JFK's assassination: your thoughts

[JayUtah]

I can never figure out what conspiracy advocates believe to be the probative value of these "couldn't do it" exercises.

Yes, there are obvious issues with stacking the deck to make it seem to take longer than is really needed. But even if the reconstruction is attempted faithfully, and yet fails to finish on time, that's dubious evidence. You can never prove something was impossible for a person to do simply by showing that some number of other people could not do it when tested.

Further, once the feat has been reasonably duplicated, that point is settled. At best a string of previous failures suggests that the feat is only difficult. A very long string of failures would suggest that a feat might be impossible. But that is, at all times, an inference based on an indirect argument. Once the feat has been duplicated, no amount of indirect handwaving undoes it.

 

[A'isha]

Yep. Funny how to this day many of them continue to claim things such as "LHO couldn't have made three shots in that short amount of time." Even though there have been any number of experiments documenting it is quite possible and not even all that difficult.

The best one wasn't even an actual experiment, but the recreation of the three shots as seen in Oliver Stone's JFK, where the on-screen dialogue declares that the person attempting to simulate the three shots in less than 6 seconds failed to do so, but the footage seen on-screen shows him doing exactly that.

 

[BStrong]

I can never figure out what conspiracy advocates believe to be the probative value of these "couldn't do it" exercises.

Yes, there are obvious issues with stacking the deck to make it seem to take longer than is really needed. But even if the reconstruction is attempted faithfully, and yet fails to finish on time, that's dubious evidence. You can never prove something was impossible for a person to do simply by showing that some number of other people could not do it when tested.

Further, once the feat has been reasonably duplicated, that point is settled. At best a string of previous failures suggests that the feat is only difficult. A very long string of failures would suggest that a feat might be impossible. But that is, at all times, an inference based on an indirect argument. Once the feat has been duplicated, no amount of indirect handwaving undoes it.

I've brought this up before, but I don't recall if I've done so in this thread.

I have one friend and one acquaintance that have survived headshots from combloc 7.62 x 39 rounds - one took the round through the left lower side of his head. It broke his jaw, took part of his tongue and most of his teeth on that side. He survived with a disfigured face and a speech impediment. The other individual took the round from the front at such an angle that it shattered the part of the skull where it impacted but did not penetrate into the brain. He carries a scar that looks much like an exclamation point and his running joke is that he always looks surprised. The projectile actually slid along the part of the skull where it impacted and exited through his scalp.

The fact that two individuals survived headshots isn't a statistic to hang one's hat on wrt gsw survival - they are both anomalies - and anomalies are as much a fact of life as are the standard results.

The various CT angles relating to how the projectiles should have performed doesn't even rise to the level of SWAG in most instances - the assertions are nothing more than self (CTist) serving propaganda at best.

 

[Mudcat]

Considering some of the crazy feats that trick shooters routinely do, Oswald's achievement seems almost trivial in comparison.

 

[Wolrab]

Too bad we couldn't organize a massive 3 shots in < 6 second demonstration nationwideworldwide on the 22nd. Tasteless being the first thing that comes to mind. Educational being a close second.

 

[dreitzes]

As others have pointed out. the Warren Commission never concluded that Oswald fired three shots in less than six seconds. It depends on which shot missed. If the first shot hit JFK & John B. Connally (the "magic bullet"), the second missed, and the third was the head shot, then yes, we're talking less than six seconds. But if the first or third shot missed, that's a different story. The consensus since the House subcommittee in the '70s and particularly since further research in 1992-93 has been that the first shot missed circa Zapruder frame 155, the second shot struck JFK & JBC at Z224, and the head shot came at Z312, giving Oswald about nine seconds. Some believe the first shot came slightly earlier, but I have my doubts.

I've got detailed information at my website, but (sigh) I still can't post links. If you go to my jfk-online dot com, then into Feature Articles, then into my Oliver Stone critique, "The JFK 100," you can see what I'm talking about in "33. The Timing of the Shots," "87. The Sixth Shot [on the missed shot]," "72. The Single Bullet Theory," and "86. The Fifth Shot (Back and to the Left)."

And, no, I'm not the one claiming there were six shots; Oliver Stone is.

Dave

 

[SpitfireIX]

I've got detailed information at my website, but (sigh) I still can't post links. If you go to my jfk-online dot com, then into Feature Articles, then into my Oliver Stone critique, "The JFK 100," you can see what I'm talking about in "33. The Timing of the Shots," "87. The Sixth Shot [on the missed shot]," "72. The Single Bullet Theory," and "86. The Fifth Shot (Back and to the Left)."

Links embedded.

 

[BStrong]

As others have pointed out. the Warren Commission never concluded that Oswald fired three shots in less than six seconds. It depends on which shot missed. If the first shot hit JFK & John B. Connally (the "magic bullet"), the second missed, and the third was the head shot, then yes, we're talking less than six seconds. But if the first or third shot missed, that's a different story. The consensus since the House subcommittee in the '70s and particularly since further research in 1992-93 has been that the first shot missed circa Zapruder frame 155, the second shot struck JFK & JBC at Z224, and the head shot came at Z312, giving Oswald about nine seconds. Some believe the first shot came slightly earlier, but I have my doubts.

I've got detailed information at my website, but (sigh) I still can't post links. If you go to my jfk-online dot com, then into Feature Articles, then into my Oliver Stone critique, "The JFK 100," you can see what I'm talking about in "33. The Timing of the Shots," "87. The Sixth Shot [on the missed shot]," "72. The Single Bullet Theory," and "86. The Fifth Shot (Back and to the Left)."

And, no, I'm not the one claiming there were six shots; Oliver Stone is.

Dave

He was just interviewed on the 50th anniversary angle and stated again that he thought there were "5 or 6" shots fired, from the front and rear and went with the "back and to the left" nonsense as proof.

I'd love to see Stone sat down in front of video from several documented instances showing individual targets reacting to projectile impacts and have him explain the varied physical reactions of the targets.

Another guy who's educated about wound ballistics and gsw through popular fiction.

 

[Robrob]

Another guy who's educated about wound ballistics and gsw through popular fiction.

Presumably JFK should have been knocked out of the car (leaving his shoes behind)...

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Oliverstone : Work of fiction based on true events masquerading as fact. "Wow, Bob, that excuse you gave your wife for getting home late from work because of the effects of the melting polar icecaps was a darned impressive oliverstone."

 

[I Ratant]

As I mentioned in my response to Smithsonian Magazine article on the Zapruder film, rotoscoping the position of JFK's head during the head shot frames shows it went FORWARD as the bullet hit and exited!
Like this:
The "back and to the left" was caused by the head shot destroying the CNS which had paralyzed the body from the neck shot. With JFK's legs up against the back of the jump seat (see the Bettmann photo), the sudden release of tension spasmed the body "back and to the left" after the bullet was long gone.
.
Good quality Zapruder images.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iU83R7rpXQY

 

[I Ratant]

From 20 years ago...
Shooting through a water-filled capped 1 liter bottle with a 7mm bullet..
a water filled capped quart can
a honeydew melon.
The response of the bottle is most interesting, as the water bursts out the exiting side, the bottle cap has been pushed off the bottle, and the stream of water going out the neck due to the pressure of the bullet's passage shows that wiggle in the ejected stream, due to the bottle leaning in the direction the bullet traveled, and then returning to a stable condition, with more water going out the neck, and then just falling off the support.
The water filled can expands due to the bullet's pressure in the water. The bottom of the can is pushed out as the water continues to leaves in the bullet's direction, and then the can leaps back...towards the gun... because the rounded bottom is unstable, and the ejected water pushes it that way.
The exit hole is impressive.
And lastly, the honeydew melon shows no motion even after the bullet has passed, with just fragments of the husk at the exit hole flying around.. the melon then rolls off the support, again due to residual "jet effect" of the exited bullet, and falls to the ground.
That exit hole is VERY impressive, resembling one seen in the Zapruder film and the autopsy photographs.
What these photos can't show is the reaction of a real head attached to a real body, and the motion of these targets is somewhat more than would be seen in reality.
I asked David Lifton on the Compuserve Conspiracy forum back then how that itty-bitty bullet pushed that big man around the back seat... I don't recall an answer.

 

[Robrob]

As I mentioned in my response to Smithsonian Magazine article on the Zapruder film, rotoscoping the position of JFK's head during the head shot frames shows it went FORWARD as the bullet hit and exited!
Like this:
The "back and to the left" was caused by the head shot destroying the CNS which had paralyzed the body from the neck shot. With JFK's legs up against the back of the jump seat (see the Bettmann photo), the sudden release of tension spasmed the body "back and to the left" after the bullet was long gone.
.
Good quality Zapruder images.

IIRC from EMT training, Decerebrate posturing.

 

[I Ratant]

A message I got from Dr. Artwohl a few years back on the neck wound and response..
.
#: 20551 S7/Political Motives [JFK]
06-Apr-94 20:08:02
Sb: #20398-#McCarthy/Reaction Time
Fm: Bob Artwohl 71712,2151
To: Paul J. Burke 74656,2333 (X)

Paul,

>>>In the neck wound, I see an instant application of a lot of
pressure to the controlling nerves of the arms, no feedback thru the
brain required.<<<

As usual, the Warrenati mind is right on target, er, so to speak.

As a result of several recent conversations with a few neurosurgeons
and biophysicists, I have reached the conclusion that:

1. JFK was not exhibiting a "Thorburn response." He was exhiting an
immediate response to the bullet passing through the base of his right
neck. It sort of looks like a Thorburn's position, but it is not a
truly what Thorburn was describing, which is a much delayed reaction
(days to months) following a low cervical cord transection.

2. JFK's reaction to the neck wound was, for all intents and
purposes, instantaneous to the hit at Z-223/224. As the bullet passed
through his neck, the pressure cavity caused an immediate and wide
spread stimulation of all the nerves in the immediate vicinity, that
is of the brachial plexus, the large groups of nerves that emerge from
C5 - T1. These are the nerves that supply motor function to the arms.

Neural impulses of large nerves travel quite rapidly, up to 130
meters per second. The nerves supplying motor function to shoulder
and arm muscles carrying neural impulses at around 80 meters (or 3,120
inches) per second.

It would take an impulse originating in the right brachial plexus
about 0.003 to 0.004 seconds (about 5% of the time span of one Z
frame) to reach the right biceps muscle about 8 -10 inches away. The
average muscle can reach a full state of contraction against no load
as fast as 1/20th of a second, or a little faster than one Z frame.

Thus, despite the arguments of many pseudo-experts (like McCarthy),
not only could JFK have reacted within one or two Z frames of being
shot, he would be EXPECTED to react within one frame, based on the
anatomy and ballistics of his injury.

When one watches JFK react, it is apparent that the right side
reacts just before before the left side. This is further proof that
the bullet passed through the right side of his neck, since the right
sided structures were stimulated first.

It should be immediately apparent that the neurophysiology exhibited
by JFK in the Z-film supports, the upper location of the back wound.

A bullet passing lower, i.e. at the level of the 3rd thoracic
vertebrae would have entered the chest cavity. This would have
prevented a massive firing of the nerves of the brachial plexus since
the air filled lungs would have easily absorded the kinetic energy of
the decelerating bullet and the we would not have seen the peculiar
arm movement of JFK.

I hope this helps.

Sorry that I've taken so long to answer a question you put forth
several weeks (or was it months?) ago.

Bob A.

 

[BazBear]

As I mentioned in my response to Smithsonian Magazine article on the Zapruder film, rotoscoping the position of JFK's head during the head shot frames shows it went FORWARD as the bullet hit and exited!
Like this:
The "back and to the left" was caused by the head shot destroying the CNS which had paralyzed the body from the neck shot. With JFK's legs up against the back of the jump seat (see the Bettmann photo), the sudden release of tension spasmed the body "back and to the left" after the bullet was long gone.
.
Good quality Zapruder images.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iU83R7rpXQY

Thank you I Ratant; it seems too many CTist forget (or choose to ignore) he had just taken a life threatening shot through the neck a moment before.

 

[I Ratant]

Yeah, what they "forget" or ignore or just make up has filled a bunch of the tree-slaughtering books I have here.
In looking through some of the old stuff, I found a hilarious letter by Jack White, on the now-defunct "JFK Resources Forum" in which he, with the aid of Robert Groden anal-yzed some of the Zapruder images and discovered the lady in the grey coat seen running across the infield was eight (8) feet tall!
Using the same images and some real photogrammetry, I showed that the lady was 5 feet tall... which Deany Richards of "JFK Lancer" confirmed, as she had talked to that very lady.

 

[catsmate]

.
Lemme spook you some more..
Look up all the past famous assassinations, and note the names of the principals involved.
Do you know anyone with any of those -same- names?
BEWARE!!!!!

OT but I know a John F. Kennedy. He's unshot, at least he was last week.

All I'm really trying to do is destroy the US government, because I gotta hunch that it's corrupt as **** and WAY off its charter. What do you think about our government?

Our government?

I disagree - Marvel supervillians are much more logical, and far more likely to actually be able to prove their statements.

Indeed.

IMHO....
Having stood where Oswald stood...and tramped back and forth through the Plaza, I am certain that:
Oswald - if he ever even fired a shot, did not act alone.
The "kill" shot came from the area of the grassy knoll
The warren commission was pages and pages of fiction weaved through precious little fact.
IMHO....

So other than your factually unsupported and unqualified opinion you have nothing to suggest the general account of the Kennedy assassination is incorrect?

 

[Robrob]

But, then again I don't consider the fact that continuance of the myth that LHO did it still requires armies of paid disinformation agents to be a failure. The myth may persist in perpetuity. Why, then deem all of our efforts over 50 years to be a failure? Progress has been made and the chance that Americans will force the government to turn over its trove of secret documents remains.

"Paid disinformation agents? Could you be any more stereotypical...

After all, the government is nothing more than a group of representatives sworn to do what the collective of Americans asks. If the majority of Americans ask that the documents be turned over, I sincerely hope that request will be fulfilled.

You do realize you are claiming FOI requests will "force" the evil conspiracy to turn over previously unknown but incriminating documents? This is almost identical to the Freeman fantasy. How retarded of an evil conspiracy must this be?

Ultimately, I won't be proving who killed JFK. I just want to know what my functionaries know. And, if that requires dismantling the state security apparatus then so be it. If it requires in the process or leads to the disbandment of the entire government, well then we should do that.

Why are the JFK kooks always so self aggrandizing?

All I'm really trying to do is destroy the US government, because I gotta hunch that it's corrupt as **** and WAY off its charter. What do you think about our government?

You place a lot of weight on a hunch. Normally people use facts and evidence.

 

[halleyscomet]

I can never figure out what conspiracy advocates believe to be the probative value of these "couldn't do it" exercises.

Yes, there are obvious issues with stacking the deck to make it seem to take longer than is really needed. But even if the reconstruction is attempted faithfully, and yet fails to finish on time, that's dubious evidence. You can never prove something was impossible for a person to do simply by showing that some number of other people could not do it when tested.

Further, once the feat has been reasonably duplicated, that point is settled. At best a string of previous failures suggests that the feat is only difficult. A very long string of failures would suggest that a feat might be impossible. But that is, at all times, an inference based on an indirect argument. Once the feat has been duplicated, no amount of indirect handwaving undoes it.

Neither I, nor anyone in my Shadowrun gaming group, can fight the way Bruce Lee did in the movies. Therefore Bruce Lee's fight scenes were faked!

 

[bynmdsue]

Neither I, nor anyone in my Shadowrun gaming group, can fight the way Bruce Lee did in the movies. Therefore Bruce Lee's fight scenes were faked!

Well...yeah, they kind of were.