Author Topic: JFK - 3 shooters 6 shots  (Read 440446 times)

Offline Jason Thompson

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1601
Re: JFK - 3 shooters 6 shots
« Reply #1065 on: June 12, 2012, 08:04:58 AM »
HB: That's ridiculous, you are parroting the official story.

This is one I have never been able to extract a decent answer from any conspiracy theorist for: exactly how do they distinguish between parroting a story and actually repeating the truth? For example, it doesn't matter how many times you ask me, I'm going to tell you 2+2 = 4 because it does. That's the official line and one supported by reality. So am I just parroting the official line that 2+2 = 4 then?
"There's this idea that everyone's opinion is equally valid. My arse! Bloke who was a professor of dentistry for forty years does NOT have a debate with some eejit who removes his teeth with string and a door!"  - Dara O'Briain

Offline ka9q

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3014
Re: JFK - 3 shooters 6 shots
« Reply #1066 on: June 12, 2012, 08:07:03 AM »
It's more like this:

while(1){
   HB: Hey look at the anomaly in this (randomly chosen) picture.
   AH: That isn't an anomaly, it is [scientific explanation]
   HB: That's ridiculous, you are parroting the official story.
   AH: *Facepalm*
}

Offline SolusLupus

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 151
Re: JFK - 3 shooters 6 shots
« Reply #1067 on: June 12, 2012, 04:41:45 PM »
Prof, I know you're likely to get lost in all the people posting responses, and get back to pointing out perceived "inconsistencies".

I really do want to know if you read and thought about my post, #1063, though.
“Yesterday we obeyed kings and bent our necks before emperors. But today we kneel only to truth, follow only beauty, and obey only love.” -- Kahlil Gibran

My blog about life, universe, and everything: http://solusl.blogspot.com/

Offline profmunkin

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 454
Re: JFK - 3 shooters 6 shots
« Reply #1068 on: June 12, 2012, 09:50:36 PM »

Prof, I'm going to give a shot at this here.  Do you know what cherry picking is?

It's where you start with a conclusion and work backwards, trying to fit every piece of data you can find to support the conclusion, ignoring everything else that doesn't seem to support it.
Yes I agree with this definition.

Does it not cause you to wonder---
How 3 men could not detect 3 reports from a rifle 12 feet away?  Is this even in the realm of plausible, because it sure as hell is not possible. Have you ever been around firearms? If so you KNOW that it is not possible to have a rifle, 12 feet away, fire and not KNOW it. Without ear protection your ears may even be ringing after a report. The first report would have scared the hell out of Jarmin and Williams and Norman.

Have you ever worked in an old, open, wooden floored warehouse?
You can hear every step from people walking on the floor above you, peek thru the cracks, even pick-up conversations. A rifle report in an open warehouse would have a tremendous reverberation, there would be no mistaking it was directly above you.
Jarmin said the report came from below and left.
Jarmin and Williams said all three reports sounded like backfire from a motorcycle. (this means the sounds were like motorcycles in the motorcade back-firing in case you can't put this together)
(((Jarmin 8 years in the Army)))
ONLY Norman figured it out and ONLY after all three shots had been fired and ONLY after Jarmin had voiced an opinion that he thought someone maybe shooting at the President and ONLY after Norman remembered hearing a bolt and hulls hitting the floor, "that it may have come from above us"
Jarmin, Williams and Norman all said they did not hear anyone on the 6th floor
Williams said he did not hear ANYTHING from the 6th floor.
Jarmin, Williams and Norman all said the shots were not evenly spaced but like Bham....Bham.Bham, a few second pause between shot 1 and 2 the shot 2 followed immediately by shot 3. How can you ignore this information? These guys are 12 feet away, they should be able to discern the rhythm of the shots.
Williams was on the 6th floor eating lunch by the pair of windows adjacent to the nest, till just a few minutes before the motorcade came by, Why would Oswald not have just walked up to the 7th floor or do you believe he just took his chances and waited for Williams to leave?
Was Oswald hiding on the sixth floor or in the stairwell or on the 7th floor waiting to come down?
After the shooting, did Jarmin, Williams and Norman run downstairs to inform everyone? no they ran down to the West window to watch all of the activity on the grassy knoll and rail yard.
How did Oswald run by Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles on the stairwell without Victoria or Sandra seeing or hearing him on the steps?

Do you really believe Jarmin and Williams and Norman are that stupid, really, really, really, really?
If they are THAT stupid, why would you even consider any of Normans testimony including that he heard a bolt and hulls hitting the floor?

Cherry-picking-- me ? I think not
« Last Edit: June 12, 2012, 09:52:30 PM by profmunkin »

Offline SolusLupus

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 151
Re: JFK - 3 shooters 6 shots
« Reply #1069 on: June 12, 2012, 10:05:15 PM »
First of all, you have terms mixed around.  Things that are not possible are never plausible.

Were any shooters spotted in the grassy knoll?  No, not a single one.  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.

Have I fired a gun before?  Yes.  Have I been in a large empty warehouse before?  Yes.

A gunshot in close quarters, especially with little in the way of the acoustics, does have a tendency to be so loud that it's not easy to directly pinpoint.  Echo is always a concern with loud noises, too.

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.

But you're still picking at small cherries here, and insisting they make a pie.  They don't.

We have video evidence of the shooting.

We have forensic evidence of the shooting.

We have a vast preponderance of testimony, not just a handful of people.

We have the gun.  We have the bullets.  Oswald shot a police officer before ducking into a theater.

You're accusing us of "cherry picking", but all of us can recognize this vast wealth of information.  You, however, pick out three people and say "That's the evidence!  What they said sounds fishy to me!  SO THERE MUST HAVE BEEN MORE THAN ONE SHOOTER".
“Yesterday we obeyed kings and bent our necks before emperors. But today we kneel only to truth, follow only beauty, and obey only love.” -- Kahlil Gibran

My blog about life, universe, and everything: http://solusl.blogspot.com/

Offline profmunkin

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 454
Re: JFK - 3 shooters 6 shots
« Reply #1070 on: June 12, 2012, 10:34:21 PM »
Victoria Adams gave testimony to WC, she was on the 4th floor at an open window in the TSBD.
3 set of windows from the east, or 1 widow to the West of were Jarmin was.
She stated the shots came from "right below" dah dah dah dah...grassy knoll.
Adams was with Sandra Styles (she was not asked to testify to the WC), Elsie Dorman (she was not asked to testify to the WC) and Dorothy Garner (she was not asked to testify to the WC)

cherry-picking, you got to be kidding

Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles were running down the steps after the shooting, the WC recognized this as a problem in timing, but never resolved it, they refused to do a time study on Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles even after Victoria requested one, the FBI or WC told her that she couldn't have been on the steps then because Oswald was on them, she was told she was mistaken. Victoria Adams asked to have Sandra Styles give testimony to the WC, Victoria as told that they had her story, they didn't need Styles.

Offline profmunkin

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 454
Re: JFK - 3 shooters 6 shots
« Reply #1071 on: June 12, 2012, 10:58:10 PM »
First of all, you have terms mixed around.  Things that are not possible are never plausible.
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!



Were any shooters spotted in the grassy knoll?  No, not a single one.

> YES 5 witnesses saw gunmen
> YES 4 saw puff of smoke
 
 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


Have I fired a gun before?  Yes.  Have I been in a large empty warehouse before?  Yes.
> And <
A gunshot in close quarters, especially with little in the way of the acoustics, does have a tendency to be so loud that it's not easy to directly pinpoint.  Echo is always a concern with loud noises, too.
>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.
>If you dodge the obvious you just come off looking like a toadie.


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

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!

We have video evidence of the shooting.
>Really?
We have forensic evidence of the shooting.
>Really?
We have a vast preponderance of testimony, not just a handful of people.
>Not True, at least as far as witnesses in Dealey Plaza.
We have the gun.  We have the bullets.  Oswald shot a police officer before ducking into a theater.
>Really?

You're accusing us of "cherry picking", but all of us can recognize this vast wealth of information.  You, however, pick out three people and say "That's the evidence!  What they said sounds fishy to me!  SO THERE MUST HAVE BEEN MORE THAN ONE SHOOTER".
« Last Edit: June 12, 2012, 11:09:53 PM by profmunkin »

Offline Echnaton

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1490
Re: JFK - 3 shooters 6 shots
« Reply #1072 on: June 12, 2012, 10:59:56 PM »
I am getting so sick of promunkin's repetitious nonsense.  He goes away to recharg and each time he comes back with a slightly greater air of desperation and need to cherry pick and ignore all the criticism that has been given for these 72 pages.  I propose that he be given a warning to address his critics on this board or if he fails to do that, he will be banned.

It is really a simple question,  who made the shots and where were they.  Give us this and the support for the accusation.  Failing a complete answer to this, profmunkin should be banned. 
The sun shone, having no alternative, on the nothing new. —Samuel Beckett

Offline LunarOrbit

  • Administrator
  • Saturn
  • *****
  • Posts: 1052
    • ApolloHoax.net
Re: JFK - 3 shooters 6 shots
« Reply #1073 on: June 12, 2012, 11:17:51 PM »
It is really a simple question,  who made the shots and where were they.  Give us this and the support for the accusation.  Failing a complete answer to this, profmunkin should be banned.

I'm going to make it official.

Profmunkin, you have until the end of the day Friday (June 15, 2012) to provide us with the answers to our questions. Who fired the shots that hit President Kennedy and Governor Connally, and what was the location of the assassin (or assassins)? Explain to us why your scenario makes more sense than Lee Harvey Oswald being the lone gunman.

If you do not provide these answers in the time I have allotted you will be permanently banned. I believe I have been extremely generous in allowing you to make over 400 posts despite what you did to the Proboards forum, but it's time for you to prove you're not just a troll.
It suddenly struck me that that tiny pea, pretty and blue, was the Earth.
I put up my thumb and shut one eye, and my thumb blotted out the planet Earth.
I didn't feel like a giant. I felt very, very small.
- Neil Armstrong (1930-2012)

Offline profmunkin

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 454
Re: JFK - 3 shooters 6 shots
« Reply #1074 on: June 12, 2012, 11:22:12 PM »
I propose that he be given a warning to address his critics on this board or if he fails to do that, he will be banned.
It is really a simple question,  who made the shots and where were they.  Give us this and the support for the accusation.  Failing a complete answer to this, profmunkin should be banned.
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.

Offline SolusLupus

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 151
Re: JFK - 3 shooters 6 shots
« Reply #1075 on: June 12, 2012, 11:32:01 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!

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

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.
  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

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!

Let's see the "nothing" I have here:

Quote
We have video evidence of the shooting.
>Really?

Zapruder Film.

Quote
We have forensic evidence of the shooting.
>Really?

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?

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?
“Yesterday we obeyed kings and bent our necks before emperors. But today we kneel only to truth, follow only beauty, and obey only love.” -- Kahlil Gibran

My blog about life, universe, and everything: http://solusl.blogspot.com/

Offline SolusLupus

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 151
Re: JFK - 3 shooters 6 shots
« Reply #1076 on: June 12, 2012, 11:45:11 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.
I'm not sure what your mentality here is.  Why do you resist offering your alternative scenario?
“Yesterday we obeyed kings and bent our necks before emperors. But today we kneel only to truth, follow only beauty, and obey only love.” -- Kahlil Gibran

My blog about life, universe, and everything: http://solusl.blogspot.com/

Offline LunarOrbit

  • Administrator
  • Saturn
  • *****
  • Posts: 1052
    • ApolloHoax.net
Re: JFK - 3 shooters 6 shots
« Reply #1077 on: June 12, 2012, 11:48:22 PM »
All lunarorbit has to do is ask me to leave.

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.
It suddenly struck me that that tiny pea, pretty and blue, was the Earth.
I put up my thumb and shut one eye, and my thumb blotted out the planet Earth.
I didn't feel like a giant. I felt very, very small.
- Neil Armstrong (1930-2012)

Offline profmunkin

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 454
Re: JFK - 3 shooters 6 shots
« Reply #1078 on: June 13, 2012, 12:10:02 AM »
Let's see the "nothing" I have here:

Zapruder Film.

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.

Offline SolusLupus

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 151
Re: JFK - 3 shooters 6 shots
« Reply #1079 on: June 13, 2012, 12:15:36 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?

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?

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?

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

--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
And you are wrong here.

By the way, check out Reply #373.
« Last Edit: June 13, 2012, 12:19:33 AM by SolusLupus »
“Yesterday we obeyed kings and bent our necks before emperors. But today we kneel only to truth, follow only beauty, and obey only love.” -- Kahlil Gibran

My blog about life, universe, and everything: http://solusl.blogspot.com/