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

[Jerry Organ]

Now you're getting it.

Laddie boy, we're all getting onto you.

You would never believe my photos were legit. This exp is for you to corroborate or refute your own graphics.

Oh, I'm pretty sure you're incapable of convincing PhotoShopping. What I believe is that your photos are authentic but they conflict with the President's posture in the motorcade. Perhaps we'll all see what controls are present, like a camera-operator and still model.

No, but it also doesn't represent a solution either. Unless you are a photogrammetrist applying a physics engine (CAD s/w), graphics can never give you the answer because at best they are a 3D projection on a 2D medium (screen). However, you can't fake a real surrogate.

Evidently a surrogate can sit anyway he wants and proclaim results without documentation. As far as we know, this is how you posed and the extent of your camera angle.



This sets a new standard. I can do 3D work and simply proclaim my results without publishing.

I'm not declaring anything.

     "What my experiment tells you is that it couldn't
      have happened the way the WC said it did."

We've gone thru the looking glass, alright.

I only proffer that this experiment is a means for you LNers to put your money where your mouth is and prove that the MB was possible. Just because you can't do it doesn't mean it was impossible, but if it prevents you from posting your graphics that don't tell us anything useful and certainly don't prove your point, then it will have been worth it.

Wow. It's now a cheat to utilize motorcade photos to demonstrate actual body positions. You're not Andrew Mason?

[Vincent Baxter]

Not only that, but also a contradiction, when one considers this is what he said next...

How in the world can Baxter argue that the shot has been proven, when next he says that it's impossible to re-enact the shot?

It's classic LN crap again; "I say the shot happened that way and since you can not prove it didn't happen, I win by default" Pathetic!

Not quite sure what you're point is here, Weidmann. It's comes across as if you're saying that the shot can't be proven to have happened simply because I've said it's impossible to accurately re-enact it. Maybe you need to reword your argument because at the moment that clearly just doesn't make any sense.

I'm not personally saying the shot happened that way, clearly I haven't done my own investigation into it and I'm nowhere even near qualified to do so even if I wanted to, but this was the official verdict given by a team of respected professionals who were qualified to do such an investigation. Now, when you take everything into account and the evidence and facts that have been laid out on this matter, I personally choose to believe that that was the way it happened.
Even the majority of CTs have long dismissed the magic bullet argument and acknowledge that Oswald (most likely) shot bullet CE399 from the 6th floor TBD window. Its the third and fatal shot that is where most people disagree.

All you seem to do is refute everyones opinion by saying "Facts? Where are your facts that this is 100% what happened?" offering absolutely no facts or counter argument yourself to prove otherwise. Yeah, I know you're going to come back with your usual "You said something so you need to prove it, I don't have to provide evidence to say it's not true" which is all very repetitive, lazy and extremely convenient for you, isn't it?

What do you actually believe? All you go on about is needing "facts" and considering there are very few 100% dead cert facts in this entire case people come to their own conclusions based on what information is out there. Are you totally on the fence with no opinion one way or the other until someone finally comes up with actual hard evidence?

All I've ever seen you do is dismiss everything you don't agree with by asking for "proof" and "evidence" without ever making any decent points or counter arguments yourself. Basically, Weidmann, you're just very boring.

[Martin Weidmann]

Not quite sure what you're point is here, Weidmann. It's comes across as if you're saying that the shot can't be proven to have happened simply because I've said it's impossible to accurately re-enact it. Maybe you need to reword your argument because at the moment that clearly just doesn't make any sense.

I'm not personally saying the shot happened that way, clearly I haven't done my own investigation into it and I'm nowhere even near qualified to do so even if I wanted to, but this was the official verdict given by a team of respected professionals who were qualified to do such an investigation. Now, when you take everything into account and the evidence and facts that have been laid out on this matter, I personally choose to believe that that was the way it happened.
Even the majority of CTs have long dismissed the magic bullet argument and acknowledge that Oswald (most likely) shot bullet CE399 from the 6th floor TBD window. Its the third and fatal shot that is where most people disagree.

All you seem to do is refute everyones opinion by saying "Facts? Where are your facts that this is 100% what happened?" offering absolutely no facts or counter argument yourself to prove otherwise. Yeah, I know you're going to come back with your usual "You said something so you need to prove it, I don't have to provide evidence to say it's not true" which is all very repetitive, lazy and extremely convenient for you, isn't it?

What do you actually believe? All you go on about is needing "facts" and considering there are very few 100% dead cert facts in this entire case people come to their own conclusions based on what information is out there. Are you totally on the fence with no opinion one way or the other until someone finally comes up with actual hard evidence?

All I've ever seen you do is dismiss everything you don't agree with by asking for "proof" and "evidence" without ever making any decent points or counter arguments yourself. Basically, Weidmann, you're just very boring.

Not quite sure what you're point is here, Weidmann.

Now, there's a surprise...

but this was the official verdict given by a team of respected professionals who were qualified to do such an investigation.

Are you serious or just oblivious to the facts? The Magic Bullet theory (it's not called that for nothing) was Arlen Specter's invention when they ended up with only two bullets to account for all the wounds. The alternative would have been more that three bullets and thus a conspiracy. And they didn't want to go there...

I personally choose to believe that that was the way it happened.

Great. That means what you believe can also be wrong which in turn means that anything you claim like "the shot has been proven" is just your belief and not worth a damn thing.

Even the majority of CTs have long dismissed the magic bullet argument and acknowledge that Oswald (most likely) shot bullet CE399 from the 6th floor TBD window.

Really? That's strange, because most CTs I know don't even believe that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was fired that day or ever was at Parkland Hospital.

All you seem to do is refute everyones opinion by saying "Facts? Where are your facts that this is 100% what happened?" offering absolutely no facts or counter argument yourself to prove otherwise.

Having an opinion is one thing, presenting it as fact (as most, if not all LNs do) is an entirely different matter. Facts always trump opinions. Don't claim something happened if you can't back it up with factual evidence.

Yeah, I know you're going to come back with your usual "You said something so you need to prove it, I don't have to provide evidence to say it's not true" which is all very repetitive, lazy and extremely convenient for you, isn't it?

Yes, it's also the way it should be. You make a claim, you prove it. What is it with guys like you? You just want to make wild and unsupported claims without being able to back them up with evidence? Ain't gonna happen!

What do you actually believe?

I believe that Kennedy and Tippit were both murdered and that there are (on both sides of the argument) individuals who are not able or willing to honestly discuss the case and who are only defending their biased opinions

All you go on about is needing "facts" and considering there are very few 100% dead cert facts in this entire case people come to their own conclusions based on what information is out there.

That's fair enough as long as those conclusions are not presented as "fact" and there is a willingness to discuss those conclusions with an open mind.

Are you totally on the fence with no opinion one way or the other

Yes, I have no predetermined opinion and in many ways, at this point in time, I couldn't care less if Oswald did it alone or if there was a conspiracy. I just want to try to find out for myself what actually happened. Not that it will make a damn bit of difference one way of the other, in the bigger scheme of things. Oswald has been dead for 56 years, history books have been written and the world keeps on turning regardless of my opinion. Which is exactly why I never give my opinion. I just want to examine the details of the case and for that I need facts!

All I've ever seen you do is dismiss everything you don't agree with by asking for "proof" and "evidence" without ever making any decent points or counter arguments yourself.

If that's all you've ever seen, than you haven't looked well and far enough. The notion that I dismiss something because I don't agree with it is absurd. I ask for proof and evidence to learn more about the substance of the argument being made. And as for "decent points or counter arguments", you really should check my posting history. When you do, you will not only find that you are wrong, but also that LNs very quickly run from the actual facts simply because they can not answer simple questions.

Basically, Weidmann, you're just very boring.

 

[Jack Trojan]

Laddie boy, we're all getting onto you.

Oh, I'm pretty sure you're incapable of convincing PhotoShopping. What I believe is that your photos are authentic but they conflict with the President's posture in the motorcade. Perhaps we'll all see what controls are present, like a camera-operator and still model.

Just when I thought you were getting it you prove me wrong. You're like a dog with a bone. Would you stop referencing my graphic like it was the results of my experiment. It was merely instructional for the set up for YOU to conduct the experiment yourself and slouch any goddamned way you like JUST LIKE YOU THINK JFK DID, and get the magic bullet wounds to line up with the lasers. GEEZUS!

Evidently a surrogate can sit anyway he wants and proclaim results without documentation. As far as we know, this is how you posed and the extent of your camera angle.



This sets a new standard. I can do 3D work and simply proclaim my results without publishing.

For Christsakes, my only claim was that I couldn't prove the MB was possible. BUT YOU CAN! If you comprehended any of this, that is.  I don't expect you to believe me and I especially don't expect you to believe my setup graphics are my results. How many times to I have to say that? A LNer says what?

     "What my experiment tells you is that it couldn't
      have happened the way the WC said it did."

We've gone thru the looking glass, alright.

Always an agenda with you LNers. Paranoid much? I give you the perfect chance to prove me wrong and make me eat crow and all you can do is spombleprofglidnoctobuns the bed.

Wow. It's now a cheat to utilize motorcade photos to demonstrate actual body positions. You're not Andrew Mason?

Yes, it is a cheat for you to use unregistered imagery from 2D film, ortho-rectify it and render a 3D CGI model in ArcGIS and use the physics engine to prove the Magic Bullet trajectory, unless you can actually do it? Can you? Way easier and cheaper using 2 lasers and a surrogate. After all, if you can get someone to make it work, then you win! Try that with a CAD app and if you succeed, I will eat a bug.

[Jerry Organ]

Just when I thought you were getting it you prove me wrong. You're like a dog with a bone. Would you stop referencing my graphic like it was the results of my experiment. It was merely instructional for the set up for YOU to conduct the experiment yourself and slouch any goddamned way you like JUST LIKE YOU THINK JFK DID, and get the magic bullet wounds to line up with the lasers. GEEZUS!

For Christsakes, my only claim was that I couldn't prove the MB was possible.

Now your claim is conditional, but before ...

    "What my experiment tells you is that it couldn't
      have happened the way the WC said it did."

BUT YOU CAN! If you comprehended any of this, that is.  I don't expect you to believe me and I especially don't expect you to believe my setup graphics are my results. How many times to I have to say that? A LNer says what?

This is the only imagery you've given us.

Always an agenda with you LNers. Paranoid much? I give you the perfect chance to prove me wrong and make me eat crow and all you can do is spombleprofglidnoctobuns the bed.

So if one does the experiment and the laser strikes match the wound sites from the JFK autopsy, one simply proclaims it and doesn't have to show their pictures?

Yes, it is a cheat for you to use unregistered imagery from 2D film, ortho-rectify it and render a 3D CGI model in ArcGIS and use the physics engine to prove the Magic Bullet trajectory, unless you can actually do it? Can you?

What are you talking about? Map-making?

Way easier and cheaper using 2 lasers and a surrogate. After all, if you can get someone to make it work, then you win! Try that with a CAD app and if you succeed, I will eat a bug.

Well, we tried to show you that the subject in the autopsy photos was the same man with the same hair, but you argued that he must have been given a haircut during the autopsy. ( Link )

[Vincent Baxter]

Not quite sure what you're point is here, Weidmann.

Now, there's a surprise...

but this was the official verdict given by a team of respected professionals who were qualified to do such an investigation.

Are you serious or just oblivious to the facts? The Magic Bullet theory (it's not called that for nothing) was Arlen Specter's invention when they ended up with only two bullets to account for all the wounds. The alternative would have been more that three bullets and thus a conspiracy. And they didn't want to go there...

I personally choose to believe that that was the way it happened.

Great. That means what you believe can also be wrong which in turn means that anything you claim like "the shot has been proven" is just your belief and not worth a damn thing.

Even the majority of CTs have long dismissed the magic bullet argument and acknowledge that Oswald (most likely) shot bullet CE399 from the 6th floor TBD window.

Really? That's strange, because most CTs I know don't even believe that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was fired that day or ever was at Parkland Hospital.

All you seem to do is refute everyones opinion by saying "Facts? Where are your facts that this is 100% what happened?" offering absolutely no facts or counter argument yourself to prove otherwise.

Having an opinion is one thing, presenting it as fact (as most, if not all LNs do) is an entirely different matter. Facts always trump opinions. Don't claim something happened if you can't back it up with factual evidence.

Yeah, I know you're going to come back with your usual "You said something so you need to prove it, I don't have to provide evidence to say it's not true" which is all very repetitive, lazy and extremely convenient for you, isn't it?

Yes, it's also the way it should be. You make a claim, you prove it. What is it with guys like you? You just want to make wild and unsupported claims without being able to back them up with evidence? Ain't gonna happen!

What do you actually believe?

I believe that Kennedy and Tippit were both murdered and that there are (on both sides of the argument) individuals who are not able or willing to honestly discuss the case and who are only defending their biased opinions

All you go on about is needing "facts" and considering there are very few 100% dead cert facts in this entire case people come to their own conclusions based on what information is out there.

That's fair enough as long as those conclusions are not presented as "fact" and there is a willingness to discuss those conclusions with an open mind.

Are you totally on the fence with no opinion one way or the other

Yes, I have no predetermined opinion and in many ways, at this point in time, I couldn't care less if Oswald did it alone or if there was a conspiracy. I just want to try to find out for myself what actually happened. Not that it will make a damn bit of difference one way of the other, in the bigger scheme of things. Oswald has been dead for 56 years, history books have been written and the world keeps on turning regardless of my opinion. Which is exactly why I never give my opinion. I just want to examine the details of the case and for that I need facts!

All I've ever seen you do is dismiss everything you don't agree with by asking for "proof" and "evidence" without ever making any decent points or counter arguments yourself.

If that's all you've ever seen, than you haven't looked well and far enough. The notion that I dismiss something because I don't agree with it is absurd. I ask for proof and evidence to learn more about the substance of the argument being made. And as for "decent points or counter arguments", you really should check my posting history. When you do, you will not only find that you are wrong, but also that LNs very quickly run from the actual facts simply because they can not answer simple questions.

Basically, Weidmann, you're just very boring.

 

YAWN! 
So as suspected, you "conveniently" never give your opinion and instead just act all high and mighty and holier-than-thou by just shooting down anyone who gives theirs. Considering your non-committal to either camp, it's odd how you only really seem to refute LNs arguments with your "FACTS! FACTS!" stance.
As said previously, there are very little concrete, set in stone FACTS on the case which is why forums like this exist and why it has been possible for thousands of varying books to written on the case.
Everyone knows that and nobody really tries to present arguments as FACTS on here. It's their opinion followed by why they think that. You're the only one that takes everything so literal. You really need to take that stick out of your arse and chill out. Criticising people for how they word something rather than for what they're actually saying is boring and that's all I really see you do.

And do people really still use the twisting and turning magic bullet theory as an argument? I was under the impression that went out about the same time as the argument that the world was flat.

[Martin Weidmann]

YAWN! 
So as suspected, you "conveniently" never give your opinion and instead just act all high and mighty and holier-than-thou by just shooting down anyone who gives theirs. Considering your non-committal to either camp, it's odd how you only really seem to refute LNs arguments with your "FACTS! FACTS!" stance.
As said previously, there are very little concrete, set in stone FACTS on the case which is why forums like this exist and why it has been possible for thousands of varying books to written on the case.
Everyone knows that and nobody really tries to present arguments as FACTS on here. It's their opinion followed by why they think that. You're the only one that takes everything so literal. You really need to take that stick out of your arse and chill out. Criticising people for how they word something rather than for what they're actually saying is boring and that's all I really see you do.

And do people really still use the twisting and turning magic bullet theory as an argument? I was under the impression that went out about the same time as the argument that the world was flat.

you "conveniently" never give your opinion and instead just act all high and mighty and holier-than-thou by just shooting down anyone who gives theirs.

Why should I give you or anybody else an opinion I don't have? Just to please you, so you have something to attack? Why not simply try to discuss something, or have you never learned how to do that? All your hyperbolic crap aside, I don't shoot anyone down who gives their opinion. I ask questions to find out how solid the opinion is and I can't help it when that theory then falls apart.

Just how much is an opinion worth if it can be shot down that easily?

Considering your non-committal to either camp, it's odd how you only really seem to refute LNs arguments with your "FACTS! FACTS!" stance.

First of all, that's not true. And secondly it's not odd at all. The LN arguments very often, if not always, equal the official narrative, so that's the place to start. I play devil's advocate to determine how solid the evidence is. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen, whiny little man!

Btw, what's your problem with facts? Don't you like them, can't you deal with them, or do you simply prefer to ignore them to make up your own reality?

As said previously, there are very little concrete, set in stone FACTS on the case which is why forums like this exist and why it has been possible for thousands of varying books to written on the case.

Thank you for admitting that there are very few facts in this case. Yet you still defend a narrative that is based on hardly any facts at all. Why is that?

Everyone knows that and nobody really tries to present arguments as FACTS on here.

For a relatively new member that's a bold statement. I am not sure who "everyone" is, but you are dead wrong about nobody trying to present arguments as facts. It happens all the time. In fact, you just did it by unqualified claiming "everybody knows" when there is no way in the world you could possibly know that. You also did it in your previous post when you falsely claimed that "Even the majority of CTs have long dismissed the magic bullet argument and acknowledge that Oswald (most likely) shot bullet CE399 from the 6th floor TBD window."

It's their opinion followed by why they think that. You're the only one that takes everything so literal.

That's simply not true.

Criticising people for how they word something rather than for what they're actually saying is boring and that's all I really see you do.

I don't give a damn if you think it's boring or not, but words and how they are presented matter. Your buddy "Mytton" for example constantly misrepresents evidence by wording something in a certain way and other LNs on this board play word games all the time.

And do people really still use the twisting and turning magic bullet theory as an argument? I was under the impression that went out about the same time as the argument that the world was flat.

Which only shows just how uninformed and naive you really are.

[John Iacoletti]

Everyone knows that and nobody really tries to present arguments as FACTS on here. It's their opinion followed by why they think that.

Lot’s of people on here present their opinions and conjectures as facts.

I don’t have any problem with you sharing your opinion, but my opinion is that “a team of respected professionals thought so” is a bad reason to believe something is true.