• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: JFK Conspiracy Theories V: Five for Fighting

Status
Not open for further replies.
JFK got an Oscar... it must be true!

Nobody is saying that Myers animation is true because it won an Emmy.

Your argument that the movie JFK by Oliver Stone must be true because it won an Oscar is therefore just another in a long line of straw man arguments.

Hank
 
Last edited:

Just watching the video and comprehending it is enough. You confuse scenes of the 3D model being used for demonstrative purposes (such as showing the difference between a C7, T1, and T3 entrance in the back) with the parts of the 3D model that can overlay the Zapruder Film.

I brought this up because I have always had an interest in what result you would get by creating a 3D model of Kennedy and Connally that matches the photographic evidence. I wish we had more information about this. Here are some legitimate questions about this new animation that don't equate to mindless garbage:

1. Does this animation move continuously to every frame of the Zapruder Film or is it only available overlaid in a couple of Zapruder frames?

2. Can this animation be modified to check to see how Kennedy and Connally's positions from the perspective of other known film and photographs?

3. What would happen around the Z220 areas? Did the developers even make animation frames corresponding to Zapruder frames?

4. Is there an absolute known margin of error for how precise a 3D model like this could match all relevant photographic evidence?
 
Do you have evidence for the shooter being on the roof of that building?
Do you (whose theory necessitates a bullet to be deflected when entering a skull) have evidence that a straight line should be assumed?

Why do you intentionally misunderstand things? I'm just saying that the official (officially debunked) cowlick-entry,-frontal-parietal-exit theory most likely requires the bullet to deflect to the right, otherwise a straight lone would go through his face.

You know what's sad? The frontal-parietal exit dreamed up by the HSCA was partially based on a (debunked, anatomically impossible) interpretation of the open-cranium photographs, and now evidently the HSCA had a flawed interpretation of the Zapruder Film.
 
Why do you intentionally misunderstand things? I'm just saying that the official (officially debunked) cowlick-entry,-frontal-parietal-exit theory most likely requires the bullet to deflect to the right, otherwise a straight lone would go through his face.

You know what's sad? The frontal-parietal exit dreamed up by the HSCA was partially based on a (debunked, anatomically impossible) interpretation of the open-cranium photographs, and now evidently the HSCA had a flawed interpretation of the Zapruder Film.

No, leaving his face is not the most likely outcome. Nor is it debunked.
No, pretending I “deliberately misunderstood” does not excuse you from the point made by the entirety of my post. As you cannot or will not address the point I will assume the point is conceded and any further discussion of an animation useless to your argument is a pointless distraction from you actually offering any evidence that might suggest any element of any of your arguments is remotely plausible.

I think everybody has noticed your double standard here. The known wounds are wrong because you assume deflection is unlikely. And yet your own theory relies on a steeper deflection, From skull to throat, when a facial exit is, according to your own (strange) understanding of ballistics, the most likely outcome, and others can be dismissed.
 
Do you think this animation supports the cowlick entry theory? It shows the trajectory roughly up to the roof of the Dallas County Records. Dale Myers' animation has that trajectory going 100 feet above the Dal-Tex. In both animations, that angle going straight and entering the cowlick would exit the face.

This 3D animation is shown morphing into frames of the Zapruder Film. More is shown of it than Dale's.

No it certainly doesn't. You can't get anything concerning this animation because it totally shows a single shooter from the sixth floor of the TSBD and therefore you dismiss it entirely or make incorrect observations of it. Dale's animation goes along the entire route, but the YT versions only show the portion of the single bullet fact. Try watching the history channel for the complete animation to get the better perspective. Of course you will still dismiss it because it disproves your (CT's) conspiracies.
 
Dale Myers' animation has that trajectory going 100 feet above the Dal-Tex.

Here's the HSCA version as determined by Thomas Canning.

wcr-headshotslope.jpg


The bullet trajectory, extended back to its source, goes right in the sixth floor south-east corner window of the Texas School Book Depository. That's the same window, I remind you, where numerous witnesses saw a gunman. It's also the same floor, again I remind you, where a rifle was found within 45 minutes of the shooting.

It agrees with Myers recreation, which likewise has the bullet emanating from that window.

The only way you could possibly imagine Myers has the shot emanating from 100 feet above the Dal-Tex building is if you think the shot was fired from a invisible helicopter, went through the brick wall, just missed the gunman numerous witnesses saw in the Depository, and then went on to strike Kennedy.

Myers has none of that in his recreation. That's all just your invention.


In both animations, that angle going straight and entering the cowlick would exit the face.

Nonsense. Not when you tilt JFK's head forward, adjust for the downward slope of the road, and take into account the 17 degree cant to the left of the centerline of the limousine that is JFK's proper head orientation at the time of the head shot. Then the bullet comes out the top of the head.

See the image above.

Not sure what you think you're gaining by posting nonsense you accumulate from conspiracy sites.

Hank
 
Just watching the video and comprehending it is enough.

We did watch it. It's all wrong.


I brought this up because I have always had an interest in what result you would get by creating a 3D model of Kennedy and Connally that matches the photographic evidence.

What you mean is a 3D model that was CT friendly, and not based on the facts.

1. Does this animation move continuously to every frame of the Zapruder Film or is it only available overlaid in a couple of Zapruder frames?

Why don't you email Orr and find out?

2. Can this animation be modified to check to see how Kennedy and Connally's positions from the perspective of other known film and photographs?

If you have to modify it then it's wrong.

4. Is there an absolute known margin of error for how precise a 3D model like this could match all relevant photographic evidence?

There is ALWAYS A MARGIN OF ERROR.

There is no such thing as an ABSOLUTE MARGIN OF ERROR.

With enough money you can do anything with CGI, and the first thing that needs to be looked at is who paid to make this computer animation? How much did they spend?

The margin of error is based on the honesty of the information gathered and used. Something that you have consistently rejected. Your stated acceptable margin of error is ZERO, and this is unrealistic, but standard for the CT world.
 
Just watching the video and comprehending it is enough. You confuse scenes of the 3D model being used for demonstrative purposes (such as showing the difference between a C7, T1, and T3 entrance in the back) with the parts of the 3D model that can overlay the Zapruder Film.

I brought this up because I have always had an interest in what result you would get by creating a 3D model of Kennedy and Connally that matches the photographic evidence. I wish we had more information about this. Here are some legitimate questions about this new animation that don't equate to mindless garbage:

1. Does this animation move continuously to every frame of the Zapruder Film or is it only available overlaid in a couple of Zapruder frames?

2. Can this animation be modified to check to see how Kennedy and Connally's positions from the perspective of other known film and photographs?

3. What would happen around the Z220 areas? Did the developers even make animation frames corresponding to Zapruder frames?

4. Is there an absolute known margin of error for how precise a 3D model like this could match all relevant photographic evidence?

Probably not that's why Myer's has error bar on his animation, but you forgot that part didn't you?
 
Here's the HSCA version as determined by Thomas Canning.

[qimg]https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/canning/reworked/wcr-headshotslope.jpg[/qimg]

The bullet trajectory, extended back to its source, goes right in the sixth floor south-east corner window of the Texas School Book Depository. That's the same window, I remind you, where numerous witnesses saw a gunman. It's also the same floor, again I remind you, where a rifle was found within 45 minutes of the shooting.

It agrees with Myers recreation, which likewise has the bullet emanating from that window.

The only way you could possibly imagine Myers has the shot emanating from 100 feet above the Dal-Tex building is if you think the shot was fired from a invisible helicopter, went through the brick wall, just missed the gunman numerous witnesses saw in the Depository, and then went on to strike Kennedy.

Myers has none of that in his recreation. That's all just your invention.




Nonsense. Not when you tilt JFK's head forward, adjust for the downward slope of the road, and take into account the 17 degree cant to the left of the centerline of the limousine that is JFK's proper head orientation at the time of the head shot. Then the bullet comes out the top of the head.

See the image above.

Not sure what you think you're gaining by posting nonsense you accumulate from conspiracy sites.

Hank

Can you kindly stop pretending to not understand my comments?

http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/concl3.htm

Dale Myers' chalks this up to the margin of error in the late Zapruder frames. The new animation from the JFK mock trial also suggests that a bullet entering the cowlick and exiting the frontal-parietal area while staying straight would necessitate an unlikely-impossible steep angle. This difficulty in defining a fundamental aspect of the cowlick entry theory is important because it could establish whether or not a bullet entering the cowlick from the snipers nest at z313 and staying straight would necessitate an exit in the face.

It's not very important either way, because we know the HSCA's crucial interpretation of the open-cranium photographs is anatomically impossible, so we must find another location to place the beveled exit shown in those photographs. And we know that there almost certainly was not an entrance in the "Cowlick" because there was already a small hole near the EOP resembling an entrance, and nobody from the autopsy reported two entrances in the back of the head.

The large head wound must be explained by something else, unless you could somehow prove a high-powered round entering Kennedy's head near the EOP from the Sniper's Nest could explain the pattern of damage to the head, skull, etc.

And we also have no guarantee that Dale Myers' animation as shown on two TV specials and his website is even consistent between frames. Dale's work could be a scam for all we know. He is a copyright Nazi after all. He has not released his computer data beyond a couple of videos and screenshots. Read Pat Speer's "animania" page on his website for the full scoop on Dale Myers' animation.
 
Last edited:
Dale Myers' chalks this up to the margin of error in the late Zapruder frames.

He knew what he was doing.


The new animation from the JFK mock trial also suggests that a bullet entering the cowlick and exiting the frontal-parietal area while staying straight would necessitate an unlikely-impossible steep angle.

Which is why it's wrong.

This difficulty in defining a fundamental aspect of the cowlick entry theory is important because it could establish whether or not a bullet entering the cowlick from the snipers nest at z313 and staying straight would necessitate an exit in the face.

The head was turned to the left, hence a straight line just the way it happened.

It's not very important either way, because we know the HSCA's crucial interpretation of the open-cranium photographs is anatomically impossible

Who is we and how much pathology experience do "we" have? I'm guessing zero.

so we must find another location to place the beveled exit shown in those photographs.

No one sees a beveled exit wound...well, no normal people...


And we know that there almost certainly was not an entrance in the "Cowlick" because there was already a small hole near the EOP resembling an entrance, and nobody from the autopsy reported two entrances in the back of the head.

We're back to this circus.

The large head wound must be explained by something else, unless you could somehow prove a high-powered round entering Kennedy's head near the EOP from the Sniper's Nest could explain the pattern of damage to the head, skull, etc.

It's called a 6.5x52mm Carcano round, and not only can it cause the damage to the head - the damage is almost exclusive to this bullet.

Thanks for playing.

And we also have no guarantee that Dale Myers' animation as shown on two TV specials and his website is even consistent between frames.

We have some guarantee. Myers' work has to hold up in court, and sloppy work on a high-profile case would be used against him in every case where his company's work is used. The fact that no trail lawyer has tried to shred his JFK work says a lot.


Dale's work could be a scam for all we know.

Strawman.

He is a copyright Nazi after all. He has not released his computer data beyond a couple of videos and screenshots.

Good for him. He doesn't give away his hard work and long hours for free.

Read Pat Speer's "animania" page on his website for the full scoop on Dale Myers' animation.

Let me save everyone time, here's the gist:

Blah, blah, blah, I've wasted my life trying to prove a conspiracy, blah, blah,blah, this animation runs counter to my years of spinning my wheels I pass off as research, blah,blah,blah, if it's accurate then I'm a hack, blah, blah.
 
More info on the autopsy timeline reconstruction.

From Harrison Livingstone's 1993 book Killing The Truth: Deceit and Deception in the JFK Case, here are the relevant parts of his interview with Joseph E. Hagan:

(page 728)...

Appendix J

...

PREPARING THE BODY FOR BURIAL

Joe Hagen: "I had some guy screaming at us the whole time... some air force major... There was a lot of interference with the autopsy, I understand." (Interview of Hagen by Harrison Livingstone and Kathlee Fitzgerald)

The professionals from Gawlers Funeral Home arrived while "they were proceeding with the most mortem... the head, I think the thoracic cavities and all, had been opened... our hearse took the (mahogany) casket out to the Naval Hospital late that evening... we dressed him and rolled the casket right in and put him in it." (Interview of Joe Hagen by Harrison Livingstone and Kathlee Fitzgerald, 8/15/91)


...

(page 740-741)...

Appendix J

...

THE "SHIPPING CASKET" STORY

A document discovered by Patrick Boyles surfaced, which originated at Gawlers Funeral Home in Washington, and was passed around at the 1992 Dallas A.S.K. Conference. The document had a handwritten notation on it which read "Body removed from metal shipping casket at USNH at Bethesda."

Joe Hagan, the president of Gawlers, wrote this himself. (Interview with Kathlee Fitzgerald and the author, March 31, 1993.) Hagan explained that the confusion is over semantics. He told me that the use of the term "casket" cannot be confused with what bodies are normally shipped in, such as a Zigler case, an air tray, a combination casket, or a "shipping container" which he said is what the military normally ships a body in. He stated that it would always be called a "container" in that case, and is not considered a casket, nor would it be called a casket.

Hagan went on to say that "The only reason we use that phrase was to identify the casket as a casket and as metal." He said that noone at Gawlers saw the body come out of the casket. nor was anyone from the funeral home there when the body arrived, but came much later, so they had no knowledge of it. He wrote the notation about a shipping casket because this is what he was told the body came in from Dallas. He said that noone would have called it a casket if it had been a shipping container or anything else, and that a casket is only called a casket if it is for viewing. (See Medical Encyclopedia Appendix for witnesses and events regarding the shipping casket.)


Compare this with the information furnished from Hagan's 5/17/1996 and 6/11/1996 interactions with the ARRB.

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/master_med_set/md182/html/md182_0001a.htm

Or William Manchester's 1967 book The Death of a President, based on interviews with Joe Hagan and Joe Gawler:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12075814&postcount=2884

Or Jim Bishop's 1968 book The Day Kennedy Was Shot:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12083285&postcount=3041

So either Tom Robinson and John Van Hoesen were incorrect about arriving at the autopsy very early, or they did arrive that early and Joe Hagan just arrived much later. Either way, it's solid that the 11:00-11:45 PM motif from Humes and Gawler's "First Call Sheet" almost certainly are indications of when the full funeral team ARRIVED, not the precise time when the autopsy ended. Hagan says that there were autopsy procedures happening in their presence, which would definitely go over 11:00 PM. Not sure exactly when the autopsy ended and the reconstruction began, but it went on longer after the funeral team arrived.
 
Last edited:
What point are you trying to make?

Gawler's funeral home members Joe Hagan, as well as Tom Robinson and John Van Hoesen, always said that they witnessed autopsy procedures being performed and had to wait for the autopsy to be completed when they arrived. It's up in the air when Sibert and O'Neill departed before the 2 AM teletype, the time they left the autopsy room isn't in their report and they only remembered it was "around midnight". Comparing their statements to other evidence and witnesses, it seems that they may have a personal motive for adding details to their stories that conveniently discredit various theories like body alteration/early throat wound discovery. O'Neill even tried saying he witnessed the dressing of the body when there's no way that happened before 2 AM (the body was completely dressed and ready for shipment to the White House by 4:45 AM, and the funeral team was under pressure to hurry up). Sibert just says they left when the Gawler's funeral team arrived.
 
Last edited:
Yeah... let’s ignore all the times we have talked about the benchmark for evidence needed to be convincing. Let’s ignore all the times that it has been pointed out that just saying “witnesses remember...” isn’t enough and will be tested against other forms of evidence...

They claim to have seen the autopsy?
That’s nice, but the documents show they are wrong.
 
Gawler's funeral home members Joe Hagan, as well as Tom Robinson and John Van Hoesen, always said that they witnessed autopsy procedures being performed and had to wait for the autopsy to be completed when they arrived. It's up in the air when Sibert and O'Neill departed before the 2 AM teletype, the time they left the autopsy room isn't in their report and they only remembered it was "around midnight". Comparing their statements to other evidence and witnesses, it seems that they may have a personal motive for adding details to their stories that conveniently discredit various theories like body alteration/early throat wound discovery. O'Neill even tried saying he witnessed the dressing of the body when there's no way that happened before 2 AM (the body was completely dressed and ready for shipment to the White House by 4:45 AM, and the funeral team was under pressure to hurry up). Sibert just says they left when the Gawler's funeral team arrived.

What part of 'fringe reset' don't you understand?

All that has been raised by you in the past and all of it has been shown to be nothing but your speculation, culled predominantly from unreliable recollections made a third of a century later to the ARRB.

I like how you often disprove the contentions in your own posts. In the above, you cite the contractions between the recollections of FBI agent Sibert and the other FBI agent at the autopsy, O'Neill. These contraditions are from when both testified to the ARRB in the mid-1990's. Each man remembered entirely different things, contradicting each other in numerous places.

To most people, that would speak to the fact that recollection is unreliable.

To you, that just implies the conspiracy was bigger than previously thought ("it seems that they may have a personal motive for adding details to their stories that conveniently discredit various theories like body alteration/early throat wound discovery").

We've covered that in the past on numerous occasions as well. I suggest you utilize the search function available here to look for "Jeremy Gunn" to refresh your memory on the import of those recollections (Sibert and O'Neill apparently aren't the only ones who are forgetful).

Hank
 
Last edited:
Nope, almost the same story was told to William Manchester and Jim Bishop in the 60's. So you don't read. You should still understand the value of one theory having more evidence than the other.
 
Yeah... let’s ignore all the times we have talked about the benchmark for evidence needed to be convincing. Let’s ignore all the times that it has been pointed out that just saying “witnesses remember...” isn’t enough and will be tested against other forms of evidence...

They claim to have seen the autopsy?
That’s nice, but the documents show they are wrong.

Edited by jsfisher: 
...snip... Edited for compliance with rules 0 and 12 of the Membership Agreement.
what document shows that the autopsy ended after the Gawler's funeral team arrived?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom