26-01-2011, 08:00 PM
My replies to Albert's comments are in italics.
AD: If you move Kennedy further west it only increases the unfavorable factors I discussed. It then becomes even more unlikely that a frangible bullet would not only not blast-off the top of Kennedy's head but would also make a hard left turn and remove an intact plug in the occiput.
JF: That is a misreading of the analysis based upon the work of David Mantik and of Bob Livingston. The bullet did not pursue the tangential trajectory described by Charles Crenshaw but created shockwaves that blew the brains out the back of an already weakened cranium, as I have been attempting to explain (several times).
What stresses me about this is the bringing the mountain to Mohammed aspect of how this conflicts with all the witnesses and other photographs.
JF: Which witnesses and other photographs are you relying upon? Why don't you sketch for me what you think happened? But as I have previously observed, you appear to be discounting the witnesses who support the limo stop and the faking of the Zapruder. The Parkland Hospital physicians reports are consistent with this account as are the studies of the medical evidence by Mantik, Aguilar, and Lifton, among others, at least right up to the point where Humes takes a saw to the cranium of his patient.
JF: While the bullet entered at the right temple, it did not exit at the back of the head, but rather created shock waves that blew his brains out the back of his head with such force that Officer Hargis, impacted with the debris, thought he himself had been shot.
AD: I question this because it brings into bearing all the points I raised. It does not conform to gunshot wound behavior that a "shockwave" would create such a precise plug wound that is then referred to as an "exit wound". You are working against physics when you zone the explosive pattern of a frangible bullet against its know behavior. If a frangible bullet enters at the temple area and explodes it creates a determinable pattern that radiates out from that point. What you are doing is channeling the force of this event towards the rear wound in such a way that necessitates the focus of this energy in the occipital wound area with enough force to cause the Parkland rear wound but avoid causing the predictable wounds that would have occurred closer to the area of impact. While I think the Discovery Channel re-creation is not scientifically valid, I believe it does show a good representation of an exploding bullet wound to the head. The Grassy Knoll shot blows the dummy's head off completely. When you compare the Parkland perfect hair with this explosive event you get an idea of what is wrong with this theory and the true nature of these shockwaves. At this point it is fairly unbelievable to match an exploding bullet wound to the temple and the condition of Kennedy's parietal area at Parkland (in my opinion).
JF: Well, as I am sure you are aware, there are many kinds of bullets, even explosive ones, which have different properties. David Mantik has discussed the particles in the lateral cranial X-ray, which I discuss in various places, such as page 6 of MURDER. And of course Bob Livingston was a world authority on the human brain and an expert on wound ballistics. He explained to me the role of shockwaves. Remember that the back of his skull had already been weakened by a shot from the rear around the EOP.
JF: With regard to some of your more specific suggestions, the ejecta was all over the trunk and nauseated other Secret Service agents when they observed in on the limo in Washington, as I point out in HOAX on page 27, yet is missing in the film.[/QUOTE]
AD: The skull is a contained dome. The transit of a bullet inside creates a huge overpressure that can blast the skull open. The hemispherical shape of the skull creates a hemispherical burst pattern from this event. The enhanced slow-motion Nix Film shows ejecta bursting rearward at the same time as the parietal burst.
JF: But of course there was an earlier shot to the back of his head, which weakened the cranium. So his skull, at that point in time, was NOT a contained dome, but rather a dome with significant damage to the rear, where brain matter would have been forced out by the shock waves created by the type of frangible bullet that had been used.
AD: I agree the trunk looks too clean for what was told by witnesses. However this doesn't preclude the forgers eliminating visible trunk material for the purpose of establishing a rear shot no matter what the shot directions. If Zapruder shows how the camera captures a gunshot wound over frames 311-312-313 then there's no excuse for it not capturing the rear wound. Unless the rear plug plopped-out when Kennedy jerked backwards. Or even later on the ride to Parkland. ?
JF: Well, we know the rear wound, which is visible in frame 374, was painted over in a crude fashion in frames 313-316 and elsewhere, which we knew to be the case but which has been independently confirmed by this new group of Hollywood experts, as Doug Horne explained in INSIDE THE ARRB, Vol. IV, and which I discuss here: "US Government Official: JFK Cover-Up, Film Fabrication", http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/...5772.shtml What is your response to the five physical features that distinguish the film brought to the NPIC on Saturday from the one brought on Sunday?
JF: Bob was a world authority on the human brain and also an expert on wound ballistics. It was his inference that the bullet that hit JFK in the throat fragmented and part went upward and severed the tentorium, which thereby exposed the cerebeullum.
AD: I'd really like to see an extensive examination of the microscopic direction of the tie fibers and how they are explained.
JF: Yes, the more evidence, the better. I think we would all agree with that, assuming, of course, that we were getting authentic tie fibers. But there seems to me to be a lot of evidence that the shot to the throat was an entry wound, as I have already explained.
JF: It did, of course, also blow open the skull flap, which is apparent in frame 374, in the HSCA diagram and photograph, and was described by Thomas Evan Robinson, the mortician, who mentioned it to Joe West when he interviewed him about the wounds.
JF: Roderick Ryan told Noel Twyman that the "blob" had been painted in. John Costella has studied the blood spray in his tutorial, where it dissipates too rapidly to be real, at http://assassinationscience.com/johncostella/jfk/intro/ I hope you have reviewed it, because it gives a very nice, illustrated (visual) introduction to evidence of fakery.
AD: So how much of this do you attribute to the blood fog and how much to the forgery?
JF: I am not sure I understand the question, but Costella's tutorial may already answer it.
James H. Fetzer Wrote:JF: That occurs in the Prologue to MURDER on page 4. In the Preface to HOAX, I point out that Newsweek (22 November 1993) published an article showing the head shot as having occurred around 35 feet further west than the "X" mark on Elm Street.
AD: If you move Kennedy further west it only increases the unfavorable factors I discussed. It then becomes even more unlikely that a frangible bullet would not only not blast-off the top of Kennedy's head but would also make a hard left turn and remove an intact plug in the occiput.
JF: That is a misreading of the analysis based upon the work of David Mantik and of Bob Livingston. The bullet did not pursue the tangential trajectory described by Charles Crenshaw but created shockwaves that blew the brains out the back of an already weakened cranium, as I have been attempting to explain (several times).
What stresses me about this is the bringing the mountain to Mohammed aspect of how this conflicts with all the witnesses and other photographs.
JF: Which witnesses and other photographs are you relying upon? Why don't you sketch for me what you think happened? But as I have previously observed, you appear to be discounting the witnesses who support the limo stop and the faking of the Zapruder. The Parkland Hospital physicians reports are consistent with this account as are the studies of the medical evidence by Mantik, Aguilar, and Lifton, among others, at least right up to the point where Humes takes a saw to the cranium of his patient.
JF: While the bullet entered at the right temple, it did not exit at the back of the head, but rather created shock waves that blew his brains out the back of his head with such force that Officer Hargis, impacted with the debris, thought he himself had been shot.
AD: I question this because it brings into bearing all the points I raised. It does not conform to gunshot wound behavior that a "shockwave" would create such a precise plug wound that is then referred to as an "exit wound". You are working against physics when you zone the explosive pattern of a frangible bullet against its know behavior. If a frangible bullet enters at the temple area and explodes it creates a determinable pattern that radiates out from that point. What you are doing is channeling the force of this event towards the rear wound in such a way that necessitates the focus of this energy in the occipital wound area with enough force to cause the Parkland rear wound but avoid causing the predictable wounds that would have occurred closer to the area of impact. While I think the Discovery Channel re-creation is not scientifically valid, I believe it does show a good representation of an exploding bullet wound to the head. The Grassy Knoll shot blows the dummy's head off completely. When you compare the Parkland perfect hair with this explosive event you get an idea of what is wrong with this theory and the true nature of these shockwaves. At this point it is fairly unbelievable to match an exploding bullet wound to the temple and the condition of Kennedy's parietal area at Parkland (in my opinion).
JF: Well, as I am sure you are aware, there are many kinds of bullets, even explosive ones, which have different properties. David Mantik has discussed the particles in the lateral cranial X-ray, which I discuss in various places, such as page 6 of MURDER. And of course Bob Livingston was a world authority on the human brain and an expert on wound ballistics. He explained to me the role of shockwaves. Remember that the back of his skull had already been weakened by a shot from the rear around the EOP.
JF: With regard to some of your more specific suggestions, the ejecta was all over the trunk and nauseated other Secret Service agents when they observed in on the limo in Washington, as I point out in HOAX on page 27, yet is missing in the film.[/QUOTE]
AD: The skull is a contained dome. The transit of a bullet inside creates a huge overpressure that can blast the skull open. The hemispherical shape of the skull creates a hemispherical burst pattern from this event. The enhanced slow-motion Nix Film shows ejecta bursting rearward at the same time as the parietal burst.
JF: But of course there was an earlier shot to the back of his head, which weakened the cranium. So his skull, at that point in time, was NOT a contained dome, but rather a dome with significant damage to the rear, where brain matter would have been forced out by the shock waves created by the type of frangible bullet that had been used.
AD: I agree the trunk looks too clean for what was told by witnesses. However this doesn't preclude the forgers eliminating visible trunk material for the purpose of establishing a rear shot no matter what the shot directions. If Zapruder shows how the camera captures a gunshot wound over frames 311-312-313 then there's no excuse for it not capturing the rear wound. Unless the rear plug plopped-out when Kennedy jerked backwards. Or even later on the ride to Parkland. ?
JF: Well, we know the rear wound, which is visible in frame 374, was painted over in a crude fashion in frames 313-316 and elsewhere, which we knew to be the case but which has been independently confirmed by this new group of Hollywood experts, as Doug Horne explained in INSIDE THE ARRB, Vol. IV, and which I discuss here: "US Government Official: JFK Cover-Up, Film Fabrication", http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/...5772.shtml What is your response to the five physical features that distinguish the film brought to the NPIC on Saturday from the one brought on Sunday?
JF: Bob was a world authority on the human brain and also an expert on wound ballistics. It was his inference that the bullet that hit JFK in the throat fragmented and part went upward and severed the tentorium, which thereby exposed the cerebeullum.
AD: I'd really like to see an extensive examination of the microscopic direction of the tie fibers and how they are explained.
JF: Yes, the more evidence, the better. I think we would all agree with that, assuming, of course, that we were getting authentic tie fibers. But there seems to me to be a lot of evidence that the shot to the throat was an entry wound, as I have already explained.
JF: It did, of course, also blow open the skull flap, which is apparent in frame 374, in the HSCA diagram and photograph, and was described by Thomas Evan Robinson, the mortician, who mentioned it to Joe West when he interviewed him about the wounds.
JF: Roderick Ryan told Noel Twyman that the "blob" had been painted in. John Costella has studied the blood spray in his tutorial, where it dissipates too rapidly to be real, at http://assassinationscience.com/johncostella/jfk/intro/ I hope you have reviewed it, because it gives a very nice, illustrated (visual) introduction to evidence of fakery.
AD: So how much of this do you attribute to the blood fog and how much to the forgery?
JF: I am not sure I understand the question, but Costella's tutorial may already answer it.