JFK Conspiracy Theories: It Never Ends

Status
Not open for further replies.
Robert Prey said:
Question: If Mr. X holds a Master's Degree in Photo Analysis from an accredited institution, does that make him an expert in photo analysis???
Click to expand...

I'm not interested in Mr. X. I'm interested in Brian Mee. You posted Mee's c.v. expecting it to substantiate your claim that he is an expert photographic analyst. What part of his c.v. do you believe does that, and why? Or what other qualifications of his can you present that would substantiate your claim?
 
JayUtah said:
I'm not interested in Mr. X. I'm interested in Brian Mee. You posted Mee's c.v. expecting it to substantiate your claim that he is an expert photographic analyst. What part of his c.v. do you believe does that, and why? Or what other qualifications of his can you present that would substantiate your claim?
Click to expand...

Jay - so far as I'm able to determine there is no such degree - I'll admit this isn't my field but my google fu turns up -o-.
 
RoboTimbo said:
That boy is on a mission. Good catch, and he hadn't even started posting insanely.
Click to expand...

He posts on another message board I frequent. You guys didn't give him a chance to present his awesome evidence that shows Greer shot Kennedy. He provided video evidence that apparently you have to have special glasses to watch and see what he claims is a very obvious view of Greer turning and shooting JFK. It's very compelling.
 
Crazytimes said:
He posts on another message board I frequent. You guys didn't give him a chance to present his awesome evidence that shows Greer shot Kennedy. He provided video evidence that apparently you have to have special glasses to watch and see what he claims is a very obvious view of Greer turning and shooting JFK. It's very compelling.
Click to expand...

Ha ha! I saw where you said that a few pages back but he wasn't posting like roundhead/7forever yet so didn't connect the dots.
 
BStrong said:
Jay - so far as I'm able to determine there is no such degree - I'll admit this isn't my field but my google fu turns up -o-.
Click to expand...

The various disciplines and types of photographic analysis are adjuncts or sub fields of larger studies. Analytic manipulations are covered in electrical engineering, computer science, and mathematics. Forensic analysis is covered in engineering and criminal justice programs. Photogrammetry is most often taught in geography programs.
 
Robert Prey said:
PAUL PETERS, MD:"...I noticed that there was a large defect in the occiput...It seemed to me that in the right occipitalparietal area that there was a large defect." (WC-V6:71
Click to expand...

Paul Peters had the chance to look at all of the evidence, courtesy of PBS's programme, NOVA. The photographs did not show any "Blow-out" of the back of the head. Paul Peters had the opportunity to look at these, and he said "Looking at these photos, they're pretty much as I remember President Kennedy at the time."

Jenkins' colleague Paul Peters also viewed the materials in the Archives, and told NOVA:

I said that I thought perhaps part of the cerebellum was missing, and that shows how even a trained observer can make an error in moment of urgency.
Click to expand...

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

Is Paul Peters a liar?
 
Straw Man said:
Paul Peters had the chance to look at all of the evidence, courtesy of PBS's programme, NOVA. The photographs did not show any "Blow-out" of the back of the head. r
Click to expand...


How do you know that? The Pics as described by Peters essentially show what his signed WR statement described:

"the wound, I still maintain, was occipitoparietal. "


"the outer portion of the occipital area and part of the parietal area of the skull. I have not changed my mind. The review of the autopsy findings at the National Archives 25 years after the injury merely reinforces my statement which I gave to the Warren Commission. I told them there was a 7 cm. (at least) hole in the occipitoparietal region." . Dr. Peterss

http://www.jfklancer.com/Peters.html

picture.php
 
JayUtah said:
The various disciplines and types of photographic analysis are adjuncts or sub fields of larger studies. Analytic manipulations are covered in electrical engineering, computer science, and mathematics. Forensic analysis is covered in engineering and criminal justice programs. Photogrammetry is most often taught in geography programs.
Click to expand...

OK. Same question: If Mr. X studied photo analysis in any of the above, does that make Mr. X an expert????
 
BStrong said:
My point is that you're regurgitating what you want others to believe, but you yourself don't understand or have firsthand experience in the subject you're trying to discuss.

Evidence in Table 1, you wouldn't even have to read too far Robert:

"In cases C9 and C12, and C15 the exit holes are smaller than the entrances"

Entrance wounds larger than exit wounds are in no way unusual in GSW to the skull, particularly when the projectile is an FMJ rifle caliber projectile.
Click to expand...

Fine. Now re-post the specific link.
 
Medical Witness NO. 7 -- Dr.Marian Jenkins

Dr Marion Jenkins from his signed statement, Warren Report, P. 530

"There was a great laceration on the right side fo the head (temporal and occipital)... so that there was herniation and laceration of the great areas of the brain, even to the extent that the cerebellum had protruded from the wound." -- M.T. Jenkins M.D. Warren Report, Page 530.
 
JayUtah said:
Oh ye of little evidence. You simply copied a list of witnesses. You have no knowledge of whether they support your case or not.
Click to expand...

For the past 7 days, Re-posting 40 plus medical witnesses with quotations and links. So far the running score is:
7 to zero. (Zero for the Pooh-Poohers.). Many more to go.
 
Robert Prey said:
How do you know that? The Pics as described by Peters essentially show what his signed WR statement described:

"the wound, I still maintain, was occipitoparietal. "


"the outer portion of the occipital area and part of the parietal area of the skull. I have not changed my mind. The review of the autopsy findings at the National Archives 25 years after the injury merely reinforces my statement which I gave to the Warren Commission. I told them there was a 7 cm. (at least) hole in the occipitoparietal region." . Dr. Peterss

http://www.jfklancer.com/Peters.html

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=808&pictureid=6405[/qimg]
Click to expand...

So how do you know he was telling the truth there, and not to NOVA?

Once again we see why one should not, and can not rely on witness testemony: When the Witness is inconsistant, how do you decide which of their conflicting statements is true?
 
Robert Prey said:
For the past 7 days, Re-posting 40 plus medical witnesses with quotations and links. So far the running score is:
7 to zero. (Zero for the Pooh-Poohers.). Many more to go.
Click to expand...

Ok, three points:

One, what you are doing is not what has been asked for.
When will you ever get around to giving a simple list with citations?


Second: What was that you said about people who declare a victory? LMAO

Third: Your count is wrong. You have yet to show that Kemp Clark was descibing a "blow out", you have yet to show us any reason to assume Crenshaws "evidence" is anything but poetic license (his own words to the NYT), and you are ignoring every post that has shown you to be insinterpreting the majority of your evidence.
 
Robert Prey said:
Dr Marion Jenkins from his signed statement, Warren Report, P. 530

"There was a great laceration on the right side fo the head (temporal and occipital)...
Click to expand...
Entirely accurate description of the exit wound as known and visible in the autopsy photographs. Like the one you cropped and rotated and called the "death stare" photo.


Robert Prey said:
so that there was herniation and laceration of the great areas of the brain, even to the extent that the cerebellum had protruded from the wound." -- M.T. Jenkins M.D. Warren Report, Page 530.
Click to expand...


Again, these match the exit wound visible in the autopsy photos.

If you want to argue, please feel free to describe which areas of the brain the lacerations of the flesh in the photographs cover.

But just to be clear, is this the same M T Jenkins who testified that JFK remained on the stretcher at all times?

Who stated in his testemony that by the time he had a chance to examine any wounds several actions were being taken and his concern was feeling for a pulse?

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh6/pdf/WH6_Jenkins.pdf

Why does he not Mention fulfilling the roles Crenshaw claimed in his book?
 
Tomtomkent said:
Entirely accurate description of the exit wound as known and visible in the autopsy photographs. Like the one you cropped and rotated and called the "death stare" photo.
Click to expand...

There are no certified authentic autopsy photographs in the public domain. The bootleg version of one does not show a large exit wound where you claim it to be. In his WC statement Jenkins signed denotes the words "Occipital" and "Cerebellum" .That's back of the head. End of story.

"a great laceration on the right side of the head (temporal and occipital) (sic), causing a great defect in the skull plate so that there was herniation and laceration of great areas of the brain, even to the extent that the cerebellum had protruded from the wound." (WC--Exhibit #392)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom