IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags HSCA , JFK assassination , Kennedy conspiracies

Closed Thread
Old 24th October 2015, 06:51 AM   #401
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Rachel, KS
Posts: 33,127
Originally Posted by RoboTimbo View Post
You'll need to answer the question I've repeatedly asked you, Robert:

Originally Posted by Robert Harris View Post
Tell me Jay, do we require an expert to determine whether this woman was exposed to a high powered rifle shot, or similar noise?
What did the FBI think caused it when you presented it to them?

Why won't you answer the question, Robert?
As you've been unwilling to answer this question repeatedly, Robert, I will take it as read that you understand that your lay opinion isn't evidence. You also understand that it isn't compelling to anyone other than yourself since you've also been unable to show any actual evidence for the phantom gunshots you've invented.

It's as JayUtah said many months ago, the purpose of CTists is to prolong the discussion, not to bring closure.
RoboTimbo 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
Old 24th October 2015, 11:02 AM   #402
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,071
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Naturally I can think of some reasons other than "extreme bias" why a person might come to a different conclusion than you regarding the evidence. For those thoughts, please see almost literally every post I've made to you since you arrived. You seem to have precluded that any of those reasons could possibly be rational. And no, just because I can think of reasons other than "extreme bias" why people might disagree with you, that doesn't absolve you of your burden of proof for your preferred reason.

But no, I'm not about to dignify your latest loaded question. "Biased to the point of insanity" is not the same as "biased because of insanity." You have missed the point. You don't get to jump over your judgment that your critics are biased, and thereafter bog down in speculation over why you think they are or why another person might think they're not. If you're going to say that people disagree with you only (or chiefly) because they're "extreme[ly] bias[ed]," then you'll need to show why your judgment on that point is the one best supported by evidence.
One has to ask. Why would a person spend their time trying to convince others of something when said person believes the others are so biased that they will not accept his ideas no matter what 'evidence' is provided. Wouldn't the person trying to change the mind of such biased persons himself be a bit of a nutter?
Hans 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
Old 24th October 2015, 12:05 PM   #403
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,087
Originally Posted by Robert Harris View Post
You're wasting my time and bandwidth. We have both agreed that suppressors were available for subsonic firearms in 1963, which you labelled as "stable".

And since the shot at 223 was heard by virtually no one, we know that it did not come from a high powered rifle, therefore it had to have come from a subsonic weapon. So why are you ONLY talking about some of the loudest, supersonic rifles on the planet??

And why won't you address the facts that only one of the early shots was even audible to most witnesses, and that there were NO visible startle reactions as we see following the shots at the end?

http://jfkhistory.com/285reactions.gif

You've previously asserted (with zero documentation) that it was impossible for a subsonic round to pass through both JFK and Connally.

But I'm not at all sure that's correct. I think the mass of the bullet and it's shape, would have a lot do with it's ability to penetrate. Don't you agree?

And let me ask you another question. Let's suppose a sniper in the Daltex was using a subsonic, semi-automatic rifle. If he fired off two, almost simultaneous rounds, is it possible that the first one passed through Kennedy, and the second, which was fired as the barrel slightly rose (which it would naturally do), passed just above JFK's right shoulder and struck Connally?

Now before everyone jumps all over me, I am NOT claiming that is what happened. I am only wondering if that is a reasonable possibility. There is considerable evidence, from the FBI reports, no less, which suggest that more bullets were recovered and flown back to Washington, than were later reported.

Sorry - didn't mean to sound like a researcher, rather than a high school debater
Not to give your assertions any credence, but to again point out the limits of your knowledge in the subject matter, the rifle test I linked to featured a specialized version of the SIG rifle in a SBR configuration (Short Barreled Rifle) w/ a 9" barrel chambered in 300 AAC Blackout:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/300_AA...7.62%C3%9735mm)

Far from being as you assert "loudest, supersonic rifles on the planet" the 300 BLK out of the 9" barrel will run at approximately 2,200 fps w/ the 115 grain projectile, 2030 fps w/ the 125 grain projectile, right in there with the 6.5 Carcano that LHO used:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6.5%C3%9752mm_Carcano

Comparing the two cartridges, the Carcano comes in with an MV of 2170 or 2300 fps with a 139 grain projectile depending on the load.

The 300 BLK out of the 9" barrel is actually less powerful than the Carcano.

Here's a video of test firing an unsuppressed 16" barrel version of the 300 BLK, viewers can make up their own minds

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
BStrong 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
Old 27th October 2015, 10:01 AM   #404
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 24,911
Originally Posted by RoboTimbo View Post
As you've been unwilling to answer this question repeatedly, Robert, I will take it as read that you understand that your lay opinion isn't evidence. You also understand that it isn't compelling to anyone other than yourself since you've also been unable to show any actual evidence for the phantom gunshots you've invented.

It's as JayUtah said many months ago, the purpose of CTists is to prolong the discussion, not to bring closure.
The evidence hasn't been presented to the FBI because, in its proponent's judgment, the FBI are tainted and would presumably just bury his evidence and (continue to) ignore it.

Now we're told that Robert's critics "have hit rock bottom," albeit without any details regarding how. So he's taking another break, after which he says he hopes to publish a few more "presentations."

The cycle of hiding from ones critics, avoiding any real accountability for correctness, and the ubiquitous fringe-reset phenomenon seems to fit quite well with an interpretation that this particular theory serves only itself.
JayUtah 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
Old 27th October 2015, 12:25 PM   #405
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 21,398
Originally Posted by Allen773 View Post
For what it's worth...



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a6699751.html

Another nail in the coffin of those who claim Oswald was "just a patsy"...
So here's the problem: no one in their right mind has had any doubts about the picture since, like, ever. And those who don't believe the pictures are real will not change their mind based on his, or anything for that matter.
__________________
Gunter Haas, the 'leading British expert,' was a graphologist who advised couples, based on their handwriting characteristics, if they were compatible for marriage. I would submit that couples idiotic enough to do this are probably quite suitable for each other. It's nice when stupid people find love. - Ludovic Kennedy
pgwenthold 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
Old 27th October 2015, 04:17 PM   #406
BT George
New Blood
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 11
Originally Posted by Robert Harris View Post
I don't waste time on pointless arguments. The fact that the witnesses did not mention this nurse's name, means nothing. All that matters is that they correctly reported what she said and did. And their mutual corroborations proved that they were correct.



Wrong again. Of course, the actual stretcher bullet and the one recovered on the second floor, went into the black hole called the FBI. But CE399 itself, provides us with conclusive hard evidence, that the initials of the two men who marked the Tomlinson bullet are nowhere to be found on it.


CE399 could not have been the same bullet that Tomlinson found, which is hardly surprising, since neither he nor anyone else who handled it prior to the FBI, would corroborate it as the same bullet. O.P. Wright, Tomlinson's supervisor and an ex-police officer stated that the original had a much more pointed tip than CE399.



That's a pointless argument. But if you want earlier data, then you could look at the evidence you just deleted. On 11/23/63, the FBI lied about their interview with Audrey Bell, claiming that she passed a single fragment to officer Nolan.

On 11/30/63, they lied, claiming that Dr. Gregory told them he removed only a single fragment from Connally's wrist.

And on 11/26/63, they manipulated the evidence, so that the DPD records showed Bell's envelope only containing a single fragment - all for the obvious purpose of trying to make it appear that Bell gave her envelope to Nolan, whose evidence envelope really did contain a single item.

I cite each of those demonstrable lies, verbatim, in the section you just deleted, in its entirety.

Have you figured out yet, what happened to the initials of agent Johnsen and FBI agent Todd, neither of which are present on CE399?

Or why all four of the men who examined the stretcher bullet refused to confirm that it was CE399?

Or why the FBI phoned Tomlinson in the wee hours of the morning, immediately after receiving fragments that they could match up against his bullet and telling him to keep his mouth shut about it?

Or why the FBI lied about what supervisor Bell told them, claiming she said she gave a single "fragment" to Nolan?

Bell BTW, told the HSCA the same thing she told the ARRB 20 years earlier.

I used to think it was an honest mistake that they referred to a single fragment, rather than four as can be easily seen in CE-842. But guess what - they made the same "mistake" when they interviewed doctor Gregory. This is from an FBI report dated 11/30/63.

Gregory testified before the WC, correctly describing multiple tiny fragments, but according to the FBI, he only talked about one.

He (Gregory) states surgery performed by him was done on the Governor's right arm, and that he removed from the arm a small fragment of metal. He stated the metal fragment was placed into a transparent container for preservation, and that during the operation, he recalled no other pieces or bits of metal being removed from the Governor's body.

Another honest mistake??

How about this then? The DPD (undoubtedly with the FBI's help) labelled CE-842 as containing only a single "fragment". Looking at the outside of the envelope, they would have seen the word "fragments". On the inside, four fragments, at least three of which were easily visible.


Another "mistake"?

The FBI couldn't say her envelope had multiple fragments as it actually did, because they were going to pass it off as the one Nolan had, which of course, really did contain a single object.

Excuse me Mr. Harris. Tell our kind viewers *exactly* which post of mine deleted the above arguments from you?

It is true I did not bother to address them, having referred our kind viewers to our prior exchanges on this topic back at AAJKF, but I did not intentionally delete anything with the exception of your URL's. The forum software still won't even allow me to post anything containing a proper URL even when quoting another poster.


BT George
BT George 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
Old 22nd November 2015, 01:17 PM   #407
Regnad Kcin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Regnad Kcin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The old Same place
Posts: 11,138
What a sad, distressing article:

Inside the plot to kill JFK: The secret story of the CIA and what really happened in Dallas Disappointed in Salon for publishing such a poor piece.
__________________
My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.

Last edited by zooterkin; 24th November 2015 at 07:26 AM.
Regnad Kcin 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
Old 22nd November 2015, 02:57 PM   #408
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 25,302
Sorry if this is the wrong thread to post this, but its the most recent JFK thread on the board that I could find, and I didn't want to resurrect a really old one.

I know I am a bit behind on this, but I have just seen JFK: The Smoking Gun for the first time last night. This is the one in which an Australian former Police investigator concluded that JFK was shot by LHO, but the final "kill shot" was an accidental discharge by a Secret Service agent in the back seat of the trailing car.

I found his forensic and ballistic investigation sound, and his conclusions difficult to refute.

What do others here think?

NOTE: I was formerly an "old believer" in the conspiracy aspects of the JFK assassination, the whole 9 yards; CIA/Mob/Cuban involvement, multiple shooters on the grassy knoll, the usual stuff, but the more I have read, watched and heard about the issue, the more I have been turned to believe that there was no conspiracy before the fact, but I am still open to the possibility that there may have been a cover of aspects that took place after the fact.
__________________
If you're not a scientist but you think you've destroyed the foundation of a vast scientific edifice with 10 minutes of Googling, you might want to consider the possibility that you're wrong.

Its TRE45ON season... convict the F45CIST!!
smartcooky is online now   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
Old 24th November 2015, 04:50 AM   #409
turingtest
Mistral, mistral wind...
 
turingtest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Embedded and embattled, reporting from Mississippi
Posts: 5,203
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Sorry if this is the wrong thread to post this, but its the most recent JFK thread on the board that I could find, and I didn't want to resurrect a really old one.

I know I am a bit behind on this, but I have just seen JFK: The Smoking Gun for the first time last night. This is the one in which an Australian former Police investigator concluded that JFK was shot by LHO, but the final "kill shot" was an accidental discharge by a Secret Service agent in the back seat of the trailing car.

I found his forensic and ballistic investigation sound, and his conclusions difficult to refute.

What do others here think?

NOTE: I was formerly an "old believer" in the conspiracy aspects of the JFK assassination, the whole 9 yards; CIA/Mob/Cuban involvement, multiple shooters on the grassy knoll, the usual stuff, but the more I have read, watched and heard about the issue, the more I have been turned to believe that there was no conspiracy before the fact, but I am still open to the possibility that there may have been a cover of aspects that took place after the fact.
Haven't seen the program, so I can't speak to the validity of his specifics; but, just as a broad general rule, there's a difference between a scenario that's possible and one that's sufficient. If he concedes LHO shot Kennedy, why is it necessary to add another (accidental) shooter, when that introduces its own complications? For instance, if you posit this, you also have to posit that either nobody in the follow-up car noticed this accidental discharge (hard to believe), or that they all covered it up. That's possible, I suppose- but is it necessary to explain what happened, does it explain things better?
__________________
I'm tired of the bombs, tired of the bullets, tired of the crazies on TV;
I'm the aviator, a dream's a dream whatever it seems
Deep Purple- "The Aviator"

Life was a short shelf that came with bookends- Stephen King
turingtest 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
Old 24th November 2015, 07:40 PM   #410
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,087
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Sorry if this is the wrong thread to post this, but its the most recent JFK thread on the board that I could find, and I didn't want to resurrect a really old one.

I know I am a bit behind on this, but I have just seen JFK: The Smoking Gun for the first time last night. This is the one in which an Australian former Police investigator concluded that JFK was shot by LHO, but the final "kill shot" was an accidental discharge by a Secret Service agent in the back seat of the trailing car.

I found his forensic and ballistic investigation sound, and his conclusions difficult to refute.

What do others here think?

NOTE: I was formerly an "old believer" in the conspiracy aspects of the JFK assassination, the whole 9 yards; CIA/Mob/Cuban involvement, multiple shooters on the grassy knoll, the usual stuff, but the more I have read, watched and heard about the issue, the more I have been turned to believe that there was no conspiracy before the fact, but I am still open to the possibility that there may have been a cover of aspects that took place after the fact.
If you go back in the thread, Donahue and The Smoking Gun has been discussed in detail, but the short story is Donahue started out with the theory that LHO couldn't have fired the shots that murdered JFK and worked backwards from that until he came up with an explanation that fit his theory - the follow on documentary TSG doesn't improve the theory any.

Do officers out on the road party and chase women? Yes. Do they have a fatal ND on POTUS and pull off a cover up? No.

Much is made in TSG about the withdrawal of the AR from the SS issue list, but that had more to do with the awkwardness of using a 39" OAL rifle as a defensive piece in close protection than covering up an ND on the POTUS - Colt didn't develop (semi- reliable) short barreled (10.5" and 11.5") variants until 1966 and although everybody that saw them wanted one asap, production versions weren't known for reliability and if it didn't have the "Sound Moderator" they were brutal on the ears for the shooter and anybody nearby.

I've had a bunch of them pass through my hands over the years and built a bunch of registered ones before 5-19-86. It wasn't until Tim Lafrance came up with his patented "twin tube" gas system that you could get one of these things to run 100%.

Had all the improvements been available in '63 the SS would most likely adopted the platform for GI, and SBR versions of AK's and the AR platform have been all the rage for PSD's (Personal Security Details) even long before 9/11. The suppressed SIG in .300 Blackout that I linked to above is specifically intended for PSD use.
BStrong 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
Old 25th November 2015, 12:19 PM   #411
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 25,302
There are just a couple of things for me to add.

A sequence of events might be unlikely, but that is not evidence that it didn't happen. Unlikely things do happen; for example, what if some Aircraft Engineers use a forklift to support an engine while refitting it to a DC10 and then knock-off for lunch with only one mount in place. During the lunch break, the forklift's hydraulic pressure gradually leaks away and the full weight of the engine is placed on the one mount, damaging it unseen. A couple of months later, the mount breaks during take-off, the engine falls off and the DC10 crashes! Unlikely sequence of events? Yes, but it happened, Flight 191, Chicago O'Hare, 25 May 1979.

While I believe that LHO acted alone (i.e. that there was no conspiracy before the fact), I have always had difficulty in accepting that a man who was not considered a particularly good shot was able to fire a Carcano three times in 5.6 seconds and hit a target that was both receding and moving in both azimuth and elevation, and hit that target two out of three times at his first and only attempt. It took investigators many attempts to achieve this in testing, with a very experienced shooter finally able to do it at his third attempt. Admittedly, my opening sentence in this post would apply; just because it was unlikely and difficult, does not mean that it could NOT have happened, however there is another challenge, and that is to explain how so many witnesses said that the three shot were not evenly spaced...

BANG......... BANG..........BANG.

They said that it was more like...

BANG................... BANG-BANG.

If what they claim to have heard was right, that would seem to rule out any kind of bolt action rifle for both of the last two shots, although there is of course the possibility that what they heard was just an echo, but then if so, how do we account for three shell casings at LHOs firing point, and the lack of any witness testimony of a fourth shot.

If the SS agent really did fire the kill shot with an accidental discharge, that might account for LHO insisting that he did not kill JFK because he would known that he didn't fire it, but would have seen its impact. He would have thought that there was another shooter.
__________________
If you're not a scientist but you think you've destroyed the foundation of a vast scientific edifice with 10 minutes of Googling, you might want to consider the possibility that you're wrong.

Its TRE45ON season... convict the F45CIST!!
smartcooky is online now   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
Old 26th November 2015, 01:10 PM   #412
Sandy McCroskey
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 186
Smartcooky, you should read the thread. The time frame for the three shots is more like eight seconds. The target was virtually stationary from Oswald's viewpoint once the limo started down Elm Street. Etc. etc.
Sandy McCroskey 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
Old 27th November 2015, 02:06 AM   #413
Tolls
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 5,229
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
While I believe that LHO acted alone (i.e. that there was no conspiracy before the fact), I have always had difficulty in accepting that a man who was not considered a particularly good shot was able to fire a Carcano three times in 5.6 seconds and hit a target that was both receding and moving in both azimuth and elevation, and hit that target two out of three times at his first and only attempt.
Except that was the time between the neck shot and the head shot.
It has been accepted that the first shot is the one that missed, not the one in the middle. This gives at least 8 seconds (and up to 12, if the theory it occurred before Zapruder started filming is correct).
Tolls 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
Old 27th November 2015, 04:40 AM   #414
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 23,499
Once more...

Mannlicher Carcano 6 shots in 5.1 seconds

3 shots in 8 seconds is hardly a stretch, is it?
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon 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
Old 28th November 2015, 02:04 AM   #415
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 25,302
Originally Posted by Sandy McCroskey View Post
Smartcooky, you should read the thread. The time frame for the three shots is more like eight seconds. The target was virtually stationary from Oswald's viewpoint once the limo started down Elm Street. Etc. etc.
Hang on! LHO is on the 6th floor of a building (at an elevation of at least 320 feet) shooting down at a target that moves away from him, starting at 170 feet away, moving to 270 feet away over the period of time of the shots. Therefore, The shoot down angle starts at at least 60° below horizontal.....Elm Street ain't that steep!!

Every simulation I have ever seen shows that from LHO's point of view, the target angle changes up by 10° and to the right at an angle of about 45° over the 6 or so seconds

Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
Once more...

Mannlicher Carcano 6 shots in 5.1 seconds

3 shots in 8 seconds is hardly a stretch, is it?
At a stationary target, using a well-set up bench rest and we have no indication of how accurate he was.

Hell, I could shoot that fast with a .303 Lee-Enfield if I didn't actually have to aim and hit anything!


Look, I'm not saying this guy has got it right, but there are some questions that are not adequately answered or explained by the official story.

The Dallas PD collected many witness statements on Nov. 22, 1963

1. How do we account for all the witness statements from people who say they heard two shots in quick succession at the time of the head shot? Echoes? If so, why didn't all three shots echo, why just the last one?

2. How do we account for all the witness statements from people who say they smelled gun smoke at ground level?

3. How do we account for all the witness statements from people who say they saw a Secret Service agent with a rifle in his hand?

Of course, the JFK:TSG narrative also raises its own awkward questions... how could an AR15 accidentally discharge without civilian witnesses near the following car hearing it? I also think that the Bronson film pretty much kills the idea that George Hickey could have fired that AR15 since it shows that at the time JFK was shot in the head, GH still had not stood up.
__________________
If you're not a scientist but you think you've destroyed the foundation of a vast scientific edifice with 10 minutes of Googling, you might want to consider the possibility that you're wrong.

Its TRE45ON season... convict the F45CIST!!
smartcooky is online now   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
Old 28th November 2015, 06:22 AM   #416
Border Reiver
Philosopher
 
Border Reiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6,726
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Hang on! LHO is on the 6th floor of a building (at an elevation of at least 320 feet) shooting down at a target that moves away from him, starting at 170 feet away, moving to 270 feet away over the period of time of the shots. Therefore, The shoot down angle starts at at least 60° below horizontal.....Elm Street ain't that steep!!
I don't know how tall the buildings are where you live, but the sixth floor of a building should be around 52 feet above the ground. http://www.oakville.ca/assets/2011%2...elevations.pdf

The Pythagorean theorem then tells us the first shot is about 178 feet and the last is about 274 feet, less than 100 yards for both shots.

Quote:
At a stationary target, using a well-set up bench rest and we have no indication of how accurate he was.



Hell, I could shoot that fast with a .303 Lee-Enfield if I didn't actually have to aim and hit anything!
The Lee enfield is a fast bolt action rifle and the Commonwealth armies used to do the mad minute 15 shots in a minute with all the bullets on paper. LHO's accuracy or speed is not superhuman.
__________________
Questions, comments, queries, bitches, complaints, rude gestures and/or remarks?
Border Reiver 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
Old 28th November 2015, 11:56 AM   #417
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 23,499
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Hang on! LHO is on the 6th floor of a building (at an elevation of at least 320 feet) shooting down at a target that moves away from him, starting at 170 feet away, moving to 270 feet away over the period of time of the shots. Therefore, The shoot down angle starts at at least 60° below horizontal.....Elm Street ain't that steep!!

Every simulation I have ever seen shows that from LHO's point of view, the target angle changes up by 10° and to the right at an angle of about 45° over the 6 or so seconds



At a stationary target, using a well-set up bench rest and we have no indication of how accurate he was.

Hell, I could shoot that fast with a .303 Lee-Enfield if I didn't actually have to aim and hit anything!


Look, I'm not saying this guy has got it right, but there are some questions that are not adequately answered or explained by the official story.

The Dallas PD collected many witness statements on Nov. 22, 1963

1. How do we account for all the witness statements from people who say they heard two shots in quick succession at the time of the head shot? Echoes? If so, why didn't all three shots echo, why just the last one?

2. How do we account for all the witness statements from people who say they smelled gun smoke at ground level?

3. How do we account for all the witness statements from people who say they saw a Secret Service agent with a rifle in his hand?

Of course, the JFK:TSG narrative also raises its own awkward questions... how could an AR15 accidentally discharge without civilian witnesses near the following car hearing it? I also think that the Bronson film pretty much kills the idea that George Hickey could have fired that AR15 since it shows that at the time JFK was shot in the head, GH still had not stood up.
I briefly chatted with that very guy on another forum eons ago. IIRC the range was 600 yards feet, 5 hits but the hang fire was a miss.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...

Last edited by Agatha; 30th November 2015 at 10:46 AM. Reason: Edited yards to feet at poster's request.
abaddon 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
Old 28th November 2015, 12:37 PM   #418
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 25,302
Originally Posted by Border Reiver View Post
I don't know how tall the buildings are where you live, but the sixth floor of a building should be around 52 feet above the ground. http://www.oakville.ca/assets/2011%2...elevations.pdf
That's my bad. I misread elevation as height in the specifications, however, the sixth floor would be closer to 80 feet. The top of the first floor is almost 20 feet above the ground.



Originally Posted by Border Reiver View Post
The Pythagorean theorem then tells us the first shot is about 178 feet and the last is about 274 feet, less than 100 yards for both shots.
I agree, but that is still a considerable shoot-down angle at a target moving up and to the right from the shooter's POV

Originally Posted by Border Reiver View Post
The Lee enfield is a fast bolt action rifle and the Commonwealth armies used to do the mad minute 15 shots in a minute with all the bullets on paper. LHO's accuracy or speed is not superhuman.
That's one shot every four seconds. The video is showing a rate of 70 shots per minute, not 15

I have both shot and drilled (on a parade ground) with the Lee-Enfield, the full stock version. Actually, my grandfather was a "filer" at the small arms factory Enfield. Middx where they were made.
__________________
If you're not a scientist but you think you've destroyed the foundation of a vast scientific edifice with 10 minutes of Googling, you might want to consider the possibility that you're wrong.

Its TRE45ON season... convict the F45CIST!!
smartcooky is online now   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
Old 30th November 2015, 05:14 AM   #419
HSienzant
Philosopher
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Never Mind
Posts: 5,074
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
That's my bad. I misread elevation as height in the specifications, however, the sixth floor would be closer to 80 feet. The top of the first floor is almost 20 feet above the ground.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...depository.jpg
The height of the sixth floor window sill was determined by the FBI in 1964. It was, is and will remain 60.7 feet above the street at the corner of Elm and Houston.

They used that, and the known distance of eyewitness Howard Brennan from the building to determine Brennan's line of sight to the shooter in the sniper's nest window. They determined it was 120.2 feet -- 40 yards -- from Brennan to the window.

http://www.history-matters.com/archi...ol22_0439a.htm

Hank
__________________
I have never ”refused” to provide evidence. I provide evidence if requested to do so in a specific and relevant manner.

Hanks ”method” [of requesting evidence] is not going to [get me to] provide any evidence since it has a completely different purpose. To create the the illusion of me not providing evidence when requested to do so.
- Manifesto
HSienzant 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
Old 1st December 2015, 04:20 PM   #420
manifesto
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,906
Anyone here who knows what happened with HSCA's acoustic studies and a 95% probable conspiracy?
manifesto 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
Old 1st December 2015, 09:05 PM   #421
manifesto
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,906
Anyone here who knows what happened to HSCA's acoustics studies? They confers at least one second rifle shot from the gassy knoll.

Shouldn't the Justice Department initiate a new broad investigation trying to solve the conspiracy?
manifesto 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
Old 3rd December 2015, 07:55 AM   #422
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 24,911
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
Shouldn't the Justice Department initiate a new broad investigation trying to solve the conspiracy?
The Justice Department did open a new investigation on the basis of the acoustic evidence from the HSCA. They found that the sound on the tape alleged to be an additional shot did not actually occur at the time of the firing from the Depository. The HSCA investigators were mistaken about the timing. Since this was the only bit of evidence from which HSCA inferred there must have been a conspiracy, it's really a moot issue now.
JayUtah 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
Old 3rd December 2015, 10:23 AM   #423
manifesto
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,906
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
The Justice Department did open a new investigation on the basis of the acoustic evidence from the HSCA. They found that the sound on the tape alleged to be an additional shot did not actually occur at the time of the firing from the Depository. The HSCA investigators were mistaken about the timing. Since this was the only bit of evidence from which HSCA inferred there must have been a conspiracy, it's really a moot issue now.
Yes, they (NRC acoustic panel) got that from a musician, I know. But there are big problems with this as I see it:

1. The tapes was not in sync, depending on different possible factors.

2. The cross over-talk appears I believe five times över the ca five minutes of the recording and the closest cross over is spot on.

You have to consider the extraordinary high probability for five (not four) rifle shots appearing as they do on the recording. According to Donald Thomas there is P=1/100 000 for this configuration to be anything other than five typical rifle shots in the Dealey Plaza that day.


The teams from BB&N and Queens College where the world leading in acoustics at the time. They solved the shooting at Kentucky State Uni, designed the sonar systems for US Navy's nuclear submarines and mobile real time sniper detection, among other things.

The panel you are referring to included exactly zero nil experts on acoustic analysis.

Never wondered why?
manifesto 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
Old 4th December 2015, 11:10 AM   #424
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 24,911
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
According to Donald Thomas there is P=1/100 000 for this configuration to be anything other than five typical rifle shots in the Dealey Plaza that day.
If you're familiar with Thomas' work then why did you ask whether the HSCA results should have motivated a Dept. of Justice investigation? Thomas specifically studied their results. And now that you are familiar with Thomas' work, can you tell us what subsequent researchers found to be his error?
JayUtah 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
Old 5th December 2015, 02:27 AM   #425
manifesto
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,906
HSCA's acoustic evidence of JFK conspiracy?

I feel that this subject needs its own thread.

Why did not the Justice Department follow up on the HSCA recommendation and initiate an investigation on the probable conspiracy behind the assassination of president John F. Kennedy?

I know that a NRC acoustic panel came to the conclusion that a cross talk appeared to refute the HSCA findings of five shots (not four) recorded on the DPD dictabelt. This was plain wrong though. There is five instances of cross talk on the ca five minutes recording from a stuck microphone and none of them is in perfect sync. One of them, the one closest to the shots are spot on and refutes NRC's findings.

Donald Thomas says that the probability for the five echo configurations being something other than typical rifle shots in Dealey Plaza is P=1/100 000. Thats is, if you are disputing the HSCA findings you have two choices:

1. Find flaws in the HSCA acoustics findings.

2. Find some other data/incidents that's even more improbable being wrong.

NRC couldn't do "1", so they tried "2" after being tipped of by a musician, but as I said, they where wrong and that contradicts the HSCA analysis.

The HSCA's two research team was world leading in acoustic analysis, solving the Kent. State shooting, inventing the sonar system for US Navy's nuclear submarines and real time mobile sniper detection for urban warfare.

The NRC acoustic panel included two Nobel prize winners but none was an expert on acoustics. What a peculiar bias, don't you think?

Last edited by manifesto; 5th December 2015 at 03:17 AM.
manifesto 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
Old 5th December 2015, 02:47 AM   #426
calebprime
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,001
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F...belt_recording

I'm satisfied that the Dictabelt recording has been discredited. It was weak evidence to begin with. People are too credulous about sound.
calebprime 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
Old 5th December 2015, 03:12 AM   #427
manifesto
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,906
Originally Posted by calebprime View Post
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F...belt_recording

I'm satisfied that the Dictabelt recording has been discredited. It was weak evidence to begin with. People are too credulous about sound.
On what grounds has it been "discredited" and by whom?
manifesto 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
Old 5th December 2015, 04:16 AM   #428
calebprime
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,001
Make your case, if you like.
calebprime 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
Old 5th December 2015, 04:25 AM   #429
manifesto
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,906
Originally Posted by calebprime View Post
Make your case, if you like.
HSCA has already made my case. You are disputing it. On what grounds?
manifesto 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
Old 5th December 2015, 04:57 AM   #430
turingtest
Mistral, mistral wind...
 
turingtest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Embedded and embattled, reporting from Mississippi
Posts: 5,203
Originally Posted by calebprime View Post
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F...belt_recording

I'm satisfied that the Dictabelt recording has been discredited. It was weak evidence to begin with. People are too credulous about sound.
Not even really sound, not even quite echoes; "impulse patterns" is what the whole thing turns on. One of the scientists of the NAS who studied the recording said it was "probably static"; it's one thing for the CTists to hang their hats on static, that's the basic methodology of CT, but it's quite another to suggest the US government should waste more taxpayer money chasing the ghosts of echoes to satisfy them.
__________________
I'm tired of the bombs, tired of the bullets, tired of the crazies on TV;
I'm the aviator, a dream's a dream whatever it seems
Deep Purple- "The Aviator"

Life was a short shelf that came with bookends- Stephen King
turingtest 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
Old 5th December 2015, 05:32 AM   #431
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 34,249
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
HSCA has already made my case. You are disputing it. On what grounds?
Sorry, are we talking about the dictabelt recording of a transmission of unknown origin, whose validity has been flatly denied by the man whose motorbike it was supposed to have come from, but has been assumed by conspiracy theorists to have been from near the Presidential limousine because that's where they want it to come from? And this from the movement that disputes the chain of custody on every piece of evidence they don't like the look of, on whatever grounds they can dream up? Motes and beams spring to mind; the chain of custody on this evidence is non-existent. There's no reason to suppose it was recorded from anywhere within earshot of the assassination.

Dave
__________________
There is truth and there are lies.

- President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021
Dave Rogers 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
Old 5th December 2015, 05:35 AM   #432
manifesto
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,906
Originally Posted by turingtest View Post
Not even really sound, not even quite echoes; "impulse patterns" is what the whole thing turns on. One of the scientists of the NAS who studied the recording said it was "probably static"; it's one thing for the CTists to hang their hats on static, that's the basic methodology of CT, but it's quite another to suggest the US government should waste more taxpayer money chasing the ghosts of echoes to satisfy them.
Yes, impulse patterns. You need those if you are a bat or if you need to in real time locate a sniper in Basra.

No one in the NAS acoustic panel knew anything about acoustics analysis. You take their "expertise" on what? Your gut?
manifesto 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
Old 5th December 2015, 06:01 AM   #433
manifesto
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,906
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Sorry, are we talking about the dictabelt recording of a transmission of unknown origin, whose validity has been flatly denied by the man whose motorbike it was supposed to have come from, ...
Ah, you mean McLain? Yes. You take his subjective 'expertise' instead of careful research from the top two of the the worlds leading research teams in acoustics analysis?

Why?


Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
but has been assumed by conspiracy theorists to have been from near the Presidential limousine because that's where they want it to come from?
No, not assumed. Carefully researched by the top two world leading research teams in acoustics analysis. And no, I do not want people get killed by evil conspiracies, all I want is the truth.

Heard of that?


Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
And this from the movement that disputes the chain of custody on every piece of evidence they don't like the look of,
So, chain of custody is an over estimated concept?


Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
on whatever grounds they can dream up?
You are the one dreaming, making a fool of yourself. I'm here to help you.


Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Motes and beams spring to mind; the chain of custody on this evidence is non-existent. There's no reason to suppose it was recorded from anywhere within earshot of the assassination.

Dave
You do not need a chain of custody in this case. The patterns are unique. It's impossible to fake them. Sorry, not completely impossible. There is a 1/100 000 possibility that the patterns isn't five typical rifle shots fired from behind (four) the limo and from the front (one), the grassy knoll in Dealey Plaza ca 12:00 on nov 22 1963.

You are willing to take that chance?

Last edited by manifesto; 5th December 2015 at 06:06 AM.
manifesto 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
Old 5th December 2015, 06:05 AM   #434
turingtest
Mistral, mistral wind...
 
turingtest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Embedded and embattled, reporting from Mississippi
Posts: 5,203
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
Yes, impulse patterns. You need those if you are a bat or if you need to in real time locate a sniper in Basra.

No one in the NAS acoustic panel knew anything about acoustics analysis. You take their "expertise" on what? Your gut?
"Expertise" was not my point; consilience, the filtering out of static from meaningful signal, was.
__________________
I'm tired of the bombs, tired of the bullets, tired of the crazies on TV;
I'm the aviator, a dream's a dream whatever it seems
Deep Purple- "The Aviator"

Life was a short shelf that came with bookends- Stephen King
turingtest 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
Old 5th December 2015, 07:05 AM   #435
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 34,249
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
Ah, you mean McLain? Yes. You take his subjective 'expertise' instead of careful research from the top two of the the worlds leading research teams in acoustics analysis?

Why?
Because the recording is supposed to come from his bike. The eyewitness on the spot denies the validity of the basic premise behind the evidence.

Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
You do not need a chain of custody in this case.
You just blew all your credibility. No evidence is of any value unless you know where it came from.

Dave
__________________
There is truth and there are lies.

- President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021
Dave Rogers 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
Old 5th December 2015, 07:46 AM   #436
turingtest
Mistral, mistral wind...
 
turingtest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Embedded and embattled, reporting from Mississippi
Posts: 5,203
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
Ah, you mean McLain? Yes. You take his subjective 'expertise' instead of careful research from the top two of the the worlds leading research teams in acoustics analysis?

Why?



No, not assumed. Carefully researched by the top two world leading research teams in acoustics analysis. And no, I do not want people get killed by evil conspiracies, all I want is the truth.

Heard of that?


So, chain of custody is an over estimated concept?


You are the one dreaming, making a fool of yourself. I'm here to help you.


You do not need a chain of custody in this case. The patterns are unique. It's impossible to fake them. Sorry, not completely impossible. There is a 1/100 000 possibility that the patterns isn't five typical rifle shots fired from behind (four) the limo and from the front (one), the grassy knoll in Dealey Plaza ca 12:00 on nov 22 1963.

You are willing to take that chance?
What you're here on this forum for is one thing- we can agree or disagree (or even agree to disagree) on the evidence and what it shows, no harm, no foul. But you apparently want a (presumably official) re-re-re-investigation of a whole event, and a conclusion about it based on total consilience, because of one isolated and only possibly anomalous data point- your not liking the NAS analysis doesn't make the anomaly more meaningful in context.

Look, I've been to Dealey Plaza-

- and the idea that a conspiracy that wanted to remain a hidden one could have, or would have, put a rifleman in such an exposed spot as the knoll (or even a Badgeman behind the fence right next to it) is ludicrous. You need more than just this one disputed data-point to justify the expense of continued investigation. Realistic trajectories, unaccounted-for bullet fragments, independent and convergent eyewitness testimony that puts a man with a rifle there- c'mon, you need consilience to overturn consilience, and your stand-alone "impulse patterns" aren't gonna get you there.
__________________
I'm tired of the bombs, tired of the bullets, tired of the crazies on TV;
I'm the aviator, a dream's a dream whatever it seems
Deep Purple- "The Aviator"

Life was a short shelf that came with bookends- Stephen King
turingtest 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
Old 5th December 2015, 08:15 AM   #437
manifesto
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,906
Originally Posted by turingtest View Post
"Expertise" was not my point; consilience, the filtering out of static from meaningful signal, was.
So you are saying that HSCA's experts didn't know the difference between statics and echo patterns?

Last edited by manifesto; 5th December 2015 at 08:30 AM. Reason: technical
manifesto 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
Old 5th December 2015, 08:22 AM   #438
manifesto
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,906
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Because the recording is supposed to come from his bike. The eyewitness on the spot denies the validity of the basic premise behind the evidence.
Yes, but eyewitness is not hard evidence. That goes for DPD in particular.


Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
You just blew all your credibility. No evidence is of any value unless you know where it came from.

Dave
Is this a blanket statement? The acoustic signature i unique and if it fits the experimental data (test firing in D Plaza) with a P = 1/100 000 you pretty much know where it came from.
manifesto 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
Old 5th December 2015, 08:28 AM   #439
manifesto
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,906
Originally Posted by turingtest View Post
What you're here on this forum for is one thing- we can agree or disagree (or even agree to disagree) on the evidence and what it shows, no harm, no foul. But you apparently want a (presumably official) re-re-re-investigation of a whole event, and a conclusion about it based on total consilience, because of one isolated and only possibly anomalous data point- your not liking the NAS analysis doesn't make the anomaly more meaningful in context.

Look, I've been to Dealey Plaza-

- and the idea that a conspiracy that wanted to remain a hidden one could have, or would have, put a rifleman in such an exposed spot as the knoll (or even a Badgeman behind the fence right next to it) is ludicrous. You need more than just this one disputed data-point to justify the expense of continued investigation. Realistic trajectories, unaccounted-for bullet fragments, independent and convergent eyewitness testimony that puts a man with a rifle there- c'mon, you need consilience to overturn consilience, and your stand-alone "impulse patterns" aren't gonna get you there.
If the acoustic analysis says there is five rifle shots on the dictabelt and a conspiracy, well, a critic has three choices:

1. Show thats something is wrong with the investigation.

2. Show other secondary data that contradicts the finding and with a stronger confidence.

3. Don't give a ****.


Wich is it?
manifesto 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
Old 5th December 2015, 08:36 AM   #440
Gawdzilla Sama
121.92-meter mutant fire-breathing lizard-thingy
 
Gawdzilla Sama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Northern St. Louis County, Missouri.
Posts: 42,180
So the "two gunners" people are down to counting echoes?
__________________
Guns that are instantly available for use are instantly available for misuse.
World War II Diplomatic and Political Resources
Hyperwar, WWII Military History
Buying conspiracy books is a voluntary tax on stupid.
Gawdzilla Sama 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
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:17 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.