56 years later and still the WC apologists deny the conspiracy.

[Jack Trojan]

Your "high-tech" laser test will always produce false positives.



Reasonable person with a legitimate interest in the truth of the case don't want to be misled by magician tricks from conspiracy loons with set-agendas.

You actually don't have a basic understanding of geometry and physics, do you? Magician tricks? Why are you using my graphic for your ridiculous "slouching" argument? Have a surrogate slouch their ass off and show us how the lasers correctly identify the entrance/exit wounds. Your graphics tell us nothing. We know you are advocating JFK "slouching" to make the MB work, but you can't show us with more useless CGI because you can always twist it to support your LNer agenda!

Are you too cheap to buy a couple of lasers and a protractor and do the experiment for yourself? Costs less than your CAD s/w, unless you pirated it.

[Jack Trojan]

That's misleading. The bullet exit through the midline (or slightly left of same) at the lower neck at the front. This graphic has the bullet going through the frontal midline of the trachea.

If you say so. But that's not what all the medicos claimed and that includes the conspirators.

Not missing bone. But thanks for highlighting the air in the missile passage the HSCA consultants said was there.

So, you must believe the HSCA was correct and this was likely a conspiracy? Good to know.

ps. Humes concluded that the missile missed bone, which is why I put a straight line path thru JFK with no deflection. However, that means the missile entered at T1 and exited at C7, which is impossible if it came from the 6th floor of the TSBD. Maybe you want to reconsider? Or will your agenda prevent you from doing so?

[Michael Walton]

First you claim about the re-enactment photo: "The marks on the back are based on the measurements from the official autopsy and all are very accurate." Now you say "there is no report at all of any rear neck wound as marked in the area above the upper back wound in that reenactment photo".

We're trying to follow what you say but you throw out contradictions and now you've added an autopsy picture.

Now you're talking about the autopsy photo (I guess). Have you allowed for the back surface in the autopsy photo being photographed at a much more oblique angle than the re-enactment photo was taken at? A reasonable person wouldn't just take an autopsy photo and slap it onto some other photo without determining if the camera angles were similar.

That an autopsy photo was taken at a different camera angle than a motorcade photo seems a "real life" consideration. That Kennedy's posture in the motorcade was different than "perfect posture" seems a legitimate reflection of "real life".

You obviously have either a reading comprehension defect or can't keep track of running commentary. I feel sorry for you [eh, not really...]

If you can't stay on the ball here, then get off the field please. And here - find a copy as this may help...

[Michael Walton]

I don't agree with the methodology of this particular reenactment. You're the one presenting a reenactment, that is missing the proper ingredients, as the be-all and end-all of official government findings.

The jump seat makes all the difference whether you like it or not.

EDIT: 2:00pm EST

Sure, Bill, sure. So now we're into the methodology of it. LOL. And proper ingredients. Sounds rich. You can't have it both ways, Bill. You can't buy all into it while also disagreeing with methodologies and proper ingredients, Bill. If that's the case, what about the methodologies and proper ingredients of the Magic Bullet doing all it supposedly did? And so on...

We're getting into Patty Cake territory now. Sure, Bill, sure.

[Jerry Organ]

You actually don't have a basic understanding of geometry and physics, do you? Magician tricks? Why are you using my graphic for your ridiculous "slouching" argument? Have a surrogate slouch their ass off and show us how the lasers correctly identify the entrance/exit wounds. Your graphics tell us nothing. We know you are advocating JFK "slouching" to make the MB work, but you can't show us with more useless CGI because you can always twist it to support your LNer agenda!

Nothing would ever convince you. I merely expect reasonable visitors to the Forum to compare what we have both put forward.

Are you too cheap to buy a couple of lasers and a protractor and do the experiment for yourself?

Duncan would charge you absolutely nothing to add a sentence cautioning laser-test "experimenters" to conform to Kennedy's posture in the motorcade.

Costs less than your CAD s/w, unless you pirated it.

3D work I post (none in this topic so far, BTW) is done using SketchUp Make (free; can't afford the Pro version). Most of my 2D work is done using a $10 "PhotoImpact" disc I bought at a checkout over ten years ago. A good 3D artist can do more in Make than a mediocre 3D artist can do with programs costing hundreds and thousands.

You obviously have either a reading comprehension defect or can't keep track of running commentary. I feel sorry for you [eh, not really...]

If you can't stay on the ball here, then get off the field please. And here - find a copy as this may help...

Ewww! I'm quaking in my wellies. Looks like we got us another Cartoon Ernie.

[John Mytton]

Your "high-tech" laser test will always produce false positives.



Reasonable person with a legitimate interest in the truth of the case don't want to be misled by magician tricks from conspiracy loons with set-agendas.

 

I agree it's only reasonable to be fair and compare apples with apples but a lot of what the CT community does is deliberately paint a misleading picture of what happened.
Like above, they make a layman claim and demand that you prove them wrong, it's totally absurd, if Jack of all trades, master of none, was actually genuine he'd show us his "laser experiment" results and I have asked him plenty of times to show us but he just repeats the same demand that I prove him wrong over and over.

Another consideration is that Kennedy's well conditioned body shape is a factor and he wasn't some generic long necked skinny guy sitting on a chair.





And this demonstration is hardly a fair representation of reality and is downright criminal, how can Wecht honestly sleep at night? and it looks like these models are just teenagers, how dare Wecht expose these innocent young minds to such deception? and if it's at a school with kids in the audience then shame on him!



JohnM

[Bill Chapman]

How did the jump seat affect the MB bullet path thru JFK? If it can be shown that the trajectory of the MB thru JFK does not match the trajectory from the 6th floor of the TSBD, then Houston, we have a problem (smoking gun), which all you LNers conveniently ignore, for obvious reasons.

We're through the looking glass here. This comes down to basic geometry and proof that Oswald was not responsible for the MB.

Bump.

Do us all a solid and place JBC in the picture. You have to include the both of them if you are going to deny a twofer. Still, that drawing on your White Paper (apparently) is as generic as the JFK face sheet and means SFA to me.

However, I prefer photographs such as Croft with a 17 degree trajectory line applied. Close enough!

[John Mytton]

When both men are lined up directly back to the snipers nest window, at that EXACT same point in time in Zapruder in a fraction of a second we see;

Connally's jacket lapel explode forward.



As Kennedy raises his hand to his throat, Connally's right wrist, the same wrist that was struck by a bullet also reacts.



Both men are violently reacting simultaneously.



There's quite a bit of footage of the two men as they drove through Dallas and besides waving, at no time in this footage did they show these extreme reactions.

JohnM