Me vs Joe Rogan: the Magic Bullet Theory

[Rrramon]

It follows pretty much the same pattern as any conspiracy debate: conspiracy theorist throws out a dozen arguments for the conspiracy, skeptic refutes one of those arguments, CTist throws back a dozen more. Cue stock footage of Whack-a-Mole.

I hadn't posted over there in like a year or so because I was getting too consumed with stuff like this--here's to falling off the wagon!

Not even close. They're advocating the single bullet theory based on the fact that Connally and Kennedy are both moving when it's believed one of the bullets hit. That's pure speculation, and they're stating it as fact which in this case is completely ridiculous.
The idea that one bullet did all that damage is complete nonsense when you look at the physical evidence and realize that the bullet supposedly shattered bone, went through two people and came out almost pristine, leaving more fragments in Connally's body than were missing from the bullet.
That, and the fact that the bullet magically appeared on a hospital gurney in Dallas.
The only reason they tried to attribute all that damage to one bullet was because it had been established that there were AT LEAST 3 gunshots fired, and even that was a difficult task for one man to pull of with the rifle he was supposedly using. The problem was it was clearly established that one of the bullets missed, because a man standing under the overpass was hit with a fragment of the curb when a bullet struck it.
So instead of trying to figure out if there were more gunmen or more shots fired they illogically tried to attribute all the damage in the two men to one bullet, the the fatal head shot to another, accounting for 3 shots.

That's total nonsense and just the fact that they pursued this angle should show that they were looking to establish that the official story of a lone gunman was correct rather than exploring all the possibilities.

It's total ********.

Joe, all of the wounds caused by the magic bullet have been recreated through rigorous computer modeling and real-life reenactments. They even used materials that were of nearly the exact same thickness, texture, etc of the victims' bodies, including animal bones, which disproves your statement about one bullet not being able to cause that much damage.

It'd be one thing if there was like a wound in Kennedy's back, and then the governor's leg, and then his shoulder, but everything is exactly where it is supposed to be if there was only one shooter.

The part about the bullet being "almost pristine" is a total myth. How pristine does this bullet look to you?

The part about Oswald not being able to fire off that many shots in that much time is a myth too. I watched some dude who was like 90 do it on the Discovery Channel. You are a smart guy and are brilliant when making fun of stuff like Noah's Ark but then you completely cheesedick yourself when you talk about these conspiracies and don't bother to fact-check any of this stuff Alex Jones just made up.

It looks VERY pristine compared to a bullet that smashed bone and went through two people.

I've done A LOT of studying on that JFK assassination, and let me explain a little something to you about internet debates; you can't just say "all of the wounds caused by the magic bullet have been recreated through rigorous computer modeling and real-life reenactments." You post links to said tests. Oh, that's right - there aren't any.
I've never heard of any tests where they sent a bullet through two people, smashing bones where it left more fragments in the body of the victim than were missing from the bullet itself, and comes out looking like that picture.
You know why? Because it's ****ing physically impossible.

Just because some people like Alex Jones say some outlandish ****, doesn't mean that some of what they say isn't valid.
By the way, there's a ton of evidence that points to that bullet being planted. http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/palamara.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfCf-xH5IRo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJq39E6UlLw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQ9ltGQXV6s

It's 20 minutes long, but you should watch the whole thing to see the painstaking detail they went to to reenact the shot--creating replica human rib cages, using gels that are the same thickness as human muscle, waiting for the same wind conditions that existed on that day, etc. And with only a couple minor differences (their bullet went through an extra rib and was thus a little more damaged, and didn't quite have enough speed to embed itself in the dummy governor's thigh), they were able to exactly replicate the path of the bullet.

It is a very good special and completely changed how I look at the whole thing. I used to be a huge JFK conspiracy junkie but after seeing stuff like this I eventually realized the evidence just isn't there.

OK, I watched all three of those. First off, the bullet looked NOTHING like the magic bullet when it came out. They attributed it to the fact that it hit 2 ribs instead of 1, but that's not an honest assessment in my opinion, because they didn't take into account that "magic" bullet shattered Connally's wrist as well. That's two bones.
They fired 2 bullets into bone, and both times the bullet was ****ed up when it came out. WAY more ****ed up than the magic bullet.

Secondly, this still doesn't address the fact that the chain evidence in acquiring the bullet was completely ****ed. Read this and you'll see why it's ridiculous to even consider that the bullet they found at the hospital was the bullet that passed through Kennedy and Connally: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/palamara.htm

And what the **** was up with them firing a bullet into a pine log to show how it could come out looking like the magic bullet? If your bones were made out of pine they would shatter every ****ing day. Any dope knows pine is an incredibly soft wood.
If they shot it into ebony it still wouldn't be as dense as bone.
Every time they shot a bullet into bone in the video it came out ****ed up.
Those guys were way too happy to try to show that their experiments showed the conspiracies were incorrect.

Yes, the bullet looked more ****ed up, but doesn't the fact that they were even able to recreate the exact same seven wounds (with the exception of the last one in the leg), with the dummies sitting in the exact same positions as the victims, show that the shot could be made by one shooter?

You said that "the idea that one bullet caused that much damage is complete nonsense" and posted a diagram arguing that the bullet would have to take some crazy midair turn in order to cause all the wounds. Ignoring the larger argument of whether there was a conspiracy or not, doesn't the video I posted at least prove that one statement wrong? Unless you wanted to argue that one bullet caused half the wounds, then another bullet following the exact same path pushed the first bullet through and caused the rest of the wounds.

They weren't able to recreate the damage, because it didn't go through the wrist and into Connally's thigh. That means one bullet wasn't able to cause all that damage, despite the fact that they were clearly looking to prove that Oswald acted alone in that video.
The main point is that the only reason why they even considered that a single bullet did all that damage was that they were trying to pin it all on one guy, despite all the eye witness testimony saying shots were fired from the grassy knoll. Then the fact that the bullet itself appeared under very suspicious circumstances at the hospital should lead anyone that's trying to be objective to question the veracity of the official story.

The only reason they came up with the single bullet theory in the first place wasn't because it was scientifically plausible or most likely, but because they were trying to attribute all the shots to one man, and had already established that at least 3 shots were fired.
It's all incredibly suspicious and suspect.

This video proves nothing, especially since they weren't able to recreate a bullet looking anything like the magic one unless they shot it into soft wood. The whole thing is bogus.

Do you think it's even possible that one bullet could cause all 7 of those wounds?

Whether it's possible or not is debatable, but they certainly didn't prove it in that video, especially in regards to the bullet coming out looking the same way. In fact, it's way easier to use that video to disprove the single bullet theory than to prove it.
They obviously went into this project with an agenda and decided they fulfilled it despite the evidence to the contrary.
Here's your original quote that got us into this:

Joe, all of the wounds caused by the magic bullet have been recreated through rigorous computer modeling and real-life reenactments.

That's 100% incorrect.

 

[Rrramon]

Wow, I haven't posted here in a while--look how irrelevant my avatar is!

 

[Civilized Worm]

Why is he referencing McAdams in an attempt to support his conspiracy theory.

 

[Drudgewire]

Joe Rogan is freakin' awesome and that's all I have to say about it.

 

[PhantomWolf]

To be honest since his venture into the Apollo Hoax arena I have been unable to determine if Joe is just taking the preverbial or if he really believes this trash.

 

[Bobert]

To be honest since his venture into the Apollo Hoax arena I have been unable to determine if Joe is just taking the preverbial or if he really believes this trash.

I couldnt believe it when he interviewed Alex Jones.
From what I remember he seemed to buy into some of AJ's crap.

 

[Wides]

I used almost this exact same reference material for a speech class in sixth grade. My grade was docked for "historical accuracy". I'm still a little sour about it.

 

[OneShotKi11]

Im sorry but from a debating point of view and after reading the entire thing.
Joe Rogan completely beat you in this round.

Especially after he quotes you and clearly your own video disproves your quote.

Quote:
"Joe, all of the wounds caused by the magic bullet have been recreated through rigorous computer modeling and real-life reenactments."
"That's 100% incorrect."

After that statement you better provide something that shows exactly all those wounds being created by one bullet, or you automatically lose the debate because of your own terminology.

Great videos though!
Poor wording!
I have to give it to JOE

 

[lee5]

I like Joe Rogan.

Nothing you can say will change that.



Honestly, even though he may be wrong about the overall theory, he still made good points. Looks like you are going to have to try from a different angle.

Rogan is a smart man. Misguided and gullible maybe but smart nonetheless. Gonna be hard to make him look stupid. Even when he is wrong. (did I just say that?)

Can you provide a link to that debate please?

 

[Rrramon]

Im sorry but from a debating point of view and after reading the entire thing.
Joe Rogan completely beat you in this round.

Especially after he quotes you and clearly your own video disproves your quote.

Quote:
"Joe, all of the wounds caused by the magic bullet have been recreated through rigorous computer modeling and real-life reenactments."
"That's 100% incorrect."

After that statement you better provide something that shows exactly all those wounds being created by one bullet, or you automatically lose the debate because of your own terminology.

Great videos though!
Poor wording!
I have to give it to JOE

Look, my only goal was to disprove his claim that the path of the shot was some kind of wild absurdity, which I think I did quite well. He claimed via a diagram that the bullet would have to take some crazy midair turn in order for the shot to be pulled off, which the reenactments blow completely out of the water. He uses the fact that the test shot barely failed to make the 7th wound as a jumping-off point for further debate but doesn't realize that by doing so he's totally contradicting his point about the wounds not lining up.

It is impossible to "win" a debate against a conspiracy theorist--my approach was to ask questions that allow him to demonstrate the ridiculousness of his views. By his logic, the fact that the test shot yielded a couple very minor differences means that it's completely impossible that Oswald could have done it. He would have you believe that if you ran the same test 100 billion times, there is no way the bullet would ever recreate all 7 wounds or come out in the same condition as the Magic Bullet. He completely sh*ts the bed with this claim.

Lee, here is a link to the thread (contains a NSFW avatar)
http://forums.joerogan.net/showthread.php?t=73460

 

[Rrramon]

He also repeated Oliver Stone's claim that it's hard to fire off three shots from Oswald's rifle in 8 seconds, when in reality it could be done by my 90-year-old Grandma who thinks I'm the cat.

That is the strategy of the conspiracy theorist--fire off a million flimsy "arguments" at once so if the skeptic doesn't have the answer to one of them off the top of his head you can paint the illusion of victory.

That's why it's best to stick to a single point and not let them whirlwind you from topic to topic.

Of course he is not gonna admit he was wrong about the wounds lining up but it is right there in the video/a million other places.

 

[lee5]

He also repeated Oliver Stone's claim that it's hard to fire off three shots from Oswald's rifle in 8 seconds, when in reality it could be done by my 90-year-old Grandma who thinks I'm the cat.

That is the strategy of the conspiracy theorist--fire off a million flimsy "arguments" at once so if the skeptic doesn't have the answer to one of them off the top of his head you can paint the illusion of victory.

That's why it's best to stick to a single point and not let them whirlwind you from topic to topic.

Of course he is not gonna admit he was wrong about the wounds lining up but it is right there in the video/a million other places.

Your right.

I think of it like this....

There theory is like a snow ball compiled of a bunch of hearsay and false claims. By the time they build up their theory, they are not willing to look at all the pieces that got them to this conclusion one by one.

And if you do by some chance point out a flawed point, they will just throw out another list with 20 more copy and pasted pieces of woo at you and say "what about these!".

So annoying.

 

[CurtC]

He also repeated Oliver Stone's claim that it's hard to fire off three shots from Oswald's rifle in 8 seconds, when in reality it could be done by my 90-year-old Grandma who thinks I'm the cat.

Here's a link to a video of a conspiracy theorist explaining how you can't cycle the mechanism of the MC in under 2.3 seconds, while actually doing it in 1.8 seconds.

That is the strategy of the conspiracy theorist--fire off a million flimsy "arguments" at once so if the skeptic doesn't have the answer to one of them off the top of his head you can paint the illusion of victory.

In creationist circles, that technique is known as the "Gish Gallop."

 

[EGarrett]

I think it was a fine exchange, and I haven't seen this Discovery Channel vid before.

In dealing with these Conspiracy Theorists, just like Creationists and 9/11 Truthers...you're fighting someone who's entire "argument" is based on shifting the burden of proof and nitpicking a uncontrolled situation. If you're fighting a blind guy, and you want to win and win convincingly, why would you let him turn the lights out before you start? Make him try to argue for the logical fallacy he's using...that usually makes them look foolish.

EDIT: This video is great btw. It reduces even the nitpicking to "well it still was more deformed then the magic bullet and didn't go through his thigh" which is seriously weak. Rogan fell back to nitpicking your own post in response, another sign that he was on the defensive.

 

[Monza]

He also repeated Oliver Stone's claim that it's hard to fire off three shots from Oswald's rifle in 8 seconds...

You need to find the scene in Stone's movie where the character states this. After he says it is impossible, he demonstrates this but actually does it in less time. Oops.

 

[thesyntaxera]

My question would be, has anyone recreated a headshot from behind with a high powered rifle that would cause the victim to lurch "back and to the left"...I have been looking for some info on and off all night...can't say I found anything useful.

It seems like I saw this debunked some where, but now I can't find the source.

 

[PhantomWolf]

Well I haven't seen it done with a Person, but it have been replicated with dummies, skulls filled with Balistics gel and water mellons at least.

The basics is that if you look at the image his head initially moves forward, but then as the bullet exits, along with some of the stuff that should have remained inside, it creates an effect that pushes the head back.

There was a good JFK Conspriacies file on discovery last night that pretty busts all of the CT claims again.

Oswald did it, he did it alone, he did it because he was a nut who wanted to make a name for himself, he did it because defecting to the USSR hadn't make him a big star there, Cuba didn't want him, and he missed the first time he tried an assassination.

 

[dudalb]

The "Impossible to get off three shot in five seconds with a Bolt Action Rifle" claim should be enough to tell you the Keneddy CTers do not know what the hell they are talking about.
I have gotten off three aimed shots in five seconds using a Springfield O3 rifle, which has longer bolt action then a Carcano.SO much for the ballistic knowledge of the CTers.
Another canard is that it was a difficult shot to make. It was not. And don't forget Oswald was a good shot.

 

[I Ratant]

I emptied my Carcano.. 5 shots, the full clip... in less than 8 seconds, shooting at 3 different targets at the Dealey Plaza distances, and hit all three.
It's not much of a feat of arms.
There's been so many successful replications of the event, I saw two on the tube at the same time yesterday evening, that only a dedicated moron could deny the Single Bullet Theory.
The use of a laser at night was an interesting way to prove this, in the Discovery channel presentation. The History Channel used Dale Myer's excellent computer simulation to demonstrate the same thing.

 

[I Ratant]

My question would be, has anyone recreated a headshot from behind with a high powered rifle that would cause the victim to lurch "back and to the left"...I have been looking for some info on and off all night...can't say I found anything useful.

It seems like I saw this debunked some where, but now I can't find the source.

"back and to the left".... JFK was in a rigidized condition from the neck shot. Arms held up to his neck.. and his position in the limo was constrained by the jump seat the governor was in.
The head shot spasmed his body, attempting to straighten his legs, which had nowhere to go, so his body moved "back and to the left".
I asked David Lifton on the Compuserve Conspiracy Forum many years ago how that itty-bitty bullet moved that big man so far. He had no response.
The bullet itself couldn't move the body at all. About all it might do is make the head nod forward.
Shooting unrestrained melons and bottles with a similar weapon, the target just sits there and vibrates, when the bullet passes thru.
A non-hysterical over-view...
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/medical.htm