How do LNers explain the white patch?

[Gerry Down]

This is a prime example of an issue that WC apologists are simply unable to explain and that they therefore ignore. The white patch is over 1,000 times brighter than the same area in a normal skull x-ray. Equally suspicious is that the white patch's location covers most of the area of the right-rear part of the skull where dozens of witnesses reported seeing a large wound. Another suspicious aspect of the patch is its size and shape: it is relatively oval and about 3 inches in diameter at its widest point.

The brightness of the white patch means that the bone in that area is far, far thicker than the bone in the same area on human skulls, an obvious impossibility. Tellingly, no such patch appears on any of JFK's pre-mortem x-rays.

Of course, the white patch is clear evidence of alteration. But WC apologists will never admit this because they are not interested in facts but in defending the lone-gunman myth.

Could it be the rubber patch the autopsy doctors said was put on the right rear of JFK's skull because bone was missing in that area? I wonder how the type of rubber that was used shows up on x ray.

[Michael T. Griffith]

Could it be the rubber patch the autopsy doctors said was put on the right rear of JFK's skull because bone was missing in that area? I wonder how the type of rubber that was used shows up on x ray.

Rubber would not have the optical density that the white patch has. Dr. Mantik and Dr. Chesser have actually discovered how the white patch was created: it was made via double exposure.

If the white patch were authentic, it would mean that the area extending from the patch to the other side of the skull was almost solid bone, and that this bone had nearly the same density as the petrous bone, the densest bone in the body. It goes without saying that both propositions are medically impossible--well, unless JFK was born with a severely deformed skull that had a 3-inch-diameter bone that ran from one side of the skull to the other, that ran from side to side from an area behind the ears that consisted of part of the parietal bone and part of the occipital bone.

The white patch occupies most of the region that dozens of witnesses said contained a large hole. Some medical personnel who saw the wound said that cerebellar tissue was visible in the wound, which is important because cerebellar tissue is easily distinguished from other brain tissue and is located only in the back of the head.

The white patch may also have been intended to conceal the fragment trail that the autopsy doctors said ran from slightly above the EOP to just above the right eye. No such fragment trail is visible on the extant x-rays. Equally suspicious is the fact that the autopsy doctors made no mention of the fragment trail at the top of the head, even though it is readily visible even to a layman. The only innocent explanation for these facts is that all three autopsy doctors made the mind-boggling "mistake" of mistaking the fragment trail at the top of the head for a fragment trail that began at the EOP.

Why didn't the autopsy doctors mention the high fragment trail, the one just below the top of the skull? Because two fragment trails--the high trail and the trail starting at the EOP--meant that two bullets hit the skull. Since they found the EOP entrance wound, they could not link that wound to a fragment trail several inches higher. So, the high fragment trail had to be ignored.

When the conspirators altered the x-rays after the autopsy, they realized the same problem, in addition to the enormous problem that the EOP entry wound could not have come from the sixth-floor window unless Kennedy had been leaning forward by some 60 degrees. So, the low fragment trail had to be concealed, and the EOP entry wound had to be moved up by several inches to at least appear to line up with the high fragment trail.

[Michael T. Griffith]

Giving this thread a bump because it shows that lone-gunman theorists cannot explain the unnatural, impossible white patch on the lateral skull x-ray. Dr. Mantik and Dr. Chessar have confirmed with optical density (OD) measurements that the white patch is unnatural and impossible, unless we assume that JFK's skull was severely deformed. Dr. Mantik has also noted that no such white patch appears on previous JFK skull x-rays.

Here is some of what Dr. Mantik has said about the white patch and Pat Speer's claim that the overlapping bone seen on the lateral x-ray explains the patch:

Does the overlapping bone (on the lateral X-ray) explain the “White Patch”?

No, it does not—nor could it even do so in principle. First, these are two distinctly different areas, as should be obvious from the right lateral X-ray—the White Patch is much more posterior than the overlap area. See my image of the White Patch in Assassination Science 1998, p. 160, or slide 5 in my Dallas lecture, or my Figure 5 just below. . . .

In my Figure 2, I have identified the external auditory canal, which Speer ignores; that structural feature clearly locates the external ear—without any ambiguity. Speer also ignores the evidence of the AP X-ray (my Figure 1). Notice there how the wing lies far out in space, quite detached from the skull. On the other hand, if the wing had extended far posteriorly (as Speer wants to believe), then some part of it would be seen much more medially in the AP X-ray, but it is not there. This argument is so powerful that little else need be said. But there is more.

Second, the ODs of these two areas are quite different: on the right lateral X-ray, the mean OD of the white patch (0.625 ±.055) is almost the same as the petrous bone (0.55), whereas a typical OD (1.33) for the overlap site is noticeably higher (than the White Patch), and it does not appear nearly so white to the eye. That visible difference is dramatically obvious in Figure 5 (especially on the right sided image). Speer claims that the White Patch was caused by three overlapping layers of bone. Despite his unrelenting caricature to the contrary, I have always accepted three layers of bone at the overlap site, although I have never emphasized this because no one (before Speer) had offered such a novel explanation for the White Patch.

Incidentally, the three layers of overlapping bone should be obvious to anyone after viewing the AP X-ray (an image that Speer overlooks). He also argues that, because the ARRB experts (p. 10 and also Chapter 19b, pp. 26-27) noticed such bone overlap, they therefore support his conclusion that the overlap explains the White Patch. But that is simply absurd. . . .

Third, the White Patch is so dense that whatever physical object it represents must appear somewhere on the AP X-ray film. I made this argument from the very beginning, even at our first press conference in New York City (1993). That transcript is reproduced in Assassination Science 1998 (p. 155) and warrants a quote here:

       On the frontal [AP] X-ray, such an extremely dense [physical] object should have been as visible as a tyrannosaurus rex in downtown Manhattan at noon. However, when I looked at the frontal X-ray, there was no such beast to be seen.

No one has even tried to explain this paradox. Even worse, Speer seems oblivious to it. Let’s next focus on the OD issues for overlapping bone, a quantitative exercise that Speer totally neglects. For these JFK skull X-rays, here are the pertinent OD changes (∆ODs) across various layers of bone: one layer = 0.45; two layers = 0.90; three layers = 1.35. The difference for one layer is easily measured at fracture lines; amazingly enough, Speer believes that I ignore these fracture lines (p. 9). If an extra bone layer truly explained the White Patch, then sites just outside the White Patch should yield ODs that are higher by about 0.45 (one layer).

But that is not the case—on the contrary, the ODs suggest a difference of more than just one layer of bone. Of special interest is the OD over the occiput, at the very back of the skull (very close to the White Patch), where the bone is viewed tangentially: the data there suggest a ∆OD (compared to the White Patch) of not just more than one layer, but actually about two bone layers (i.e., it is much less white). In other words, the White Patch is truly an anomaly (much too white and with ODs that are far too low). It cannot possibly arise simply from overlapping bone. On the other hand, of course, a deliberate superposition of this area in the dark room could easily explain this paradox. That the ODs of the White Patch and the petrous bone are not nearly so identical (to one another) on the left lateral X-ray should also raise some doubt that not all is well in OD land.

Now recall that three layers of bone yield a ∆OD of 1.35. Since the measured OD (cited above) in the overlap area is already 1.33, the OD without the three layers of bone would be 1.35 + 1.33 = 2.68. The ODs in the maxillary sinuses (mostly air) are 2.89, so this value of 2.68 clearly suggests substantial missing brain in the overlap area. But the site in question (medial to the overlapping bone on the lateral X-ray) lies near the middle of the brain, where the autopsy photographs show no missing brain tissue! (https://themantikview.org/pdf/Speer_Critique.pdf)

This is a case where hard science refutes a key pillar of the lone-gunman theory, namely, the claim that the autopsy skull x-rays are pristine and unaltered. Of course, we have more evidence that the skull x-rays have been altered:

* The 6.5 mm object has been established via OD measurement and high-magnification analysis to be a ghosted image that was double exposed over a smaller genuine fragment on the rear outer table of the skull about 1 cm from the bogus cowlick entry site. Dr. Mantik was even able to duplicate how the object was added to the x-ray.

* The skull x-rays do not show the fragment trail described in the autopsy report but only show a much higher trail that is at about 3 inches above the low fragment trail described in the autopsy report.

* Moreover, the high fragment trail has a cloud of fragments in the right frontal region (exactly what you'd expect if a frangible bullet struck the right temple) and then the trail dissipates upward toward the back of the head but does not reach the cowlick.

* Dr. Mantik was unable to find a single skull x-ray with a white patch like the one in the lateral skull x-ray, nor has any other scientist been able to do so. Since we know from OD measurement that the white patch is not authentic, it is not surprising that no one has been able to find another skull x-ray with such an impossibly bright white patch, much less one that yields the same or similar OD measurements.

[Jerry Organ]

Pat Speer points out that Mantik is all over the place. Here are some excerpts from Speer's website ( "Chapter 19a:  Stuck in the Middle With You" Link )

    "Mantik then discussed the optical density of the x-rays. He'd measured this
     himself. He claimed that these measurements were clear proof of alteration,
     as some areas on the x-rays were far too white, and others far too black, and
     there was far more contrast on Kennedy's x-rays than on the other x-rays
     he'd measured. While doing so, he pointed out the problematic white and
     black areas to his audience... He did this, however, on photos of the computer-
     enhanced x-rays published by the HSCA. He failed to tell his audience that
     these were not the original x-rays, and that these images were computer-
     enhanced to increase the contrast, and that this contrast was made even
     greater through the reproduction of these images on paper."

    "And the more I viewed Mantik's presentation the more obvious these lies became.
     To counter my claim the "white patch" he'd identified on the x-rays was nothing
     more than the wing of bone seen on the autopsy photos overlapping intact bone
     at the back of Kennedy's skull, Mantik claimed (on a slide entitled "The White
     Patch--Impossible to Explain via Overlapping Bone") that "a single layer of bone
     contributes only a modest amount to the OD" (optical density measurements) --
     "an amount far too small to explain the white patch." Well, okay, he was sticking
     to his original story here. Nothing wrong with that. I mean, he'd never tested
     x-rays created on the equipment used to make Kennedy's x-rays, at various settings,
     let alone those involving over-lapping bone. And he'd never explained why, if the
     loss of a layer of bone would have so little effect on the appearance of the skull
     on the x-ray, that the fractures in Kennedy's skull, which Mantik accepts as
     legitimate fractures, and which would have involved only one layer of bone, were
     so easily recognizable. But the man's entitled to his beliefs."

    "It is to Mantik's credit, then, that, on his slide discussing the findings of Dr. John
     Fitzpatrick, a Forensic Radiologist, he noted, among eight other points of interest,
     that Dr. Fitzpatrick claimed he did not find the work of Dr. Mantik "persuasive."
     Now, on Fetzer's website, Mantik admits this is troublesome, and that he is
     annoyed that Fitzpatrick wouldn't respond to his letters and explain his failure to
     be persuaded.

          But what Mantik should have known, and should have told his audience, was
     that Fitzpatrick's reasons for rejecting his conclusions regarding the "white patch"
     and "dark area" were readily apparent, once one read the entirety of Horne's
     report on Fitzpatrick."

    "That's right. While Mantik told his audience the "buck stops with Fitzpatrick" when
     Fitzpatrick agreed with him, he concealed from his audience that Fitzpatrick had
     subscribed to the "overlapping bone" theory to which I subscribe, which explains
     both the "dark area" and "white patch." What Mantik had snidely dismissed as
     "Speer's theory" before his audience, had been in fact "Fitzpatrick's theory" years
     before. And Mantik had chosen not to tell this to his audience.

          And Fitzpatrick wasn't the only expert whose findings he concealed. While Mantik
     noted, on his slide describing the findings of Dr. Douglas Ubelaker, a forensic
     anthropology consultant to the ARRB, that Ubelaker found the "dark area" on the
     lateral x-rays "very puzzling," he left out that this led Dr. Ubelaker to wonder, not if
     the x-rays had been altered, as Mantik was suggesting, but "whether there had been
     some processing defect when the x-rays were developed." He also failed to reveal
     that Ubelaker had noted "overlapping bone fragments" in "the temporal-parietal
     region of the lateral x-rays," which we can only assume was yet another reference to
     the "white patch.""

     

    "After first viewing the autopsy materials, Dr. Mantik told his fellow researchers his
     OD measurements proved the x-rays had been altered, and that a white patch had
     been added to the lateral x-rays to cover a hole on the back of the head. (1993)
     He later backed off this claim, and said the white patch had been added to make
     the back of the head appear more white than the front of the head. (1998) He was
     then confronted with the fact the white patch didn't actually cover the back of the
     head, and that his original claim had been incorrect. (2010) He then claimed he'd
     never said the white patch had been added to cover a hole on the back of the head,
     and that it was all a misunderstanding. (2013) He also said his OD measurements for
     the lateral x-rays actually suggest there was a hole on the back of the head, posterior
     to the white patch. It's just that we can't see it. (2013)"


     

    "As you can see, Dr. Chesser took a page out of Dr. Mantik's book by comparing an
     unenhanced version of the pre-mortem x-ray with a computer-enhanced version of
     the post-mortem x-ray. He even put his OD numbers--presumably taken from the
     unenhanced lateral x-rays--on the computer-enhanced x-ray. Eegads. This is
     nothing if not deceptive. Chesser admitted his left lateral was a simulation created
     by reversing the right lateral, but failed to explain that the OD measurements on
     both post-mortem x-rays were taken from the original unenhanced x-rays, one of
     which was shown previously in his presentation."

     

     "Well, this is more than interesting, IMO. It's damning. From his first visits to the
     archives in 1993 until the present day, Dr. Mantik has asserted that his OD
     measurements for the right lateral x-ray (only recently published by Horne as .53
     petrous, .625 white patch) were impossible, and suggested Kennedy was a "bonehead".
     And yet the whole damn time he knew his OD's for the pre-mortem x-ray were even
     more suggestive Kennedy was a "bonehead", with the petrous bone and "white patch"
     actually matching at .55!"

    "Articles and presentations found online establish that the optical density range for
     x-rays stretches from 0.0 (all white) to 4.0 (all black), and that the "useful" range is
     from 0.5 to 2.25. Well, this demonstrates that there is nothing unusually white about
     the so-called "white patch" on the post-mortem x-ray and that it only seems too white
     when one compares it to the petrous bone and the dark area at the front of the head"

Maybe a bit of peer review would be in order for quacks like Mantik and Chesser. They would be destroyed if they took this junk science to an impartial scientific panel, government committee (with resources to evaluate their claims) or media giants like "The New York Times".

[Steve M. Galbraith]

Summarizing in part: This "white patch" that, according to Mantik, was added to the x-rays to cover up a blowout is seen in the pre-mortem x-rays of JFK's head? It's a "natural" part of JFK's brain? So it's "authentic" and not fake? Let me guess: the pre-mortem x-rays showing this patch were also altered?

Second: Is the claim, or part of it, that there was a large blowout of the back of JFK's head and that Abraham Zapruder and Richard Stolley et al. - those who saw the original in camera film - never noticed that this blowout was missing/covered up in the extant/later versions of the film? They wouldn't notice such a discrepancy? Stolley is still alive; he never noticed this? Zapruder showed the film in the Shaw trial and didn't notice this either?

Horne cites Brugioni's account that the "ejecta" from the side/top of JFK's head seemed higher/bigger in the film he saw. But Brugioni said nothing about seeing a blowout in the back of the head or that it appeared to be missing from later versions of the film.

[Michael T. Griffith]

Pat Speer points out that Mantik is all over the place. Here are some excerpts from Speer's website ( "Chapter 19a:  Stuck in the Middle With You" Link )

    "Mantik then discussed the optical density of the x-rays. He'd measured this
     himself. He claimed that these measurements were clear proof of alteration,
     as some areas on the x-rays were far too white, and others far too black, and
     there was far more contrast on Kennedy's x-rays than on the other x-rays
     he'd measured. While doing so, he pointed out the problematic white and
     black areas to his audience... He did this, however, on photos of the computer-
     enhanced x-rays published by the HSCA. He failed to tell his audience that
     these were not the original x-rays, and that these images were computer-
     enhanced to increase the contrast, and that this contrast was made even
     greater through the reproduction of these images on paper."

[SNIPPER FOR BREVITY.]

Let's be clear what you've done here: You have quoted large chunks from Speer's critique of Mantik's research on the white patch and OD measurements, but you ignored Mantik's response to Speer's amateurish and confused arguments. Speer doesn't even address some of the key problems. Let me quote once again the segment I quoted from Mantik's response to Speer in my previous reply, since you simply ignored it:

Does the overlapping bone (on the lateral X-ray) explain the “White Patch”?

No, it does not—nor could it even do so in principle. First, these are two distinctly different areas, as should be obvious from the right lateral X-ray—the White Patch is much more posterior than the overlap area. See my image of the White Patch in Assassination Science 1998, p. 160, or slide 5 in my Dallas lecture, or my Figure 5 just below. . . .

In my Figure 2, I have identified the external auditory canal, which Speer ignores; that structural feature clearly locates the external ear—without any ambiguity. Speer also ignores the evidence of the AP X-ray (my Figure 1). Notice there how the wing lies far out in space, quite detached from the skull. On the other hand, if the wing had extended far posteriorly (as Speer wants to believe), then some part of it would be seen much more medially in the AP X-ray, but it is not there. This argument is so powerful that little else need be said. But there is more.

Second, the ODs of these two areas are quite different: on the right lateral X-ray, the mean OD of the white patch (0.625 ±.055) is almost the same as the petrous bone (0.55), whereas a typical OD (1.33) for the overlap site is noticeably higher (than the White Patch), and it does not appear nearly so white to the eye. That visible difference is dramatically obvious in Figure 5 (especially on the right sided image). Speer claims that the White Patch was caused by three overlapping layers of bone. Despite his unrelenting caricature to the contrary, I have always accepted three layers of bone at the overlap site, although I have never emphasized this because no one (before Speer) had offered such a novel explanation for the White Patch.

Incidentally, the three layers of overlapping bone should be obvious to anyone after viewing the AP X-ray (an image that Speer overlooks). He also argues that, because the ARRB experts (p. 10 and also Chapter 19b, pp. 26-27) noticed such bone overlap, they therefore support his conclusion that the overlap explains the White Patch. But that is simply absurd. . . .

Third, the White Patch is so dense that whatever physical object it represents must appear somewhere on the AP X-ray film. I made this argument from the very beginning, even at our first press conference in New York City (1993). That transcript is reproduced in Assassination Science 1998 (p. 155) and warrants a quote here:

       On the frontal [AP] X-ray, such an extremely dense [physical] object should have been as visible as a tyrannosaurus rex in downtown Manhattan at noon. However, when I looked at the frontal X-ray, there was no such beast to be seen.

No one has even tried to explain this paradox. Even worse, Speer seems oblivious to it. Let’s next focus on the OD issues for overlapping bone, a quantitative exercise that Speer totally neglects. For these JFK skull X-rays, here are the pertinent OD changes (∆ODs) across various layers of bone: one layer = 0.45; two layers = 0.90; three layers = 1.35. The difference for one layer is easily measured at fracture lines; amazingly enough, Speer believes that I ignore these fracture lines (p. 9). If an extra bone layer truly explained the White Patch, then sites just outside the White Patch should yield ODs that are higher by about 0.45 (one layer).

But that is not the case—on the contrary, the ODs suggest a difference of more than just one layer of bone. Of special interest is the OD over the occiput, at the very back of the skull (very close to the White Patch), where the bone is viewed tangentially: the data there suggest a ∆OD (compared to the White Patch) of not just more than one layer, but actually about two bone layers (i.e., it is much less white). In other words, the White Patch is truly an anomaly (much too white and with ODs that are far too low). It cannot possibly arise simply from overlapping bone. On the other hand, of course, a deliberate superposition of this area in the dark room could easily explain this paradox. That the ODs of the White Patch and the petrous bone are not nearly so identical (to one another) on the left lateral X-ray should also raise some doubt that not all is well in OD land.

Now recall that three layers of bone yield a ∆OD of 1.35. Since the measured OD (cited above) in the overlap area is already 1.33, the OD without the three layers of bone would be 1.35 + 1.33 = 2.68. The ODs in the maxillary sinuses (mostly air) are 2.89, so this value of 2.68 clearly suggests substantial missing brain in the overlap area. But the site in question (medial to the overlapping bone on the lateral X-ray) lies near the middle of the brain, where the autopsy photographs show no missing brain tissue! (https://themantikview.org/pdf/Speer_Critique.pdf)

And Speer is totally confused when he makes the bizarre argument that Mantik's OD data show that there's nothing unusual about the white patch and that there's no conflict between the autopsy lateral skull x-ray and JFK's pre-mortem skull x-ray:

"Well, this is more than interesting, IMO. It's damning. From his first visits to the archives in 1993 until the present day, Dr. Mantik has asserted that his OD    measurements for the right lateral x-ray (only recently published by Horne as .53     petrous, .625 white patch) were impossible, and suggested Kennedy was a "bonehead".
And yet the whole damn time he knew his OD's for the pre-mortem x-ray were even     more suggestive Kennedy was a "bonehead", with the petrous bone and "white patch"     actually matching at .55!"

This is what happens when an amateur with an agenda tries to tackle scientific matters. First off, the whole point that Mantik and others have made is that the white patch should not and cannot have the same optical density as the petrous bone! That's a clear sign of fraud in the lateral skull x-ray, but apparently Speer does not realize this. The bone in the area of the white patch in a normal skull is not--I repeat, not--as thick as the petrous bone, so the fact that the white patch measures as having the same OD as the petrous bone means either that JFK's skull was severely deformed or that the white patch is impossible.

Mantik has repeatedly said that the identical whiteness of the white patch and the petrous bone is absurd impossible, e.g.:

       Also note the absurdly identical whiteness (on the left image) in the petrous bone and in the White Patch. (https://themantikview.org/pdf/Speer_Critique.pdf)

Furthermore, Dr. Chesser has measured the ODs on the original pre-mortem JFK x-ray at the Kennedy Library in Boston and has confirmed that there is a "huge difference" between that x-ray and the lateral autopsy skull x-ray in the region of the white patch.

Maybe a bit of peer review would be in order for quacks like Mantik and Chesser. They would be destroyed if they took this junk science to an impartial scientific panel, government committee (with resources to evaluate their claims) or media giants like "The New York Times".

Oh, wow. LOL! So you, of all people, who has been caught in untold numbers of comical blunders and dishonest snipping of material--you are now calling Dr. Mantik and Dr. Chessar "quacks." Let's see: Mantik has a doctorate in physics and is a former professor of physics at the collegiate level, and he has an MD specializing in radiation oncology and is a board-certified in radiation oncologist. Dr. Chessar is a clinical neurophysiologist with over 41 years of experience in the medical field and holds a doctorate in neuroscience.

If anyone's material needs peer review, it is Pat Speer's material on the autopsy x-rays. Dr. Mantik has politely showed that Speer simply does not know what he is talking about regarding the autopsy x-rays. And since you don't know what you're talking about either, you approvingly quote Speer's amateurish error-filled critique of Mantik's OD work.

[Jerry Organ]

Yep. Guess Griffith's still not taking these "historic developments" and "monumental" disclosures to mainstream media or his Congressman (maybe try Ted Cruz or Marjorie Taylor Greene).

The original x-ray showed a fairly- even range of whiteness.

The HSCA enhancement unintentionally added some artificial contrast.

The fraud quack Mantik then added even more contrast to the enhancement (the "white patch" inset, above) to make the "white patch" glow. Good enough for the likes of Griffith, I suppose. Anything, as long as it suggests conspiracy or cover-up.

[Michael T. Griffith]

Maybe a bit of peer review would be in order for quacks like Mantik and Chesser. They would be destroyed if they took this junk science to an impartial scientific panel, government committee (with resources to evaluate their claims) or media giants like "The New York Times".

I’m going to hammer you for a long time to come for making the sleazy, absurd claim that Dr. David Mantik and Dr. Michael Chesser are “quacks.” It just goes to show how far you will go to distort and mislead, rather than seriously consider hard scientific evidence that destroys your position on the JFK case.

Let’s start with Dr. Mantik’s qualifications and with those who have endorsed his research on the autopsy photos and x-rays.

Dr. Mantik received his doctorate in physics from the University of Wisconsin. He then accepted a position as a professor of physics at the University of Michigan, after which he was accepted for medical school at the same institution. After an internship and residency in radiation oncology at the LAC/USC Medical Center in Los Angeles, he joined the faculty at Loma Linda University, where he held a fellowship from the American Cancer Society and served as a professor of radiation medicine. Among his other credits are fellowships in physics at the University of Illinois and in biophysics at Stanford University, and a position as a professor of radiation oncology at the University of Pittsburgh.

I’m sure most of us know about the website WebMD. Here’s what WebMD says about Dr. Mantik:

Dr. Mantik graduated from the University of Michigan Medical School in 1976. He works in Green Bay, WI and 4 other locations and specializes in Diagnostic Radiology and Radiation Oncology.

In 1993, Dr. Mantik gained permission to examine the JFK autopsy x-rays and photos at the National Archives on four separate days. Altogether he has visited the National Archives nine times over the years.

Here are some of Dr. Mantik’s peer-reviewed, published medical research articles:

“Proton Radiation for Treatment of Cancer of the Oropharynx: Early Experience at Loma Linda University Medical Center using a Concomitant Boost Technique,” International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/7849955_Proton_radiation_for_treatment_of_cancer_of_the_oropharynx_Early_experience_at_Loma_Linda_University_Medical_Center_using_a_concomitant_boost_technique)

“Hyperthermia and Radiation In Vivo: Effect of 2-Deoxy-D-Glucose.” (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/19188608_Hyperthermia_and_radiation_in_vivo_Effect_of_2-deoxy-D-glucose)

“Mouse Neoplasia and Immunity: Effects of Radiation, Hyperthermia, 2-Deoxy-D-Glucose, and Corynebacterium Parvum.” (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/19091709_Mouse_Neoplasia_and_Immunity_Effects_of_Radiation_Hyperthermia_2-deoxy-D-glucose_and_Corynebacterium_parvum)

For a complete listing of Dr. Mantik’s published articles on physics or radiation science, see this link: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/David-Mantik.

As for the scientists who have been impressed with Dr. Mantik’s research on the JFK autopsy x-rays and photos, they include the following:

-- Dr. Greg Henkelmann (a radiation oncologist)
-- Dr. Arthur G. Haus (a former chief medical physicist at Kodak)
-- Dr. Robert Livingston (a former Scientific Director of the National Institute for Neurological Diseases)
-- Dr. Gary Aguilar (professor of clinical surgery at Stanford University and the University of California)
-- Dr. Cyril Wecht (a former president of the American Academy of Forensic Science with decades of experience as a board-certified forensic pathologist)
-- Dr. Ronald Siple (a former chief radiologist at Maryland General Hospital in Baltimore, Maryland)

By the way, Dr. Henkelmann says the following in his endorsement of Dr. Mantik’s book JFK’s Head Wounds and of his new book JFK Assassination Paradoxes:

Dr. Mantik’s optical density analysis is the single most important piece of scientific evidence in the JFK assassination. To reject alteration of the JFK skull x-rays is to reject basic physics and radiology.

As for Dr. Michael Chesser’s credentials, he is a board-certified neurologist and works as a clinical neurophysiologist in the Neurology Department at the Baptist Health Medical Center in Little Rock, Arkansas. He received his medical degree from the University of Arkansas and has worked as a board-certified—and highly rated—neurologist for over 20 years. Before becoming a neurologist, Dr. Chesser worked as a primary care medical officer in the U.S. Navy, and then he worked as a morgue assistant and assisted with several autopsies while working in that position.

The medical website Top NPI says the following about Dr. Chesser:

Dr. Michael Z Chesser has a medical practice at 9601 Baptist Health Drive, Little Rock, AR. Dr. Michael Z Chesser specializes in neurology and has over 41 years of experience in the field of medicine. He is affiliated with numerous hospitals, including Baptist Health Medical Center-Little Rock (AR) and more. (https://www.topnpi.com/ar1942289293/dr-michael-chesser/ar-1)

Based on his qualifications, Dr. Chesser was granted permission to twice view the JFK autopsy x-rays and photos at the National Archives. The following paragraphs on his OD measurements of a pre-mortem JFK skull x-ray and the autopsy skull x-rays are from his 2015 presentation titled “A Review of the Cranial Autopsy X-Rays and Photographs”—and note his findings regarding the white patch:

This lateral skull x-ray was performed on President Kennedy in 1960, and it took me a while, but I located the original at the Presidential Library in Boston, where it was labeled as a sinus x-ray. This is shown here to show that the petrous portion of the temporal bone is the most dense, and brightest, region on a skull x-ray. The pattern of variable density throughout the skull is typical. The autopsy x-rays show an abnormally dense and homogeneous appearance in the occipital region of the skull. I viewed this original x-ray at the JFK Library in Boston on 7/23/15 and measured the optical density of various areas of the film, for comparison with the autopsy x-rays. The pituitary gland sits in the sella turcica — and the sella turcica appears relatively enlarged compared with the overall skull dimensions on this skull x-ray.

These OD readings were taken with an X-Rite 341 portable optical densitometer. Calibration was performed. This shows that the most dense part of the skull is easily the petrous (latin “petrosus” – stone hard) portion of the temporal bone. This also shows that the optical densitometer can demonstrate differences in density which aren’t apparent to the human eye.

The optical density measurement is a logarithmic value, as shown, with a density of 1 for 10% of the light transmitted through the film, and a density of 2 is equivalent to 1% of light transmission through the film. Optical density readings were used for quality control of x-ray film. A lower optical density measurement indicates a more dense region of the skull. . . .

On the frontal view, the AP x-ray, the particle trail is located high in this image, which is probably in the scalp and meninges. There is a lot going on in this image, with multiple skull fractures, and much of the skull missing over the right frontal, parietal, occipital regions. The orbital rim is fractured on both sides. The vomer bone (nasal) is fractured. You can see that there is brain shadow on the left side, but you really can’t see any on the right side. The burn marks are located on the right side, lateral to the orbital wall. There is low density, or missing bone behind the nasal bones and at the lower edge of the left orbit – and I agree with Dr. Mantik that this suggests missing occipital bone, extending over to the left side. . . .

Dr. Mantik took many more optical density readings that I did, but I wanted to show that my readings agree with his – that the white patch appears much more dense than is possible. On the left lateral x-ray, the OD reading was much more dense than the petrous bone – and again, this is not possible. An optical density of .24 is equivalent to a much higher density of the skull in this region, compared with an optical density of .32, and this is not physiologic, even in the face of traumatic alteration of the skull.

This is a simulation of the left lateral skull x-ray. NARA never released an actual copy of the left lateral skull x-ray. As you see, the back part of the skull isn’t visible. I flipped the image of the right lateral x-ray, and then cut off the occipital region, to simulate the appearance of the left lateral image. I also took optical density measurements of this film, and the left posterior temporal/occipital skull was more dense than the petrous ridge. The skull at the level of the petrous ridge is almost all bone, and it is impossible to explain this finding except to consider that the evidence was altered. (https://assassinationofjfk.net/a-review-of-the-jfk-cranial-x-rays-and-photographs/)