On Oct 1, 1:57 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 9/30/2012 10:57 PM, Bud wrote:Then you should show that Kennedy`s head was going forward at
> > On Sep 29, 9:54 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>> On 9/28/12 4:33 PM, Richard Ferguson wrote:
> >>> >snip<
> >>>> It's a
> >>> You need to compare frame 312, just before he was shot, to frame 313,
> >>> /sandy
> >> No, you need to compare all the frames from Z-300 to Z-320.
> > Why not z-170?
> Because the limo did not start slowing down until after Z-300.
> >> You are committing the Fallacy of False Cause by only looking at two
> > They are the only two relevant to how Kennedy`s position changed
> CAUSE. The cause does not have to be what you assumed.
generally the same rate every frame leading up to the headshot.
> >> No one argues that the IMPACT of the bullet moves his whole bodyIs that why you couldn`t figure out that people had taken the
> >> backward.
> > You should familiarize yourself with the discussions you enter. the
> > "For me, that has never been satisfactorily explained, that and the
> He never mentions the word IMPACT.
position you claimed no one had. Because they didn`t use the word
> >> That is a straw man argument.Actually the poster was putting forth the idea that it was the force of
> > An actual position someone took is the opposite of a strawman.
> No one took that actual position. That is what a straw man argument is.
the bullet that threw Kennedy back. Not a strawman, an actual position
expressed by someone.
> >> And yet some WC defenders try to argue that just the IMPACT of a bullet
> >> threw his head forward violently.
> > Yes, the impact of the bullet pushed Kennedy`s head forward
> >> Hypocrisy, thy name is WC defender.
> > Misrepresentation, your name is Marsh.
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.