Re: Single-Bullet Logic
Robert Harris
David, let me help you out here.
Your refutation to Speers' claim that JFK was hit at 190, lies in the
nature of JFK's reaction.
Try a simple experiment. Bring your hands up to your throat, imagining
that you are suffering a terrible pain there. No, seriously, do it.
Now, look down at your elbows. Did they remain at your side?
JFK brought his arms up, not because of anything he felt in his throat,
but because a nerve located at C7 in the spine connects directly with
the elbow extensors.
That's why his elbows rose above the level of his shoulders.
If you talk to any neurologist, you will learn that such reactions are
much faster than even startle reactions. Therefore, JFK's arms and
elbows had to have risen within no more than 3-4 frames of him being
struck by a bullet.
Since we can see that his arm first began to rise at 226, we have a
perfect match with JBC's reactions, which began when his jacket was
blown outward at frame 223.
190 is totally out of the question for JFK.
Unfortunately for your cause however, that shot could not possibly have
come from Oswald's location.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eGupSng-Po
Robert Harris
In article
<a024f29c-b6d1-4da7...@l8g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>,
David Von Pein <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
> "SINGLE-BULLET THEORY" LOGIC:
>
> -----------------------------------------
>
> http://homepage.mac.com/bkohley
>
> Upon looking over just a small portion of Pat Speer's JFK
> assassination presentation (linked above), a series of proposed anti-
> SBT problems become readily apparent.
>
> Pat thinks that President John F. Kennedy was struck in the back by a
> bullet at Zapruder Film frame #190, which is also the "SBT" Z-Film
> frame as proposed by the HSCA in the late 1970s, which is a SBT
> timeline that I can only assume author Vincent Bugliosi has revised
> for his 2007 JFK book ("Reclaiming History"), since Vince, too,
> supported such an early SBT hit as of 1986. But better copies of the
> Z-Film (which show more clearly the Z224 SBT hit) have come to light
> since Mr. Bugliosi's support of a Z190 SBT in '86.
>
> Besides the obvious problem of "WHY DOESN'T KENNEDY REACT TO A Z190
> SHOT UNTIL Z225, VIA THE SUPER-RAPID ARM RISE WHICH ONLY STARTS AT
> Z226?" -- Pat also believes that the Z190 shot into JFK's back did not
> transit his body, despite the autopsy report claiming it MUST have
> transited. So that's DISAPPEARING BULLET #1.
>
> Plus: What the hell STOPPED this bullet?
>
> And Pat thinks that Connally was hit by a separate shot at Z224 (from
> behind, of course), and, based on the slightly R-to-L angle through
> JBC's body and the downward angle through him, this bullet almost
> certainly had to have come from a window in the Texas School Book
> Depository Building.
>
> Now, since the only known gunman in the TSBD was occupying the
> "Oswald" Sniper's-Nest window in the southeast corner of the building,
> is it reasonable to assume that this bullet DIDN'T come from that
> window?
>
> In my own opinion, that is not a reasonable thing to believe, per the
> overall evidence. So, based on the reasonable hypothesis that that
> Z224 bullet which went into JBC came from that SN window....I want to
> know HOW on this green Earth Mr. Speer manages to get John F. Kennedy
> OUT OF THE GUNMAN'S way in order for a separate bullet to hit Connally
> in the back where we KNOW Connally was hit?
>
> And then Pat needs a separate bullet to hit JFK in the throat from the
> front...which (coincidentally) Pat thinks ALSO occurs at Z224....the
> EXACT same frame he says Connally is hit (but by a SEPARATE bullet)!
> Here's DISAPPEARING BULLET #2.
>
> And -- What stopped THIS bullet from transiting Kennedy's body? Did
> the mere friction from the bullet going into his neck stop it dead?
> TWO "dud" rounds from TWO separate rifles (to account for the separate
> neck and back missiles not transiting)? Come now! How far into crazy-
> land are people expected to travel?
>
> Overall -- That CTer-created version of the shooting amounts to what
> would be an absolutely-miraculous piece of good fortune and great
> (coincidental) marksmanship on the part of the THREE different gunmen
> who must have (per this crazy theory) peppered the two victims with
> three separate bullets in a beautifully-coordinated "SBT"-like
> pattern...with the CORRECT TIMING even (per the Zapruder Film)!
>
> Just how much "coincidence" is too much? How is it even remotely
> possible to believe in such a 3-Shot anti-SBT shooting alternative?
> Which is a scenario that so closely mirrors the SBT in various ways,
> that members of two different Government inquiries FELL FOR THE
> SINGLE-BULLET THEORY??!!
>
> There's also the built-in "CE399" problem for any anti-SBT theory.
> Let's examine that.....
>
> 1.) Bullet CE399 is definitely a bullet from LEE HARVEY OSWALD'S GUN.
>
> 2.) Oswald's gun was almost certainly being fired from the SN window
> in the TSBD (it was found on that very same floor -- the 6th Floor --
> and the only gunman seen throughout Dealey Plaza was the gunman
> located in the southeast corner window on that TSBD 6th Floor).
>
> 3.) Connally was hit by just ONE single bullet during the shooting
> (per his doctors and per Connally's own beliefs regarding this
> matter).
>
> 4.) Given this approximate "Z224" view of the limo from the SN in the
> TSBD (linked below; via Dale Myers' computer animation, which is based
> almost exclusively on the Zapruder Film), President Kennedy is
> positively in between the gunman and the place on Governor Connally's
> back where he was hit by a bullet at Z224. ....
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/SOH_1061.jpg
>
> 5.) CE399 was found inside Parkland Hospital--and was found on a
> stretcher located in a place WHERE PRESIDENT KENNEDY NEVER WAS LOCATED
> (nor was JFK's stretcher). Which means that Bullet CE399 HAD to be the
> ONE AND ONLY BULLET that struck Governor Connally on 11/22/63. In
> other words, given the place where CE399 was found, that bullet had to
> have fallen out of CONNALLY, not KENNEDY.
>
> (This hypothesis is sans the introduction of any crazy, totally-
> unsupportable/unprovable belief of Bullet 399 being "planted", which
> is what most conspiracy theorists HAVE to believe....because if that
> bullet was NOT a "plant", the SBT fits like a glove, per #1 through #5
> above.)
>
> So, based on the above five points, the "problem" for anti-SBTers is
> finding a way for that bullet (CE399) to get to that stretcher inside
> Parkland Hospital (where it was found by Darrell Tomlinson) WITHOUT
> FIRST HAVING THAT SAME BULLET GO THROUGH BOTH JOHN F. KENNEDY AND JOHN
> B. CONNALLY (IN THAT ORDER).
>
> David Von Pein
> March 2007
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/00a4ecbb835edc89
bigdog
> David, let me help you out here.
>
> Your refutation to Speers' claim that JFK was hit at 190, lies in the
> nature of JFK's reaction.
>
> Try a simple experiment. Bring your hands up to your throat, imagining
> that you are suffering a terrible pain there. No, seriously, do it.
>
> Now, look down at your elbows. Did they remain at your side?
>
> JFK brought his arms up, not because of anything he felt in his throat,
> but because a nerve located at C7 in the spine connects directly with
> the elbow extensors.
>
> That's why his elbows rose above the level of his shoulders.
>
> If you talk to any neurologist, you will learn that such reactions are
> much faster than even startle reactions. Therefore, JFK's arms and
> elbows had to have risen within no more than 3-4 frames of him being
> struck by a bullet.
>
> Since we can see that his arm first began to rise at 226, we have a
> perfect match with JBC's reactions, which began when his jacket was
> blown outward at frame 223.
>
> 190 is totally out of the question for JFK.
>
> Unfortunately for your cause however, that shot could not possibly have
> come from Oswald's location.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eGupSng-Po
>
> Robert Harris
>
> In article
>
> - Show quoted text -
Bob, you were really going good until you got to the part about the shot
not coming from Oswald. The SN is exactly where two computer animations,
Failure Analysis and Myers, have said that shot came from. FA created a
cone indicating where the bullet could have come from based on the data
they had and the SN was in the center of that cone. Myers was more precise
in his analysis, again pointing to the SN.
David Von Pein
>>> "Your refutation to Speers' claim that JFK was hit at 190, lies in the
nature of JFK's reaction." <<<
Yes. Exactly. Which is why I said this earlier:
"Besides the obvious problem of "WHY DOESN'T KENNEDY REACT TO A Z190
SHOT UNTIL Z225, VIA THE SUPER-RAPID ARM RISE WHICH ONLY STARTS AT Z226?"
-- Pat [Speer] also believes that the Z190 shot into JFK's back did not
transit his body, despite the autopsy report claiming it MUST have
transited." -- D.V.P.
David Von Pein
www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/a8169329313d11c8
DVP SAID:
>>> "VIA THE SUPER-RAPID ARM RISE WHICH ONLY STARTS AT Z226?" <<<
JOHN FIORENTINO SAID:
>>> "None of that is correct." <<<
DVP NOW SAYS:
Nonsense. It's obvious that JFK's hands are very LOW as late as Z225
(much lower than they were in the Z190s when the HSCA claims JFK has
already been hit), and that his arms rise very rapidly only after
Z225, beginning at exactly Z226....2/18ths of a second after the
bullet struck him (or 3/18ths if we want to say that the bullet
technically struck at Z223, which is indeed possible).
>>> "The "super-extension" was referred to by Cecil Kirk as you can reference in the documentary LHO on Trial w/Bugliosi & Spence. It occurs at frame 199. I explain in my book what this is." <<<
Yes. That's the same Cecil Kirk that you (John F.) were poking fun at
the other day, claiming that he was seeing things that weren't there
(i.e., a bullet hitting Kennedy at Z190).
>>> "JFK & JBC were most certainly struck [at] Z- 223-224." <<<
Indeed they were. And JFK's hands don't begin their "rise" to his neck/
mouth until Z226, which is, of course, perfectly consistent with such
a Z223-224 hit.
==================================
THE S.B.T. IN ACTION:
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/88cd14ec6de230eb
==================================
Robert Harris
<9a66b1fe-929b-473c...@f16g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
bigdog <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
You can learn more about Myers' conclusions in these two video
presentations,
http://jfkhistory.com/myersx/myersx.mov
http://jfkhistory.com/silent3/silent3.mov
And the FAA is even worse. This is the 3D image they produced. Notice
that the angle is much flatter than the the 18 degrees back to the
alleged SN.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/sbt-faa.jpg
The real angle back to Oswald were much steeper than was consistent with
the wound locations of the two victims. Look at what happened when this
Discovery Channel team tried to play it straight and honestly depict the
trajectory:-)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hgec6oCdIvE
Robert Harris
geovulture
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Bob, you were really going good until you got to the part about the shot
> not coming from Oswald. The SN is exactly where two computer animations,
> Failure Analysis and Myers, have said that shot came from. FA created a
> cone indicating where the bullet could have come from based on the data
> they had and the SN was in the center of that cone. Myers was more precise
>
> - Show quoted text -
Reactions to the single bullet theory are an interesting study in bias
regarding researchers. I would say it falls on both sides due to the lack
of real information and data to rely on, but one of the things that stands
out to me is the demand for precision from conpiracy theorists. I very
often hear that the trajectory doesn't work because the bullet exiting
Kennedy should have hit Connally futher to the left. However, when we
look at where they claim the bullet should have hit, we all know that
there was no wound. Instead of looking logically at the situation and
understanding that perhaps their alignment of the bodies, limo and shooter
are wrong, they claim that the bullet glanced off of a vertebrae and
missed the car and its occupants all together.
Now, if this isn't bias, I don't know what is. What they are essentially
saying is that they are the ones who decide which direction bullets will
ricochet. They are willing to accept that the bullet didn't go in a
straight line only if it turned in a direction that disallows the single
bullet theory. They would never take that same ricochet solution to why
we don't see a bullet wound further to the left on Connally and decide
that the bullet glanced off of a vertebrae and hit Connally in his right
armpit. Why is that?