Dale Myers
Robert Harris
Dale and I go way back, to when I emailed him in 1995 in response to his
article in Toaster magazine.
To this day, I am still waiting for him to reveal the angles he used to
conclude that a line through the known wounds in JFK and Connally
pointed directly back at Oswald.
This video demonstrates that Myers is well aware that the angles don't
work, which is why he deliberately misrepresented the position of the
two victims.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xP0mH_u_no
Robert Harris
David Von Pein
TO THE CONTINUOUS RIDICULOUS ATTEMPTS BY VARIOUS CONSPIRACY KOOKS
(THIS TIME ROBERT HARRIS) TO UNDERMINE AND DEBUNK MR. MYERS' TOP-NOTCH
ANIMATION WORK REGARDING THE JFK ASSASSINATION AND, IN PARTICULAR, THE
SINGLE-BULLET THEORY:
"I’ve gotten more than one email in the last few days asking
about a video posted on YouTube over the weekend claiming to debunk my
computer animation work on the validity of the single bullet theory.
This latest video posting, entitled “Dale Myers or Voodoo Geometry
101,” arrives courtesy of conspiracy advocate Robert Harris who
manages to prove how little he knows about my computer work,
photography and geometric relations, and the Kennedy assassination in
general in less than six minutes.
The crux of Mr. Harris’ argument is that yours truly (that’s me)
falsified the geometric positions of Kennedy and Connally in order to
make it appear that the single bullet theory was valid and that the
single bullet shot traced back to Lee Harvey Oswald’s firing position
on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository. In short,
according to Mr. Harris, my computer work is a transparent lie.
Never mind that Mr. Harris’ charges have been made numerous times in
the past by equally ignorant detractors and rebutted in detail on my
own website (see, FAQ: Computer Reconstruction of the JFK
Assassination) and here in this forum (see, Con Job: Debunking the
Debunkers).
The modern day pied pipers of the YouTube generation count on the
short attention spans and general ignorance of their audience to sell
their own brand of snake-oil and promote themselves as reliable
purveyors of truth via video on the Internet.
Of course, anyone can point a webcam at their own mug a pretend to be
someone of knowledge and responsibility. Hence, the wisdom of the
ancient axiom, “You get what you pay for.”
In this case, those who buy Mr. Harris’ free offerings are getting a
pig in a poke.
For instance, Mr. Harris makes the foolish claim that he can measure a
two dimensional still frame of a computer rendering of the
presidential limousine and it’s occupants (as culled from the
Discovery Channel program, “Beyond the Magic Bullet”) and determine
the angle of a three-dimensional trajectory from the sniper’s nest.
Apparently Mr. Harris never heard of (or understands) the underlying
principle of photogrammetry, which in essence shows that it is
impossible to project three dimensional lines in space onto two
dimensional photographs without taking into account the location and
angle of both known vantage points. By some wizardry unknown to human
science, Mr. Harris is able to do both.
Conspiracy guru Jack White found out the lessons of photogrammetry the
hard way when he took a beating in 1978 while trying to convince the
House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) that multiple press
photographs of Oswald’s Mannlicher-Carcano rifle depicted multiple
rifles of differing lengths. The “proof” Mr. White offered of the
multiple rifle cover-up were measurements he made on two-dimensional
press photographs.
As the HSCA photograph experts called to rebut Mr. White rightly
pointed out, the former advertising photographer failed to take into
account the relationship between the camera making the photograph and
the tilt of the rifle in three dimensional space. In fact, White had
never heard of the principle of photogrammetry.
Apparently, Mr. Harris never heard of Jack White’s boo-boo, because he
makes the same error. And he makes it more than once.
For instance, Mr. Harris claims that a comparison of a photograph of
the presidential limousine made early in the parade route with a
computer rendering of my limousine model shows that “Myers has jammed
the two men much more closely together than they really were.” Mr.
Harris claims that the distance between the back seat where the
president was seated and Governor Connally’s jumpseat were compressed
in my computer model by “a little over fifty percent.”
What is the evidence for the charge that I manipulated the dimensions
of the limousine to better serve the single bullet theory?
Mr. Harris offers nothing more that his own self-proclaimed expertise
at visually aligning two different photographs made from two
completely different angles in three dimensional space – [a] virtual
impossibility – along with an unsupported declarative statement:
“There is no way JFK’s legs could have been up against the back of
Connally’s car seat.”
In fact, Mr. Harris’ credibility on this last point is effectively
destroyed by the existence of numerous photographs taken throughout
the motorcade (a photograph on the back dust jacket of Bill Sloan’s
JFK: Breaking the Silence to name one) which shows exactly the
opposite to be true – Kennedy’s knees were comparatively tight to the
back of Connally’s jump seat.
In addition, Mr. Harris’ claim that “when the House Select Committee
on Assassinations depicted the victims they had to move Connally
considerably [more] to his left” than he appeared to be in other
photographs suggests that Mr. Harris doesn’t know that the HSCA
Photographic Panel mistakenly based Connally’s position on a line of
sight as seen in a photograph made by Hugh Betzner and that the HSCA
analysis failed to take into account the fact that Connally’s right
shoulder was below Betzner’s line of sight (as proven by the Altgens’
photograph) and hence Connally might have been seated further right
than the HSCA believed. My three dimensional analysis of the Zapruder
film bares this fact out.
Most importantly, Mr. Harris states, “The next scene from [Mr. Myers’]
presentation includes an amazing sleight of hand or pixels or
whatever. Watch closely folks, as Mr. Myers tries to hide the evidence
of his deception by slipping the victims back into a proper position.”
Here, Mr. Harris shows a clip from the Discovery program which
features my computer work in which the moment of the single bullet is
shown in wireframe and in solid form as the camera circles the
limousine and its occupants.
Mr. Harris then adds this, “Okay, notice two things here. First the
car and the background are all wireframes. Also, he still has Kennedy
and Connally close together, so that 18 degree bullet trajectory looks
pretty reasonable. But as the car rotates, notice that something
happens. The wireframes disappear and right in the middle of the
rotation, Mr. Myers switches to a totally different video. In this
video he positions President Kennedy and Governor Connally correctly.”
What Mr. Harris doesn’t know is that the two renderings (wireframe and
solid form) depict THE SAME MODEL.
That’s right folks, the wireframe model that he claims has been
“jammed together” in order to mislead the American public and
perpetuate the cover-up, is the exact same model (and in the same
position) as the solid form model which Mr. Harris says depicts
Kennedy and Connally correctly.
For you tech junkies, the model of the single bullet moment was simply
rendered in a 360 degree rotational view multiple times with a variety
of surface settings (wireframe, solids, etc.), and then combined with
simple dissolves pulled between the various layers.
At the end of his presentation, Mr. Harris proudly boasts, “People
like Myers have been playing this same game for years, misconstruing
the positions of the President and Governor Connally to make it appear
that the shot was fired from the sixth floor of the depository. But
the angles from there just don’t work.”
Of course, the only game players in this case are the conspiracy
diehards like Mr. Harris who refuse to accept the reality of what
happened in Dealey Plaza and prefer instead to prey on the young and
naïve who are more than happy to follow any video pied piper willing
to tell them whatever they want to hear about the Kennedy
assassination – truth be damned."
Dale K. Myers
August 18, 2008
PermaLink to above article:
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2008/08/youtube-pied-pipers.html
===================================================
===================================================
Now seems like a good time to re-post what I wrote regarding this same
topic (on 08/18/2008 at 1:48 AM EDT):
www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xP0mH_u_no
Mr. Harris' attempt at debunking Dale Myers' animation work (via the
above-linked video) can itself be completely trashed when we realize
that Mr. Myers utilized the ORIGINAL BODY DRAFT of the Kennedy
limousine throughout all of his animation project.
Myers didn't just suddenly stop relying on the limo body draft (for
victim placement in their seats) only for the close-up shots. (Or does
Bob Harris really think Mr. Myers DID do just that very thing?)
IOW -- The whole "Secrets Of A Homicide" animation project by Dale K.
Myers is based on rock-solid, verifiable PHYSICAL data with respect to
the TSBD, the angles from the TSBD to the limo, Dealey Plaza as a
whole, and (most importantly for this post in response to Mr. Harris'
argument) the body draft from Hess & Eisenhardt for JFK's 1961 Lincoln
limousine:
http://jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/models.htm
Moreover.....
Mr. Myers didn't simply MAKE UP (from whole cloth) the measurements he
used to position JFK and Connally in their respective seats. He relied
on photos and, as mentioned, the actual body draft of the limo. Here's
a photo of the specific layout of the car in which the victims were
riding when they were shot (and this comes not from Myers, but from
the HSCA volumes--from 30 years ago). And just look at the amount of
"leg room" for the back-seat occupants (which would have been JFK and
Jackie on 11/22/63 in Dallas). Not very much room there, per my
perception of things:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol6/html/HSCA_Vol6_0028b.htm
The exact numbers are hard to read, but it looks like it says 8.80
inches between the front of the (JFK) back seat and the back of the
(Connally) jump seat. For comparison, my Size-10 shoes are about 10
inches long. IOW, there sure wasn't much room between those seats.
Here are some additional looks at the car (via actual pictures of the
limo from various angles):
http://in-broad-daylight.com/LIMO1961.jpg
http://www.in-broad-daylight.com/window.jpg
http://www.in-broad-daylight.com/fbiblky4.jpg
And this one really shows the "cramped" nature of those seats:
http://in-broad-daylight.com/LIMO1961.jpg
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/9328fa334b2541be
David Von Pein
>>> "David, you can "tell" us what he did until you are blue in the face, but my video PROVES that he deliberately misrepresented the positions of the two victims in an effort to make it appear that a trajectory from the 6th floor was consistent with the wounds of those men." <<<
As Mr. Myers so aptly points out in his written rebuttal on his
website -- you, Bob Harris, don't have the slightest fucking idea what
you're talking about.
You think you can accurately measure (to the inch) 3D imagery on a 2D
scale. You can't do it (accurately). And Dale Myers has told people
this endlessly for years on his website.
CTer and self-professed "photo expert" Bill Miller being another such
example, after Miller decided to try and debunk Myers by drawing lines
on the Bronson slide and then contending that Myers' 3D angles won't
work. Dale fully explained why this cannot be done....but, like gum on
your shoe, these stupid arguments keep popping back up time and time
again.
Could be it's time to shut the hell up. Because Robert Harris (and
other anti-Myers CTers) continue to embarrass themselves intensely.
But as long as those "5-Star" ratings keep coming in at YouTube, Bob
is happy. Right, Bob?
Chuck Schuyler
I've come to the conclusion that Robert Harris-as nice and normal a
guy as he may be when he is not discussing the Kennedy assassination-
is nuts.
I actually posted the Myers rebuttal to Bob awhile ago from acj., but
I didn't notice that it was cross linked to aaj, so it needs to clear
the censors over there, and Lord knows how long that will take.
Isn't it interesting that these kooks, who can prest-o-bam-o a video
on YouTube attacking Myers, don't take the time to actually meet him
and go over his work with him? I guess they're worried they might be
converted by commonsense, facts, logic, etc. to the Oswald Alone side.
And Bob couldn't have that. It would wreck his hobby.
Chuck Schuyler
Dale responded to you yesterday at his website.
You really don't know what you're talking about.
Here's his rebuttal:
completely different angles in three dimensional space – an virtual
solid form) depict the same model.
aeffects
> PRINTED BELOW IS ANOTHER EXCELLENT (AS USUAL) REBUTTAL BY DALE MYERS
> TO THE CONTINUOUS RIDICULOUS ATTEMPTS BY VARIOUS CONSPIRACY KOOKS
> (THIS TIME ROBERT HARRIS) TO UNDERMINE AND DEBUNK MR. MYERS' TOP-NOTCH
> ANIMATION WORK REGARDING THE JFK ASSASSINATION AND, IN PARTICULAR, THE
> SINGLE-BULLET THEORY:
>
sitdown David, you're working yourself in a lather.... we KNOW Myers
won't release his cartoon data.
There are a few out here who can drive the 3D application called
LIGHTWAVE as well if not better than old Dale Myers...
Some can even make it Hummmmmmm.
How 'bout dem apples young feller?
cdddraftsman
the JFK Assassination .
Myers is just one .......... at YT mag30th made him into the fool he
loves to be .
tl
Robert Harris
It is disappointing, though not surprising that Mr. Myers has to use a
surrogate to present his defense of my video, but let's take a look at
his
arguments.
Keep in mind, that I simply pointed out that he reduced the distance
between JFK and Connally, in the first part of his presentation, using
what was obviously, a hastily thrown together wireframe of the
limousine,
and that he switched back to an accurate rendering of the two victims
after finishing his "analysis".
Myers arguments in the order presented:
1. Harris is ignorant.
2. These same charges have been made "numerous times" by others (not
exactly surprising:-) who are therefore, also ignorant.
3. Harris relies on short attention spans to present his arguments.
4. Harris pretends to be knowledgeable.
5. Harris pretends that he can look at a two dimensional drawing and
determine a three dimensional trajectory.
6. Jack White was full of crap, so somehow, that proves Harris is the
same.
7. Harris has not presented evidence that he placed the two victims more
closely together than they were.
8. Myers claims that he used exactly the same models in both the
wireframe version of video, and the completed version.
Of course, 1-4 are typical ad hominem attacks on myself and his many
critics, as well as those poor attention deficient slobs who study my
videos.
Number 5 is totally bogus, since my argument was that he shrunk the
distance between the two men - a fact which is quite obvious, and
requires no extrapolation whatsoever. Of course, Mr. Myers knew that,
but he needed to pretend that I was acting like Jack White.
Number 6 - see above.
Number 7 - the most commonly used and fallacious argument used by
conspiracy deniers. After being confronted with evidence they cannot
refute, they simply say, "where is the evidence?".
Number 8 could only be true if he compressed the wireframes in the
horizontal dimension.
But what is really great about debates on graphics is that you don't
have to rely on the *words* of either Mr. Myers or myself. Look at the
images - pause the video, and hold a ruler up to your screen. Decide for
yourself, who is full of crap here:-)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xP0mH_u_no
Myers complete response is below.
Robert Harris
"Iąve gotten more than one email in the last few days asking
about a video posted on YouTube over the weekend claiming to debunk my
computer animation work on the validity of the single bullet theory.
This latest video posting, entitled łDale Myers or Voodoo Geometry
101,˛ arrives courtesy of conspiracy advocate Robert Harris who
manages to prove how little he knows about my computer work,
photography and geometric relations, and the Kennedy assassination in
general in less than six minutes.
The crux of Mr. Harrisą argument is that yours truly (thatąs me)
falsified the geometric positions of Kennedy and Connally in order to
make it appear that the single bullet theory was valid and that the
single bullet shot traced back to Lee Harvey Oswaldąs firing position
on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository. In short,
according to Mr. Harris, my computer work is a transparent lie.
Never mind that Mr. Harrisą charges have been made numerous times in
the past by equally ignorant detractors and rebutted in detail on my
own website (see, FAQ: Computer Reconstruction of the JFK
Assassination) and here in this forum (see, Con Job: Debunking the
Debunkers).
The modern day pied pipers of the YouTube generation count on the
short attention spans and general ignorance of their audience to sell
their own brand of snake-oil and promote themselves as reliable
purveyors of truth via video on the Internet.
Of course, anyone can point a webcam at their own mug a pretend to be
someone of knowledge and responsibility. Hence, the wisdom of the
ancient axiom, łYou get what you pay for.˛
In this case, those who buy Mr. Harrisą free offerings are getting a
pig in a poke.
For instance, Mr. Harris makes the foolish claim that he can measure a
two dimensional still frame of a computer rendering of the
presidential limousine and itąs occupants (as culled from the
Discovery Channel program, łBeyond the Magic Bullet˛) and determine
the angle of a three-dimensional trajectory from the sniperąs nest.
Apparently Mr. Harris never heard of (or understands) the underlying
principle of photogrammetry, which in essence shows that it is
impossible to project three dimensional lines in space onto two
dimensional photographs without taking into account the location and
angle of both known vantage points. By some wizardry unknown to human
science, Mr. Harris is able to do both.
Conspiracy guru Jack White found out the lessons of photogrammetry the
hard way when he took a beating in 1978 while trying to convince the
House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) that multiple press
photographs of Oswaldąs Mannlicher-Carcano rifle depicted multiple
rifles of differing lengths. The łproof˛ Mr. White offered of the
multiple rifle cover-up were measurements he made on two-dimensional
press photographs.
As the HSCA photograph experts called to rebut Mr. White rightly
pointed out, the former advertising photographer failed to take into
account the relationship between the camera making the photograph and
the tilt of the rifle in three dimensional space. In fact, White had
never heard of the principle of photogrammetry.
Apparently, Mr. Harris never heard of Jack Whiteąs boo-boo, because he
makes the same error. And he makes it more than once.
For instance, Mr. Harris claims that a comparison of a photograph of
the presidential limousine made early in the parade route with a
computer rendering of my limousine model shows that łMyers has jammed
the two men much more closely together than they really were.˛ Mr.
Harris claims that the distance between the back seat where the
president was seated and Governor Connallyąs jumpseat were compressed
in my computer model by ła little over fifty percent.˛
What is the evidence for the charge that I manipulated the dimensions
of the limousine to better serve the single bullet theory?
Mr. Harris offers nothing more that his own self-proclaimed expertise
at visually aligning two different photographs made from two
completely different angles in three dimensional space [a] virtual
impossibility along with an unsupported declarative statement:
łThere is no way JFKąs legs could have been up against the back of
Connallyąs car seat.˛
In fact, Mr. Harrisą credibility on this last point is effectively
destroyed by the existence of numerous photographs taken throughout
the motorcade (a photograph on the back dust jacket of Bill Sloanąs
JFK: Breaking the Silence to name one) which shows exactly the
opposite to be true Kennedyąs knees were comparatively tight to the
back of Connallyąs jump seat.
In addition, Mr. Harrisą claim that łwhen the House Select Committee
on Assassinations depicted the victims they had to move Connally
considerably [more] to his left˛ than he appeared to be in other
photographs suggests that Mr. Harris doesnąt know that the HSCA
Photographic Panel mistakenly based Connallyąs position on a line of
sight as seen in a photograph made by Hugh Betzner and that the HSCA
analysis failed to take into account the fact that Connallyąs right
shoulder was below Betznerąs line of sight (as proven by the Altgensą
photograph) and hence Connally might have been seated further right
than the HSCA believed. My three dimensional analysis of the Zapruder
film bares this fact out.
Most importantly, Mr. Harris states, łThe next scene from [Mr. Myersą]
presentation includes an amazing sleight of hand or pixels or
whatever. Watch closely folks, as Mr. Myers tries to hide the evidence
of his deception by slipping the victims back into a proper position.˛
Here, Mr. Harris shows a clip from the Discovery program which
features my computer work in which the moment of the single bullet is
shown in wireframe and in solid form as the camera circles the
limousine and its occupants.
Mr. Harris then adds this, łOkay, notice two things here. First the
car and the background are all wireframes. Also, he still has Kennedy
and Connally close together, so that 18 degree bullet trajectory looks
pretty reasonable. But as the car rotates, notice that something
happens. The wireframes disappear and right in the middle of the
rotation, Mr. Myers switches to a totally different video. In this
video he positions President Kennedy and Governor Connally correctly.˛
What Mr. Harris doesnąt know is that the two renderings (wireframe and
solid form) depict THE SAME MODEL.
Thatąs right folks, the wireframe model that he claims has been
łjammed together˛ in order to mislead the American public and
perpetuate the cover-up, is the exact same model (and in the same
position) as the solid form model which Mr. Harris says depicts
Kennedy and Connally correctly.
For you tech junkies, the model of the single bullet moment was simply
rendered in a 360 degree rotational view multiple times with a variety
of surface settings (wireframe, solids, etc.), and then combined with
simple dissolves pulled between the various layers.
At the end of his presentation, Mr. Harris proudly boasts, łPeople
like Myers have been playing this same game for years, misconstruing
the positions of the President and Governor Connally to make it appear
that the shot was fired from the sixth floor of the depository. But
the angles from there just donąt work.˛
Of course, the only game players in this case are the conspiracy
diehards like Mr. Harris who refuse to accept the reality of what
happened in Dealey Plaza and prefer instead to prey on the young and
naďve who are more than happy to follow any video pied piper willing
to tell them whatever they want to hear about the Kennedy
assassination truth be damned."
Dale K. Myers
August 18, 2008
aeffects
> On Aug 19, 11:18 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > >>> "David, you can "tell" us what he did until you are blue in the face, but my video PROVES that he deliberately misrepresented the positions of the two victims in an effort to make it appear that a trajectory from the 6th floor was consistent with the wounds of those men." <<<
>
> > As Mr. Myers so aptly points out in his written rebuttal on his
> > website -- you, Bob Harris, don't have the slightest fucking idea what
> > you're talking about.
>
> > You think you can accurately measure (to the inch) 3D imagery on a 2D
> > scale. You can't do it (accurately). And Dale Myers has told people
> > this endlessly for years on his website.
>
> > CTer and self-professed "photo expert" Bill Miller being another such
> > example, after Miller decided to try and debunk Myers by drawing lines
> > on the Bronson slide and then contending that Myers' 3D angles won't
> > work. Dale fully explained why this cannot be done....but, like gum on
> > your shoe, these stupid arguments keep popping back up time and time
> > again.
>
> > Could be it's time to shut the hell up. Because Robert Harris (and
> > other anti-Myers CTers) continue to embarrass themselves intensely.
>
> > But as long as those "5-Star" ratings keep coming in at YouTube, Bob
> > is happy. Right, Bob?
>
> I've come to the conclusion that Robert Harris-as nice and normal a
> guy as he may be when he is not discussing the Kennedy assassination-
> is nuts.
Chuckie daShoe, your topic related conclusion[s] are irrelevant, we
keep you around here (3+ years now) for humor purposes. For physical
exercise: mentallly batting you around a bit, snookum's
> I actually posted the Myers rebuttal to Bob awhile ago from acj., but
> I didn't notice that it was cross linked to aaj, so it needs to clear
> the censors over there, and Lord knows how long that will take.
silly excuse... grow up son!
> Isn't it interesting that these kooks, who can prest-o-bam-o a video
> on YouTube attacking Myers, don't take the time to actually meet him
> and go over his work with him? I guess they're worried they might be
> converted by commonsense, facts, logic, etc. to the Oswald Alone side.
Myers can drop his Zappy cartoon Lightwave project folder at your
house, anytime he wants.... little peer review is in store... Can you
handle that Dale?
> And Bob couldn't have that. It would wreck his hobby.
Finally admitting your here for the job, are ya? You in a crypt next
to Tommy daTune Lowry these day's..... LMFAO
aeffects
> On Aug 19, 8:38 pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Dale responded to you yesterday at his website.
>
> http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/
>
> You really don't know what you're talking about.
>
> Here's his rebuttal:
>
> I’ve gotten more than one email in the last few days asking about a
> video posted on YouTube over the weekend claiming to debunk my
> computer animation work on the validity of the single bullet theory.
c'mon Dale drop by, bring your cartoons project files -- I'll provide
the popcorn and someone with mucho experience on Lightwave 8, we'll
dig beneath the hood a bit -- What you say son? Hell you can watch the
stands while your polishing that EMMY Award.
Lets give some real meaning to "CASE CLOSED", you do remember saying
that, right?
aeffects
bump.... Dale? or that dup David VonPein?
David Von Pein
nfoha...@gmail.com
simulation", there is the use of LASER technology to demonstrate the
path of the projectile of the MANNLICHER-CARCANO rifle, in an attempt
to demonstrate that not only could Oswald have hit Mr. Kennedy, but
that the same, "pristine bullet" also made the several injuries
passing through Connally's various injuries. The question becomes one
of physics as we know it and not as a theoretical computer simulation
would have that physics be.
The Mannlicher Carcano rifle is of Italian ancestry. The projectile is
referred to as the .5x52mm Carcano or 6.5x52mm Mannlicher-Carcano is
an Italian military 6.77 mm (.266/67 cal.) rimless bottle-necked rifle
cartridge, developed from 1889-1891.
Wikipedia has a picture of the projectile
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ce141.gif
More from the Wikipedia article about the projectile
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6.5x52mm_Mannlicher-Carcano#Design
The MC projectile is an infantry type load, and the specifics of that
bullet are as
follows:
Bullet weight
Velocity Energy
10.5 g (162 gr) RN 700 m/s (2,300 ft/s) 2,572 J (1,897 ft·lbf
Also from Wikipedia :
Performance
"The 6.5x52 Carcano is an effective and easy-to-shoot deer cartridge
out to 200 m (220 yards), with properly-bulleted ammunition. Its main
drawback in military use was that the standard Italian service round
had a round-nosed bullet and was highly stable (did not usually tumble
unless it hit bone), giving many narrow-channel straight-through
wounds.[citation needed] This characteristic is due to the high
sectional density of the round (the extreme bullet length compared to
its diameter) and probably accounts for the "magic bullet" that
managed to fatally wound John Kennedy and seriously wound Governor
Connelly and was later found on a stretcher in Parkland Hospital.
Handloaders should note that the currently available factory
ammunition may lack accuracy due to use of a 6.7 mm (.264 in) bullet
instead of the 6.8 (.268 in) as originally loaded."
The last line is a bit interesting.
But, let's not get "deflected" as the "magic bullet" did.
Unless a person has had no experience in high school physics, or
actually firing of rifles, one might BELIEVE the magic trajectory
theory, i.e. that a physical bullet
weighing 10.5 g will fly at the speed of light and with an absolute
straight trajectory as does the laser. Alas, the real world has nasty
things like friction, gravity, wind speed, and other physical forces
that can alter the path of a real, honest to goodness projectile.
One diagram about the path of the bullet through the two government
officials is fuzzily found at http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=6879
A poster at that forum says this:
"The whole 'magic bullet' theory is laughable. I can understand how
they managed to get away with it in the 1960's, but not today.
I have watched the fatal shot, over and over, he gets it in the face
everytime...and the shooter is to his front-right...or just off to the
right of the camera by around several hundred meters. The blood is not
splattered forwards, its a plume created when the bullet enters the
front of his face..." He has inserted the picture frame of the event
located at http://www.k12.nf.ca/gc/SocialStudies/whist3201/World%20History/MMartin/ZapruderFilm/z-313.jpg
.
Anyone watching the film of Kennedy getting shot sees the immediate
retrograde translation of the head. Jackie gets out of her seat and
frantically goes backward toward the rear of the vehicle. Would she do
that if she thought at all that the bullets were coming from that
direction? I certainly would not have. And, the silly notion that she
was trying to get the secret service agent back there for help is
laughable.
From the same page, another poster quotes this report
"http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/selec...mmittee-report/
continued
nfoha...@gmail.com
Quote:
"I. Findings of the Select Committee on Assassination in the
assassination of President John F. Kennedy
I.A. Lee Harvey Oswald fired three shots at President John F. Kennedy.
The second and third shots he fired struck the President. The third
shot he fired killed the President
I.B. Scientific acoustical evidence establishes a high probability
that two gunmen fired at President John F. Kennedy. Other scientific
evidence does not preclude the possibility of two gunmen firing at the
President. Scientific evidence negates some specific conspiracy
allegations
I.C. The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to
it, that President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a
result of a conspiracy. The committee was unable to identify the other
gunmen or the extent of the conspiracy I.D. Agencies and departments
of the U.S. Government performed with varying degrees of competency in
the fulfillment of their duties. President John F. Kennedy did not
receive adequate protection. A thorough and reliable investigation
into the responsibility of Lee Harvey Oswald for the assassination was
conducted. The investigation into the possibility of conspiracy in the
assassination was inadequate. the conclusions of the investigations
were arrived at in good faith, but presented in a fashion that was too
definitive"
On the same forum page, a person reporting to be a former Marine and
excellent shot said this:
"I will add to that. as a former Marine, and a top notch shooter, I
could NOT have taken those 3 shots in that short a period of time from
that distance and had that kind of accuracy.
I would be hard pressed to do that with a semi automatic. and I shot a 239
out of 250 at ranges up to 500 meters. Now someone tell me how a flunky
managed to pop off that many shots that fast with a bolt action rifle, AND
to top it off, one of the slugs did not compress/flatten out on impact.
(The magic bullet) you can hit a piece of paper with a round and it will
balloon... I do NOT believe Oswald was alone. As for who? good luck. "
Getting back to the documentary in which Mr. Myers Lightwave generated
tale of woe was featured, when the producers TRIED as hard as possible to
do a recreation and produce the SEVEN WOUNDS and retrieve the bullet in
the same shape as the one that just happened to tumble off the gurney in
the Parkland hospital, they failed to do that...they could NOT reproduce
it under optimal conditions.
The program used laser trajectory when they wanted it to fit their theory,
but we know that a spiraling, 10.5 g old Italian rifle bullet does not
necessary go laser straight if a nervous little school book depository
employee is firing it.
You have to remember, even though Oswald did fire a rifle in the service,
he was not practicing with it daily or even weekly. I have a 357 S&W
Magnum, but , since I am not firing it and practicing regularly, I would
only probably be deadly within 25 feet (and that would be with a still
target and me doing the old double tap head and body center mass cop
style).
But, the problem I see with the documentary is the fact that they are
stressing their "proof" of the single shooter theory on things like Mr.
Myers Lightwave Modelling, and lasers, optimal conditions with calm
shooters who practice a lot.
Why? Because as you start to use real world , actual dirty and gritty
testing, things fall apart and the center will not hold. If computer
modeling faithfully represented the real world, then us Muggles would have
to be concerned about the prodigious magical feats of Harry Potter, Star
Wars would be real, there would really be a Gollum, and Frodo would live.
But, it's legerdermain, "Movie Magic", smoke and mirrors.
How about real world efforts to duplicate the alleged "Robin Hood splits
the arrow" effort of Lee Harvey Oswald?
It doesn't take much googling to come up with some of that.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo/jfk8/mc.htm "(2) It is apparently
difficult, but not impossible -- at least with only minimal practice with
the firearm used -- to fire 3 shots, at least two of which score "kills",
with an elapsed time of 1.7 seconds or less between any two shots, even
though in the limited testing conducted, no shooter achieved this degree
of proficiency." The shots performed in the above, were performed at the
following distances, by expert marksmen who arguably get regular firearm
practice as law enforcement professionals...
"The shots were fired from a two story tower (approximately 20 feet high),
at three targets, stationed from left to right at distances of 143, 165
and 266 feet from the tower. [1] The rifle was shot by four expert
marksmen from the D.C.P.D., Officers D.M. Smith, B.L. Miller, Joe Masson,
and E.E. Lewis, and two inexperienced staff members, deputy Chief Counsel
Gary Cornwell and myself. Also present were Sgt. Cecil Kirk and Officer
M.D. Gonzales, the D.C.P.D. Range Instructor. All members of the D.C.P.D.
who fired the rifle had prior military experience. Officers Lewis and
Smith had additional extensive civilian training in the use of rifles,
while officers Miller and Masson had similar extensive training in the use
of handguns. Each of the officers thus can be considered experts in the
use of such weapons."
This last statement appears on the above test report : "In light of the
difficulty involved in making the first two shots in 1.66, I note that
showing that it is possible does not offer any reason why he would have
acted so quickly after the first miss."
Now, riflemen who try to duplicate the alleged shots of Oswald, don't have
something that the real Oswald WOULD have had. Adrenaline was no doubt
pumping through his system. Any non-professional assassin trying to kill a
sitting president is going to have a stress soup of hormones and
neurotransmitters flooding his system. He also had "time pressure". His
window of opportunity would be very small, and if the didn't score kill
shots within a very small time frame, he would have missed it altogether.
I don't recall anyone talking about the effects of adrenaline on a
marksman, or a person like Oswald who hadn't really kept up his practice
with the weapon he used in the service of our country, let alone the
cheap, Italian made MC rifle.
"Officer Friendly" warns us of the negative effects of adrenaline on
marksmanship
http://advicefromofficerfriendly.blogspot.com/2008/04/rifle-shooting-tips-learn-to-relax.html
"Adrenalin will affect your hold, your position and your timing... if
you rush the shot, you're just going to scare him away. "
Now, let's think more about this little Oswald guy, finger on the trigger,
staring out into the bright sunshine from the darkened depository, about
to perform perhaps the scariest and most monumentally horrible act he has
ever done, i.e. , to kill the president. He hasn't had time to practice
with the weapon that much, and his "muscle memory" from his service
shooting is not going to help him in this situation. His breathing is
rapid, shallow, adrenaline is pumping in his system, increasing his heart
rate, affecting his sight. We CANNOT ignore this physiological state he
was in. He is not calm, breathing normally, squeezing off a slow round at
a paper target.
He is firing at the top leader of the free world, in a moving car,
surrounding by cops and secret service.
Let's think more about what adrenaline does to your ability to shoot
well...
http://www.shootingusa.com/GUN_QUESTIONS/gun_questions.html
" Most people in an emergency, with adrenaline pumping in their ears,
have real trouble hitting any target. Trained cops have had 10 round
exchanges of gunfire with perpetrators who were shooting back at
distances as short as 15 feet… and neither cop nor perp hit the other
guy. So the handgun is a problem to actually use in an emergency… but
the handgun is better than no gun… for the emergency when you can’t
get to the shotgun in time."
And, when Oswald, under the Myers scenario, fired three shots, Oswald
had to know that he may be revealing his position and that either
Secret Service or FBI spotters may be hurling lead toward that window.
He wouldn't have thought he had all the time in the world to shoot,
and then sit there and survey the damage. Again, he was time hurried
if he actually did it. continued
In the real world re-enactments by people not specifically trying to
debunk the conspiracy theory, every person who as used the MC rifle,
and tried shooting through trees at a moving car, with an old Italian
made, cheap MC bolt action will tell you that it would be a difficult
shot to make. Here we have this nervous 24 year old boy (most folks
who knew Oswald talk about his nervous nature) who undoubtedly, if he
did do it, was breathing hard and fast, upper chest breathing,
nervous, time pressured, who didn't know for sure if after he fired
the three shots, would be under a hail of automatic rifle fire, or if
the building would be surrounded, of if he would just be shot on
sight,
here is this "loser" as many people have described him, who, if you
believe the Dale Myers of the world, cool and calm like a hitman or
professional special forces sharpshooter, was able to fire off three
shots with an antique rifle, and get "two birds with one shot" in the
sense of hitting Connelly and Kennedy. Sci-Fi has noting on this tale
of incredulity. Oswald was NOT Jason Bourne of the BOURNE ULTIMATUM
nor was he Wahlberg in SHOOTER. He was a pissed off, frustrated little
(he was small and weak as a kid and got the nickname "Ozzie Rabbit"
after a cartoon character) man whose life was going nowhere fast.
The notes of the man who interrogated Oswald, document that Oswald
denied shooting Kennedy, and even denied owning the rifle, in essence
saying the photo of him holding the rifle was doctored. In the
videotape of Oswald, he denies again shooting Kennedy or anyone.
(Those wanting to dispute the "I didn't own a rifle" or
"The Photo was Faked" will probably want to quote this Wikipedia page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Harvey_Oswald#Mannlicher-Carcano_rifle,
and
I've been there and read it so don't waste your googling on that URL).
So, instead of wasting your time at that hackneyed page spouting the
party line
about the "Backyard Photo", check out a more interesting web page at
http://www.pimall.com/nais/news/backyard.html
I kind of like Richard Belzer's (Belz) piece in Huffington post from
which I draw a limited quote
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-belzer/defaming-history-or-who-_b_60188.html
(Quoted Under FAIR USE)
"So it behooves me to settle one irrefutable reality about the "crime
of the century": IT WAS PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR OSWALD TO HAVE SHOT
PRESIDENT KENNEDY!!!...There I said it: with no apologies to the likes
of prosecutor Bugliosi. Let me explain this pesky fact once and for
all. The prosecutor likes to boast that he is virtually the only
person on earth to have read the entire 26 volumes of the Warren
Report. He fails to mention his willfull, startlingly lax examination
of the contradictions and omissions in the report.
After President Kennedy's head was exploded, Lee Harvey Oswald was
discovered on the second floor of the Book Depository building
drinking a Coke. His presence was verified by his boss, Roy Truly, and
motorcycle patrolman Marion Baker. According to the Warren Commission,
the three men's encounter was reenacted in two "tests" by the
commission: in the first, Baker (walking!) reached the second floor
landing in 1 minute, 30 seconds. In the second test; in his words: "at
kind of a trot"; he finished the course in 1 minute, 15 seconds...to
"time" Oswald's movements Special Agent John Howlett of the Secret
Service (in another rigged "test") carried a rifle (there were three
rifles found in the Depository on November 22: a German Mauser, a much
joked about Italian Mannlicher-Carcano, and a British Enfield Rifle;
but that's another story) from the "nest" and "placed" the Carcano on
the floor near the site where it was actually found. The truth is the
murderer hid the rifle, which would take longer than to "place it on
the floor". The reality is (as Mr. Bugliosi knows full well if he
"read" the Report as he claims) the Warren Commission reenactments of
Baker's reaction times were done at a slower speed than his actual
movements, according to Baker's own testimony he ran from his
motorcycle and into the depository quickly but the reenactments had
him purposely go slower to meet the needs of the Commission's desire
to create the impression that there was time enough for the assassin
to do his dirty deed. Let us now consider what Oswald was alleged to
have accomplished, by some miracle, with his rickety ass misaligned
bolt-action relic of a rifle: fire three bullets, with deadly
accuraccy (of which one was "magic": a theory concocted by Arlen
Specter, at the behest of the Commission, that manages to suspend the
laws of Newtonian physics!) squeeze out of the sniper's nest, wipe off
the gun, go to the opposite end of the sixth floor, zigzagging and
dodging stacks of books, wedge the weapon between two of the stacks,
run down four flights of stairs (with landings, actually making it
eight flights, I visited the Book Depository) then, according to page
679 of Volume XXV1 of the Commission's Hearings and Exhibits...exhibit
No. 3076 quoting Officer Baker's deposition: "on the second floor
where the lunchroom is located, I saw a man standing in the lunchroom
drinking a Coke"; Oswald appeared completely calm and not the least
out of breath or nervous at his chance encounter with patrolman Baker
and Roy Truly (who remember ran up just one flight of stairs) in
reality surely getting them there in more like SIXTY TO SIXTY FIVE
SECONDS ladies and gentlemen: Therefore to repeat: IT WAS PHYSICALLY
IMPOSSIBLE FOR OSWALD TO HAVE SHOT PRESIDENT KENNEDY!!!" -----------
Amen Belz, Amen.
Lightwave , 3DS MAX, Softimage, or other software based simulations
have a hard time refuting reality. Facts, are stubborn things. Enter
the father of ex-white house spokesman Scott McClellan, son of Barr
McClellan and Carole Keaton Rylander (ex Comptroller of the State of
Texas). Barr is ALSO father of Mark McClellan, former Food and Drug
Administration Commissioner and former director of Medicare for the
George W. Bush administration . Oliver Barr McClellan was born 1939,
and later, became a lawyer. Not just any lawyer, he became Lyndon
Baines Johnson's lawyer (you may recall him, since he directly
benefited from Kennedy's demise by becoming president). More on Barr
at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barr_McClellan .
", McClellan published Blood, Money & Power: How LBJ Killed JFK*[3],
in 2003 which became a best-seller in November of that year. In the
book McClellan presents a theory that Lyndon B. Johnson and Edward
Clark were involved in the planning and cover-up of the Kennedy
assassination. McClellan also named Malcolm Wallace as one of the
assassins. The killing of Kennedy, he alleged, was paid for by oil
millionaires such as Clint Murchison, Sr. and Haroldson L. Hunt.
McClellan purports that Clark got $6 million for this work. French
journalist William Reymond published a book the same year in which he
claims that Cliff Carter and Malcolm "Mac" Wallace were key to helping
plot the murder of JFK. McClellan's book has been translated into
Japanese. He is presently completing a sequel to his book.
McClellan states, the assassination of Kennedy allowed the oil
depletion allowance to be kept at 27.5 percent. It remained unchanged
during the Johnson presidency. According to McClellan this resulted in
a saving of over 100 million dollars to the American oil industry.
During President Richard M. Nixon term, in 1970, it dropped to 15
percent."
Now, I know, there are no "Barr McClellan" controls in Lightwave for
Myers to fiddel with, and as noted, "facts are stubborn things".
Myers and the HISTORY CHANNEL want to paint those who do not swallow
the Kool Aid about the one shooter myth would like to paint themselves
as "scientific" and those who do not fall in line, as being poorly
informed, or something short of illiterate knuckledraggers. Au
contraire, there are certainly critics of the WARREN FABRICATION,
er..."WARREN REPORT" who mount a viable and intelligent dissection of
the fiction that shows logical and reasonable dissection of this
writhing piece of fantasy.
Check out http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/the_critics/sauvage/WC_Case/WC_case_against_Oswald.html
"The Commission’s explanation is that Oswald killed Tippit “in an
apparent attempt to escape.” Yet, no one—the Commission no more than I—
knows why Tippit, alone in his patrol car, “pulled up alongside a man
walking in the same direction.” The Commission states that “it is
conceivable, even probable, that Tippit stopped Oswald because of the
description broadcast by the police radio.” This statement is
ridiculous. The description broadcast by the police did not mention
clothing, shoes, manner or any other distinctive trait enabling
identification of a man approached from behind in a car. And this
occurred several miles from the scene of the crime, in a neighborhood
where Tippit (unless he was informed about Oswald, a hypothesis the
Commission avoids like the plague) had no reason to seek the suspect.
If the police had taken to arresting every “white male,
approximately 30, slender build, height 5’ 10”, weight 165 pounds,”
from one end of Dallas to the other, there would not have been enough
theaters and gymnasiums and ballrooms to hold them all. As it turned
out, the description broadcast by the police radio did not lead to any
other arrest, not even in the immediate neighborhood of the Texas
School Book Depository. Is it “probable,” even “conceivable,” that in
the entire Dallas Police Department, J. D. Tippit alone was able to
identify someone he saw from behind, in Oak Cliff, who in fact stood 5
foot 9 inches tall, was 24 years old, and weighed between 140 and 150
pounds? Finally, according to the extraordinary Helen Markham—whose
testimony the Commission regards as “reliable,” though I do not have
the slightest faith in it—Tippit did not at any time act as if he were
dealing with someone suspected of assassinating the President. In
short, it is impossible to affirm that Oswald was seeking “to escape”
because it is impossible to affirm that Tippit was trying to arrest
him.
Nor is it possible to affirm, as proof number 5 does, that Oswald
“resisted arrest by drawing a fully loaded pistol and attempting to
shoot another police officer.” The circumstances of Oswald’s arrest in
the Texas Theater remain confused, since the Warren Report does not
elucidate any of the contradictions and inconsistencies raised by the
accounts of the police offices, and the two witnesses it produced (out
of a total it estimates at 12 or 14) only added new contradictions and
inconsistencies, as the Commission recognizes. The Report itself, and
the statements of officer M. N. McDonald contained in Volume III of
the Hearings of the Commission, show that in striking the officer who
was arresting him, Oswald was not attempting an escape. Oswald
resisted arrest, the Report tells us, by hitting McDonald “between the
eyes with his left fist,” and it was only after this, according to the
Report, that he drew a gun."
Several people have tried to close the book on the Kennedy murder, and
I say MURDER because that is what it is. People like Gerald Posner, in
his "Case Closed" book, tried to make money AND support the party line
(you may recall another tome using the term "Case Closed", this one
from the federal government trying to put an end to the UFO -Roswell
story).
I'm sorry HISTORY CHANNEL, DALE MYERS, et al, you have not proved your
case. The case is NOT CLOSED, and most Americans don't accept your
fairy tale drawn from fairy dust and polygons.
~NFO HACKERZ
Sam McClung
<nfoha...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4f13d714-27ff-462b...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
English
> On Aug 19, 8:38 pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Dale responded to you yesterday at his website.
Great.
If you are on good terms with Mr Myers, may I ask you to ask Mr Myers
how he calculated his error cones, please?
I have no wish to present a case against Mr Myers. It's just for my
personal interest.
Kind Regards
Tim Hughes
aeffects
> What do you want, Crackpipe?
you look and respond much better when your anal. Carry on, hon!