JFK -- Here we go again

[ConspiRaider]

Though it could have been fewer: Kennedy shot by Oswald, Oswald shot by Ruby, Ruby had club that used strippers.

And possibly even shorter:

Kennedy liked strippers.

 

[calebprime]

As far as news reporting goes - it used to be better. On the networks, news was carried as overhead, as an expense. Essentially as a service to the viewing public. It's why it was delivered to the viewer by rumpled, rather ordinary-looking guys such Cronkite, Huntley, Brinkley, Reynolds and so forth. There were standards, similar to the tough standards major newspapers placed on themselves to encourage objectivity and accuracy in reporting.

...


Flawed as the Internet is - still the best source for real news, if you know where to look. TeeVee has forever lost its credibility as an outlet of objective reporting and analysis. That era has passed.

I always refer to the new "pop divas" as "strippers that lipsnyc" because, when you think about it, that's pretty much what they do. Has anyone here seen that show where young girls are "auditioning" to be the next Pussycatdoll but pretty much all they do is glorified stripping (or "showing confidence" as they call it) ? What a travesty.

Golden Age of Television generally refers to the 50s.

As far back as 46 years ago, it was all over.

According to Newton Minnow and his "vast wasteland" speech:
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/newtonminow.htm

when ConspiRaider is right, he's very right. TV news used to be much better.

the music died, apparently on February 2, 1959.

I was almost one year old.

downhill ever since. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-gi4Nt_xxg

Say, anyone remember KC440? He'd like this thread.

 

[ConspiRaider]

when ConspiRaider is right, he's very right. TV news used to be much better.

the music died, apparently on February 2, 1959.

I was almost one year old.

downhill ever since. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-gi4Nt_xxg

Say, anyone remember KC440? He'd like this thread.

Good one, CP

Before I hit the link I was trying to guess what it might be, and I landed on the scene in American Graffiti where John Milner and the kiddie Carol (Mackenzie Phillips) are fighting over the radio. He shuts the Beach Boys off, says something about rock and roll never being the same since Buddy Holly died...

But at least, George Lucas was indirectly connected to your link, so that's something...

 

[CurtC]

Gov. Connelly was shot and lived. He said all the shots that hit him came from behind. His wife also in the car said all the shots came from behind.

Somehow a JFK thread came and went while I was frolicking with Mickey in Florida last week. Sorry to resurrect this, but...

Connally also says that the shot that hit him was not the shot that hit JFK in the neck. For what that's worth.

The missed shot did not disappear. A fragment hit a bystander.

The bystander was hit by something, and I've read that the most likely explanation is a chip of concrete, after a bullet fragment hit the curb near his feet. But, it is not at all clear which shot this fragment is from. It could be from the first, missing bullet, or it could be a fragment from the head shot. From the evidence I've seen, the third shot seems more likely, because of the angles involved.

 

[RBG]

I'm always amazed at the supposed planning and skill of the multiple shooters such that they were all able to fire with different weapons from different angles and still make it look like all the shots came from their patsy Oswald. Or were they just hoping to be that lucky?

RBG

PS: "I'm number 1! I'm number 1!"

 

[CurtC]

Yes, it was the world's most intricate and flawlessly executed plan ever, ever.

Until 2001.

ETA: ...and welcome, Mr. Red Blue Green.

 

[Kenneth A. Rahn]

Here we go again!

To All,

I am Ken Rahn, of the two Rahn/Sturdivan articles on the NAA. Jonathan Ferguson encouraged me to join this forum, and I just have. My career was in applying NAA to environmental samples, mostly aerosol and precipitation (i.e., air pollution studies). I have examined the JFK NAA data produced by Vincent P. Guinn very carefully, and have concluded that he got the right answer (two groups of fragments, two bullets) even though he didn't deal with certain aspects of his results in enough depth. Larry Sturdivan and I think we have finished the job. Obviously, some folks disagree with us, and quite vehemently at times.

I have posted on my JFK site rebuttals to the two revisionist NAA articles that have appeared in the last year. Both are deeply flawed. I think the rules for new members here prohibit me from posting links for a few messages, but I would be happy to discuss the articles with anyone interested. In the meantime, you can see the rebuttals by going to kenrahn.com, then clicking successively on The Academic JFK Assassination Site, Scientific Topics, and NAA.

Ken Rahn

 

[Hamradioguy]

I actually visited Dealey Plaza yesterday. It was pretty interesting. The thing that struck me was how easy of a shot it would have been for Oswald.

I was surprised at the "grassy knoll", I was expecting this hidden area away from the motorcade route where a sniper could have hidden. It was a little park, only about 10-15 meters from the road. Anyone there with a rifle would have been obvious to dozens of onlookers, and given the crowds would have had a hard time getting a clear shot.

Yeah, interesting that a huge number of the CTers who claim how difficult it would have been for Oswald, or how a shooter could have hidden behind the "grassy knoll" fence have apparently never actually been to Dealey Plaza. It's really quite small, and the grassy knoll is a tiny slope with no place to hide whatsoever. Typical of the CT crowd who don't apply logic or even make a first hand visit. (And when I was there I noted that without exception the folks wandering around the site would always at some point glance up at that 6th floor window.)

BTW, welcome to the Forums, Ken Rahn!

 

[SpitfireIX]

To All,

I am Ken Rahn, of the two Rahn/Sturdivan articles on the NAA. Jonathan Ferguson encouraged me to join this forum, and I just have. My career was in applying NAA to environmental samples, mostly aerosol and precipitation (i.e., air pollution studies). I have examined the JFK NAA data produced by Vincent P. Guinn very carefully, and have concluded that he got the right answer (two groups of fragments, two bullets) even though he didn't deal with certain aspects of his results in enough depth. Larry Sturdivan and I think we have finished the job. Obviously, some folks disagree with us, and quite vehemently at times.

I have posted on my JFK site rebuttals to the two revisionist NAA articles that have appeared in the last year. Both are deeply flawed. I think the rules for new members here prohibit me from posting links for a few messages, but I would be happy to discuss the articles with anyone interested. In the meantime, you can see the rebuttals by going to kenrahn.com, then clicking successively on The Academic JFK Assassination Site, Scientific Topics, and NAA.

Ken Rahn

Welcome, Ken; we're very glad to have you here. I don't know if we have any JFK conspiracists hanging around at the moment (well, I know of one, but I think he showed up just to argue about the September 11 attacks). Perhaps your presence will bring a few lurkers out of the woodwork.

In the meantime, here are some links to your writings. You will be able to post your own links after your 15th post. Evidently, your site does not allow deep linking, so I can only link to the home page.

The Academic JFK Assassination Site.

Here are links to a couple of other articles of yours I found on the URI web site.

March 2001 article on the NAA tests and the JFK assassination.

Presentation on the Rand-Sturdivan paper.

 

[Kenneth A. Rahn]

SpitfireIX,

Thanks for the welcome. Can you just copy and paste the internal links? I have done it this way in other forums.

The March 2001 article is a long review of how JFK books have treated the NAA. Their handling is grim, to put it mildly. The "presentation" is one that I gave at a JFK meeting in Washington in 2004, I think it was, just before our two articles appeared.

The newest revisionist NAA article, by Spiegelman et al., has good analyses by NAA of bullets of the type used in the assassination, but poor interpretation of the results. It was intended to show that there was a much greater chance of an accidental chemical match to the five assassination fragments than previously recognized. That higher probability was needed to buttress the theory of one of the authors, Stuart Wexler, that Kennedy and Connally were hit by three bullets from two Mannlicher-Carcano rifles, both firing from the rear. That was the true driving force behind this article. Never mind that there is zero physical evidence for a second shooter from any direction. Their 30 bullets, ten each from three boxes, did indeed show the possibility of such accidental matches. The problem is that those bullets did not show the within-bullet heterogeneity (of antimony) that is required by their very large between-bullet heterogeneity. Guinn found both kinds of heterogeneity; these authors found only one kind. Thus these authors got an unrepresentative set of bullets, through no fault of their own. They can't generalize from this unrepresentative set, even though they tried very hard to.

Ken Rahn

 

[Big Les]

Hi Ken - glad you could make it here; I just hope all the conspiracy weirdos aren't too preoccupied with the 9/11 topics to at least have a go at responding!

I think the frames on your site make linking at little trickier than usual, but this:

Review of Spiegelman et al.'s article on NAA in the journal Annals of Applied Statistics

...appears to be your most recent rebuttal, addressing the supposedly new analysis linked in the opening post of this thread - great job. It must be a little wearing to have to keep whacking those moles back down, but we're used to that here too.

 

[SpitfireIX]

SpitfireIX,

Thanks for the welcome. Can you just copy and paste the internal links? I have done it this way in other forums.

The March 2001 article is a long review of how JFK books have treated the NAA. Their handling is grim, to put it mildly. The "presentation" is one that I gave at a JFK meeting in Washington in 2004, I think it was, just before our two articles appeared.

The newest revisionist NAA article, by Spiegelman et al., has good analyses by NAA of bullets of the type used in the assassination, but poor interpretation of the results. It was intended to show that there was a much greater chance of an accidental chemical match to the five assassination fragments than previously recognized. That higher probability was needed to buttress the theory of one of the authors, Stuart Wexler, that Kennedy and Connally were hit by three bullets from two Mannlicher-Carcano rifles, both firing from the rear. That was the true driving force behind this article. Never mind that there is zero physical evidence for a second shooter from any direction. Their 30 bullets, ten each from three boxes, did indeed show the possibility of such accidental matches. The problem is that those bullets did not show the within-bullet heterogeneity (of antimony) that is required by their very large between-bullet heterogeneity. Guinn found both kinds of heterogeneity; these authors found only one kind. Thus these authors got an unrepresentative set of bullets, through no fault of their own. They can't generalize from this unrepresentative set, even though they tried very hard to.


Ken Rahn

Review of "Chemical and forensic analysis of JFK assassination bullet lots: Is a second shooter possible?"

Review of Randich and Grant's article on the NAA

Good suggestion. That seems to have done the trick.

 

[Brattus]

I think you're mistaken here. This sort of stuff has always been a fundamental part of pop music. And it still is.

But if you go into other genres, you'll see nothing has changed. Look at rock bands, or metal bands, or any other genre other than the "pop" ones, and you will find ordinary or plain ugly people making beautiful music.

(You might not consider it beautiful, depending on your age and tastes, but it's genuine music; no lip syncing, written by themselves, performed by themselves)

-Gumboot

Always uh? Elvis was lip syncing? Buddy Holly had his songs written and played for him by people he had never met or heard of?
The Beatles couldn't even play their instruments for real?
They were all pop muscians.

 

[Big Les]

Ken, you might well find that this drifts off the front pages pretty quickly, but the very fact that you've posted your brief rebuttal and links to all the relevant articles on your website means that anyone trawling the forums for research (I know I do this on a regular basis) is more likely to find your work and not fall for the conspiracy nonsense.

It's a shame in a way that 9/11 dominates so strongly; we may not get any JFK theorists responding at this point! Of course, they may just lack the ability to articulate a response to your thorough refutation.

 

[Gravy]

Always uh? Elvis was lip syncing? Buddy Holly had his songs written and played for him by people he had never met or heard of?
The Beatles couldn't even play their instruments for real?
They were all pop muscians.

Rock 'n' Roll, baby!

 

[Gravy]

Ken, you might well find that this drifts off the front pages pretty quickly, but the very fact that you've posted your brief rebuttal and links to all the relevant articles on your website means that anyone trawling the forums for research (I know I do this on a regular basis) is more likely to find your work and not fall for the conspiracy nonsense.

It's a shame in a way that 9/11 dominates so strongly; we may not get any JFK theorists responding at this point! Of course, they may just lack the ability to articulate a response to your thorough refutation.

Seconded. Excellent work, Ken.

 

[Non Believer]

How about the two bullets that hiyt the windshielsd of the limo

 

[JimBenArm]

How about the two bullets that hiyt the windshielsd of the limo

Uhm, no. No bullets hit the windshield. Anyplace that told you that is lying to you.
Repeat - no bullets hit the windshield.
One shooter, three shots. End of story.

 

[Non Believer]

There are pictures of it. I know they confiscated the limo and had it destroyed within a couple of days, but the pictures of the bullet hles are fact. IO will try to dig them up for you.

 

[HyJinX]

There are pictures of it. I know they confiscated the limo and had it destroyed within a couple of days, but the pictures of the bullet hles are fact. IO will try to dig them up for you.

I suppose they shipped the scraps off to China before a proper investigation could be done.