The Fundamental Problem

[Dillon Rankine]

Really...You want me to spell it out for you??    Any bullet traveling so slow with barely enough energy to penetrate a couple of inches of flesh would have to be fired from close range .....   Let's say a gun was fired behind JFK at his head.....But the cartridge had been under loaded with the wrong gunpowder.   So instead of the projectile emerging from the barrel at 950 fps it was only flying at 700fps.....  Naturally the bullet would not have the energy to hit the target (JFK's head) and would drop to a lower impact point....and it would not penetrate very deep into the muscle of his back .....

I was interested in where the shot came from when you thought it was close range.

None of your conclusions follow from your arguments; you?re just rambling a load of ?bull stuff?: ?according to me, if he didn?t load the gun properly it would drop to 700 ft/sec which wouldn?t penetrate the back very far because I said so and I?m me which means I?m right.? Making claims at this level of specificity requires some empiricism, actually prove what you?re saying. How do you expect anyone but yourself to believe this?

Give me an approx wound depth, rough details on the bullet (just to calculate KE), and a distance and some simple maths can tell whether or not you?re wrong.   

[Walt Cakebread]

I was interested in where the shot came from when you thought it was close range.

None of your conclusions follow from your arguments; you?re just rambling a load of ?bull stuff?: ?according to me, if he didn?t load the gun properly it would drop to 700 ft/sec which wouldn?t penetrate the back very far because I said so and I?m me which means I?m right.? Making claims at this level of specificity requires some empiricism, actually prove what you?re saying. How do you expect anyone but yourself to believe this?

Give me an approx wound depth, rough details on the bullet (just to calculate KE), and a distance and some simple maths can tell whether or not you?re wrong.

Making claims at this level of specificity requires some empiricism, actually prove what you?re saying. How do you expect anyone but yourself to believe this?

A person of average intelligence, with an ounce of commonsense, can understand that a weak load will not fire accurately....

[Dillon Rankine]

Making claims at this level of specificity requires some empiricism, actually prove what you?re saying. How do you expect anyone but yourself to believe this?

A person of average intelligence, with an ounce of commonsense, can understand that a weak load will not fire accurately....

Surely such a person would also figure out that such a round would hardly hit straight on (it?d yaw). Average IQ and common sense hardly give you a close range gunman with faulty gunpowder firing a special bullet creating a shallow wound at a subnormal velcoity.

[Jack Trojan]

14x14cm

What vertebrae is that? T1?

[Walt Cakebread]

Surely such a person would also figure out that such a round would hardly hit straight on (it?d yaw). Average IQ and common sense hardly give you a close range gunman with faulty gunpowder firing a special bullet creating a shallow wound at a subnormal velcoity.

such a round would hardly hit straight on (it?d yaw)

Mr Rankin, I'm sorry....IMO You lack the intelligence to debate this subject.....You seem to be stuck in the 6.5mm bullet groove....And think that a wound made by a tiny 1/4 inch bullet could be probed by an adult man's finger....  WAKE UP!

The bullet that would create a hole large enough to be probed by a man sure as hell would be a lot larger than 1/4 inch.... And a large bullet could be fired from a smooth bore gun and still fly fairly true at close range...."yaw" is something that happens to high velocity bullets fired from a rifled barrel....

[Dillon Rankine]

such a round would hardly hit straight on (it?d yaw)

Mr Rankin, I'm sorry....IMO You lack the intelligence to debate this subject.....

 

You seem to be suck in the 6.5mm bullet groove....And think that a wound made by a tiny 1/4 inch bullet could be probed by an adult man's finger....  WAKE UP!

The thing is........ Mr Walter....... I never actually....... said....any of that!

The bullet that would create a hole large enough to be probed by a man sure as hell would be a lot larger than 1/4 inch.... And a large bullet could be fired from a smoth bore gun and still fly fairly true at close range...."yaw" is something that happens to high velocity bullets fired fro a rifled barrel....

A claim so self-evident that we don?t need proof  howsoever could I be so dense? 

[Jerry Freeman]

From what I understand....

In the mid 1960?s, Humes confided to a personal friend that, as a once-secret, internal Columbia  Broadcasting System memo put it, ?Although initially in the autopsy procedure the back wound could only be penetrated to finger length, a probe later was made ? when no FBI men were present ? that traced the path of the bullet from the back going downwards, then upwards slightly, then downwards again exiting at the throat. One X-ray photo taken, Humes said, clearly shows the above, as it was apparently taken with a mental probe stick of some kind that was left in the body to show the wound?s path.?

  https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/How5Investigations/How5InvestigationsGotItWrong_1a.htm

[Jerry Freeman]

  I would say 99% of the CTers claims are nonsense. 

Oscar <<<<< paints 4 inch wide boards with a 16 inch wide brush. Probably..maybe...could be 50%? But my claims [not theories] are correct ...I think 
P.S. I forgot to add that this lone assassin claim is 100% nonsense.