No rational person would believe Kennedy's head would go backward from a rear shot. This is the type of suspending one's common sense that is required to play on your team.
Merged bullet hole in the windshield of JFK's limo/ You might be...
- Thread starter roundhead
- Start date
-
- Tags
- jfk assassination
No rational person would believe Kennedy's head would go backward from a rear shot. This is the type of suspending one's common sense that is required to play on your team.
How does a shot that enters his right thoracic vertebrae make it out his neck from a shooter on an incline?
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 12,374
You are wrong. The motion of the human body when struck with a bullet is well-documented and well-studied. There is nothing suspicious about the way his head went. You have NO idea what you are talking about.
Deal with it.
JimBenArm
Based on a true story!
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2006
- Messages
- 13,092
I tend to suspend "common sense" because it's been found to be so unreliable.
It's amazing how many times people have used "common sense" and been proven wrong by science.
Of course, some people are afraid of science. You know, that whole "Fire bad!" mentality. Thank goodness there are those who look beyond "common sense", otherwise we'd still be huddled in caves, naked and shivering in the cold!
It's amazing how many times people have used "common sense" and been proven wrong by science.
Of course, some people are afraid of science. You know, that whole "Fire bad!" mentality. Thank goodness there are those who look beyond "common sense", otherwise we'd still be huddled in caves, naked and shivering in the cold!
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
Last edited:
They used a pumpkin which proves nothing....beyond stupid and absurd. Have someone punch you in the back of the head as hard as they can and see which way your head goes.
JimBenArm
Based on a true story!
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2006
- Messages
- 13,092
Yes, because a bullet and a fist are exactly the same!
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2001
- Messages
- 15,934
I'm sorry, but you are wrong, you continue to be wrong, and whining like this does nothing to prove your cause whatsoever.
It is apparent that all you are doing making assertions (the same ones over and over) and insisting that they must be true when there is plentiful evidence in the medical world that it is not the case.
Now, I know that I will never convince you of that - you've obviously invested emotionally in this belief system and no level of presented evidence will sway you, but that is not why I reply. I respond so that others on the fence might have a proper balance of evidence vs. the insanity you are handing out.
But for FSM's sake quit whining about being countered and argued against on a freaking skeptics forum!
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2001
- Messages
- 15,934
jhunter1163
beer-swilling semiliterate
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2006
- Messages
- 7,474
punch a pumpkin and it behaves differently than when you shoot it, your head is the same way, have someone shoot you in the back of the head with a rifle and see which way your head goes
Last edited:
Well jeez, if the family doctor said so, it MUST be true.
His doctor said that his body was in a position to receive his four wounds around that time. The main reason why the sbt is false is because John Connally said it was. He knew what happened and in a court with a jury they would believe him along with a plethora of other evidence. Playing Costner's scene would suffice. I DID NOT PROVE THE SBT FALSE, others who studied it proved it false.
Jump off your high horse and read post 221. Why did Connally flinch at 225, in your opinion?
JimBenArm
Based on a true story!
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2006
- Messages
- 13,092
I prefer to listen to ballistics experts rather than Texas politicians when it comes to evidence concerning gunshots. Likewise, film makers and actors generally are not among those I would seek out to provide anything serious.
But since you're not looking for evidence to actually prove anything, I guess that's okay, since that's really all you have.
But since you're not looking for evidence to actually prove anything, I guess that's okay, since that's really all you have.
JimBenArm
Based on a true story!
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2006
- Messages
- 13,092
Because he realized he was in Texas? I always flinch when I realize that.
You know you are a Kennedy Kook if...
You know you are a Kennedy Kook if... you use a fictional movie to guide your conspiracy theory.
You know you are a Kennedy Kook if... you use a fictional movie to guide your conspiracy theory.
It's nonsense, 100 percent nonsense. Show me anything that backs up your theory. There is nothing to back it up because it's not true.
Edited by Tricky:
Edited for rule 5.
Last edited by a moderator:
He flinched at a precognition of a journalist misrepresenting, after his death, his drunken comments about the Warren Commission?
ETA - even after editing that doesn't make sense. So it must be on-topic here.
ETA - even after editing that doesn't make sense. So it must be on-topic here.
Last edited:
It depends on what can be proven but yes I agree the movie got people down the wrong road but the scene in the movie destroyed the sbt. The sbt was child's play and the movie did accomplish making proper fun of it.