JFK Headshot,laws of physics, and the official story

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

You’re absolutely right. But I have seen apologist claim that this happens often.

I don’t believe them.

Cyril Wecht, the well known pathologist, says it’s impossible for a back head shot to make a head recoil in the opposite direction.

Honestly, I'll take my years of experience putting bullets into things over some pathologist's scientific opinion.

Things react strangely when hit with bullets. Especially when they're live things.

It should be impossible for a rabbit to do a backflip in midair after having his midsection removed by a shotgun... but I've seen it happen.

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: AgentShillington
a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

George Hickey was the second shooter.

I agree with this premise.........

I watched the Netflix movie on this, and it does seem that an accidental shot by the Agent is well within reason.......

That doesnt discount the fact that Oswald TRIED to kill the president........

However from the ballistics in this movie and the forensics they put together, honestly it answered a lot of questions for me

Likewise. That documentary completely changed my mind about the whole incident.

It really did for me too, I had all kinds of questions and conspiracies running through my head........

Then i watched that documentary and , the old saying is true, sometimes the simple answers are the right ones.....

I honestly feel like this is what happened......glad a few more of the people here have seen it too!

If you guys havent seen it yet, watch ...."JFK: The Smoking Gun "

I watched the piece as well...it does present a good case...one thing I do mind though and it casts a shadow on the presentation. They completely reduced Jack Ruby's role as non existent. Apparently he played no significant role in the event. I don't think I can accept that.

a reply to: Blue Shift

You mean like how hundred of experts thought that the earth was flat, and one crazy person decided it wasn't?

originally posted by: yuniorsan
a reply to: Blue Shift



You mean like how hundred of experts thought that the earth was flat, and one crazy person decided it wasn't?

I remember in Howard Wasdin's book "SEAL Team Six: Memoirs of an Elite Navy Sniper," he mentions when you shoot someone with a sniper rifle (.300 win mag in their case) bodies actually tend to fall forward instead of falling backward.

The bullet leaves the body with such velocity and power it actually pulls the body forward.

I'm not sure if this is the case for JFK, but I thought I would just mention it.

originally posted by: yuniorsan
You mean like how hundred of experts thought that the earth was flat, and one crazy person decided it wasn't?

That's a stupid straw man argument, based on a common fallacy. Most of the learned people ("experts") of the past understood that the Earth was spherical, just like most of the experts in this age agree that Oswald was the lone gunman.

But please feel free to lump yourself in with the fringe theorists and crackpots and generally ignorant if you wish. I will agree that historially, there will always be those.

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: yuniorsan
You mean like how hundred of experts thought that the earth was flat, and one crazy person decided it wasn't?

That's a stupid straw man argument, based on a common fallacy. Most of the learned people ("experts") of the past understood that the Earth was spherical, just like most of the experts in this age agree that Oswald was the lone gunman.

But please feel free to lump yourself in with the fringe theorists and crackpots and generally ignorant if you wish. I will agree that historially, there will always be those.

Who was it that said, "Only a madman has never doubted his sanity?"

ETA:
To stay on topic, Dan Rather can finally feel vindicated. The forward headsnap he saw was on the original Zapruder film. Zapruder showed it to several people that weekend. The $100,000 was for all copies and woldwide rights on the video. Then Life Magazine sat on it 'til the '70s.

Hmm.... I thought you were busy in D.C. today, Mr. Gruber.

a reply to: Blue Shift

I thought you were smarter, and that little joke would have been enough, but since I see you have your blinds on and you wanted to get all scientific on me, here are some that you might be interested on:

1- Fleischmann–Pons’s Nuclear Fusion
2- Einstein’s Stationary Universe
3- Martian Canals (My Favorite)

and so on and so forth, this were people of intellect that later on where found to be wrong, SO as you can see, and I feel dumb having to explain this, just because a whole bunch of experts say it is so, it doesn't mean is so. There are thousands of theories that are acknowledge by the scientific community that are being disproved constantly, so again open your eyes and mind, and don't put down a person for using critical thinking, or having different believes you do. Calling someone out for thinking something different that "THE EXPERTS" have told you, is a sign of a close and small mind.

And I understand your need to come up with replies and excuses, which is a normal mechanism of your brain when your believes are questioned, is a normal response to change, but don't worry you will eventually get there.

By the way, let me guess you also believe the experts on TV? and reality TV is not scripted? and that media pictures are not photoshop in any way or form?

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

You’re absolutely right. But I have seen apologist claim that this happens often.

I don’t believe them.

Cyril Wecht, the well known pathologist, says it’s impossible for a back head shot to make a head recoil in the opposite direction.

Honestly, I'll take my years of experience putting bullets into things over some pathologist's scientific opinion.

Things react strangely when hit with bullets. Especially when they're live things.

It should be impossible for a rabbit to do a backflip in midair after having his midsection removed by a shotgun... but I've seen it happen.

Ha...that goes for prairie dogs as well....I have seen them do some crazy stuff after being hit with a large caliber rifle round.

Fact is, people can shoot inanimate objects all day long and say it's impossible. They are not testing on humans who have nerves and involuntary reactions to stimuli.

Personally I am willing to back the idea of a second gunman, (referring to the accidental shot mentioned in "JFK: The Smoking Gun"). Did enjoy that surprisingly informative documentary, I felt that a lot of what was said actually had decent evidence. Many of the things that were deemed either 'Impossible' or 'inexplicable' had relatively simple answers put forward, with a substantial amount of evidence.

I guess people just enjoy all the romanticized stories of a lone, crazed man on a mission for vengeance far more than the simple facts, which are explained rather well in the aforementioned documentary. Not to say that I'm 100% on that theory, I just feel its the one that has the most weight.

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: AgentShillington
a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

George Hickey was the second shooter.

I agree with this premise.........

I watched the Netflix movie on this, and it does seem that an accidental shot by the Agent is well within reason.......

That doesnt discount the fact that Oswald TRIED to kill the president........

However from the ballistics in this movie and the forensics they put together, honestly it answered a lot of questions for me

Likewise. That documentary completely changed my mind about the whole incident.

It really did for me too, I had all kinds of questions and conspiracies running through my head........

Then i watched that documentary and , the old saying is true, sometimes the simple answers are the right ones.....

I honestly feel like this is what happened......glad a few more of the people here have seen it too!

If you guys havent seen it yet, watch ...."JFK: The Smoking Gun "

Is this the one where the untrained agent was reaching for the gun (in response to Oswalds shots, one of which missed and one hit him in the throat) and it went off hitting JFK in the head from the following car?

I have to say it's an extremely convincing and believable account of the event AND what followed, that that I now feel is the most likely to be correct.

a reply to: waynos

The main problem with the secret ser. agent accidently firing his rifle is that rifles make a lot of noise. None of the witnesses on the street, sidewalk, or grass said the "shot came from the car following Kennedy's car" (as far as I know), none of them immediately looked to that car, the cover-up would have been massive and would have included all of the secret service agents and other people in that car (and likely the people on the sidewalk and grass who would have both heard and seen the rifle fire - wouldn't it have discharge smoke?). It's a fun theory to read about (I have the book), but as for Vegas odds, I wouldn't bet a nickel.

originally posted by: AgentShillington
a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

George Hickey was the second shooter.

How come nobody flinched and covered their ears? An AR is LOUD!

a reply to: Aleister

But the guy (mayor?) on the front seat of the car following Kennedy gave a statement that a shot whizzed past his ear and he felt it, so that could only come from directly behind him, when no shots were supposed to have been fired from that car at all, as I recall.

No, I don't think that people generally would have pinpointed a shot from the following car, I can easily envisage that being lost in the general confusion and panic. This, in any case, is supposition by you and me, I prefer to look at the explanations offered for specific points raised.

Do you know of an explanation for that first point that I may be unaware of?

a reply to: Maverick7

Silencer?

a reply to: waynos

Maybe he did feel one of the shots, if the bullet from the School Book Depository was traveling along a path just above his head. As for the rifle, he probably would have heard a rifle going off right in back of him. So if he is talking about feeling a bullet's passing he's probably not in the conspiracy of silence which would have been set-up if the Secret Service agent had shot the rifle, and if he wasn't, then who is?

a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

How about someday we're able to actually see the bullets trajectory?
Will that finally be enough to shatter the worlds of those who live in
fear of truth? Oh wait, thats today.



Penn & Teller, couple of iluminati mouth piece crackpots.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

I haven't seen that movie....and regardless of whether that is what really happened, or TPTB/Mafia/Gov't conspired....the BIGGEST conspiracy is why Oswald was allowed to become the Lone Gunman and murderer of JFK.

originally posted by: Aleister
a reply to: waynos

Maybe he did feel one of the shots, if the bullet from the School Book Depository was traveling along a path just above his head. As for the rifle, he probably would have heard a rifle going off right in back of him. So if he is talking about feeling a bullet's passing he's probably not in the conspiracy of silence which would have been set-up if the Secret Service agent had shot the rifle, and if he wasn't, then who is?

Naturally, I am only going by the information offered, but the documentary on this theory showed, with graphics and reconstruction, why it couldn't have been a shot fired from the book depository. His statement about the shot was made in the immediate aftermath of the event (as were some others) but was not presented to the inquiry and he wasnt questioned about it, another point of suspicion. Like I said, this film pulled together so many different strands that I simply found it the most coherent and reasonable. I may buy the book and read the original account as its several years since I saw the programme. Do you know the original title? Was it something like "Fatal Error"?