Autopsy Photos and X-rays

[Louis Earl]

The famous "Brylcreem" photo of the intact back of the head was contradicted by everyone who saw the back of the head in Dallas. 

[John Mytton]

The famous "Brylcreem" photo of the intact back of the head was contradicted by everyone who saw the back of the head in Dallas.

Well actually there were at least two photos of the back of the Presidents head. When two of these stereoscopic photos are combined we see every pixel, skin crease, blemishes, individual hairs and general head shape is correctly depth mapped across both images meaning that both photos were taken of JFK's authenticated head and both show only a single bullet entrance wound.



And as for Dallas eyewitnesses, the very first eyewitnesses to be interviewed only hours later on TV all describe the same damage as seen in the Zapruder film, X Rays, Autopsy photos, etc etc..





JohnM

[Royell Storing]

Well actually there were at least two photos of the back of the Presidents head. When two of these stereoscopic photos are combined we see every pixel, skin crease, blemishes, individual hairs and general head shape is correctly depth mapped across both images meaning that both photos were taken of JFK's authenticated head and both show only a single bullet entrance wound.



And as for Dallas eyewitnesses, the very first eyewitnesses to be interviewed only hours later on TV all describe the same damage as seen in the Zapruder film, X Rays, Autopsy photos, etc etc..





JohnM

         Correction: What you should say is, "both photos were taken of................" the SAME HEAD.   

[John Mytton]

         Correction: What you should say is, "both photos were taken of................" the SAME HEAD.

No, it's always Kennedy. The HSCA did an extensive study on the authenticity of the Autopsy Photos and here is a few examples of their proof;

First of all they measured all the individual facial parts and by using photogrammetric rules they calculated the positions and distances between skin blemishes, creases, ears, eyes, neck, mouth, nose, chin etc.



For instance here's Kennedy's neck creases which line up from front to back.



And we also can see a random mark on Kennedy's back which is repeated in the top down photo.



When the entire set of autopsy photos is examined as a whole, like a jigsaw puzzle each photo has links in other photos.

Btw isn't getting some other guy and performing plastic surgery on him, then blowing his brains out a little extreme?

JohnM

[Ray Mitcham]

When the entire set of autopsy photos is examined as a whole, like a jigsaw puzzle each photo has links in other photos.

JohnM

But according to the people who took the photos, we haven't seen the entire set.

[Ray Mitcham]

So you agree that what we do have is authentic?

No.

[Royell Storing]

No, it's always Kennedy. The HSCA did an extensive study on the authenticity of the Autopsy Photos and here is a few examples of their proof;

First of all they measured all the individual facial parts and by using photogrammetric rules they calculated the positions and distances between skin blemishes, creases, ears, eyes, neck, mouth, nose, chin etc.



For instance here's Kennedy's neck creases which line up from front to back.



And we also can see a random mark on Kennedy's back which is repeated in the top down photo.



When the entire set of autopsy photos is examined as a whole, like a jigsaw puzzle each photo has links in other photos.

Btw isn't getting some other guy and performing plastic surgery on him, then blowing his brains out a little extreme?

JohnM

    The discussion centered on the "Brylcreem Photo", and  you then post photos of everything But the Brylcream Photo. It's obvious why.  Is it possible that what you are innocently labeling a, "Random mark on Kennedy's back" = BULLET HOLE?

[John Iacoletti]

    The discussion centered on the "Brylcreem Photo", and  you then post photos of everything But the Brylcream Photo. It's obvious why.  Is it possible that what you are innocently labeling a, "Random mark on Kennedy's back" = BULLET HOLE?

And his evidence that the "random marks" are "the same" is left as an exercise for the reader.  Much like the magic rifle gouge.