27-08-2014, 10:04 PM
I have the same objections to a bullet (only) throwing Connally forward as I have to a bullet (only) throwing JFK's head back and to the left.
Excerpts from testimony of Alfred G. Olivier, DVM to Rockefeller Commission, April 18, 1975. Transcript of testimony taken beginning at page 21 of the testimony. Dr. Olivier, (A.) a wound ballistics scientist, is being questioned by Robert Olsen. (Q.)
"Q. Do you have an opinion, then, based upon your work in this field over the years, as to whether President Kennedy's body would have moved in the fashion that it did after the fatal shot in the head, that movement being a consequence of the impact of the bullet?
A. As a result of the momentum imparted to the body by the bullet?
Q. Yes.
A. No, it wouldn't.
Q. Are you saying --
A. The President weights a lot more than a 100 pound goat, and if a bullet wouldn't move a 100 pound goat it isn't going to move the President. This just doesn't happen. "[end excerpts from Olivier testimony]
(emphasis added)
Dr. Oliver is a bit disingenuous in his answer. However, the physics of the event can't be approximated by the transfer of momentum from a bullet that exits the skull to the skull itself without more. A lot more.
http://www.kenrahn.com/JFK/Scientific_to...-film.html contains a mathematical analysis of the motion of JFK's head. At frame 313, the head has been accelerated forward at 56.4 ft/sec2 (somewhat higher than absorbing all the momentum from a 10.5 gram bullet moving at 2100 ft/sec). The next frame, the head is accelerated at -75.88 ft./sec2. That requires far more energy than is available from a bullet transfer. It requires an explosion.
Excerpts from testimony of Alfred G. Olivier, DVM to Rockefeller Commission, April 18, 1975. Transcript of testimony taken beginning at page 21 of the testimony. Dr. Olivier, (A.) a wound ballistics scientist, is being questioned by Robert Olsen. (Q.)
"Q. Do you have an opinion, then, based upon your work in this field over the years, as to whether President Kennedy's body would have moved in the fashion that it did after the fatal shot in the head, that movement being a consequence of the impact of the bullet?
A. As a result of the momentum imparted to the body by the bullet?
Q. Yes.
A. No, it wouldn't.
Q. Are you saying --
A. The President weights a lot more than a 100 pound goat, and if a bullet wouldn't move a 100 pound goat it isn't going to move the President. This just doesn't happen. "[end excerpts from Olivier testimony]
(emphasis added)
Dr. Oliver is a bit disingenuous in his answer. However, the physics of the event can't be approximated by the transfer of momentum from a bullet that exits the skull to the skull itself without more. A lot more.
http://www.kenrahn.com/JFK/Scientific_to...-film.html contains a mathematical analysis of the motion of JFK's head. At frame 313, the head has been accelerated forward at 56.4 ft/sec2 (somewhat higher than absorbing all the momentum from a 10.5 gram bullet moving at 2100 ft/sec). The next frame, the head is accelerated at -75.88 ft./sec2. That requires far more energy than is available from a bullet transfer. It requires an explosion.
"All that is necessary for tyranny to succeed is for good men to do nothing." (unknown)
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."