ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events 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!

Closed Thread
Old 12th February 2018, 07:07 AM   #161
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Springwood, NJ
Posts: 29,268
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
I didn't find anything compelling about the comments here from the last couple of days. You can't get away with stating something without basis because you put it in a long rambling wall of text.
You've not said anything compelling that points to conspiracy. Maybe it would help you if you were to answer the numerous outstanding questions which you've consistently run away from.

Until then, you've not made a case for whatever it is you're claiming and the prevailing theory still prevails as it is the one with a consilience of evidence behind it.

If you do have some other theory which would better explain the consilience of evidence, you may present it here.
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 12th February 2018, 08:51 AM   #162
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 4,574
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
I didn't find anything compelling about the comments here from the last couple of days. You can't get away with stating something without basis because you put it in a long rambling wall of text.
So you're saying that we can dismiss Pat Speer's article you previously cited simply by saying it isn't all that compelling and calling it a long rambling wall of text?

Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Here is some history behind who saw what on the X-rays regarding a purported defect 4-5 inches above the EOP.
http://www.patspeer.com/chapter18%3Ax-rayspecs
Thanks for the tip!

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

Last edited by HSienzant; 12th February 2018 at 10:30 AM.
HSienzant 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 12th February 2018, 12:51 PM   #163
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 9,202
Micahjava pretty much exhibits no more than SOPs right out of the CT playbook...

1. Find a study, experiment or article that contains some of the words that show it relates to the subject.

2. Ignore the professionally or scientifically attained results and conclusions.

3. Draw his own conclusions, ones that are totally at odds with the data or information therein.

4. Ignore any data or information that doesn't support his case, and quote some words or a phrase from the study, experiment or article, completely out of context to support his case.

Then, when someone points out the the study, experiment or article not only doesn't support his case, but actually refutes his case, and wants to ask him some hard questions about it, run away and pretend it never happened. After a suitable period of time, come back and refute the article as if he never posted it in the first place.

I've seen this same behaviour over and over with Apollo Moon landing deniers, Holocaust deniers, 9/11 truthers, et al. Nothing new to see here!
__________________
As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
- Henry Louis Mencken - Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920
smartcooky 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 12th February 2018, 06:04 PM   #164
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 4,574
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Micahjava pretty much exhibits no more than SOPs right out of the CT playbook...

1. Find a study, experiment or article that contains some of the words that show it relates to the subject.

2. Ignore the professionally or scientifically attained results and conclusions.

3. Draw his own conclusions, ones that are totally at odds with the data or information therein.

4. Ignore any data or information that doesn't support his case, and quote some words or a phrase from the study, experiment or article, completely out of context to support his case.

Then, when someone points out the the study, experiment or article not only doesn't support his case, but actually refutes his case, and wants to ask him some hard questions about it, run away and pretend it never happened. After a suitable period of time, come back and refute the article as if he never posted it in the first place.

I've seen this same behaviour over and over with Apollo Moon landing deniers, Holocaust deniers, 9/11 truthers, et al. Nothing new to see here!
And it's funny you should mention this, because it's also exactly what MicahJava's cited source (Pat Speer) does in the article by Pat Speer that MicahJava cited here in this post:
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Here is some history behind who saw what on the X-rays regarding a purported defect 4-5 inches above the EOP.
http://www.patspeer.com/chapter18%3Ax-rayspecs
Perhaps MicahJava thinks that's the appropriate way to do CT "research"?

Let me mention just a few examples of Speer putting his opinion over that of his cited experts.

EXAMPLE ONE: Cites Mantik and Wecht as experts, then overrules their findings:
"Should one think I'm exaggerating the obviousness of Livingstone's mistake, then one should consider that Dr.s Cyril Wecht and David Mantik offered a similar rebuttal to the "missing face argument" of Livingstone and others in The Assassinations, published 2003. They wrote: "most of the x-rays in the beam are absorbed not by the bone, but rather by the brain itself. The dark area should instead have suggested to them that brain, rather than skull, was missing in this area."

Now, to be clear, I'm not claiming Wecht and Mantik as unerring experts on the x-rays.

Actually, far from it. While Wecht and Mantik observed that Kennedy was laying on his back when x-rayed, and that the brain in such case would settle on the back of his head, they also expressed doubt that the damage to Kennedy's brain observed at autopsy was significant enough to explain this "settling". On this, however, I believe they are mistaken..."



EXAMPLE TWO: Cites Dr. Peter Cummings as an expert, then overrules his findings: "On November 13, 2013, PBS broadcast a new program on the Kennedy assassination, NOVA: Cold Case JFK. While much of the program was wasted trying to prop up the single-bullet theory, the ending of the program held a big surprise. Dr. Peter Cummings, a Massachusetts forensic pathologist, visited the National Archives to view the Kennedy assassination medical evidence. He came out with a surprising conclusion. He concluded that the x-rays suggested that the fatal bullet entered low on the head, as determined at autopsy. A quick graphic showed why he came to this conclusion. Cummings believed the large fracture running along the back of the skull derived not from the large defect, as I suspect, but from the entrance by the EOP, and that the lateral fracture heading from the supposed cowlick defect was a subsequent fracture, and part of an eggshell or spiderweb fracturing pattern, in which primary fractures from the defect are connected by secondary fractures running between them.

In other words...Cummings AGREED with Robertson (and presumably Ubelaker) that the lateral fracture from the supposed cowlick entrance came to a stop at the vertical fracture heading into the large defect! Well, this completely undercuts the long-held (supposedly official) conclusion the fatal bullet entered at the cowlick!

Of course, it also undercuts my suspicion that the vertical fracture derived from the large defect, and that the large defect came first. This led me, then, to consider the possibility the bullet entered near the EOP, sent fractures up the back of the head, and then exploded out of the large defect, pretty much as described in the autopsy report.

But only pretty much. The report makes it clear that the largest fractures derived from the large defect. In Cummings' and apparently Robertson's interpretation of the x-rays, the bullet's impact in the occipital region creates a small entrance hole and massive fractures that stretch upwards to the vertex of the skull. I'm skeptical this happened..."



EXAMPLE THREE: After demonstrating (he says) Mantik's unreliability and (he says) untrustworthiness, he cites Mantik's conclusions and says he agrees with him: "Now, to be clear, on this particular point I concur with Dr. Mantik. He was apparently the first to notice it, he deserves credit for it, and he is absolutely correct--CE 843, the fragment Humes claimed he'd removed from behind Kennedy's eye, bears no resemblance to the club-shaped fragment so many assume he'd recovered from the forehead.

In his essay 20 Conclusions After Nine Visits, Mantik writes that this is “One of the most shocking contradictions in the entire case.The shape of the larger piece of metal is nothing like the supposedly identical piece seen on the x-rays. No measurements taken on this piece can explain its bizarre transformation in shape. Most likely, it is not the piece taken from the skull…I saw only two, not three, at NARA. The largest, however, bears no resemblance to the corresponding image on the x-rays. The larger piece shown here is pancake shaped and was 107 mg. On the other hand the x-rays show a club shaped object—on both x-ray views. The studies done by the FBI on this object—spectrographic analysis and neutron activation analysis, required only a tiny amount at most, about 1 mg, according to one of the FBI experts…No one has offered an explanation for this flagrant discrepancy in shape of the largest piece. Sampling of the material is not an explanation. The possibility of substitution of fragments, an issue actually raised by the neutron activation expert (Dr. Vincent Guinn), remains wide open.”

While it might seem strange my quoting Mantik on this issue, seeing as I've repeatedly demonstrated his lack of credibility..."


This then, is the sum and substances of the article cited by MicahJava as CT "research". It's not dissimilar to the same argumentation style MJ demonstrates here, posting some expert's finding, then over-ruling those findings and substituting his own lay opinion in its place. Or claim expert so-and-so is unreliable and not credible, and then citing his findings as true.

It's a bizarre methodology for getting at the truth, without a doubt.

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

Last edited by HSienzant; 12th February 2018 at 06:09 PM.
HSienzant 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 12th February 2018, 06:47 PM   #165
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,500
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
I didn't find anything compelling about the comments here from the last couple of days. You can't get away with stating something without basis because you put it in a long rambling wall of text.
At any point will you explain how one of your favorite sources (Pat Speer) acknowledges that a single 6.5 x 52R projectile can cause a catastrophic headwound as in JFK's case but you don't accept that conclusion?
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"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 12th February 2018, 06:48 PM   #166
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 18,091
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Micahjava pretty much exhibits no more than SOPs right out of the CT playbook...

1. Find a study, experiment or article that contains some of the words that show it relates to the subject.

2. Ignore the professionally or scientifically attained results and conclusions.

3. Draw his own conclusions, ones that are totally at odds with the data or information therein.

4. Ignore any data or information that doesn't support his case, and quote some words or a phrase from the study, experiment or article, completely out of context to support his case.

Then, when someone points out the the study, experiment or article not only doesn't support his case, but actually refutes his case, and wants to ask him some hard questions about it, run away and pretend it never happened. After a suitable period of time, come back and refute the article as if he never posted it in the first place.

I've seen this same behaviour over and over with Apollo Moon landing deniers, Holocaust deniers, 9/11 truthers, et al. Nothing new to see here!
There is also the phenomenon of the "no-claimer". Something, anything else must have happened. No idea what, just something else. Those wingnuts are hard to nail down since they don't have an actual claim to start with. It is an intentional tactic. Hurl the holy hand grenade of Antioch in the vain hope that something happens.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon 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 14th February 2018, 09:19 AM   #167
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,500
Our hero is studiously avoiding this thread while posting nonsense on other possible CT's to keep their hand in.

Must be a rough position to be in when your supply of nonsense runs out on one subject and you're forced to cut and paste on a whole new area of ignorance.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"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 14th February 2018, 11:34 AM   #168
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 9,202
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
Our hero is studiously avoiding this thread while posting nonsense on other possible CT's to keep their hand in.

Must be a rough position to be in when your supply of nonsense runs out on one subject and you're forced to cut and paste on a whole new area of ignorance.
I pointed this out in the thread he transparently created for the sole purpose of running away to... unfortunately the posts "got removed".

Go figure
__________________
As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
- Henry Louis Mencken - Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920
smartcooky 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 19th February 2018, 02:21 PM   #169
bknight
Muse
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 916
I've been away for about 21 days (that's 3 weeks for MJ) and find he still has nothing to say that has any evidence nor anything new. Give it up MJ, Oswald and only Oswald,shot JFK. No evidence points to anyone else, plain and simple.
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 19th February 2018, 04:47 PM   #170
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,500
Originally Posted by bknight View Post
I've been away for about 21 days (that's 3 weeks for MJ) and find he still has nothing to say that has any evidence nor anything new. Give it up MJ, Oswald and only Oswald,shot JFK. No evidence points to anyone else, plain and simple.
They are very busy being wrong on another subject.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"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 19th February 2018, 06:49 PM   #171
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 9,202
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
They are very busy being wrong on another subject.

__________________
As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
- Henry Louis Mencken - Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920
smartcooky 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 20th February 2018, 02:16 PM   #172
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 3,218
Whelp...since it's just the grownups in the room now, I'll post this story, hot off the press:

http://www.hsvvoice.com/news/2018022...ation---part-i

It's about Secret Service Agent Mike Howard who " was the advance agent in Fort Worth on Nov. 21 and the morning of Nov. 22, he was in the room when suspect Lee Harvey Oswald was interrogated and later protected Oswald’s family for a week following the assassination."

This looks like part one, but this highlight is an instant classic:

Quote:
After the planes left for Washington, D.C., Howard was told to return to Fort Worth to interview a suspect.
The suspect had been seen at a filling station with a rifle and scope in the backseat of his vehicle. Police found him and took him in for questioning. They were getting little information from him until Howard arrived. He entered the interrogation room and sat down in front of him. The man said the rifle was his father’s and he had gotten it from a repair shop. While at the store he decided to purchase a shotgun, thus the guns in the car. Howard asked him what he was doing in Dallas. “He said none of your business,” Howard said. At that point an exhausted Howard had enough of the cocky suspect, pulled his revolver, cocked the hammer back and convinced the man it would be in his best interest to talk, which he did. Turns out the suspect had picked up a girl in Dallas and spent the night in a hotel. Thereafter the man was released.

On top of the macho awesomeness, this anecdote shows that law enforcement was pulling in suspects from everywhere, and not just focused on framing Oswald.

Real history is fun.
__________________
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 20th February 2018, 11:20 PM   #173
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,500
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
Whelp...since it's just the grownups in the room now, I'll post this story, hot off the press:

http://www.hsvvoice.com/news/2018022...ation---part-i

It's about Secret Service Agent Mike Howard who " was the advance agent in Fort Worth on Nov. 21 and the morning of Nov. 22, he was in the room when suspect Lee Harvey Oswald was interrogated and later protected Oswald’s family for a week following the assassination."

This looks like part one, but this highlight is an instant classic:




On top of the macho awesomeness, this anecdote shows that law enforcement was pulling in suspects from everywhere, and not just focused on framing Oswald.

Real history is fun.
Agent Howard sounds like he was a real world close cousin of Pete Boundurant, the fictional character created by James Ellroy for his Underworld USA trilogy.

When the fictional Big Pete encountered individuals that wouldn't talk, he'd remove all the rounds from his wheelgun (except one) and would give them the Russian roulette conversation encouragement treatment.

It worked in the fictional world.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"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 21st February 2018, 03:38 AM   #174
Wolrab
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,372
1963 was 18 years after WWII. Huge numbers of men and women in their thirties (and younger) up were a bit...harder than most Americans today.
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov
Wolrab 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 21st February 2018, 08:10 AM   #175
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,500
Originally Posted by Wolrab View Post
1963 was 18 years after WWII. Huge numbers of men and women in their thirties (and younger) up were a bit...harder than most Americans today.
That could be the understatement of the year because to survive the war they first had to survive The Depression.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"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 21st February 2018, 01:37 PM   #176
Wolrab
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,372
True dat.
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov
Wolrab 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 21st February 2018, 04:09 PM   #177
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 9,202
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
Agent Howard sounds like he was a real world close cousin of Pete Boundurant, the fictional character created by James Ellroy for his Underworld USA trilogy.

When the fictional Big Pete encountered individuals that wouldn't talk, he'd remove all the rounds from his wheelgun (except one) and would give them the Russian roulette conversation encouragement treatment.

It worked in the fictional world.

I know what you're thinking. "Did he fire six shots or only five?" Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement, I've kinda lost track myself. But being this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and would blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question...'Do I feel lucky?'...Well, do ya, punk?
__________________
As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
- Henry Louis Mencken - Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920
smartcooky 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 23rd February 2018, 05:38 AM   #178
Disbelief
Master Poster
 
Disbelief's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,598
Maybe MJ is putting the finishing touches on his theory that combines all the known evidence, instead of planning a fringe reset.
__________________
Zensmack (LastChild, Laughing Assassin, RazetheFlag, Wastrel, TruthbyDecree) - Working his way up the sock puppet chain, trying to overtake P'Doh. Or, are they the same?

Quote me where I said conspiracists use evidence. - mchapman
Disbelief 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 23rd February 2018, 11:38 AM   #179
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,849
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Further, from the link that you provided!

"4.1 Test Conditions

The shot sequence was unknown to both of the observers. Because repeats of certain shots were requested during the sequence, I was also uncertain - despite knowing the planned sequence.

We requested three motorcycles to be running during the test to provide some background noise that would approximate the original listening conditions in Dealey Plaza. Unfortunately, these newer motorcycles were not very noisy, but the shots were so loud that any reasonable level of background noise would have been low in comparison with the shots themselves. Our listening conditions were, therefore, essentially representative of those at the time of the assassination, except for our being able to hear some very-low-level, long-delay echoes that originally might have been inaudible.

Our observers did know that there were only two possible locations for the marksman, whereas there was considerably more uncertainty on this issue at the time or the assassination.

Signal uncertainty of this kind generally does not seriously degrade the accuracy or Judgments, but it does depend on the number or potential alternatives. In this case, as we shall see, the localization reports made by the trained listeners were, for the most part, or general areas, rather than specific windows or a building. The total number or potential locations was not, therefore, large and, thus, was likely to be representative of localization responses given at the time of the assassination.

4.2 Analysis of Observers’ Localization Responses I
The descriptive comments made by the observers are difficult to compare with any degree of precision. However, there was clear agreement in their reports with respect to the apparent loudness or the sounds and echoes and the apparent size of the acoustic image. After each test shot, we asked the two observers to guess whether the shot was fired from the TSBD or the knoll, independent of what the apparent locus might be. Table IV is an analysis of this forced-choice data."

https://www.dropbox.com/s/3u5lymw44d...leIV.png?raw=1

Now, if am understanding this table correctly, three sequences of shots were fired randomly from either the TSBD or the Grassy Knoll. The test subjects were told only to choose between TSBD or Grassy Knoll as the source of each shot

In the first sequence
Dr Wightman correctly identified the locations of all 12 shots
Dr. McFadden correctly identified 11 out of 12 locations... he got one wrong

In the second sequence
Dr Wightman correctly identified 11 out of 15 locations... he got four wrong
Dr. McFadden correctly identified 14 out of 15 locations... he got one wrong

In the third sequence
Dr Wightman correctly identified the 19 out of 25 locations... he got six wrong
Dr. McFadden correctly identified 23 out of 25 locations... he got two wrong

So, out of 57 shots altogether, Dr, Wightman misidentified the location of the shots ten times (17.5% fail rate) and Dr. McFadden misidentified the locations of the shot 4 times (7% fail rate). Under ideal conditions, knowing that the test shots were only coming from either the 6th floor of the TSBD or the Grassy knoll, these two expert witnesses, still managed to get it wrong 14 times between them.



Well, I've just done that for him... and guess what? It doesn't support your claim at all. Do you still stand by your claim that a shot from the TSBD could not be mistaken for a shot from the Grassy Knoll?
If you torture the data, it'll admit to anything. You have to be an honest person and assess all of the evidence instead of rearranging the content of the HSCA earshot experiment to make it seem like you have a chance.

The table you didn't show:



Here are the pages which show Dr. Wightman and Dr. McFadden wrote a knoll answer for a shot from the depository. See how sure they were about where the shot originated:












Out of 50 gunshots fired. And it depends on where they were standing in Dealey Plaza.

Compare that to the situation in Dealey Plaza where multiple knoll witnesses swore they were sure and reacted as such. You need a better explanation for the perceived loud report(s) from the knoll area. Right now you have no case.

Last edited by MicahJava; 23rd February 2018 at 11:42 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 23rd February 2018, 12:03 PM   #180
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Springwood, NJ
Posts: 29,268
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Compare that to the situation in Dealey Plaza where multiple knoll witnesses swore they were sure and reacted as such. You need a better explanation for the perceived loud report(s) from the knoll area. Right now you have no case.
Now all you have to do is show evidence for a grassy knoll shooter that can trump the consilience of evidence for Oswald's three shots.

When can we expect that?
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 23rd February 2018, 12:05 PM   #181
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,849
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
So the wheel of CT nonsense was spun and it landed on March 2017.

Here's a bit of the previous run MJ took at earwitness accounts and the acoustics involved:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...postcount=2893

MJ

What are you talking about? If the noise caused by a subsonic bullet moving through the air is louder than the noise caused by the muzzle blast, the sound of the shot will be distorted. And earlier I provided a book that talked about how silencers can disperse the sound of the muzzle blast itself.

I first heard of this "opposite direction" phenomenon on the JFK section of the London Education Forum from user and gun enthusiast Robert Prudhomme. I Googled and browsed around gun forums and saw corroboration for this, where not only can the use of noise-suppressors in conjunction with supersonic ammunition distort the noise of a shot to make it difficult to locate it's origin, but in some cases it can actually sound like the shots are coming from the opposite direction of the shooter. Here are some gun nuts talking about it:


snipped...

My answer, from March 2017

Your complete lack of knowledge in the subject matter. You are trying to find (in your mind) a seemingly plausible explanation of facts not in evidence.

My first hands-on experience with suppressors was in the 1960's. I held a SOT license from the late 1970's until the late '80's and manufactured cans. My first hand knowledge of the subject matter is extensive.

You persist in attempting to crowbar nonsense into the established evidence based on a patent misunderstanding of how individuals perceive sound.

A suppressor as a mechanical device is not the controlling factor that confuses earwitnesses. Earwitnesses are fully capable of mis-identifying sounds and the source of those sounds.

That is why the earwitness accounts you wish to hang your hat on are pretty much worthless.

The smartest suppressor designer of my generation had a sales technique that was and is unprecedented. He would take people on a tour of various areas of New Orleans and fire examples of his suppressed pistols in public areas and inside a particular hotel. One of the venues involved firing a pistol from a balcony into a safe backstop over the heads of people doing their thing down at street level.

The people gettin' their drink on paid no attention to the overhead projectiles, sonic and sub-sonic.

Suppressed or non-suppressed, individuals often make mistakes regarding sound.

Earwitness accounts are wholly subjective. If that wasn't the case, there wouldn't be so many accounts of gunshots sounding like firecrackers.

Try these:

http://komonews.com/news/local/heard...was-a-shooting

http://patch.com/illinois/chicago/gu...ell-difference

The earwitnesses involved filter what they heard through their experience, and more people are familiar with the sounds of firecrackers than are experienced in the sounds of gunfire and the sound of a passing supersonic or sub-sonic projectile.

XXXXXX

MJ should I just repost everything you ignored last time around on this issue?
Edited by jsfisher:  ..snip.. Edited for compliance with rules 0 and 12 of the Membership Agreement.


You can't deny facts that are so common. No big words and enter bars to inflate your crappy wall of text is going to change the laws of physics.

Noise-suppressors can distort the noise of both the muzzle blast of the weapon, A noise suppressor can make a muzzle blast sound like it's coming from somewhere else. This is a fact. Remember?



Witnesses can also confuse the origin of a gunshot if the sound of the supersonic bullet traveling through the air is louder than the muzzle blast. This is a fact. You can not deny it. I have shown that this is a known fact among gun enthusiasts. A noise-suppressor in conjunction with supersonic ammunition can even create an illusion like a gunshot is originating from the opposite direction. Don't pretend to forget.

Last edited by jsfisher; 25th February 2018 at 05:45 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 23rd February 2018, 12:07 PM   #182
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,849
Originally Posted by RoboTimbo View Post
Now all you have to do is show evidence for a grassy knoll shooter that can trump the consilience of evidence for Oswald's three shots.

When can we expect that?
RoboTimbo, do you grasp that the acoustical problem of the grassy knoll loud report is evidence against the single-assassin theory?
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 23rd February 2018, 12:24 PM   #183
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 3,218
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
If you torture the data, it'll admit to anything. You have to be an honest person and assess all of the evidence instead of rearranging the content of the HSCA earshot experiment to make it seem like you have a chance.

Out of 50 gunshots fired. And it depends on where they were standing in Dealey Plaza.

Compare that to the situation in Dealey Plaza where multiple knoll witnesses swore they were sure and reacted as such. You need a better explanation for the perceived loud report(s) from the knoll area. Right now you have no case.
Actually he does, we know where the shots came from (hint: 6th floor of the TSBD), and we know no gunshots were fired from the knoll. The ballistics and pathology has proved this.
__________________
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 23rd February 2018, 12:29 PM   #184
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,849
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
Actually he does, we know where the shots came from (hint: 6th floor of the TSBD), and we know no gunshots were fired from the knoll. The ballistics and pathology has proved this.
Axxman300, how many times do i have to tell you. There does not need to be a gunman on the knoll to explain the perceived loud report(s) originating from the knoll. A rear shooter may have been able to replicate this acoustical anomaly by using a noise-suppressor in conjunction with supersonic ammunition. The evidence gathered by the HSCA earshot experiment indicates that a high-powered rifle fired from the snipers nest cannot explain the knoll witnesses.
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 23rd February 2018, 12:35 PM   #185
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 3,218
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Are you frustrated because you're a nutter who used to sell guns and have literally nothing to contribute to a conversation about guns?
Clearly knows more about firearms than you do.

Quote:
You can't deny facts that are so common. No big words and enter bars to inflate your crappy wall of text is going to change the laws of physics.
Physics is against you.

Quote:
Noise-suppressors can distort the noise of both the muzzle blast of the weapon, A noise suppressor can make a muzzle blast sound like it's coming from somewhere else. This is a fact. Remember?
Hey, fringe reset!

Plus: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

No, not even close to true.

Quote:
Witnesses can also confuse the origin of a gunshot if the sound of the supersonic bullet traveling through the air is louder than the muzzle blast. This is a fact.
In your previous post you discount the obvious, and measured echo-chamber that it Dealey Plaza, and now you're going with the nimrod concept of suppressors, because people can't be confused by echoes, only suppressors.

Quote:
You can not deny it.
We can, we have the two bullets that struck JFK, and we have the Carcano that fired them. You lose.

Quote:
I have shown that this is a known fact among gun enthusiasts.
No you have not. You are currently arguing with at least three gun enthusiasts, including one who is also an instructor. So you fail.

Quote:
A noise-suppressor in conjunction with supersonic ammunition can even create an illusion like a gunshot is originating from the opposite direction. Don't pretend to forget.
The entire 75th Ranger Regiment will disagree with you on this one.
__________________
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 23rd February 2018, 12:37 PM   #186
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 3,218
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Axxman300, how many times do i have to tell you. There does not need to be a gunman on the knoll to explain the perceived loud report(s) originating from the knoll. A rear shooter may have been able to replicate this acoustical anomaly by using a noise-suppressor in conjunction with supersonic ammunition. The evidence gathered by the HSCA earshot experiment indicates that a high-powered rifle fired from the snipers nest cannot explain the knoll witnesses.
Nope.

The shots echoed off of the underpass. The acoustics is clear on this one.
__________________
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 23rd February 2018, 12:42 PM   #187
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,849
http://index-of.co.uk/Tutorials-2/Mo...id%20Truby.pdf

Found a digital copy of the book with the diagram posted above. It explains that a noise-suppressor can distort the perceived location of a muzzle blast. Page 11 of the pdf.

Look, an actual source. What do you have? Nothing, because you are a lone nutter before you are a gun enthusiast. I believe that lone nutters are delusional people. You need to show otherwise otherwise you're talking to a brick wall on a thread nobody lurks in. You can't cite yourself as a source because I know how you will say anything to waste people's time. Do not leave lone nutter disinformation for others to clean up.
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 23rd February 2018, 12:48 PM   #188
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,849
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
Nope.

The shots echoed off of the underpass. The acoustics is clear on this one.
The man who confused centimeters for millimeters is going to use himself as a source for that claim?
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 23rd February 2018, 12:51 PM   #189
bknight
Muse
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 916
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
Actually he does, we know where the shots came from (hint: 6th floor of the TSBD), and we know no gunshots were fired from the knoll. The ballistics and pathology has proved this.
Facts are stubborn aren't they MJ?.
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 23rd February 2018, 12:58 PM   #190
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,849
Originally Posted by bknight View Post
Facts are stubborn aren't they MJ?.
Minus one hitpoint.

Eats Lobby
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 23rd February 2018, 01:04 PM   #191
Steve
Illuminator
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 3,986
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post



Physics is against you.

Physics are irrelevant. MJ has an OPINION!
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve 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 23rd February 2018, 01:21 PM   #192
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Springwood, NJ
Posts: 29,268
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
RoboTimbo, do you grasp that the acoustical problem of the grassy knoll loud report is evidence against the single-assassin theory?
It seems beyond your ability to understand even the simplest of concepts. You need evidence for another shooter. What we DO have is evidence for three shots fired from Oswald's M-C from the sixth floor of the TSBD.

Pretty much exactly what you don't have.

Who was the phantom gunman that nobody saw? With what weapon and ammunition which seems to have struck nothing in Texas?

Don't you feel betrayed by your one CT website for not giving you those "facts"?
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 23rd February 2018, 01:22 PM   #193
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Springwood, NJ
Posts: 29,268
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The man who confused centimeters for millimeters is going to use himself as a source for that claim?
Have you learned what an "RN" is yet? How about a "gun"?

We're willing to teach you things but you have to meet us halfway and be able to learn.
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 23rd February 2018, 04:56 PM   #194
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 3,218
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The man who confused centimeters for millimeters is going to use himself as a source for that claim?
Also the man who read 90% of the JFK document dump from the National Archives, and the man who used to be on your side of the fence and knows all of your tricks...even ones you haven't used yet...
__________________
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 23rd February 2018, 05:29 PM   #195
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,849
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
Also the man who read 90% of the JFK document dump from the National Archives, and the man who used to be on your side of the fence and knows all of your tricks...even ones you haven't used yet...
Then why do you always act like you aren't already familiar with the most important evidence? I know you claim to have become a lone nutter on a journey of rediscovering the evidence, but you clearly don't know a lot of the material by memory.
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 23rd February 2018, 05:40 PM   #196
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,849
Originally Posted by HSienzant View Post
So you're saying that we can dismiss Pat Speer's article you previously cited simply by saying it isn't all that compelling and calling it a long rambling wall of text?



Thanks for the tip!

Hank
You really would benefit reading Speer's chapters on the X-rays. The whole history behind the formulation of the cowlick entry theory is documented. There's actual documented history in there, although that book recommendation may be as pointless as Spongebob explaining to Patrick that the food is in the can rather than the can itself.
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 23rd February 2018, 05:55 PM   #197
Tomtomkent
Philosopher
 
Tomtomkent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,595
Well this is interesting.
Strip away the misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the effect and capability of a suppressor and we appear to be left with a conspiracy that relies upon how easily somebody can be fooled when trying to identify the location of gunfire based on sound.

Which means the *reason* for believing in a conspiracy boils down to confusion that could just mean Oswald was alone where he was known to be, with the only rifle we have any evidence for having been fired that day...
__________________
@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 23rd February 2018, 05:56 PM   #198
Tomtomkent
Philosopher
 
Tomtomkent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,595
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
You really would benefit reading Speer's chapters on the X-rays. The whole history behind the formulation of the cowlick entry theory is documented. There's actual documented history in there, although that book recommendation may be as pointless as Spongebob explaining to Patrick that the food is in the can rather than the can itself.
Is there a reason you are unable to support your claims with primary sources?
__________________
@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 23rd February 2018, 06:10 PM   #199
bknight
Muse
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 916
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Minus one hitpoint.

Eats Lobby
This makes no sense, per usual from you.
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 23rd February 2018, 06:23 PM   #200
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,849
Originally Posted by Tomtomkent View Post
Is there a reason you are unable to support your claims with primary sources?
Because many of these testimonies and statements aren't available with OCR text, and I cannot copy and paste them directly here? There's nothing stopping you from going to history-matters or maryferrel.
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
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

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 04:10 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, 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.