be made, and I believe that this is a huge part of the problem since few shooters/sportsmen/hunters have ever shot 6.5 let alone 6.5x52mm even today, but especially in 1963/64. A .762 head wound would look a lot different (no much, but enough).

USSOCOM just adopted 6.5 as their main sniper round, and I'm sure that as time goes by there will be less doubt about Oswald's guilt as more sportsmen become familiar with the basic round even if the current ammo is less powerful than the Carcano round used in Dallas. Coupled with our sad, growing history of angry young men with rifles doing major damage and I think we can see the light at the end of the tunnel as far as the second gunman silliness is concerned.

Again, my complaint is the laziness of the multiple gunmen CT. The physical evidence doesn't support it in any way, and the theories just get more stupid as they stretch the facts tighter.

Give me a Cuban Exile or Cuban Direct Action connection, you know, something remotely plausible to chew on for a while. Spin a story about Oswald meeting someone on a bus he wants to impress, or who sucks him into a evil plan to kill JFK. Give me a lost conversation in a back bedroom at that party on Mexico City with Oswald and a Cuban agent. Give me a couple of mob-connected Cubans from Mongoose who make a bet with Oswald.

In other words: Give me something that might have actually happened. Don't give me a second gunman.

Right now the closest the assassination has to a conspiracy is a phone call from CIA to the FBI about Oswald that was never made. To me that should be sad and frustrating enough.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Manifesto's suspension ended yesterday. He has not jumped back into this thread yet. Seems he doesn't want to interfere with Micah Java's sparkling commentary.

They might be taken more seriously if they would both agree on an alternative scenario and argue that. It might reduce the amount of laughter they get.

How about it, CTs? Doesn't all your evidence point to one conclusion?

 

[bknight]

Axxman, I am not technically denying that a Carcano bullet struck the head from behind, especially with the fragments in evidence that were found to contain blood and tissue. The discussion here is about where the small head wound was situated, and a Carcano round entering the EOP could not replicate the wounds shown on the x-rays and brain photographs.

The official story, as dictated by the HSCA forensic pathology panel is that Kennedy's whole brain was removed through a five inch skull cavity. I am the one saying the skull cavity must have been larger.

I believe a citation is required

You either have virtually zero grasp of the JFK forensic evidence, despite claiming you understand this subject and despite being repeatedly reminded in this thread, OR you have chosen to use your time playing the human version of Lenny the automatic telemarketing company harasser.

 

[HSienzant]

The official story, as dictated by the HSCA forensic pathology panel is that Kennedy's whole brain was removed through a five inch skull cavity.

I believe a citation is required

Yeah, I second BKnight's request.

Where did the HSCA forensic pathology panel say what you're claiming?

If you can't cite for it, our choices reduce to:

• You're misunderstanding something
• You're making it up

A clear and concise quote where the panel says the above is requested. A long interpretative claim by you is not what I'm looking for.

Thanks in advance,
Hank

 

[carlitos]

I made it through a couple of minutes before this guy gets to his false dilemma - that some people believe nothing is a conspiracy while others believe that everything is a conspiracy. No. The truth does not live in the middle of this false dilemma.

Yeah....

Yeah. I usually tune out videos after the speaker lies. It’s sometimes called “time to first lie” and I know that, when there is a lie early on, I don’t need to waste any more of my time. You might want to develop a similar system, a kind of baloney detection device. It would save you a lot of wasted time on conspiracy junk.

 

[BStrong]

One time when I mentioned the 6.5 centimeter surgical incision on Kennedy's throat, Axxman mistook centimeters for millimeters and took it as an indicator of a 6.5mm bullet hole in his imagination.

As the inventor of the ventriloquist sound suppressor and the poster fully vested in a complete lack of knowledge about terminal ballistics, a reference to measurement confusion as evidence of incompetence is about as ironic as it gets.

 

[manifesto]

And there it is.

Oswald was a communist...so he's innocent...

No, he wasn’t. He was a low level US Intel agent way in over his head, not knowing he was sheep dipped as a patsy for the assassination of president Kennedy.

To suggest otherwise is plain stupid or accessories after the fact.

 

[RoboTimbo]

No, he wasn’t. He was a low level US Intel agent way in over his head, not knowing he was sheep dipped as a patsy for the assassination of president Kennedy.

To suggest otherwise is plain stupid or accessories after the fact.

, explain.

 

[manifesto]

Yes, you have found an answer.

Opisthotonus

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opisthotonus

"Opisthotonus or opisthotonos, from Greek roots, ὄπισθεν, opisthen meaning "behind" and τόνος tonos meaning "tension", is a state of severe hyperextension and spasticity in which an individual's head, neck and spinal column enter into a complete "bridging" or "arching" position.[1][2] This abnormal posturing is an extrapyramidal effect and is caused by spasm of the axial muscles along the spinal column."

"It is seen in some cases of severe cerebral palsy and traumatic brain injury or as a result of the severe muscular spasms associated with tetanus. It can be a feature of severe acute hydrocephalus."

Decerebrate Posture

https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/003299.htm

Decerebrate posture is an abnormal body posture that involves the arms and legs being held straight out, the toes being pointed downward, and the head and neck being arched backward. The muscles are tightened and held rigidly. This type of posturing usually means there has been severe damage to the brain.

Considerations
A severe injury to the brain is the usual cause of decerebrate posture.

Opisthotonos (a severe muscle spasm of the neck and back) may occur in severe cases of decerebrate posture.

Decerebrate posture can occur on one side, on both sides, or in just the arms. It may alternate with another type of abnormal posture called decorticate posture. A person can also have decorticate posture on one side of the body and decerebrate posture on the other side.

Decerebrate reflexes are always delayed. The head movement back in the Z-film is instant when the bullet hit the head. That said, even if not delayed, it can’t explain JFK’s movements from Z312/13 forward.

Other suggestions?

 

[manifesto]

Is that what he would mean? Or what you would mean?
Is it that uncommon for people to say they were "near the railway" because of a bridge, being a nice easy landmark for the embankment?
The same logic could be applied in reverse: "If he meant the railway by the knoll, he would have said the knoll, or the goods yards, because those are what it is called!"

The ”knoll” was next to a parking lot which in turn was next to a railway yard, full of railway tracks.

The ”tripple over/underpass” was/is a railway bridge and a well known landmark in Dallas. To suggest that ”the railway tracks” is ”the tripple overpass” is therefore not reasonable. It’s an obvious incredulity with the purpose of mislead the reader.

Railway tracks = all the tracks behind the knoll and the parking lot = railway yard.

Railway tracks ≠ tripple underpass.

Ergo. 52 witness who was asked, said that the shots came from the knoll/ direction of the knoll. Stands.

Anything else?

 

[bknight]

Decerebrate reflexes are always delayed. The head movement back in the Z-film is instant when the bullet hit the head. That said, even if not delayed, it can’t explain JFK’s movements from Z312/13 forward.

Other suggestions?

You should really put on your eyeglasses when viewing the Zapruder film, the first head reaction is forward as you have been told many times and that is as physics dictates, energy transferred from bullet to head. Th subsequent backward movement could be Decerebrate Posture. That makes perfect sense from a GSW from the rear.

 

[Tomtomkent]

The ”knoll” was next to a parking lot which in turn was next to a railway yard, full of railway tracks.

The ”tripple over/underpass” was/is a railway bridge and a well known landmark in Dallas. To suggest that ”the railway tracks” is ”the tripple overpass” is therefore not reasonable. It’s an obvious incredulity with the purpose of mislead the reader.

Railway tracks = all the tracks behind the knoll and the parking lot = railway yard.

Railway tracks ≠ tripple underpass.

Ergo. 52 witness who was asked, said that the shots came from the knoll/ direction of the knoll. Stands.

Anything else?

Sorry, but... something, being near something else, beyond which there was a goods yard, only sounds within the same likelihood as the bridge on which a railway was known to be.

Your interpretation is not enough to disregard one in favour of the other, especially given the context of the full statement.

I’m not convinced.

 

[manifesto]

Sorry, but... something, being near something else, beyond which there was a goods yard, only sounds within the same likelihood as the bridge on which a railway was known to be.

Your interpretation is not enough to disregard one in favour of the other, especially given the context of the full statement.

I’m not convinced.

The ”Tripple underpass” was/is a well known landmark + an obvious structure to name as such if it was from there the witness heard shots.

To equate ”the railway tracks” with this landmark just because it had railway tracks on it, doesn’t stand to reason. No.

52 witnesses stands. Anyone else who you find ’problems’ with?

 

[manifesto]

You should really put on your eyeglasses when viewing the Zapruder film, the first head reaction is forward as you have been told many times and that is as physics dictates, energy transferred from bullet to head.

1. Does the head move forward anything before Z312/13?

2. Does anyone else in the limo move forward during the same time sequence?

3. Could he have been hit with two bullets, one from behind and one from in front, almost instantaneously?

4. Could the forward nick be explained by a well known effect of an initial movement against the direction of an incoming bullet caused by over pressure initially having nowhere else to go?

The answer to all these questions is, yes.

Th subsequent backward movement could be Decerebrate Posture. That makes perfect sense from a GSW from the rear.

No, it couldn’t. All known decerebrate reflexes are way too delayed. JFK’s head snaps violently backwards as if hit by a baseball bat. Instantaneously.