JFK Conspiracy Theories: It Never Ends

[Hans]

Can you please point out where this is in the forum rules?

He just made it up he says that when he cannot answer a question. Simply repeat the question and note that he conceded it at that point.

 

[Hans]

Strange how you refuse to address this. Not only is Lipsey not a medical expert, he contradicts you and yet you include him in your list of 40+ medical witnesses. Explanation please.

As usual, you have nothing, and worse, you misrepresent the witnesses you think you have.

Easy answer he's a troll that is what troll do

 

[Regnad Kcin]

And 40 plus witnesses observing a large blow-out in the back of the head is strong evidence of at least one other shooter from the front. And that means conspiracy.

That, followed by this:

All conclusions unsupported by any facts.

...makes me giggle like a ticklish baby.

 

[abaddon]

I want to know how Lt. Lipsey qualifies as one of the supposed list of medical witness, when his HSCA testimony directly flies in the face of Robert's invention.

That's a single question as requested/demanded by Robert.

 

[Hans]

I want to know how Lt. Lipsey qualifies as one of the supposed list of medical witness, when his HSCA testimony directly flies in the face of Robert's invention.

That's a single question as requested/demanded by Robert.

Ah Robert knows that info his response to that knowledge is to troll you guys

 

[BazBear]

I want to know how Lt. Lipsey qualifies as one of the supposed list of medical witness, when his HSCA testimony directly flies in the face of Robert's invention.

That's a single question as requested/demanded by Robert.

I think Robert forgot to tell us about Rule No.2: There will be no direct answers to questions Robert has no good answers for.

 

[Robert Prey]

I said "without disjunction." Look up what that means and what function the word "or" serves in a sentence.

As I suspected, you cannot do it. You insist on trying to have your cake and eat it too. You lump dissimilar witnesses together to pad out your list and impress us with the aggregate size. You cherry pick a few medical experts among the many, so that it seems you have a distinguished expert panel. Then you backfill the list with others who, for example, are merely hearsay witnesses.

Sorry, this does not answer my question. Please try again.

Still waiting for all of those un-cherry picked witnesses you claim exist. Crickets still chirping.

 

[Robert Prey]

Strange how you refuse to address this. Not only is Lipsey not a medical expert, he contradicts you and yet you include him in your list of 40+ medical witnesses. Explanation please.

Quote:
Yeah, well as far as the exact x-rays were taken, no I don’t recall. I do recall the comments from the doctors, you know, who started examining the body before they did anything, you know, looking at the body, looking at where the bullets had entered the back of the his head. It was obvious that one bullet entered the back of his head and exited on the right side of his face and pretty well blew away the right side of his head.

As usual, you have nothing, and worse, you misrepresent the witnesses you think you have.

The explanation as you can plainly see, is that Lipsey was merely parroting what he says he heard the doctors say. But is own testimony is quite contradictory:

" I feel that there was no really entrance wound -- maybe I said that --in the rear of his head.

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/med_testimony/Lipsey_1-18-78/HSCA-Lipsey.htm
Get it now???

Lipsey witnessed the medical procedures at the autopsy. That makes him a medical witness. Obviously.

 

[jargon buster]

Lipsey witnessed the medical procedures at the autopsy. That makes him a medical witness. Obviously.

Robert, thats sublime.
To be a medical witness you have to only be a witness to a medical, and all along we were under the impression you meant a medical witness was an individual with a medical background who saw the wound in Kennedys head.

So anyone walking past the room with Kennedys body in it while they were performing the autopsy is a medical witness.(even the porter)
Nice work Robert, that should get you another few pages.

 

[Robert Prey]

I want to know how Lt. Lipsey qualifies as one of the supposed list of medical witness, when his HSCA testimony directly flies in the face of Robert's invention.

Simple answer: It doesn't. No entrance wound in the back. Large blow-out in the back. -- Lipsey

"There was a point where they determined the bullet entered the back of his head but I believe all of that part of his head was blown. I mean I think it just physically blew away that part of his head. You know, just like a strip right across there or may have been just in that area -- just blew it out...

"I feel that there was no really entrance wound ... in the rear of his head."

And in conclusion he said,

"I guess everybody in the whole world is curious since Oswald was killed, and then Ruby was killed. There’s something rotten in Denmark, obviously..."

-- Lipsey

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/med_testimony/Lipsey_1-18-78/HSCA-Lipsey.htm

Something rotten, indeed.

 

[Robert Prey]

Robert, thats sublime.
To be a medical witness you have to only be a witness to a medical, and all along we were under the impression you meant a medical witness was an individual with a medical background who saw the wound in Kennedys head.

So anyone walking past the room with Kennedys body in it while they were performing the autopsy is a medical witness.(even the porter)
Nice work Robert, that should get you another few pages.

Lipsey was no porter. He was assigned to guard the body during autopsy. That makes him a witness to the medical procedure -- a medical witness.

 

[Robert Prey]

So you're saying you don't have a testable alternate hypothesis? You've already speculated there was another shooter instead of or besides Oswald. Why so selective about where you stop speculating?

Or is this just another attempt to shame and insult your critics? Is it really true that all you have in this debate is, "All my critics are brainwashed" ?

Please do not make up direct quotes. It denigrates your credibility -- what's left of it, that is.

 

[Robert Prey]

So you can't name a perp.
Any reason you can't supply your version of events on that day in Dallas, or are you unable to meet the most "Sophomoric" of challenges?

But glad to hear you have nothing to offer beyond fantasy and speculation.

40 plus medical witnesses plus many others who observed a large blow-out in the back of K's head is not fantasy, but eye-witness fact. Of course, these are facts you and your cohorts simply cannot deal with, but strain to impune for the past 217 pages but with zero success. Perhaps you could ask Jay about all those un-cherry picked witnesses he seems to know all about.

 

[abaddon]

Lipsey was no porter. He was assigned to guard the body during autopsy. That makes him a witness to the medical procedure -- a medical witness.

He was a soldier assigned a duty.

Please do not make up direct quotes. It denigrates your credibility -- what's left of it, that is.

OK, then what is this?

Simple answer: It doesn't. No entrance wound in the back. Large blow-out in the back. -- Lipsey

This does not appear anywhere in Lipsey's testimony. You just made it up.

 

[jargon buster]

Lipsey was no porter.

I didnt say he was, my point was that according to your definition of a "medical witness" anyone with a view into that room during the autopsy would be a "medical witness"

I think you knew that though.

 

[Robert Prey]

He was a soldier assigned a duty.


OK, then what is this?

Simple answer: It doesn't. No entrance wound in the back. Large blow-out in the back. -- Lipsey

This does not appear anywhere in Lipsey's testimony. You just made it up.

Do you understand the difference between a direct quote which is placed in quotes like "this"? And a summary of what the man said????

"I feel that there was no really entrance wound --maybe I said that --in the rear of his head. There was a point where they determined the bullet entered the back of his head but I believe all of that part of his head was blown. "

 

[aggle-rithm]

Do you understand the difference between a direct quote which is placed in quotes like "this"? And a summary of what the man said????

"I feel that there was no really entrance wound --maybe I said that --in the rear of his head. There was a point where they determined the bullet entered the back of his head but I believe all of that part of his head was blown. "

Get a high-powered rifle.

Shoot a hole through a watermelon.

Observe the size of the entrance hole vs. the exit hole.

There, you will have your answers.

edit: Here's one with an apple: http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y95/armyyouhave/cruelanimal/bullet-apple-s.jpg

 

[aggle-rithm]

Here's one where the exit hole is bigger, but it demonstrates that a great deal of material is being ejected in the opposite direction from the bullet's path.

http://www.chb.com/images/work/watermelon_hand_0_486_310.jpg

 

[aggle-rithm]

40 plus medical witnesses plus many others who observed a large blow-out in the back of K's head is not fantasy, but eye-witness fact.

Irrelevant.

http://www.bevfitchett.com/gunshot-wounds/gunshot-wounds-of-the-brain.html

As the bullet perforates the brain, it produces a temporary cavity that undergoes a series of pulsations before disappearing. The pressure waves in the brain in the case of high-velocity missiles may produce massive fragmentation of the skull.

(I'm sure this has all be explained repeatedly in the last 200 pages, but clearly we haven't gotten across.)

 

[BStrong]

Here's one where the exit hole is bigger, but it demonstrates that a great deal of material is being ejected in the opposite direction from the bullet's path.

http://www.chb.com/images/work/watermelon_hand_0_486_310.jpg

For better or worse, most folks idea of terminal effect comes from popular fiction, not real world experience.

Headshots are odd things in real life.

First because most hits are to the body mass, and second there are so many variables in caliber, trajectory and point of impact and the construction of the skull itself.

I've posted links earlier in this thread linking to medical studies of ballistic head wounds and iirc the study found that in a percentage of cases examined, the entry wound was larger than the exit wound.