View Single Post
Old 22nd August 2015, 01:13 PM   #35
Robert Harris
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 867

Originally Posted by Robert Harris View Post
That's an excellent question, Zooterin. I will try to answer it for you.

1. They were in the middle of a shooting. That alone, might not constitute a 100% proof, but it certainly makes a gunshot, the most probable explanation.

2. The large consensus of witnesses was that they heard two closely bunched gunshots at the end of the attack. That is a perfect match with shots at 285 and 313, 1.5 seconds apart.

3. Bill Greer, the driver of the limo, stated that the second shot, which he described as almost simultaneous with the third, caused him to feel it's "concussion", which is exactly what we would expect him to have felt from the shock wave of a passing, high powered rifle shot.

4. The absence of plausible, alternative explanations. The most common of these has been that the reactions were caused by the driver slamming on the brakes, but the evidence proves that the reactions preceded the slowdown. That fact was confirmed by the Nobel prize winning physicist, Dr. Luis Alvarez, who I corroborated in this brief presentation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCDAg5c4x5U

The only other alternative which has been suggested, is that the noise at 285 was a motorcycle backfiring. But the witnesses confirmed that this backfiring was heard repeatedly all throughout the motorcades, but no similar reactions can be seen, either prior to frame 285 in the Zapruder film, or during movies taken prior to the limo's arrival in Dealey Plaza.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GleA2BHxGcM

In fact, reactions like those following frame 285, can ONLY be seen, following the fatal headshot at frame 313.

http://jfkhistory.com/duckstwice.gif

And finally, the HSCA confirmed that shots fired from Oswald's rifle, where much louder than motorcycle backfires. This is from their report,

All observers rated the rifle shots as very, very loud, and they were unable to understand how they could have been described as a firecracker or backfire..

We requested three motorcycles to be running during the test that would approximate the original listening conditions in Dealey Plaza. But the shots were so loud that any reasonable level of background noise woud have been low in comparison with the shots themselves.

5. Each of the nonvictims in the limousine, who we see reacting, stated that what they heard at the end of attack, were gunshots.


Originally Posted by HSienzant View Post
False. We've discussed this. For example, Clint Hill
Clint Hill was not one of the "nonvictims in the limousine". So why did you claim that my statement was false?

Quote:
who rushed to the car as the final shot was fired, said he heard only two shots total. He said he also heard, almost simultaneous with the second shot, a different sound, which he described as "though someone was shooting a revolver into a hard object--it seemed to have some type of an echo".
That is untrue. He NEVER differentiated the shot fired "into a hard object", from the "second" shot that he heard. This is from his original report, of 11/22/63,

I heard a second firecracker type noise but it had a different sound-- like the sound of shooting a revolver into something hard.

He NEVER said he heard two separate shots then.

Quote:
And as you previously admitted, Governor Connally heard only two shots total. He couldn't have described "gunshots" at the end of the attack.
Yes indeed, that's why I said,

5. Each of the nonvictims in the limousine, who we see reacting, stated that what they heard at the end of attack, were gunshots.

I'm sure you realize that he was a victim, not a "nonvictim" , do you not?

Quote:
He did describe, and distinguish between, the sound of the final shot, and the sound of the impact on the head of the President.
No sir, he did not. He said he heard ONE shot striking something hard, which was obviously, the skull.

Quote:
We also saw the same type of testimony from the other occupants of the car ...
I have read every relevant testimony in the WC report and I can assure you than none of the limo passengers said anything that even remotely implies that they confused one shot as two.

Quote:
where they described three sounds, two very close together. There is no reason to exclude a two-shot, one head impact scenario
There is no way that the sound of the bullet striking the head, would sound like two separate gunshots. The shock wave emanated from the bullet itself; it arrived simultaneous with it striking the head. Clint Hill had it exactly right, when he said it was

[COLOR=Blue"like the sound of shooting a revolver into something hard." [/color]

Now consider how SAIC, Roy Kellerman described those final shots,

"Let me give you an illustration, sir, before I can give you an answer. You have heard the sound barrier, of a plane breaking the sound barrier, bang, bang? That is it."

The other, even more serious problem with your theory, is that the reactions by the limo passengers as well as by Zapruder, as Dr. Alvarez confirmed, PRECEDED the headshot at 313. So they could NOT have been caused by the bullet striking the head.

This brief, annotated Zapruder segment matches up what Mrs. Kennedy and Connally said, in comparison with their reactions then.

http://jfkhistory.com/annotated.gif

Quote:
but exclude it you do, ignoring entirely this was previously referenced in detail.
Exclude what?? You haven't cited anyone who thought that the headshot was really two separate shots, and none of those reactions are consistent with your theory, since they occurred, prior to the shot at 313.

And I certainly did reply, in considerable detail, when you posted your theory before. You have presented no evidence of any kind, which supports your theory and it is entirely inconsistent with the visible reactions as well as the scientific evidence of Drs. Alvarez and Stroscio.

Quote:
Here's where you ignored it most recently:
4. The absence of plausible, alternative explanations. The most common of these has been that the reactions were caused by the driver slamming on the brakes... The only other alternative which has been suggested, is that the noise at 285 was a motorcycle backfiring...

Quote:
That's the logical fallacy where you incorrectly limit the options,
I was talking about "plausible" alternatives. Illogical theories with zero evidential support do not fall into that category. Your own star witness, Clint Hill, was very specific that he heard a SINGLE shot at the end;

"like the sound of shooting a revolver into something hard."

And this is from his testimony,

Mr. SPECTER. How many shots have you described that you heard?
Mr. HILL. Two.
Mr. SPECTER. Did you hear any more than two shots?
Mr. HILL. No, sir.


Obviously, he was not fooled into thinking he heard an additional shot at the end. Neither was anyone else. Numerous witnesses for example, said there was 1 or 2 seconds between those two shots.

By the way, I made this presentation about Clint Hill, several years ago. You might find it interesting to learn that he jumped in direct reaction to the shot at 285,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u08P2R2l5T8
Robert Harris is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top