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

[BStrong]

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?

Before your time-out I posted this:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12294290&postcount=3357

Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
I didn’t request known nerve reflexes from goats, I requested such from humans, since JFK was, a human.

Do you have any?

Can do easy, disturbing footage at 1:19:



Summary execution of VC suspect by Gen. Nguyen Van Lem, Tet '68. Single .38 special round to the right temple. The victim's head does not move to the left from projectile impact as asserted by your popular fiction based pov of terminal ballistics.

Even better example, w/ no disturbing footage, other than for the adherents of "back and to the left":




Footage for a law enforcement training video on the effects of common caliber projectiles, and this segment shows live fire testing of both military and law enforcement body armor. Pay particular attention to the visible effect of projectile impact on the tester wearing the military oriented hard armor. He is shot twice from point blank range with a 7.62 NATO cartridge out of an early FAL type rifle, once while balancing on one foot. He was not "knocked down" or visibly moved by either impact.

Specs for the 7.62 x 51 NATO round:Muzzle velocity with the GI 147 grain FMJ round is approx 2,700 feet per second, muzzle energy approx. 2,400 foot pounds - Carcano specs 162 grain round is 2,300 feet per second with approx. 1,900 foot pounds of energy. If a point-blank hit from the NATO round doesn't produce the dramatic Hollywood effect from a man balancing on one foot when shot there's no chance that the effect of the lesser Carcano round will produce that much-loved popular fiction instant reaction to a projectile impact.

Just to be clear, because the Hollywood ballistics experts have noted the difference between a headshot and a center of mass hit on armor and drew the completely wrong conclusion, the impacts from the NATO round on the body armor transferred the whole of the kinetic energy to the tester and any penetrating wound that exits a soft target only transfers a very small portion of the energy to the target.

When a human or game animal takes a projectile impact that instantly stops the nervous system (solid brain or spinal cord hit) they collapse according to what their body posture was at that moment. It doesn't matter if it's a .22 long rifle round or a .50 BMG round, they collapse and that's it.

Some more evidence, disturbing footage:



A group of South African miners on strike shot and killed by SA police. The strikers were hit with concentrated fire from the localy manufactured Galil type R4's in 5.56 rounds, semi and full auto and 9mm semi auto pistol fire. Every striker hit collapsed exactly as their body posture was at the moment of impact, moving forward, not backwards as the Hollywood ballistic experts continually assert, and those victims were all hit by multiple projectiles, not single hits. If there was any truth to Oliver Stone's ******** and the jive posted in this thread those strikers should have moved like they were hit by a tidal wave - because a force of water can actually knock someone backwards or in the direction of force from that water, but projectiles can't and don't.


And further, this:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12294429&postcount=3362

For the grown ups. there's been some new examinations of the terminal ballistics by Nicholas R. Nalli

https://www.heliyon.com/article/e00603

...a frontal impact at Z313 is physically ruled out. Of course, the validity of statement (34) does not rule out conjectured missed shots (although no physical evidence was ever recovered for any such shots), nor does it pinpoint the exact origin of the shot that hit (e.g., the TSBD as opposed to another nearby building). But the modeling study (and underlying dynamics and conservation laws) presented in this paper, in corroboration of the autopsy findings [25], do imply that President Kennedy was not hit by a hypothesized gunshot from the front.

The conclusion is an important one given that the hypothesized existence of a shooter in front of the limousine (viz., on the Grassy Knoll) has been the primary physical foundation for virtually all conspiracy conjectures to date on the topic.13 As a parting note, while the simple one-dimensional physical models presented in this paper were derived for application to a special case study (viz., the Kennedy Assassination), the underlying physical principles provide an approximate quantitative description of the interaction between a high-speed projectile (slowed by an intervening atmosphere) and a heterogenous body comprised of bone and visco-elastic tissue (viz., the human head), and may also form a basic conceptual basis for understanding the wounding mechanisms involved in such interactions.

ETA:

https://www.history.com/news/jfk-ass...heory-debunked


When the president was shot, he says, Kennedy’s head exploded, as the film so graphically shows. Nalli’s model shows that the wound wasn’t where the bullet exited, but where it entered. It demonstrates that a temporary cavity formed inside the president’s soft tissue as the momentum and kinetic energy of the bullet smashed into his skull, causing his head to snap forward.

Based on his model, Nalli also thinks that the theory of a second shooter and that of the president being shot by hollow-point or soft-point bullets are also unlikely. Not only were such bullets never recovered, he writes, but the movements of Kennedy’s head are only consistent with a shot from the back.

 

[smartcooky]

It is not spin to argue that shot/s from in front/knoll has as much or more witness support as shot/s from behind/TSBD.

It is a stament based on recorded facts.

Nope

I agree on the precise location not being the knoll, but I propose that it doesn’t exclude the knoll and certainly not from in front.

Nope

There is no physical evidence whatsoever of any shots hitting JFK from any direction other that from behind and above. The film, the forensics, the photographs, the x-rays and the terminal ballistics all point to shots from behind

If there were shots fired from the Knoll or the top of the triple underpass, they must have all missed. The problem here, however, is that there is no physical evidence of these missed shots. The knoll and the triple underpass are both elevated firing positions, so missed shots would not have flown off into the distance never to be seen again.

Missed shots from the knoll would have hit the outside, rear right hand side of the car and/or the rear passenger's seat and/or Jackie and/or or gone beyond the car to strike the grassy area on the north side of Elm. No bullets were found in the back seat or anywhere in the back of the car. Jackie was not hit. When bullets strike a grassy area, they kick up a lot of dirt; witnesses would have seen this, and the bullets would have been easily found with a metal detector.

Missed shots from top of the underpass would also have hit the car and/or the back seat, and/or gone beyond to ricochet off the road well behind the car. The occupants of the follow up car (which had SS agents standing on the running boards, would have been right in the firing line from these ricochets, and would certainly have seen them.

The echo-argument goes both ways. If the underpass had a hard reflecting surface, that certainly goes for the TSBD.

Nope.

The triple underpass has a flat surface and is right at the correct angle to reflect the sound of gunshots from the TSBD into Dealey Plaza. However the TSBD is not a completely flat surface. It has windows and ridges that help dissipate the sounds, and is at just about the worst possible angle to reflect the sounds of shots from the knoll or the triple underpass back into Dealey Plaza.

A Mauser turning Carcano turning murder weapon, yes.

It might interest you to know that

► David Brinkley (NBC News) reported it was 7.65 Mauser
► An unnamed (ABC News) TV reporter at the TSBD ABC reported it was a British (Lee-Enfield) .303 rifle
► Bob Walker (WFAA-TV Dallas) reported it was a .25cal Japanese Rifle of unspecified make.
► Walter Cronkite (CBS) reported it was a 3030 rifle

 

[smartcooky]

Source?

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/headwnd.htm

4. Werner U. Spitz, M.D., forensic pathologist, Chief Medical Examiner, Wayne County, Michigan: "7. It is impossible to conclude from the motion of the President's head and body following the head shot, from which direction the shots came. There is no doubt that as soon as the President was struck in the head, death occurred. The President's body was thus limp, devoid of control and stability normally exerted by the cerebral centers. Nothing would keep the body up at this stage and a forward drop is likely to occur. The subsequent backward movement of the President's head can be explained by sudden decerebration. This position is well known as "decerebrate posture" and is characterized by opisthotonos, a tetanic spasm -- or seizure-like condition."

5. Richard Lindenberg, M.D., Director of Neuropathology and Legal Medicine, State of Maryland: "Immediately after the shot through the head the President took rather abruptly an almost erect position before slumping over to the left. This straightening is to be considered a sudden opisthotonic reflex movement due to decerebration."

Human reaction time is about 1/3 of a second, and reflex action is immediate. Therefore, we can expect decerebrate reflexes within human reaction time (less than 2 Zapruder Frames) of bullet impact

No, I’m refering to ’decerebrate reflexes.’

Which are also known as decerebrate posturing, decerebrate response, decerebrate rigidity, and extensor posturing.

How do you know this? There are no visible signs of a bullet hitting the head until Z313.

The world does not happen in fraction of a second snapshots, but the limitations of a movie camera is that it can only show the world in fraction of a second snapshots. This is as true now with a digital camera as it was back in 1963.

Unlike most of the home movie cameras of the time, which used a rotating disk as a shutter, Zapruder's Bell And Howell 414PD movie camera used a proper camera type shutter. It had an exposure time of 1/40th of a second (25 milliseconds) per frame. The implications of this is that for every frame cycle of 1/18 of a second (56ms) the shutter is closed for 31ms (film sees no image). The bullet is likely to have impacted some time during the 31 ms closed time between Z312 and Z313, since there appears to be no evidence of impact in Z312

Yes, the kinetic energy usually transforms to heat and/or momentum transfered to the object it travels through, but you are saying it ”explodes” and that this ”explosion” are like pushing the head away from the exit whole/wound?

No, not quite.

The bullet fragments when it strikes the bone at the back of JFK's skull. Some of the kinetic energy is dissipated at the point of impact (which is why Kennedy's head moved forward between Z312 and Z313). However, the fragments still carry a lot of kinetic energy, and most of that energy is dissipated in the form of shock waves and a pressure cavity. When a high velocity bullet strikes the the head, penetrates the skull and moves through the brain, pressure changes of as high as 1500 psi or higher can develop. There are three types of pressure change

1. the shock wave or high pressure pulse formed when the bullet strikes the head;

2. very high pressure regions form immediately in front of and all around the moving bullets or bullet fragments

3. relatively slow, low pressure changes which cause a large explosive temporary cavity to be formed behind the bullet or bullet fragments.

In the case of the head, the pressure is pushing out, but the skull is closed, then the cavity collapsed. The pressure is too much of the skull to cope with, and it explodes

In addition, I submit this, a gif made by a poster called "William Seger" (who is also a member here). The first time I saw it was a post by him made at "Democratic Underground" about five years ago. I don't usually like to plagiarise, but in this case I will, because I cannot say it any better than he did, so I will quote from his post (my emphasis)

Here's one that shows a couple of previous frames (to prove there was no forward motion before frame 313), and several frames after that to show why the back-and-to-left cannot be explained by momentum from the bullet because it comes 1/6 second after the hit and it shows acceleration over several frames, which implies a continued force long after the bullet is gone:

 

[manifesto]

Right.

And *that's* how we know this. You just answered your own question!

Z312 shows no bullet impact, and no bullet damage. So the bullet has not yet hit the head.

Agree.

In Z313 we see the bullet damage and the result of the bullet impact, so the bullet has already passed completely through the head and is somewhere off in the distance.

No. The spatter travels faster than the bullet, so it would show up the same instance that the bullet hits the head.

The bullet impact is over with by Z313 and the momentum from the bullet has already been transferred to the head. Any motion you see after 313 is not from the bullet impact. It's already too late.

No. The effect of the transferred momentum is seen until JFK’s head come to a stop at Z321.

So we measure from frame Z312 to Z313 to see what impact the bullet had on the head movement. Turns out it pushed it forward about three inches.

No. Based on conjecture.

And this was asked and answered numerous times in the past.

In fact, I pointed this out to you earlier today.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12302950&postcount=3519

Pretend some more you're asking questions that still need answering. They have already been answered. You're just repeating the question because you don't like the answer. But it won't change based on your likes or dislikes. Physics is like that.



Hank

I’ll answer this in my next post.

 

[bknight]

Agree.

No. The spatter travels faster than the bullet, so it would show up the same instance that the bullet hits the head./

Citation required for this bare assertion.

No. The effect of the transferred momentum is seen until JFK’s head come to a stop at Z321.

No. Based on conjecture.

I’ll answer this in my next post.

And you can add to it the previously requested citations for the rest of bare assertions.

manifesto, probably some of the thread participants have suggested and I will reiterate, you whole heartedly accept any science that purports supporting your conclusion that there were multiple shooters at Dealey Plaza, but you hand wave away any science that does not support multiple shooters. Why is that. Are you assuming true what you must prove?

 

[smartcooky]

No. The spatter travels faster than the bullet, so it would show up the same instance that the bullet hits the head.

Utter rubbish

The spatter is a result of the pressure cavity, which travels behind the bullet!

Watch this again

No. The effect of the transferred momentum is seen until JFK’s head come to a stop at Z321.

No. JFK's head accelerates backwards after Z313. If the movement backwards was the result of transferred momentum from a shot from the front, then that cannot happen, acceleration requires a force to be applied. What is the force causing the acceleration?

No. Based on conjecture.

No. Based on simple observation

 

[HSienzant]

But I agree, Davis and Kounas should be removed from the ”knoll” category.

Bravo. That wasn't too hard, was it?

You're starting to see my point, that the data has been manipulated in those lists to increase the overall count of knoll witnesses and decrease the overall count of TSBD witnesses.

So with this admission, we've gone from 52 knoll witnesses to 50. Right?

We were never at a majority as per your original remarks. Over time you've come down on that claim as well.

I pointed out your various claims concerning the percentage of knoll witnesses were not true in this post: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12291889&postcount=3184

So we're making real progress here. You're admitting your conspiracy site source didn't properly vet their list. You're admitting the list is inflated. And we've shown your claims about the relative percentage of knoll witnesses wasn't true either.

Hank

 

[RoboTimbo]

No. The spatter travels faster than the bullet, so it would show up the same instance that the bullet hits the head.

LOL. Where do you CTs (s) come up with this crap?

 

[manifesto]

Obey the laws of physics.

Of course.

David Lifton went through all this with Nobel Prize-winning physicist Richard Feynman hoping to win a conspiracy convert.

Looking at his fellow physicist and Nobel Prize-winner, Luis Alvarez, that is far from reassuring when it comes to matters of the JFK assassination, isn’t it?

Feynman patiently explained to Lifton the momentum is transferred at the moment of impact, not a tenth or an eighteenth of a second later. Or two eighteenths later.

Yes, the ’impact’ extending from hitting the skin through the head and exiting, if exiting, that is.

Feynmann patiently explained to Lifton that the correct comparison for the transfer of momentum is between Zapruder frames 312 and 313 - the frame immediately before the bullet impact and the frame immediately after the bullet impact.

Feynmann patiently explained to Lifton that in that eighteenth of a second (the time between the two exposures of the camera) he saw the President's head move forward. That meant, to this Nobel Prize winning physicist, that the bullet came from behind and pushed the President's head forward.

You anxiously invoking his ”Nobel Prize” in every sentence have the opposite effect. A sure sign of a shaky argument.

Feynmann patiently explained to Lifton that whatever happened after that, after the bullet had already left the head

I agree that the bullet left the head, but how did Feynman come to that conclusion?

(which it had done by frame Z313, which shows the immediate aftermath of the bullet strike) could not be caused by the bullet that struck JFK between frames 312 and 313.

All this is covered in great detail in David Lifton's book, BEST EVIDENCE.

1. Since there is a considerable inertia in a head traveling forward, the visible effect of transferred momentum is drawn out in time. First the head stops, in an instance. Second, the head changes direction/accelerates. Third, the head is traveling. Fourth, the head stops and comes to rest. All this is happening in between Z312 and Z321.

2. The spattter visible in Z313 is traveling faster than the incoming bullet so it is almost instant = the bullet hits the head in Z313 or a couple of hundredths of seconds before.

Ergo. The Z312 - Z321 is fully consistent with a bullet from in front to the right (direction of momentum).

The next question is how much momentum that would have to be transferred in order to explain the head movement between Z313 and Z321. An ordinarie Winchester rifle with .30-30 soft point ammo could have easily done the job.

There are a lot of different reasons advanced for the backward movement

Lets see.

which happens AFTER the bullet has left the head (and Z215 starts the backward movement, which is an eternity in terms of physics).

No. The head first comes to a STOP in Z313 = momentum transferred in Z313 or in a couple of 1/100’th seconds before.

1. Jet Effect (proposed by Nobel Prize winning physicist Luis Alvarez)

Proven bogus and a proven scientific fraud willfully fabricated by Luis Alvarez in order to explain away the head violently snapping back and to the left = shot from in front to the right, which the American public came to know 13 years after the fact thanks to Jim Garrison and Geraldo Rivera who showed a copy of the Zapruder film in prime time National TV.

In comes the ”Nobel Prize-winner”, Luis Alvarez.

The same happened a couple of years later when HSCA’s acoustic evidence became known. In comes the ”Nobel Prize-winner”, Luis Alvarez.

Alvarez who is also known for covering up the Israeli nuclear weapons tests in the south Indian ocean. Busy carrying water for the US National Security State since his work in the Manhattan Project, developing the bombs who exploded over Japan in 1945.

Alvarez should have his own thread.

2. Neuromuscular reaction (the brain being damaged causes the muscles to freeze up, and the back muscles being stronger than the stomach muscles, causes JFK to lurch backwards)

No. These reflexes are always delayed and couldn’t possibly explain the head movement from Z313 to Z321.

Impossible.

3. Back brace holds JFK upright, and he rebounds backward.

Lol. Rebounds. No, the brace was of cloth and had very little if any effect on JFK’s posture before or after being hit.

4. JFK's head is forced forward with his chin forced to his chest, and then the head rebounds and takes the body with it.

The question is what it is that ”forces” the head forward between Z311 and Z313. You say a bullet. I say maybe a bullet or maybe the decelerating limo. A bullet from behind doesn’t exclude a bullet almost simultaneosly from in front or vice versa.

5. A second shot to the head (with a cover up concealing all evidence of it) forces JFK back.

Yes, my contention is that shot/s from in front were covered up in order to lay all blame on the patsy. To protect the guilty men/women who were the real assassins. Yes.

6. A first shot to the head forces JFK backward (which ignores the laws of physics as explained by Nobel Prize winning physicist Richard Feynman AND a cover up concealing all evidence of it).

As I said, invoking his Nobel Prize all the time has the opposite effect, it shows that you have little faith in the actual science. If not, show me the science.

Btw, Feynman is a one of my heroes too. In the field of quantum physics, that is. That doesn’t automatically translate to all fields of science, forensic ballistics included.

Which ones did you eliminate and why? Which one did you settle on and why?

Bonus points if you obey the laws of physics.

Hank

See above.

PS: All this is covered in detail in the thread. You would be caught up by now and not raising bogus questions if you had started reading it when you were advised to.

It is not me who has to find facts or arguments in defence of your assertions, Hank.

You know this.

 

[manifesto]

Utter rubbish

The spatter is a result of the pressure cavity, which travels behind the bullet!

Watch this again

[qimg]https://www.dropbox.com/s/x4lisdkhwy55k9h/Bullet%2BGel.gif?raw=1[/qimg]

Funny that you are posting a gif confirming my statement. Look at where the bullet enters the gel block. The gel travels outward = back spatters at the instant the bullet enters the block.

That said, the gel is not watery blood which continues outward as seen in the Z-film. It rebounds and therefore doesn’t show the relative speed to the bullet traveling through the head.

No. JFK's head accelerates backwards after Z313.

No. It decelerate/stops almost in the same instant that the bullet hits the head. After this, it starts accelerate in the opposite direction until coming to rest in Z321. Inertia.

If the movement backwards was the result of transferred momentum from a shot from the front, then that cannot happen, acceleration requires a force to be applied. What is the force causing the acceleration?

The momentum transferred from an incoming soft point hunting bullet from in front to the right.

No. Based on simple observation

No. Conjecture. You are assuming that a bullet hit from behind in Z312 and conjure from that. Teleologically. Not science.

 

[RoboTimbo]

It is not me who has to find facts or arguments in defence of your assertions, Hank.

You certainly aren't finding any to support your own claims. The null hypothesis remains unmoved.

You know this.

You should.

You and the other CT were never able to agree on an alternative scenario?

 

[jeffas69]

Ok, you wrote:
Go further? How? Why?


I’m talking of two of the witnesses standing at the Houston-Elm intersection testifying that they heard shots in the direction of the triple underpass.

The ”knoll” is alligned with the triple underpass if you are standing at the intersection. That is, it is the same direction. Knoll = triple underpass, if standing at the intersection = shot from in front.

Yes, their testimony is weaker for the ”knoll” but it doesn’t exclude it since the direction is the same from where they where standing.

Ok?

You skipped something. Go back to 3515 and read it. See if you can catch my drift. Hank responded in the very next post showing that he understood me perfectly. Go ahead and read that one as well while you are there.

 

[manifesto]

You skipped something. Go back to 3515 and read it. See if you can catch my drift. Hank responded in the very next post showing that he understood me perfectly. Go ahead and read that one as well while you are there.

No. As has been pointed out to you already all of the earwitnesses on your list are classified as knoll shots only. Even though your "theory" according to the acoustic "evidence" supposedly says that at least four shots came from behind and only one from the front. Since your blindfold tests say that no one would be fooled by echoes then either the blindfold tests were administered wrong because none of them heard shots from only one direction or all of the "52" knoll witnesses are wrong or both.

- Were they asked if they heard shots from more than one direction?

- Witnesses tend to remember the most pregnant part of an episode, depending on what they saw and where they were placed.

- The exact number of shots are more difficult to recall especially if they were tightly spaced in a highly reverberating enviroment.

- The TSBD-witnesses too gave only one direction of the shots = same same.

Ergo. The asked witnesses in Dealey Plaza gives as much or more (or as little) support to shots from the front/knoll, as to shots from behind/TSBD.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Ergo. The asked witnesses in Dealey Plaza gives as much or more (or as little) support to shots from the front/knoll, as to shots from behind/TSBD.

So you advocate going by physical evidence rather than witness testimony?

 

[jeffas69]

- Were they asked if they heard shots from more than one direction?

Most of them I would assume were asked what they remembered. I don't see how it matters because we are going on what we have on record.

- Witnesses tend to remember the most pregnant part of an episode, depending on what the saw and where they were placed.

Do you have a citation? Or is this wishful thinking? It looks like speculation. Making it meaningless.

- The exact number of shots are more difficult to recall especially if they were tightly spaced in a highly reverberating enviroment.

According to the null the vast majority heard the correct number of shots.

- The TSBD-witnesses too gave only one direction of the shots = same same.

It is not the same according to the null everyone who said TBSD only for direction and 3 shots only were exactly right. Even if there were five shots these witnessess got three out of five for direction and count. Correct? The knoll only witnessess according to your theory got 1 out of 5 for direction, and were also wrong on the number.

Your knoll only witness testimonies are weaker. The fact that they got more wrong than right means every single one of them had to have heard some echoes. This means that every single one of them could have heard three echoes of shots that originated from the TSBD.

Can you name a single witness that heard one shot only from the knoll and four from behind? Anyone that even closely matches your theory of what happened?

 

[manifesto]

​

Nope, it's your issue. You need to cite why the IRS rules should be overturned because "Oswald".

Anything else is a attempt to shift the burden of proof. Ball is in your court. Show where the ARRB act overturned existing U.S. law concerning the secrecy of individual's U.S. tax returns. Show that Oswald's tax return (he only filed one since his return from Russia) is specifically named as being included or excluded.

We'll wait.

We'll wait forever, because you're just repeating some nonsense you read online from some conspiracy site.

Hank

1. There is no excemption on ”private” records in the JFK Act.

2. To say that Oswalds tax returns are not relevant to the JFK assassination is at best a sign of ignorance. Of course they are extremely relevant in researching his financial connections to see if any of those could lead to a better understanding of his whereabouts before the assassination he allegedly took part in.

If he worked for organized crime or for political right- or left-wing organisations, for a foregn state or, for US Intel.

Your argument reminds me of the 9/11-Commission when it states that the financiers of the alleged high-jackers were of ”little practical significance”.

Same same?

 

[manifesto]

No.

- Explain why it's of relevance and how it fits the specific criteria you quoted above: "document, describe, report on, analyze, or interpret activities, persons, or events reasonably related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy and investigations of or inquiries into the assassination." A tax return from 1962 hardly seems to fit.

- Explain why the JFK records act takes priority over the IRS laws protecting individuals' tax returns.

- Maybe it's already been released and your web source is out of date or just wrong?

- What is your source for this claim, by the way? Did you just make it up?

Hank

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12303943&postcount=3596

 

[manifesto]

Most of them I would assume were asked what they remembered. I don't see how it matters because we are going on what we have on record.

If they were asked from where the shooter (singular) was shooting, they conveyed that only one shooter was behind the attack, ergo one direction.

Do you have a citation? Or is this wishful thinking? It looks like speculation. Making it meaningless.

No. I have common sense.

According to the null the vast majority heard the correct number of shots.

Wow. According to null Oswald and Oswald alone shot JFK from behind and therefore all evidence that says otherwise are to be ignored.

Sherlock Holmes.

It is not the same according to the null everyone who said TBSD only for direction and 3 shots only were exactly right.

Eh ... they were exactly right ... eh ... because they were ... eh ... exactly right?

Even if there were five shots these witnessess got three out of five for direction and count. Correct? The knoll only witnessess according to your theory got 1 out of 5 for direction, and were also wrong on the number.

Your knoll only witness testimonies are weaker. The fact that they got more wrong than right means every single one of them had to have heard some echoes. This means that every single one of them could have heard three echoes of shots that originated from the TSBD.

No, you are sliding around all over the place. The question at hand is the ratio of withesses hearing knoll vs TSBD, nothing else, only that.

So far, there were more of those asked saying the knoll than the TSBD. Period.

If you want to go beyond this and discuss other possible factors, please do, but that is another question not to be conflated with the direction.

Can you name a single witness that heard one shot only from the knoll and four from behind? Anyone that even closely matches your theory of what happened?

The reason for HSCA commiting resources and hiring the two world leading expert teams in acoustic ballistics was that human perception and memory only go so far when it comes to detail, numbers, directions, etc.

Science trancends these limitations and can provide a more exact and correct, unbiased, answer to exactly what happened, in this case, how many rifle shots were fired and from where they were fired.

Once again. My contention is that the number of asked witness who said shot/s were fired from in front/knoll is greater than that for from behind/TSBD.

This is a documented fact. Period.


And, that said, I have still not even touched upon multiple reports of intimidation or coaching of witnesses by the authorities from the get go. The fix was in.

The Null = The Fix.

 

[Axxman300]

Utter rubbish

The spatter is a result of the pressure cavity, which travels behind the bullet!

Watch this again

[qimg]https://www.dropbox.com/s/x4lisdkhwy55k9h/Bullet%2BGel.gif?raw=1[/qimg]



No. JFK's head accelerates backwards after Z313. If the movement backwards was the result of transferred momentum from a shot from the front, then that cannot happen, acceleration requires a force to be applied. What is the force causing the acceleration?



No. Based on simple observation

Need to add that the bullet fractured upon initial impact with the back of the head and cartwheeled like a mini-buzzsaw adding to the cavitation damage.

A close look at on of the larger recovered fragments should tell the tale:

https://catalog.archives.gov/id/305151

The nose of the missile:

https://catalog.archives.gov/id/305150

The kinetic energy as the bullet tore apart combined with the cavitation mirrored a small explosion.

 

[BStrong]

Agree.

No. The spatter travels faster than the bullet, so it would show up the same instance that the bullet hits the head.

No. The effect of the transferred momentum is seen until JFK’s head come to a stop at Z321.

No. Based on conjecture.

I’ll answer this in my next post.

I guess you're too busy digging your hole to nowhere to address my earlier posts, so I'll address the 1st bolded nugget of nuttiness.

The blood mist that exits a entrance or exit wound doesn't meet or exceed the velocity of the penetrating projectile - blood spatter defined as "high velocity" is generated by projectile impacts as low as 100 feet per second. The volume of ejected blood spatter can be greater with a higher velocity projectile than a lower velocity projectile but the potential velocity of ejected blood (liquid is substantially different than a solid for the purposes of acceleration) can not equal or exceed projectile velocity.

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/241744.pdf

Is the second bolded intended to create dramatic tension or just drama?