JFK Conspiracy Theories: It Never Ends

Status
Not open for further replies.
jargon buster said:
Is Robert on holiday?
Click to expand...

I sense a "fringe reset" in progress. He's away (for whatever reason) to encourage us to lose interest and go elsewhere. Then he'll return and present the same arguments all over for a new crop of debunkers, starting over with the same scripted argument. That's how conspiracy theorists work. When they get cornered, they just disappear until their critics wander off.
 
Then he'll return and present the same arguments all over for a new crop of debunkers, starting over with the same scripted argument. That's how conspiracy theorists work. When they get cornered, they just disappear until their critics wander off.
Click to expand...
Thats a description of freemanmenard in a nutshell.:)
 
JayUtah said:
I sense a "fringe reset" in progress. He's away (for whatever reason) to encourage us to lose interest and go elsewhere. Then he'll return and present the same arguments all over for a new crop of debunkers, starting over with the same scripted argument. That's how conspiracy theorists work. When they get cornered, they just disappear until their critics wander off.
Click to expand...
What's he going to do if we're still here "waiting" for him? :degrin:
 
Well, try as I might, I could not get Mr. Prey to define what he means when he uses the term "blow out" in relation to the head wound suffered by the president. I'll move forward anyway.

Based on deduction, I suspect he is working along these lines: A "blow out," by nature of the word "out" suggests something going "in" to precipitate it. Makes sense so far. If you were to take, say, a pencil and push the point into a piece of paper it would exit the opposite side. This is easy to visualize, accustomed as we are to similar patterns as well as simplicity of action. A train goes in one end of the tunnel and emerges from the other. A hammer is struck on one side of a piece of sheetrock and a dimple or break is apparent on the reverse face. A high-speed bullet enters a skull at the 6 o'clock mark and is going to emerge...where? 12 o'clock.

So, if we have 40 (or even a couple) people observe a large "blow-out" somewhere on the posterior area of JFK's head, that surely means the bullet could only have come from a rifleman somewhere around the railroad overpass or the grassy knoll, right? Blow-out on one side means the "blow-in" must come from the opposite.

Unless it doesn't.

Please watch from approx 1:00.

 
Last edited:
Nobody blames you for running away, Robert. It isn't your fault you were easily duped by those Loon sites. I hope you went back and gave them a good scolding for using you to spread their lunacy.



LOL
 
Regnad Kcin said:
A high-speed bullet enters a skull at the 6 o'clock mark and is going to emerge...where? 12 o'clock.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's that simple. A bullet could enter at the 6 o'clock mark from many different angles, thereby leading to many possible exit points and 'blow out' patterns.
 
Southwind17 said:
I don't think it's that simple. A bullet could enter at the 6 o'clock mark from many different angles, thereby leading to many possible exit points and 'blow out' patterns.
Click to expand...

Robert is aware of this. He even attempted to state that the mass ejecta visible on the Z film was sucked out of an entry wound by "jet effect" meaning a shot from the front.

What he could never explain, except through vague assertions of one or more film or photo being faked (with out showing any signs of tampering) why this "jet effect" and frangible bullet did not match the wounds described by his cherry picked statements and drawings.

We know there MUST have been a massive wound, ie a wound displassing a large amount of mass, because a sniper says the ejecta is from a frangible bullet making a big old entry wound. From the cloud of ejecta spreading out in all kinds of directions.

The ejecta, not being capable of quantum displacement and having mass, in a broad range of angles, a cloud in point of fact, can only have come from a big hole, as it can not have passed through areas of the skull and skin that are not damaged.

But wait! The best evidence apparently is the 100% accurated descriptions and drawings. Even if they don't match up to each other. Or the photos and films. JFK MUST have had a small entry wound on the front of the head. A small entry wound that would not allow for massive ejecta.

How does Robert explain how both these statements can be true? He wishes for a bird of paradise to align with the ejecta. The Z film is totally fake (except when its not and proves a frangible bullet).

Apparently refusing to explain how two conclusions that disprove each other can both be true is too difficult, but retracting either is impossible. Robert resorted to his catch phrases and denied there was a conflict. The apparent logical assumption being a frangible bullet hitJFK from the front, causing a small entry wound but blood, bone and tissue to think it hadexited through a big hole.

Further impossibilities abound. The z film must therefore have been altered to remove any sign of the exit wound on the back of the head. Robert insisted at length the back of jfks head was painted black to hide an exit wound.

He refused however to address how the exit wound ejecta, the stuff "blown out" was removed from the film. This would require a cloud of mass proportionately larger than the entry wound "jet effect" to be removed. A cloud that would obscure the background. Of course no explanation of how the background behind the car was restored, or why no ejecta from the rear is visible was forth coming. Instead it was stated it must have been there because Jackie can be seen scooping it up. Really.

So there is too much ejecta from the front, and too little behind. A theory that relies upon the same evidence it wishes to discredit. Hmm. Robert was in the habit of saying how evidence stands in court. What about when your experts discredit each other?
 
Southwind17 said:
I don't think it's that simple. A bullet could enter at the 6 o'clock mark from many different angles, thereby leading to many possible exit points and 'blow out' patterns.
Click to expand...
You misunderstand me, I think.

Of course it's not that simple. But our Mr. Prey has, seemingly, been promoting just such a simplicity: Blow out in the rear = blow "in" from the front.

It's another version of "back and to the left."
 
I haven't read the thread.
But has probably included the "impossible shot" claim.

I recently looked up Dealy Plaza/Elmstreet on Google streetview and maps.

It's quite interesting to just look around.

Why was supposed to be an impossible shot?
Its a high building along a street, for chisssakes.

There is an inconvenient tree in the way, but that would interrupt visual contact between the car and the shooter for a couple of seconds at most.
 
Eddie Dane said:
I recently looked up Dealy Plaza/Elmstreet on Google streetview and maps.

It's quite interesting to just look around.

Why was supposed to be an impossible shot?
Its a high building along a street, for chisssakes.
Click to expand...


You can also download Google Earth and move around the plaza with all the buildings in 3-D (with 3D Buildings turned on).

Eddie Dane said:
There is an inconvenient tree in the way, but that would interrupt visual contact between the car and the shooter for a couple of seconds at most.
Click to expand...


Note that that tree was considerably smaller 50 years ago.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom