back and to the left ?
paul seaton
Below there's a link to a photo I came across of a bullet being fired
through a tall , fluted glass full of red wine, caught in a very high
speed photo.
Before looking, try imagining what you think the result will be.
Mass of broken glass & wine gobs heading off in the direction of the
bullet's travel, perhaps ? The whole wine glass falling over & shattering
in that same direction, maybe?
Well, when you are done imagining, here is the link :-
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nebarnix/5380563828/in/photostream/
And generally OT but just because some of these are fascinating -
http://www.businessinsider.com/27-high-speed-photos-2011-3#metrocard-hit-by-bullet-1
Paul S
davidemerling
wrote:
>
> Paul S
Those are cool photos!
I'm not sure what this lends to the back-and-to-the-left argument,
however.
As long as this debate has been alive, people have been sharing various
photos and videos (mostly) of bullets a wide assortment of objects to
"prove" their point. It never seems to convince anybody. There is always
some argument about how it doesn't completely represent what happened to
Kennedy's head. Mostly, those are valid arguments because very few of the
photos show bullets hitting anything other than inanimate objects.
Even when videos of actually PEOPLE getting shot, there are STILL
arguments about how it doesn't completely duplicated the Dealey Plaza
shooting. And around and around we go.
The bottom line is this:
1. It is not IMPOSSIBLE for Kennedy's head to do what it did.
2. The autopsy settles the score. He was shot ONCE, from BEHIND.
That's why they *have* autopsies, for the most part.
Another thing that is really cool to watch is SUPER slow-motion of rather
mundane events, like a drop of water falling into a calm pool of water.
What is normally uninteresting becomes fascinating.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLYhkU6tMA8
David Emerling
Memphis, TN
timstter
wrote:
>
> Paul S
Interesting that even a glass of wine appears to cause the bullet to
begin tumbling.
:-)
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
John Blubaugh
>
A real autopsy would have been nice. If there had been one it would
have shown that shot in the temple from the Grassy Knoll.
Jb
claviger
And all the fragments inside the skull evaporated before the autopsy. You
are advocating the Ice Bullet Theory. Even a mercury bullet would leave
evidence of such a wound. Problem is air friction tends to melt ice
bullets before they reach the target. Another problem, how do you keep
them cold until the target arrives?
claviger
JB,
Back and to the left is exactly right. The President's body was driven
straight back into the seat cushion. His body bounced off the cushion
then fell to the left into Jackie's lap. Two separate motions. Films
from different angles prove this beyond any doubt. If this physical
reaction was caused by the bullet impact then the shot could not have come
from the GK.
curtjester1
>
> - Show quoted text -
How so? And where would the bullet have come from for your theory?
CJ
curtjester1
bigdog
>
> - Show quoted text -
Damn! All my ammo melted.
bigdog
>
> - Show quoted text -
Exactly. Nix, Muchmore, and Moorman all show how much JFK was leaning
to his left prior to the head shot. That isn't as apparent in Zapruder
because his camera was pointing on roughly the same plane as JFK's
shoulders which leveled out the leftward lean. Immediately following
the head shot JFK lurched straight back, almost certainly the result
of the muscle contractions triggered by the severe injury to his
brain. His body is still on the extreme right side when it hits the
car seat. After rebounding off the seat, his body went limp and
gravity took over. He simply fell in the direction he had been leaning
prior to the head shot. Good luck trying to get Blubaugh to explain
any leftward movement prior to that.
John Blubaugh
>
> - Show quoted text -
I have never said one word about an ice bullet. I do believe in
expoding bullets and there is x-ray evidence of that.
JB
John Blubaugh
>
> - Show quoted text -
Wrong. He was going both back and to the left when he hit the back of
the seat and then continued left. It could have been and was caused by
a shot to the temple from the grassy knoll. That makes a lot more
sense than that reaction being caused by a shot from the rear.
JB
bigdog
> the seat and then continued left. It could have been and was caused by
> a shot to the temple from the grassy knoll. That makes a lot more
> sense than that reaction being caused by a shot from the rear.
>
Here's a real stumper, JB. How did JFK go back and to the left and hit
the right side of the car seat? Take your time. This one is tricky.
bigdog
> expoding bullets and there is x-ray evidence of that.
>
Wait a minute. Weren't those x-rays taken at the autopsy? Haven't you been
telling us all along we can't trust anything from the autopsy because if
was so fouled up?What gives?
claviger
JB postulates the physical reaction of the President is caused by the
impact of the bullet. On this we all agree. HB then hypothecates the
motion of the body reveals the trajectory of this bullet, the basic
assumption being the bullet influenced the head and torso to move in the
same direction the bullet was moving. According to JB this defines the
vector of the bullet in flight and we merely have to track backward on
that vector to determine the source of the bullet.
Therefore, if we can establish the motion of the torso we can locate the
position where the bullet originated. Many CTs seem to believe this.
Assuming this hypothesis is correct, then we must carefully study the
movement of the President influenced by the head wound. When we view the
films taken from both sides of the Limousine they corroborate the fact the
body goes straight back into the seat cushion, not toward Jackie. As
close as she was there is no contact until the President comes off the
cushion and collapses to the left into her lap.
Based on JB's hypothesis this means the vector must be down the centerline
of the Limousine. The bullet could have originated from either end of the
vector, so which end did it come from? Forward of the Limousine was the
viaduct across the Triple Underpass with 16 witnesses, including 2 police
officers. None of them saw or heard a shot from up there or anywhere
close to that location. That eliminates the viaduct as a source for the
head shot, which means the head shot came from somewhere behind the
Limousine. There are three possible locations as a source for the shot:
the TSBD, the Dal-Tex building, and SS697X. Is there evidence for a shot
from behind the President? Yes, his head tilt forward before the mass of
ejecta bursting upward and forward. According to JB's theory of motion
this would be confirmation the shot could not have come from the front of
or to the side of the Limousine. It could only have originated from
somewhere behind the Limousine.
Anthony Marsh
> On Mar 5, 11:03 am, curtjester1<curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mar 4, 11:23 pm, claviger<historiae.fi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Mar 4, 9:35 pm, John Blubaugh<jbluba...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> On Mar 4, 9:57 pm, davidemerling<davidemerl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Mar 4, 7:16 pm, "paul seaton"<paulNOseatonS...@paulseaton.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Below there's a link to a photo I came across of a bullet being fired
>>>>>> through a tall , fluted glass full of red wine, caught in a very high
>>>>>> speed photo.
>>
>>>>>> Before looking, try imagining what you think the result will be.
>>
>>>>>> bullet's travel, perhaps ? The whole wine glass falling over& shattering
Sure, except that Decker ordered his men up there to investigate and
several policemen went up there.
> head shot, which means the head shot came from somewhere behind the
> Limousine. There are three possible locations as a source for the shot:
No it doesn't.
> the TSBD, the Dal-Tex building, and SS697X. Is there evidence for a shot
> from behind the President? Yes, his head tilt forward before the mass of
> ejecta bursting upward and forward. According to JB's theory of motion
> this would be confirmation the shot could not have come from the front of
> or to the side of the Limousine. It could only have originated from
> somewhere behind the Limousine.
No, his head was already tilting before the shot. Everyone else was
tilting forward so according to your theory they were all shot from
behind at Z-312.
Simultaneously. You need SIX SHOOTERS.
bigdog
>
And if JB's hypothesis is correct, it should apply to all shooting victims
all the time. Physical laws are not selective. They are not applied
randomly. Therefore, Blubaugh's Laws of Motion should apply to JBC as
well. Since JBC spun "back and to the right" after he was shot, it follows
that he must have been shot from the front left. Can anybody vouch for
what Jean Hill was doing at or about Z222?
Anthony Marsh
> On Mar 4, 11:19 pm, claviger<historiae.fi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mar 4, 9:35 pm, John Blubaugh<jbluba...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Mar 4, 9:57 pm, davidemerling<davidemerl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> On Mar 4, 7:16 pm, "paul seaton"<paulNOseatonS...@paulseaton.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>
>>>>> Below there's a link to a photo I came across of a bullet being fired
>>>>> through a tall , fluted glass full of red wine, caught in a very high
>>>>> speed photo.
>>
>>>>> Before looking, try imagining what you think the result will be.
>>
>>>>> bullet's travel, perhaps ? The whole wine glass falling over& shattering
Like all WC defenders he is deliberately confusing the issue about an ice
bullet. It was not the conspiracy believers who invented the ice bullet
theory. It was Commander Humes on the night of the autopsy and the FBI
agents. To explain the shallow back wound. It had nothing to do with the
throat wound because they didn't even know there was a throat wound. It
had absolutely nothing to do with the head wound.
Anthony Marsh
> On Mar 4, 11:23 pm, claviger<historiae.fi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mar 4, 9:35 pm, John Blubaugh<jbluba...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Mar 4, 9:57 pm, davidemerling<davidemerl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> On Mar 4, 7:16 pm, "paul seaton"<paulNOseatonS...@paulseaton.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>
>>>>> Below there's a link to a photo I came across of a bullet being fired
>>>>> through a tall , fluted glass full of red wine, caught in a very high
>>>>> speed photo.
>>
>>>>> Before looking, try imagining what you think the result will be.
>>
>>>>> bullet's travel, perhaps ? The whole wine glass falling over& shattering
Well, at least you didn't invoke the Jet Effect, so you are starting to
learn. You are getting closer to the truth. Your exact explanation is
close. But you need to show how a bullet so high in the brain can
stimulate those nerves so low in the brain.
And at least you admit that he fell back and to the left because he had
already been leaning to the left. That's a good start.
Anthony Marsh
> On Mar 5, 12:16 pm, "paul seaton"<paulNOseatonS...@paulseaton.com>
> wrote:
>> Below there's a link to a photo I came across of a bullet being fired
>> through a tall , fluted glass full of red wine, caught in a very high
>> speed photo.
>>
>> Before looking, try imagining what you think the result will be.
>>
>> bullet's travel, perhaps ? The whole wine glass falling over& shattering
>> in that same direction, maybe?
>>
>> Well, when you are done imagining, here is the link :-
>>
>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/nebarnix/5380563828/in/photostream/
>>
>> And generally OT but just because some of these are fascinating -http://www.businessinsider.com/27-high-speed-photos-2011-3#metrocard-...
>>
>> Paul S
>
> Interesting that even a glass of wine appears to cause the bullet to
> begin tumbling.
>
But ballistics gel doesn't.
Anthony Marsh
> On Mar 4, 7:16 pm, "paul seaton"<paulNOseatonS...@paulseaton.com>
> wrote:
>> Below there's a link to a photo I came across of a bullet being fired
>> through a tall , fluted glass full of red wine, caught in a very high
>> speed photo.
>>
>> Before looking, try imagining what you think the result will be.
>>
>> bullet's travel, perhaps ? The whole wine glass falling over& shattering
>> in that same direction, maybe?
>>
>> Well, when you are done imagining, here is the link :-
>>
>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/nebarnix/5380563828/in/photostream/
>>
>> And generally OT but just because some of these are fascinating -http://www.businessinsider.com/27-high-speed-photos-2011-3#metrocard-...
>>
>> Paul S
>
> Those are cool photos!
>
> I'm not sure what this lends to the back-and-to-the-left argument,
> however.
>
> As long as this debate has been alive, people have been sharing various
> photos and videos (mostly) of bullets a wide assortment of objects to
> "prove" their point. It never seems to convince anybody. There is always
> some argument about how it doesn't completely represent what happened to
> Kennedy's head. Mostly, those are valid arguments because very few of the
> photos show bullets hitting anything other than inanimate objects.
>
> Even when videos of actually PEOPLE getting shot, there are STILL
> arguments about how it doesn't completely duplicated the Dealey Plaza
> shooting. And around and around we go.
>
> The bottom line is this:
>
> 1. It is not IMPOSSIBLE for Kennedy's head to do what it did.
> 2. The autopsy settles the score. He was shot ONCE, from BEHIND.
> That's why they *have* autopsies, for the most part.
>
That's why the President should have had a LEGAL autopsy, not a
cover-up. The original autopsy report said conspiracy.
Anthony Marsh
>
> Below there's a link to a photo I came across of a bullet being fired
> through a tall , fluted glass full of red wine, caught in a very high
> speed photo.
>
> Before looking, try imagining what you think the result will be.
>
> bullet's travel, perhaps ? The whole wine glass falling over& shattering
> in that same direction, maybe?
>
> Well, when you are done imagining, here is the link :-
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/nebarnix/5380563828/in/photostream/
>
> And generally OT but just because some of these are fascinating -
> http://www.businessinsider.com/27-high-speed-photos-2011-3#metrocard-hit-by-bullet-1
>
> Paul S
Very pretty. But the wrong type of bullet. Why aren't you uploading some
of the pretty Doc Edgerton photos?
What is this supposed to prove? Why didn't you instead upload a photo of
the latest solar flare?
Matt
wrote:
>
> Paul S
I noticed that in this picture the mass of wine and glass did not move
toward the gun following impact. That is the central problem here. It is
true that parts of a target might fly in all directions following impact,
but if the center of gravity or the overall mass moves towards the weapon
then Sir Isaac Newton is proven wrong for the first time in history.
John Blubaugh
Amen!!!
JB
cdddraftsman
> Another problem, how do you keep
> them cold until the target arrives?
>
>
If the 'Evil Minions of Conspiracy' can make the assassin's, their guns,
and shell casings disappear, leaving no visible trace, I imagine making a
small refrigerator disappear wouldn't pose much of an obstacale.
The real question here is ....
WHO IS MORE DELUSIONAL IN THEIR THINKING ?
a) Ozzie of New Orleans
Or
b) Conspiracy Theorist's who have tried unsuccessfully to exonerate a
'Malcontented Maxist' in order to incriminate 1000's of innocent and loyal
American's ?
cdddraftsman
>
>
> A real autopsy would have been nice. If there had been one it would
> have shown that shot in the temple from the Grassy Knoll.
>
> Jb
>
>
>
of repair by one of your hoaxing interpreters ....
Tehehehehe .....
JB reacts to his 'Red Romeo' Oswald killing JFK the same way the
'Mummy' reacts to a bad batch of 'Tanna Leafs' ...."
tl
paul seaton
"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:4d72cd45$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
> On 3/4/2011 8:16 PM, paul seaton wrote:
>>
>> Below there's a link to a photo I came across of a bullet being fired
>> through a tall , fluted glass full of red wine, caught in a very high
>> speed photo.
>>
>> Before looking, try imagining what you think the result will be.
>>
>> Mass of broken glass& wine gobs heading off in the direction of the
>> bullet's travel, perhaps ? The whole wine glass falling over& shattering
>> in that same direction, maybe?
>>
>> Well, when you are done imagining, here is the link :-
>>
>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/nebarnix/5380563828/in/photostream/
>>
>> And generally OT but just because some of these are fascinating -
>> http://www.businessinsider.com/27-high-speed-photos-2011-3#metrocard-hit-by-bullet-1
>>
>> Paul S
>
> Very pretty.
Indeed.
> But the wrong type of bullet.
Shucks.
> Why aren't you uploading some of the pretty Doc Edgerton photos?
Why aren't you flying a kite ?
> What is this supposed to prove?
That high speed physics doesn't neccessarily work as low speed intuition
might suggest.
> Why didn't you instead upload a photo of the latest solar flare?
Why didn't you reply in Mandarin Chinese ? Questions questions...
>
>
paul seaton
"Matt" <mmatt...@westnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:08191456-db6f-4716...@s18g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
The point I suppose was that this picture just doesn't show what intuition
would expect. Shoot a bullet through an open door, the door doesn't slam
shut. Bullets don't have the momentum to slam people around very much ,
much as Sam Peckinpah might wish they did. Plus of course I had a
mischeivous feeling that I would just check 2 see if a 'back & to the
left' post would still draw the crowds here :-)
I was watching some documentary about global warming or something on
Youtube the other day, all well & good, & then the narrator sticks up the
Z movie & says 'back & the left !' and was totally convinced that it was
OBVIOUS JFK was shot from the front.
By the way, is a documentary about ducks a duckumentary ? There are more
questions than answers .. :-)
Anthony Marsh
How did Humes think Oswald kept his ice bullet frozen then?
There was a refrigerator on the first floor, wasn't there? I assume it
had a freezer in the top compartment.
Jason Burke
> On Mar 6, 9:40 pm, Matt<mmattja...@westnet.com.au> wrote:
>> On Mar 5, 9:16 am, "paul seaton"<paulNOseatonS...@paulseaton.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Below there's a link to a photo I came across of a bullet being fired
>>> through a tall , fluted glass full of red wine, caught in a very high
>>> speed photo.
>>
>>> Before looking, try imagining what you think the result will be.
>>
>>> bullet's travel, perhaps ? The whole wine glass falling over& shattering
>>> in that same direction, maybe?
>>
>>> Well, when you are done imagining, here is the link :-
>>
>>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/nebarnix/5380563828/in/photostream/
>>
>>> And generally OT but just because some of these are fascinating -http://www.businessinsider.com/27-high-speed-photos-2011-3#metrocard-...
>>
>>> Paul S
>>
>> I noticed that in this picture the mass of wine and glass did not move
>> toward the gun following impact. That is the central problem here. It is
>> true that parts of a target might fly in all directions following impact,
>> but if the center of gravity or the overall mass moves towards the weapon
>> then Sir Isaac Newton is proven wrong for the first time in history.
>>
>
> Amen!!!
>
>
> JB
>
Too bad Doc wasn't in Dealey Plaza that day, eh?
bigdog
wine glass should move toward the gun. I have never stated, nor have I
read any statement by any of my fellow LNs, that an object or a victim
that is struck by a bullet will always move toward the gun. It is our
position that the direction an object will move after being shot is
NOT predicated by the direction of the bullet. Saying that a rearward
move by a victim following a gun shot proves the shot came from the
rear is as dumb as saying the rearward movement proves the shot came
from the front. There are other forces that come into play when a
victim is shot with a gun which have far more influence on the
direction the victim will move than the direction of the bullet, which
has a negligible effect on that movement. In the case of JFK, his
movement is almost certainly the result of a neurological response to
the massive damge to his brain. Such a movement could have been toward
the gun, away from the gun, or anywhere in between. In the case of the
wine glass, it is an inanimate object which will not produce a
neurological response, so the only force acting upon it is the
bullet's momentum. The fact that the wine glass is not thrown
violently from the pedestal in the same direction of the bullet is
indicative of how little momentum passes from a transiting bullet to
the object being struck. If a bullet cannot propel an object as small
and as light as a glass of wine, how the hell could it send an adult
male flying backward, as the frontal shooter proponents keep insisting?
bigdog
>
bump
I though maybe you missed this one, JB. I wanted to give you another
crack at it.