Debunking the "Jet Effect"?

[Dan O'meara]

Your line is arbitrary. The back half of the skull appears to me to be intact.  Again, why do you think it matters?  Take your time to review your high school physics.

Your line is arbitrary.

My line is arbitrary??
I assume you're talking about the yellow centre-line in the image below:



You are suggesting that this line is somehow randomly chosen.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
A child can see that the specific purpose of this line is to demonstrate the basic principle of the 'front' and 'back' of the head.
The reason I have been forced to demonstrate such a moronically simple principle is because you are in denial about the picture below:



It is your contention that the image above shows a "jet" of material coming from the front half of JFK's head.
It clearly does not, but such is the extremity of your mentality you will simply keep insisting that it is.
The great thing is that, as you are constantly forgetting, the forum is a written record. Your foolishness is on the record.
I've reproduced the image above but added a centre-line. This line has been eyeballed but, again, it's not that far off and it demonstrates the very simple principle of the 'front' and 'back' of the head as it relates to JFK around the moment of the head shot.
Anything to the left of the centre-line as we look at the picture, is to the back half of the the head.
Anything to the right of the line is to the front half of the head:




Again, why do you think it matters?

You, John and a whole host of fools believe that JFK's head acts like a balloon that has air escaping from it and is being blown around Dealey Plaza.
It makes me cringe how embarrassing this theory is.
Like good little LNers you can't see past the AUTHORITY, namely Alvarez's shiny Nobel prize. He must be right because he has lots of complicated mathematics and physics on his side. However, there is a very basic aspect to his stupid theory - the "jet" is coming out of an object and that object will move in the opposite direction to the expulsion of the jet.
In order to determine what direction the object will move in, all we have to do is determine what direction the jet is being expelled.
So, when you ask an unbelievably stupid question like - why do you think it matters - it is because we need able to determine what direction the jet is being expelled otherwise we cannot determine what direction the object will move in as a result of the jet. A child can understand that.

Because I'm generous, I'll give you one last chance to recant your foolishness.
Is the "Jet" below being expelled from the front half of JFK's head?

[John Mytton]

At the moment of impact, Kennedy's head was leaning forward.



And as for separating Kennedy's head into halves while he was standing bolt upright is not a true reflection of Zapruder frame 312 and we must take into consideration that we are examining the upper portion of the skull itself and as is abundantly clear, whichever way you halve Kennedy's head the back section always appears intact.
 


I also wanted to have a close look at the HSCA's high contrast image as a comparison to a very early generational Zapruder frame and due to the HSCA's extreme contrast, the expelled matter along with a light mist has merged and is not an accurate representation of the main exploded matter which is forward of Kennedy's temple.



Releasing a balloon and letting the air escape through the opening as the balloon moves away from the exiting air is the jet effect in action but what if we release all the air at once? In the following GIF, the balloon first loses it's outer integrity at the bottom right near the man's left hand and then the remaining larger fragment is propelled violently away in the opposite direction to the top left of frame.




And finally, the Dealey Plaza eyewitnesses all describe this same explosion as seen in Zapruder because this is where the vast majority of matter was seen to escape.



JohnM