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 !MOD BOX WARNING! , JFK assassination , Kennedy conspiracies

Closed Thread
Old 28th August 2017, 08:33 PM   #1441
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,087
Is our MJ a Del Shannon fan?

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


He seems to be running away from my earlier question:

Why are you ignoring this question?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...postcount=1388

Cite, and you still haven't answered my earlier question:

What's backspatter in relation to the JFK GSW?
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus

Last edited by BStrong; 28th August 2017 at 08:34 PM.
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 28th August 2017, 11:47 PM   #1442
Bubba
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 6,556
Originally Posted by HSienzant View Post
As it's a tough thing to replicate (nobody is exactly stepping forward to volunteer to be shot in the head), the explanations on the table will have to suffice. First off, consider that there are TWO reversals of motion in the Zapruder film, but the second is seen as unremarkable and not considered evidence of conspiracy - as that reversal happens when JFK rebounds off the back of the limo seat. The physics of that reversal is well known and readily accepted.

And secondly, although the refrain has always been "Back and to the Left", there's no evidence the body of JFK moves to the left at all. It appears that JFK, upon rebounding off the back seat, winds up no closer to Jackie than he was at the time of the head shot. So where's the evidence of movement to the left? It appears from here to be an illusion caused by JFK's leaning leftward toward JFK at the time of the headshot. JFK's leftward movement has always been *assumed*, not established.

So this backward motion has been explained in a number of ways:

1. As pointed out above by Sandy McCroskey, the head actually moves forward noticeably for one frame at the time of the impact of the bullet. This movement was discovered by Nobel Prize winning physicist Richard Feynman and discussed at length in David Lifton's book, BEST EVIDENCE.

2. The backward movement which starts only after the bullet has exited the head (and therefore cannot be due to the impact of the bullet, as the momentum would be transferred instantaneously) can be due to a neuromuscular reaction, as pointed out above by BKnight. This was tested by experiment using live goats and demonstrated in films shown to the Warren Commission.

3. The estimated mass carried forward by the cavitation of the head (times the speed pf the mass) is greater than the mass of the bullet (times the speed of the bullet) that struck the head. The physics of this exchange says, as I understand it, that the head should therefore move backward to maintain the stability of the system. This was determined by Nobel Prize winning physicist Luis Alvarez. This has been called "the Jet Effect".

4. The head can only go so far forward before it will reverse its motion. It appears JFK's chin is compressed pretty much as far as it can go into the chest by Zapruder frame 313. Like the physics of a basketball hitting a backboard and reversing its flight direction, JFK's head can be considered to be rebounding off the chest of JFK by Z-frame 313.

5. The rigid back brace held JFK upright, but prevented his body from moving forward too far. Once it reached the limits, it rebounded the body backward. This was mentioned by Tomtomkent above.

6. A bullet from somewhere to the front (not the knoll) caused the head to move backward. Let's examine this in detail:
(a) There's no evidence of a shooter in front of JFK, as there were a dozen men on the overpass directly in front of JFK at the time of the shooting, and none of them saw a shooter anywhere on the overpass.
(b) Further, there's no evidence of a shot striking JFK in the head from anywhere except from behind (as determined at the autopsy) and this finding was confirmed by neutral expert forensic pathologists who examined the extant autopsy materials in 1978 at the behest of the HSCA.
(c) There is also no damage evident to the skull from a shot at Z314, and no ejecta from a shot from the front.
(d) And all the fragments found anywhere that were large enough to be ballistically traceable where traceable to Oswald's weapon, so there's no evidence of a bullet fired from another weapon.
(e) The movement is too large to be caused by a bullet. It's not even close to the appropriate magnitude.

So it's my opinion this suggested explanation of a shooter striking JFK in the head from anywhere but the sixth floor southeast corner window of the Depository can be eliminated, as a shooter elsewhere in the plaza is the only one that has ZERO evidence in support, and no experts claiming this is what would happen. So I eliminate this explanation from consideration.

What explanations do you eliminate (if any) and why? Please be expansive in your response.

Thanks in advance.

Hank

Good explanation and answer to my question. Re your hilited request, sorry I'm just not that interested. I do appreciate your (and others) taking the time for my question.
Bubba 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 29th August 2017, 01:24 AM   #1443
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,087
Originally Posted by Bubba View Post
Good explanation and answer to my question. Re your hilited request, sorry I'm just not that interested. I do appreciate your (and others) taking the time for my question.
In that case, why are you posting in this thread?
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
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 29th August 2017, 05:07 AM   #1444
bknight
Master Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,733
Originally Posted by HSienzant View Post
ERRATA: Underlined should read Rockefeller Commission.
Here: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/olivier_a.htm

Hank
I very much wanted to indicate that the tissue etc. exiting the wound would move the head opposite of the ejection, but I had no links to studies. Thanks for the link and info Hank.
bknight 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 29th August 2017, 08:46 AM   #1445
SpitfireIX
Philosopher
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
Posts: 6,119
Originally Posted by Tomtomkent View Post
What I didn't get about the logic of the movie:
If the conspiracy can silence David Ferrie, by somehow giving him a brain aneurism, (and there is no known viable method of inducing an aneurism that appears natural and leaves no other trace) why waste it on a schlub nobody would believe, who is only suspected because he was in the civil air patrol at a different time to LHO, (and a photograph of him with a bunch of kids, one of whom somebody mistook for LHO)?

Why not use the Amazing-Natural-Causes-O-Matic-Ray on JFK, instead of a spate of shootings that leaves not only JFK, but Tippit and LHO dead?

[ct]Ferrie didn't actually die of an aneurysm; he was poisoned, but the local medical examiner was bribed and/or coerced to report that Ferrie's death was from natural causes. This wouldn't have worked with JFK; he was too high-profile, and there would have been too many important witnesses to his autopsy.[/ct]
__________________
"My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right."
--Carl Schurz
SpitfireIX 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 29th August 2017, 08:59 AM   #1446
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 SpitfireIX View Post
[ct]Ferrie didn't actually die of an aneurysm; he was poisoned, but the local medical examiner was bribed and/or coerced to report that Ferrie's death was from natural causes. This wouldn't have worked with JFK; he was too high-profile, and there would have been too many important witnesses to his autopsy.[/ct]
[ct]Though the same objection doesn't apply to the fact that all these important witnesses to the autopsy were for some reason unable to count as high as two.[/ct]

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 29th August 2017, 10:27 AM   #1447
MicahJava
Illuminator
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 3,027
The wound near the external occipital protuberance in the back of Kennedy's head, presumably of entrance, is more than enough evidence of conspiracy. At the moment, it seems like the existent photographs and X-rays on Kennedy's body are ambiguous to showing any kind of entrance wound at all, but the strong statements of the autopsy doctors and the six other autopsy witnesses are strong enough evidence because they corroborate each other appropriately.

Last edited by MicahJava; 29th August 2017 at 10:31 AM.
MicahJava 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 29th August 2017, 10:33 AM   #1448
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Rachel, KS
Posts: 33,127
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The wound near the external occipital protuberance in the back of Kennedy's head, presumably of entrance, is more than enough evidence of conspiracy. At the moment, it seems like the existent photographs and X-rays on Kennedy's body are ambiguous to showing any kind of entrance wound at all, but the strong statements of the autopsy doctors and the six other autopsy witnesses are strong enough evidence because they corroborate each other appropriately.
Put down the mashed peas and answer the questions asked.
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 29th August 2017, 10:42 AM   #1449
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,087
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The wound near the external occipital protuberance in the back of Kennedy's head, presumably of entrance, is more than enough evidence of conspiracy. At the moment, it seems like the existent photographs and X-rays on Kennedy's body are ambiguous to showing any kind of entrance wound at all, but the strong statements of the autopsy doctors and the six other autopsy witnesses are strong enough evidence because they corroborate each other appropriately.
Why are you ignoring this question?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...postcount=1388

Cite, and you still haven't answered my earlier question:

What's backspatter in relation to the JFK GSW?
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
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 29th August 2017, 11:09 AM   #1450
Bubba
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 6,556
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
In that case, why are you posting in this thread?

I dont want no trouble Marshall, I'm just passin through town. I'll be on my way presently sir.

Like I said:


Quote:
So anyway, I always wondered (didnt read up on it) what was the explanation for 'back and to the left' ?

As mentioned here, the 'hollywood' version was a factor, so I thought I'd come here and ask. Thank you kindly.

edit: meaning the hollywood hype was a factor

Last edited by Bubba; 29th August 2017 at 11:21 AM.
Bubba 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 29th August 2017, 11:54 AM   #1451
MicahJava
Illuminator
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 3,027
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
Why are you ignoring this question?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...postcount=1388

Cite, and you still haven't answered my earlier question:

What's backspatter in relation to the JFK GSW?
Backspatter is the blood and tissue that spurts out of a point of entry for a projectile.
MicahJava 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 29th August 2017, 12:05 PM   #1452
bknight
Master Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,733
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The wound near the external occipital protuberance in the back of Kennedy's head, presumably of entrance,
All of the evidence shown by the autopsy directly contradicts you presumption, it was an entrance wound.

Quote:
is more than enough evidence of conspiracy.
You have shown no evidence of a conspiracy, why do you continue to post your fantasies? Continued re-posting does not make it true.
Quote:
At the moment, it seems like the existent photographs and X-rays on Kennedy's body are ambiguous to showing any kind of entrance wound at all, but the strong statements of the autopsy doctors and the six other autopsy witnesses are strong enough evidence because they corroborate each other appropriately.
As many others have posted you haven't looked at all the x-rays and photographs. The strong statements are of an entrance wound (not plural)
from the back, right and higher.
bknight 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 29th August 2017, 12:09 PM   #1453
MicahJava
Illuminator
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 3,027
The entrance wound in the back of the head was low enough to remove the brain without disturbing said entrance wound in the skull. That is what Dr. Finck always said, starting with his Warren Commission testimony, then further clarified in his Bloomberg report, then consistently on and on until he died.
MicahJava 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 29th August 2017, 12:20 PM   #1454
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,087
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Backspatter is the blood and tissue that spurts out of a point of entry for a projectile.
You are the one that used the term. A generic description of backspatter doesn't explain why you used that term and what you believe the term means in the context of JFK's GSW to the head.

What does the backspatter as observed in the Z film tell us?
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus

Last edited by BStrong; 29th August 2017 at 12:22 PM.
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 29th August 2017, 12:21 PM   #1455
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Rachel, KS
Posts: 33,127
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The entrance wound in the back of the head was low enough to remove the brain without disturbing said entrance wound in the skull. That is what Dr. Finck always said, starting with his Warren Commission testimony, then further clarified in his Bloomberg report, then consistently on and on until he died.
How many of Oswald's shots hit Kennedy?
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 29th August 2017, 12:32 PM   #1456
Tomtomkent
Philosopher
 
Tomtomkent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,607
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The entrance wound in the back of the head was low enough to remove the brain without disturbing said entrance wound in the skull. That is what Dr. Finck always said, starting with his Warren Commission testimony, then further clarified in his Bloomberg report, then consistently on and on until he died.
And? You have yet to show this is inconsistent with the WC, given descriptions of how the brain was removed.
__________________
@tomhodden

Never look up an E-book because this signature line told you. Especially not Dead Lament (ASIN: B00JEN1MWY). Or A Little Trouble (ASIN: B00GQFZZQW).
Tomtomkent 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 29th August 2017, 12:42 PM   #1457
bknight
Master Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,733
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The entrance wound in the back of the head was low enough to remove the brain without disturbing said entrance wound in the skull. That is what Dr. Finck always said, starting with his Warren Commission testimony, then further clarified in his Bloomberg report, then consistently on and on until he died.
The entrance wound has nothing to do with the ease of removing the brain. The exit wound and the massive fracturing of the skull have everything to do with the ease of the brain removal.
You appear to be unable to use any reasoning powers when discussing the autopsy.
bknight 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 29th August 2017, 12:57 PM   #1458
MicahJava
Illuminator
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 3,027
Originally Posted by bknight View Post
The entrance wound has nothing to do with the ease of removing the brain. The exit wound and the massive fracturing of the skull have everything to do with the ease of the brain removal.
You appear to be unable to use any reasoning powers when discussing the autopsy.
The "cowlick" part of the skull was right beside the large defect (which you call the exit wound, although the autopsy doctors always stated that external beveling could only be observed on skull fragments that were previously blasted out in Dealey Plaza). So any entrance wound in the "cowlick" part of the skull would be among the portions of the skull removed to facilitate the removal of the brain.

Dr. Finck arrived at the autopsy after the brain had already been removed, and he always said that he could examine (and witness the photographing of) the small hole in the skull indicating an entrance. For many reasons, the entire top of the skull, including the "cowlick" part, is removed during an autopsy to facilitate removal of the brain.
MicahJava 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 29th August 2017, 01:00 PM   #1459
MicahJava
Illuminator
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 3,027
Originally Posted by Tomtomkent View Post
And? You have yet to show this is inconsistent with the WC, given descriptions of how the brain was removed.
The Warren Commission endorsed the EOP location for the entrance wound in the back of the head. The "cowlick" location for the entrance wound in the back of the head was developed by the Clark panel and the HSCA. The wide difference between the two locations was clearly addressed for the first time in Dr. Finck's 1969 testimony at the trial of Clay Shaw, in which he went on the record disagreeing with the Clark panel's upper "cowlick" placement of the entrance wound.

Last edited by MicahJava; 29th August 2017 at 01:13 PM.
MicahJava 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 29th August 2017, 01:15 PM   #1460
Tomtomkent
Philosopher
 
Tomtomkent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,607
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The Warren Commission endorsed the EOP location for the entrance wound in the back of the head. The "cowlick" location for the entrance wound in the back of the head was developed by the Clark panel and the HSCA. The wide difference between the two locations was clearly addressed for the first time in Dr. Finck's testimony at the trial of Clay Shaw, in which he went on the record disagreeing with the Clark panel's upper "cowlick" placement of the entrance wound.
Either you are unfamiliar with the WC, or your definition of "EOP" is a movable feast.

Quite aside from figure 29, the body of the WC makes it quite clear the autopsy is accurate. Mr Finck's later rememberances are less reliable than contemporary records, because they are just that, rememberances.
__________________
@tomhodden

Never look up an E-book because this signature line told you. Especially not Dead Lament (ASIN: B00JEN1MWY). Or A Little Trouble (ASIN: B00GQFZZQW).
Tomtomkent 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 29th August 2017, 01:20 PM   #1461
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Rachel, KS
Posts: 33,127
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The Warren Commission endorsed the EOP location for the entrance wound in the back of the head. The "cowlick" location for the entrance wound in the back of the head was developed by the Clark panel and the HSCA. The wide difference between the two locations was clearly addressed for the first time in Dr. Finck's 1969 testimony at the trial of Clay Shaw, in which he went on the record disagreeing with the Clark panel's upper "cowlick" placement of the entrance wound.
I notice you've stopped posting the picture of the entrance wound. Got spanked too many times on it?
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 29th August 2017, 01:48 PM   #1462
MicahJava
Illuminator
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 3,027
Originally Posted by RoboTimbo View Post
I notice you've stopped posting the picture of the entrance wound. Got spanked too many times on it?
Do you believe on faith that the red spot on the BOH photographs is THE entrance wound described by the doctors/the autopsy report? Drs. Humes, Boswell, Finck, the autopsy photographer John Stringer, and X-ray technician John Ebersole specifically denied that the red spot is an entry wound. Humes and Finck suggested that it could be a drop of blood, while Boswell stated to the HSCA and the ARRB that the red spot is an injury in the scalp related to the large head wound.

It is true that hair is parted in autopsy photographs to expose wounds that cannot be exposed by shaving hair, as shown in Scott a. Wagner's book Color Atlas of the Autopsy here:





But, as Boswell said, it could have been a wound in the scalp, albeit not THE entrance wound. And the autopsy doctors always said that the hair did not need to be parted or washed to expose THE entrance wound. Also notice how the wounds in the photographs shown above show, well, a hole! A wound devoid of scalp AND skull. The red spot on the BOH autopsy photographs appears little more than two-dimensional. Dr. Humes said that the ruler in the BOH photographs is to provide scale, not to measure the red spot. The fashion Kennedy's hair is parted also differs between photographs. Autopsy photographs have also gone missing. So no matter how you approach it, cowlickers are taking autopsy photographs out of context.
MicahJava 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 29th August 2017, 01:50 PM   #1463
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,087
C'mon MJ:

You are the one that used the term. A generic description of backspatter doesn't explain why you used that term and what you believe the term means in the context of JFK's GSW to the head.

What does the backspatter as observed in the Z film tell us?
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
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 29th August 2017, 01:51 PM   #1464
Tomtomkent
Philosopher
 
Tomtomkent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,607
Unfortunately, Micha Java's opinion of what a wound should, or should not, look like is not an accurate measure of if the photographs show a blatant wound.
__________________
@tomhodden

Never look up an E-book because this signature line told you. Especially not Dead Lament (ASIN: B00JEN1MWY). Or A Little Trouble (ASIN: B00GQFZZQW).
Tomtomkent 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 29th August 2017, 01:51 PM   #1465
MicahJava
Illuminator
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 3,027
Originally Posted by Tomtomkent View Post
Either you are unfamiliar with the WC, or your definition of "EOP" is a movable feast.

Quite aside from figure 29, the body of the WC makes it quite clear the autopsy is accurate. Mr Finck's later rememberances are less reliable than contemporary records, because they are just that, rememberances.
These are the drawings made under the supervision of Dr. Humes as an accurate representation of the small head wound:



It appears near the EOP. The Warren Commission endorsed the EOP wound. The existence of the EOP wound is a separate matter than the existence of more than one gunshot to Kennedy's head. The Warren Commission obviously endorsed only one gunshot to the head.

Last edited by MicahJava; 29th August 2017 at 01:57 PM.
MicahJava 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 29th August 2017, 01:54 PM   #1466
MicahJava
Illuminator
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 3,027
Originally Posted by Tomtomkent View Post
Unfortunately, Micha Java's opinion of what a wound should, or should not, look like is not an accurate measure of if the photographs show a blatant wound.
Okay, well not only was Dr. Pierre Finck experienced in gunshot wound autopsies before the assassination, he was a participant in the actual autopsy of JFK, and other gunshot wound autopsies afterwards. He always said the red spot on the BOH photographs was not the entry wound. Deal?
MicahJava 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 29th August 2017, 02:16 PM   #1467
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 23,499
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
These are the drawings made under the supervision of Dr. Humes as an accurate representation of the small head wound:

https://i.imgur.com/cM8BeTz.png

It appears near the EOP. The Warren Commission endorsed the EOP wound. The existence of the EOP wound is a separate matter than the existence of more than one gunshot to Kennedy's head. The Warren Commission obviously endorsed only one gunshot to the head.
How many do YOU endorse?
__________________
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 29th August 2017, 03:12 PM   #1468
Axxman300
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,863
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The "cowlick" part of the skull was right beside the large defect (which you call the exit wound, although the autopsy doctors always stated that external beveling could only be observed on skull fragments that were previously blasted out in Dealey Plaza). So any entrance wound in the "cowlick" part of the skull would be among the portions of the skull removed to facilitate the removal of the brain.
You're make a lot of assumptions that are not supported by the evidence. More important is the fact that since the bulk of the autopsy photos remain restricted to public view you have no idea what they [the pathologists] actually saw, and to refute their testimony, and findings without any concrete counter evidence is ridiculous. I should throw in the fact that Pathologists have an additional 10 years of education before they get to practice, and you- a YouTube commando with a Google Tab are in no way qualified to counter anything they say on any level.

Quote:
Dr. Finck arrived at the autopsy after the brain had already been removed, and he always said that he could examine (and witness the photographing of) the small hole in the skull indicating an entrance. For many reasons, the entire top of the skull, including the "cowlick" part, is removed during an autopsy to facilitate removal of the brain.
Why is it so hard for you to grasp the concept of using a bone-saw to cut around the bullet hole? We have even posted links to Humes discussing how he had to "cut carefully" to remove the brain.

We get it, you need a conspiracy to hang your world view on, but if there was on involved with the murder of JFK you won't find it in Dealey Plaza. The ballistics alone slam the door on that party.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 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 29th August 2017, 03:27 PM   #1469
Axxman300
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,863
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
It is true that hair is parted in autopsy photographs to expose wounds that cannot be exposed by shaving hair, as shown in Scott a. Wagner's book Color Atlas of the Autopsy here:
Neat.

Which one is made by a 6.5x52mm bullet?

I'm guessing none of them.

The FBI and Secret Service had to buy Carcanos and shoot hundreds of rounds into various targets before they understood the performance of the bullet.

Quote:
But, as Boswell said, it could have been a wound in the scalp, albeit not THE entrance wound.
So he didn't know or couldn't recall.

Quote:
Also notice how the wounds in the photographs shown above show, well, a hole! A wound devoid of scalp AND skull.
The photos NOT of a 6.5x52mm round.

Quote:
The red spot on the BOH autopsy photographs appears little more than two-dimensional. Dr. Humes said that the ruler in the BOH photographs is to provide scale, not to measure the red spot
.

So they just took a photo of the back of the head for no reason?


Quote:
The fashion Kennedy's hair is parted also differs between photographs.
Weird, it's almost as if they had cut around the head, and peeled the scalp back to cut the skull cap off, and remove the brain, and pulled the scalp back into position for the pictures.

Wonder what that does to a guy's hairstyle?

Quote:
Autopsy photographs have also gone missing.
No. I've posted the 2004 inventory, and the negatives are still around.

Quote:
So no matter how you approach it, cowlickers are taking autopsy photographs out of context.
No we're not.

We haven't seen them, so we're not stupid enough to confuse conjecture with fact. We don't use them in context because we don't use them at all.

You're the guy posting them...just like the Bigfooters post the Patterson Film stills, you see what you want to see.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 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 29th August 2017, 05:22 PM   #1470
MicahJava
Illuminator
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 3,027
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
Why is it so hard for you to grasp the concept of using a bone-saw to cut around the bullet hole? We have even posted links to Humes discussing how he had to "cut carefully" to remove the brain
Drs. Humes and Boswell always said that virtually so sawing the skull was necessary to create a skull cavity large enough to remove the brain. The area of skull around the large defect was so damaged, that portions of skull bone would naturally separate in their hands. This allows little precision. Since the cowlick mark on the X-ray purported to be an entry wound is right beside the large defect, that area would have been among the portions of skull to come off.

Even if the skull was in a condition that allowed typical sawing, the "cowlick" portion of the skull would have to be among the areas separated, otherwise you could not separate or remove the brain.
MicahJava 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 29th August 2017, 05:29 PM   #1471
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Rachel, KS
Posts: 33,127
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Since the cowlick mark on the X-ray purported to be an entry wound is right beside the large defect, that area would have been among the portions of skull to come off.
Post your qualifications for making such a determination.

Quote:
Even if the skull was in a condition that allowed typical sawing, the "cowlick" portion of the skull would have to be among the areas separated, otherwise you could not separate or remove the brain.
Once you've posted your qualifications, I will stop thinking of your postings as devoid of substance.

This isn't on par with your expertise in firearms, is it?
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 29th August 2017, 07:05 PM   #1472
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,087
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Drs. Humes and Boswell always said that virtually so sawing the skull was necessary to create a skull cavity large enough to remove the brain. The area of skull around the large defect was so damaged, that portions of skull bone would naturally separate in their hands. This allows little precision. Since the cowlick mark on the X-ray purported to be an entry wound is right beside the large defect, that area would have been among the portions of skull to come off.

Even if the skull was in a condition that allowed typical sawing, the "cowlick" portion of the skull would have to be among the areas separated, otherwise you could not separate or remove the brain.
"Backspatter" you used the term more than once. Why can't you explain what it means in your own (presumably) words past a generic description?

If you can't explain what the words mean in the context you used them, the only reasonable answer is that you glom onto words and terms and use them without understanding what they mean.

Pretty sad, especially for somebody that favorably compares their intellectual position with Aristotle and Plato.

I think you may have more in common with The Sicilian Lawyer:

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
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
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 29th August 2017, 07:16 PM   #1473
MicahJava
Illuminator
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 3,027
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
"Backspatter" you used the term more than once. Why can't you explain what it means in your own (presumably) words past a generic description?

If you can't explain what the words mean in the context you used them, the only reasonable answer is that you glom onto words and terms and use them without understanding what they mean.

Pretty sad, especially for somebody that favorably compares their intellectual position with Aristotle and Plato.

I think you may have more in common with The Sicilian Lawyer:

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
The Z film shows no obvious backspatter from an entry in the back of the head. No significant debris is shown moving backwards. Although backspatter does disperse faster than forward spatter.
MicahJava 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 29th August 2017, 07:47 PM   #1474
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,087
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The Z film shows no obvious backspatter from an entry in the back of the head. No significant debris is shown moving backwards. Although backspatter does disperse faster than forward spatter.
You'd better go back to whatever Ctist website you picked this crap up from, because "backspatter" as you are applying it to the Z film is incorrect.

"Back Spatter" describes a type of arterial bleeding, but the application of forensic science involved in it's evaluation does not involve the evaluation of video footage. it is related to blood stains on materials or persons at the scene of a death or injury. It is not exclusive to projectile impacts only and falls into different categories of blood stains depending on the type of weapon used, climate, etc.

http://www.forensicsciencesimplified...rinciples.html

Blood spatter is categorized as impact spatter (created when a force is applied to a liquid blood source) or projection spatter (caused by arterial spurting, expirated spray or spatter cast off an object). The characteristics of blood spatter depend on the speed at which the blood leaves the body and the type of force applied to the blood source.

And further:

http://www.forensicsciencesimplified.../glossary.html

"Backspatter Pattern - A bloodstain pattern resulting from blood drops that traveled in the opposite direction of the external force applied; associated with an entrance wound created by a projectile."

To be fair, you or somebody else probably ran into this:

https://www.azflse.org/download.cfm?...loc=csiarizona

"Back Spatter -- Blood directed back towards the source of energy or force that caused the spatter"

Saw a nifty term that sounded all sciency, but didn't read the rest of the material that related back spatter to blood stain pattern analysis.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
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 29th August 2017, 08:08 PM   #1475
MicahJava
Illuminator
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 3,027
BStrong, your sources only use that wording because it is assumed that a gunshot wounding incident would not have a video of it happening.
MicahJava 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 29th August 2017, 09:31 PM   #1476
Axxman300
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,863
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Drs. Humes and Boswell always said that virtually so sawing the skull was necessary to create a skull cavity large enough to remove the brain. The area of skull around the large defect was so damaged, that portions of skull bone would naturally separate in their hands. This allows little precision. Since the cowlick mark on the X-ray purported to be an entry wound is right beside the large defect, that area would have been among the portions of skull to come off.

Even if the skull was in a condition that allowed typical sawing, the "cowlick" portion of the skull would have to be among the areas separated, otherwise you could not separate or remove the brain.
And yet they still sawed the skull cap off as per the standard autopsy protocol, as per Dr. Humes' statement. They cut where they had to cut, and worked around the damage where they could not cut, this is a painfully simple concept for everyone else reading this thread.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 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 29th August 2017, 09:36 PM   #1477
Axxman300
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,863
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
BStrong, your sources only use that wording because it is assumed that a gunshot wounding incident would not have a video of it happening.
So what's the percentage of headshots that occur on camera verses headshots where there are few or no witnesses (other than the killer)?

Just asking for my police friends to make their job easier in case there's some giant visual archive of murder they don't know about.

The great-but-sad thing about the United States is our collective knowledge of gunshot wounds to almost every part of the human body.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 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 29th August 2017, 09:38 PM   #1478
Axxman300
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,863
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The Z film shows no obvious backspatter from an entry in the back of the head. No significant debris is shown moving backwards. Although backspatter does disperse faster than forward spatter.
Which means that there was NO SECOND SHOT TO THE HEAD.

Thanks for playing
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 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 29th August 2017, 09:55 PM   #1479
Tomtomkent
Philosopher
 
Tomtomkent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,607
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
These are the drawings made under the supervision of Dr. Humes as an accurate representation of the small head wound:

https://i.imgur.com/cM8BeTz.png

It appears near the EOP. The Warren Commission endorsed the EOP wound. The existence of the EOP wound is a separate matter than the existence of more than one gunshot to Kennedy's head. The Warren Commission obviously endorsed only one gunshot to the head.
Are those the ONLY images in the WCR?
How close is that sketch to the "cowlick"?
Why is no wound in the "EOP" visible in the photographs?
__________________
@tomhodden

Never look up an E-book because this signature line told you. Especially not Dead Lament (ASIN: B00JEN1MWY). Or A Little Trouble (ASIN: B00GQFZZQW).
Tomtomkent 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 30th August 2017, 12:15 AM   #1480
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,087
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
BStrong, your sources only use that wording because it is assumed that a gunshot wounding incident would not have a video of it happening.
You (or some other CT monger) used the term "backspatter" because you or they didn't know what it means and had no idea that somebody else did know what the tern means and would call you out on your ignorance.

Par for the course with you in this thread.

Aristotle and Plato would not approve.

At some point even a train wreck comes to a stop, but you seem to be a perpetual motion machine of fail.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
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
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 10:17 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.