Reply With Quote
meh... the video evidence says otherwise (including the fragments from JFK's skull that were blown behind him)...
neh. The autopsy shows he was clearly from behind.Oswald's shots through JFK's back and through his throat could have been fatal enough... BUT...
The reality of another shot fired at JFK from the front, invalidates the official story altogether... one that asserts as its primary argument, that Oswald acted alone... one that places Oswald in the book depository behind JFK.
Blatant denial of the obvious frontal attack on JFK (the physics is as clear as night and day in all the videos) is enough to warrant the placing of a ''conspiracy'' label on JFK's assassination, all in spite of the ''investigation's'' findings, tbh.
meh... the video evidence says otherwise (including the fragments from JFK's skull that were blown behind him)...
meh neh. I trust the autospy report more than I trust your eyes.
I don't know what Oswald's motive was, but JFK's head movement was consistent with getting shot from behind.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...48745546892501
I've seen that Penn & Teller clip before... in all their smugness (and much like the demonstration at Berkeley) they don't account for the rest of Kennedy's torso... It's easy to suggest that a 'toward-the-shooter' recoil effect exists when the simulated head 1) sits unconnected to anything that would resemble the resistance provided by the spine and the neck and 2) is completely motionless (not in any motion of its own), as would be the case of a passenger in a moving vehicle...
Since the setting in this simulation doesn't match the crime scene... the logical deductions drawn from the simulation don't fully apply (about the transfer of inertia)...
Also, if you look at the bullet they use in that demo, the nose of the bullet (bullet tip) is clearly tapered and pointed (not the round blunt shape from the bullets Oswald was using)...
Lastly, the type of exit wound shown in that simulation is exactly what Kennedy's death fotos reveal... except said exit wound was not found on the front of his head, clearly that pattern was seen on the posterior side of his head...
Last edited by Phenomanul; 11-15-2011 at 06:50 PM.
Good for you
Bad for your conspiracy theory.Good for you
Having made hundreds of head shots on various large animals over the years I can tell you that brain shots are tricky, especially with relatively low velocity rounds. It's not uncommon for the energy to get trapped in the brain cavity and rebound back through the entry wound making it look like a classic exit wound. Just sayin.
The car doesn't look to be accelerating too much until after his head is blown off, so I don't think the car's motion contributes much to the snap-back. I don't think the neck and spine should almost completely damp the sizable force backwards at the exit wound, but perhaps an expert like Agloco could chime in here.
EDIT: Do you find it an unreasonable assumption that the bullet is essentially exiting with a lot more mass than it entered with? Honest question; not trying to bait or anything like things can always look like on message boards.
Last edited by baseline bum; 11-15-2011 at 07:42 PM.
Oswald should never had had a shot....it's pretty clear there were elements within the SS which conspired to kill Kennedy...and Kennedy's body was autopsied before it reached Bethesda.....nothing that the doctors at Park Medical saw matched the official autopsy report....it was complete bogus...
Did Phenomanul just call someone else smug?
I remember reading somewhere that it's possible that Kennedy suffered a neuro-muscular reaction to the shot entering his skull. Sort of like a tonic-clonic seizure if you will. That might explain the motion of his head right after impact.
Assuming the car isn't accelerating at impact, we can treat this as an inertial frame of reference. As such we are free of so called "fic ious forces". Now the question is simply: Is the force vector of the car (and Kennedys head) significant when compared to the force vector of the bullet? Better put, does this difference between the two negate or marginalize the hypothesized "jet spray effect"?
I dunno the velocities of either tbh. I'd wager that the cars vector is quite small when compared to that of the bullet though. Get those and you can begin to explain things a bit better.
But that's exactly what I'm trying to tell you; Kennedy's whole body flung "back and to the left" from the bullet impact... all this well before the car began accelerating. The head moving toward Oswald's position? Possible... His whole body snapping in unison with his head towards Oswald? not as likely...
Except the bulk of Kennedy's brain trail (along with the fragments Mrs. Kennedy scrammbled to recover) flew backward... To me this suggests the exit wound was on the posterior side of his head... and that the bullet entry point was on Kennedy's right frontal lobe...
Even your Penn & Teller clip shows only minimal 'ejection' on the side of the entry point, with the exit material blasting its way through a much larger orifice, at high velocity... enough, say... to disperse fragments several feet away from the victim...
The bullet does exit along with more mass... I was never debating that... the ''mass'' however, was flung in the opposite direction of the official theory... that is, the exiting bullet, the exit brain fragments and Kennedy's body are all flung backward and towards his wife...
Last edited by Phenomanul; 11-16-2011 at 09:31 AM.
Did you hear how they dismissively ended the clip? "Second shooter my ass" sounds like smugness to me... so the adjective fits...
I tend not to direct profanity at anyone here unless they are being intentional jerks (Blake, clambake, etc...) and even then, it's uncommon for me to be driven to that point...
Fair enough... but that's not what the investigation claimed. They claimed that Kennedy's body 'slumped forward' from the shot, with the implied assertion that his shooter was behind him... The video, however, clearly shows Kennedy's entire body snapping backwards... why attempt to make a claim not supported by the video evidence, instead of just explaining Kennedy's motion from the get-go? In other words, why try to negate the inertial response seen on the clip ('back and to the left') with the argument that "his body slumped forward" instead? That approach was senseless...
Such approach only added fuel to the fire, because it expanded the ever-increasing list of people who's alibis kept changing, people who couldn't keep their story straight, or simply people who made statements that ran contrary to what was later revealed by the videos that began coming out... why go to such great lengths to hide something, if there wasn't anything to hide...?
The investigative committee could have attempted, for example, to suggest your noted explanation above as a possible reason for Kennedy's ''unnatural'' reaction to a rear impacting shot... instead the commission suggested he never moved backward (''that his head recoiled toward the shooter because...'')...
Last edited by Phenomanul; 11-16-2011 at 09:25 AM.
Doesn't the science say that Oswald had to be in two places at the same time to be the shooter or be the best sniper in the history of mankind? I think a conspiracy is highly possible. I would say I'm more confident that this was a conspiracy than 9/11 being an inside job. There is a lot of doubt in the evidence in my opinion that makes you wonder whether Oswald was the only shooter or if he was just a fall guy. I think it's funny how people get their panties in a wad if you question this . It's like you're suppose to believe everything the government tells you because they never lie to us.
The bad science says that.
Where are the options for LBJ, mob hit, and Fidel?
If you're going to start a conspiracy theory poll, you should at least hit all of the major ones.
rofl uncommon
for all the ones voting "government conspiracy", what part of the government do you feel killed another member of said "government" and why?
R.I.P. Kennedy... (48th year anniversary)
The original doctors disagree with that bogus autopsy.
C.I.A. For the changes he was making with the Fed Reserve. Breaking up CIA operations, wanting to end Vietnam.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
