Off Topic > Other Conspiracy Theories
JFK - 3 shooters 6 shots
SolusLupus:
--- Quote from: profmunkin on June 12, 2012, 10:58:10 PM ---No, it's correct, that is exactly correct, plausible, just as a bullet has NEVER smashed thru bones and
come out similar to the bullet that "traversed thru" JFK and JC but by god some "expert" believes it might be plausible. No one could believe it's possible, how could you, it has never been done, but because an "expert" offers his opinion that it might be plausible, you say oh, OK.
Your nuts!
--- End quote ---
Ad hominem. Strawman.
The gunshot has been replicated. It has been replicated several times. The bullet was damaged. Images of it have been shown in this thread several times, and each time you've ignored them.
--- Quote ---Did they leave behind shell casings or any trace they were there? No, they did not. Would it have been wise to carry an assassination with more than one shooter, then pretend it was only one? No, it would not have.
> Why would they leave shells behind?
> Don't know, but appearantly you do
--- End quote ---
Apparently, they were really good at keeping themselves hidden, keeping their weapons hidden, not leaving a single trace of evidence they were there, and being a place that could easily have been exposed... kind of ballsy.
>please address the issue, can you detect the direction of gun firing from 12 feet away from an open space not? Remember Jarmin, Williams, Norman, Styles, Adams, Dorman and Garner were close to this distance, hanging out open windows.
Echo. Acoustics. People misidentify the direction of sounds all the time.
--- Quote --->If you dodge the obvious you just come off looking like a toadie.
--- End quote ---
Oh, you'd consider me a "toadie"! Well, that would be terrible. I'd not be able to sleep at night for that!
--- Quote ---Do I "really believe Jarmin and Williams and Norman are that stupid, really, really, really, really?" No, I do not "really, really, really, really" believe they were stupid.
>Well then explain their testimony and actions
--- End quote ---
So people are perfect or stupid. Nice logic there.
--- Quote ---But you're still picking at small cherries here, and insisting they make a pie. They don't.
>I got a bowl of cherries you got nothin!
--- End quote ---
Let's see the "nothing" I have here:
--- Quote ---We have video evidence of the shooting.
>Really?
--- End quote ---
Zapruder Film.
--- Quote ---We have forensic evidence of the shooting.
>Really?
--- End quote ---
Yes, a forensics report. The one you keep citing as evidence of conspiracy, and then ignoring any counters to your claim?
--- Quote ---We have the gun. We have the bullets. Oswald shot a police officer before ducking into a theater.
>Really?
--- End quote ---
Yes. On all three counts. Actually look at the websites you pull quotes from, why don't you?
And you're saying Oswald did NOT shoot a police officer?
You're saying I look like a toadie, but your saying "really?" to what's been vastly known, and brought up *in this thread itself* just points to your being... well, rather ignorant of the subject, don't you think?
SolusLupus:
--- Quote from: profmunkin on June 12, 2012, 11:22:12 PM ---Came back to answer post, #1063
I don't envision posting on this forum an alternative scenario, not now, probably not ever.
If you can't deal with what I post, so what?
All lunarorbit has to do is ask me to leave.
--- End quote ---
I'm not sure what your mentality here is. Why do you resist offering your alternative scenario?
LunarOrbit:
--- Quote from: profmunkin on June 12, 2012, 11:22:12 PM ---All lunarorbit has to do is ask me to leave.
--- End quote ---
I guess you don't consider having been banned from the Proboards forum the same thing as being asked to leave.
What is so difficult about answering our questions, Prof? You're so certain that Lee Oswald was innocent, but you haven't provided an alternative scenario. That means you have failed to make the case that the conclusions of the Warren Commission are wrong.
profmunkin:
--- Quote from: SolusLupus on June 12, 2012, 11:32:01 PM ---Let's see the "nothing" I have here:
Zapruder Film.
--- End quote ---
Do you know if it would have been possible for an expert to take a film similar to the z-film and add special effects to it?
Do you know if special effects can be easily detected?
Do you know for certain the chain of custody of the Z-film?
My understanding is the chain of custody was broken by the CIA, this comes form Douglas P. Horne "inside the ARRB", I know blah blah blah
Would it be plausible if the CIA had this film and in a timely manner was able to add special effects to the film,
if JFK was shot from the front / side how would you hide it, make a spray of blood to the front and disguise the hole in the back of the head.
and
Better adjust the background timing, because it sucks to have to answer why the limo came to almost a complete stop.
Could they have accomplished this?
It would make for a significant piece of evidence in support for "the" shooter from the rear.
Especially good, because they didn't even have to show the film, just some carefully selected stills.
Easier to build fiction around pictures verses a movie, I imagine.
Besides the fact, NO ONE would have believed JFK was hit from the rear after viewing the Z-Film
They sequestered the film at Time Life, probably thinking it would NEVER be shown to the public.
Problem is we got it and now know it, back and to the left, no matter what anyone says, back and to the left.
SolusLupus:
--- Quote from: profmunkin on June 13, 2012, 12:10:02 AM ---Do you know if it would have been possible for an expert to take a film similar to the z-film and add special effects to it?
--- End quote ---
With that tech? Even the best "special effects" weren't that great, especially if you were just video editing.
What special effects were added, and how can you tell?
--- Quote ---Do you know if special effects can be easily detected?
--- End quote ---
If they're going to entirely rewrite what happened, then yes, yes they would be.
--- Quote ---Do you know for certain the chain of custody of the Z-film?
--- End quote ---
There was not the time needed to take it and edit, no.
--- Quote ---My understanding is the chain of custody was broken by the CIA, this comes form Douglas P. Horne "inside the ARRB", I know blah blah blah
--- End quote ---
--Abraham Zapruder took the film to be processed right away. He made three copies.
--One went to the Warren Commission.
--One went to Life Magazine.
--(EDITED)One went to the Secret Service -- not the CIA.
The one that went to life went there in a day. What technology is available that can edit video in a day? Please answer. Detail me exactly the kind of video tech, or even just an example of it.
--- Quote ---Besides the fact, NO ONE would have believed JFK was hit from the rear after viewing the Z-Film
--- End quote ---
And you are wrong here.
By the way, check out Reply #373.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version