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

[Peter Goth]

Why are you so convinced that nobody on here understands the concept of your experiment? I do understand it but, as stated elsewhere on this topic thread, it's impossible to re-enact a once in infinity occurrence.

Assuming that you did get President Kennedy's posture correct, your laser experiment then presumes that absolutely nothing interfered with the bullet's trajectory from the moment the shot was fired until the bullet exited the President's throat. A laser cannot measure the exact angle the bullet left the rifle, the conditions in Dealey Plaza that day, how the bullet reacted when ripping through live human muscle and flesh, etc. Even the most unbelievably minuscule slight movement would effect the outcome. The reaction of a live bullet traveling through a live human body cannot be measured by a laser and even shooting a live person through the back of the neck from the same angle wouldn't have the same outcome. It just doesn't work like that.

It already happened, that's it you can't recreate it. You can't ask someone to re-enact something like this.
Conspiracy theorists don't believe two planes flying into the World Trade Centre would cause both towers to collapse but it happened. I suppose you'd ask someone to re-enact that t prove it's possible too?

  you talk like Mytton.

[Vincent Baxter]

I'm using your LNer criteria to test the MB, which doesn't include any ricochet off JFK's bones. Humes concluded the bullet took a straight line path thru JFK without touching bone. That's why the MB was pristine and showed up on the wrong stretcher. Forget that it smashed thru Connally's bones and according to you, ricocheted off JFK's spine.

What my experiment tells you is that it couldn't have happened the way the WC said it did. Isn't that worth a re-enactment?

Yeah, I was referring to the bullet hitting Connally as well with regards to the human bone, but I realise we're only talking about it's movement until it exit's Kennedy's throat so my bad there.

If a 100% accurate test could be done, then yes, but people can't even agree on the posture or position of JFK at the time of the shooting so how can you accurately do a test?

Am I correct in thinking that not a single person in Dealey Plaza that day testified to saying they believed shots came from the Dal-Tex building? (That is indeed a question not a statement as I can't say for sure)

[Vincent Baxter]

you talk like Mytton.

Yes, you've said that before, Goth.
Yet another fascinating insight and contribution to the discussion from yourself.

Do enlighten us with your method of re-enacting a completely authentic and accurate test of the shot, or are you just going to leave us all with your usual contribution of your infinite wisdom of "you talk like Mytton"?

[John Iacoletti]

Surely, it's already been proven to be possible as that's what happened on 22nd November, 1963 so there's no need for a re-enactment.

Circular argument (n.): see circular argument

[Martin Weidmann]

Surely, it's already been proven to be possible as that's what happened on 22nd November, 1963 so there's no need for a re-enactment.

Circular argument (n.): see circular argument

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

You can't re-enact this with levelling lasers that cost you $35 bucks. You can't re-enact it by shooting real bullets through ram's heads or silicon wrapped in animal skin. The shot, the bullet, the rifle, the angle, the reaction of the live human body muscles as the bullet makes contact, the ricochet off human bone, etc. make the shot truly unique and totally impossible to re-enact.
No matter how many times you do it, no matter whether you shoot at a living person or synthetic you WILL NOT get an accurate or identical outcome so why bother to argue that it didn't happen?

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!

[Jack Trojan]

I didn't say to have a model in the picture before ensuring there appeared a 17-degree beam angle in the picture. You start doing model shots with a site-fixed camera AFTER the beam angle is set. Preferably having someone on the camera directing the model. Someone aware of Kennedy's actual position in the motorcade.

Now you're getting it.

Great. When are we going to see your laser-experiment photos to compare your body position to JFK's?

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

This represents "a grossly disfigured spine" and/or Olympic-style contortion?

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.

No one's disputing the ability to construct a 17-degree laser beam and take a picture of someone sitting in its path. When we now need to do is see how close your body position is to Kennedy's in the motorcade. If off, we can declare your own personal experiment, rather than the MB, a failure. What you're doing is declaring the MB a failure based on a personal experiment that hasn't been vetted.

I'm not declaring anything. 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.

[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.