Discussion:
Breakability: The Diminishing Velocity Theory
Add Reply
claviger
2018-06-30 15:15:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Breakability: CE-399 and the Diminishing Velocity Theory
John Hunt
https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/Breakability/Breakability.htm
The Single-Bullet Theory
Anthony Marsh
2018-07-01 00:58:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Breakability: CE-399 and the Diminishing Velocity Theory
John Hunt
https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/Breakability/Breakability.htm
The Single-Bullet Theory
I don't know why you posted this. It destroys the WC.
John Hunt is an excellent researcher and I helped him with his research
and he helped me. One sentence typifies the difference between the
conspiracy researchers and the WC defenders:

Mr. John Hunt, Kennedy Assassination Investigator, for supplying hard to
get material from the Archives and spotting distracting errors in the text.

______________

The fact remains that the WC defenders never do any actual research and
very rarely visit the National Archives to examine the original
materials for themselves. John Hunt did. I did.

________
There are still a few points that John made which I disagreed with or
thought were not forceful enough. He is too much of a gentleman to come
right out and call the WC defenders liars.

Either Sturdivan was simply ignorant of the H.P. White Laboratory tests
which show the ACTUAL measured velocities for Oswald's ammo or he
realized that he had to lie about them to get the velocities he needed.
Maybe he was not allowed to see the FBI documents which I copied.

Loading Image...
Loading Image...

But if you use them you can calculate exactly how many FPS the bullet
loses per foot of flight.

John correctly critiques the Australian tests, but overlooks the fact
that their bullet totally missed the WRIST simulation. You can get a
bullet that looks undamaged if you don't hit the wrist, but when
Edgewood did the nose is smashed.

Loading Image...

But John did not mention a couple of things that I have pointed out
before. The discrepancy of the missing fragments from CE 399.
He seemed to overlook the fact that the hole in the base of the bullet
is where they drilled out some bullet lead to test.
Then several fragments of lead remain in Connally's wrist and thigh.
We don't know how much because they were never measured or tested. They
could be today, but the WC defenders won't allow it because it might
destroy their precious lies.
Then there is another fragment which was unaccounted for the FBI
scratched out the text about it on their report because it may not have
come from CE 399:

http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/FBI_3452.tif

I can make out the first words that were crossed out: the Governor's

But what is the third word which the FBI desperately tried to hide?
If we were allowed to examine the original document we might be able to
figure out what they were trying to hide and why.
When I examined original HSCA documents at the National Archives I was
able to reconstruct the words they had erased with WhiteOUT by seeing
and feeling the typewriter impressions on the back of the pages. Also,
using bluelihght may let us see the black ink text obscured by pencil marks.


I also suggested to John that some type of SBT might be possible if we
simply remove the wrist from the equation and assign that to another bullet.
What I call a Modified Single Bullet Theory.
claviger
2018-07-02 00:57:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Breakability: CE-399 and the Diminishing Velocity Theory
John Hunt
https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/Breakability/Breakability.htm
The Single-Bullet Theory
I don't know why you posted this. It destroys the WC.
John Hunt is an excellent researcher and I helped him
with his research and he helped me. One sentence
typifies the difference between the conspiracy researchers
and the WC defenders: Mr. John Hunt, Kennedy Assassination
Investigator, for supplying hard to get material from the
Archives and spotting distracting errors in the text.
If John Hunt is so brilliant then who shot JFK and why?
How many snipers and where were they located? For
any credibility we need type of bullet and trajectories.
How did they escape with weapons in hand?

Should be easy questions to answer for both of you
mentally superior researchers. Remember once you
bash and trash the WCR and HSCA, et al, you have an
obligation to explain every detail of what actually took
place. Just being two of numerous naysayers is boring
and unconvincing.

By the way, what you didn't notice in Hunt's article is
revealing of your inability to digest all pertinent info in
his presentation. You claim he destroys the WCR but
also your argument about Connally's back wound.

Hunt is just one more CT who gets lost in deep minutia
and has no rational alternative to offer. Why don't both
of you get back to us when you have some information
about who organized the ambush and how they pulled
it off.
Anthony Marsh
2018-07-02 19:34:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Breakability: CE-399 and the Diminishing Velocity Theory
John Hunt
https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/Breakability/Breakability.htm
The Single-Bullet Theory
I don't know why you posted this. It destroys the WC.
John Hunt is an excellent researcher and I helped him
with his research and he helped me. One sentence
typifies the difference between the conspiracy researchers
and the WC defenders: Mr. John Hunt, Kennedy Assassination
Investigator, for supplying hard to get material from the
Archives and spotting distracting errors in the text.
If John Hunt is so brilliant then who shot JFK and why?
Did he say? Did he even get to the point of figuring that out?
Post by claviger
How many snipers and where were they located? For
any credibility we need type of bullet and trajectories.
I've given you some of the answer, with diagrams. You have produced nothing.
Post by claviger
How did they escape with weapons in hand?
I never said they did.
Post by claviger
Should be easy questions to answer for both of you
mentally superior researchers. Remember once you
bash and trash the WCR and HSCA, et al, you have an
obligation to explain every detail of what actually took
place. Just being two of numerous naysayers is boring
and unconvincing.
I have exaplained more details than most have, but I don't have all the
answers.
Post by claviger
By the way, what you didn't notice in Hunt's article is
revealing of your inability to digest all pertinent info in
his presentation. You claim he destroys the WCR but
also your argument about Connally's back wound.
No.
We disagree on some details.
He calls into question the SBT. I offer an alternative.
Post by claviger
Hunt is just one more CT who gets lost in deep minutia
Great idea. If anyone dissents at all, just call them crazy.
Post by claviger
and has no rational alternative to offer. Why don't both
of you get back to us when you have some information
about who organized the ambush and how they pulled
it off.
I am still working on it.
Why don't YOU release all the files? Sometimes it is only by seeing the
released files that I learn new facts.
claviger
2018-07-07 21:42:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Breakability: CE-399 and the Diminishing Velocity Theory
John Hunt
https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/Breakability/Breakability.htm
The Single-Bullet Theory
I don't know why you posted this. It destroys the WC.
John Hunt is an excellent researcher and I helped him
with his research and he helped me. One sentence
typifies the difference between the conspiracy researchers
and the WC defenders: Mr. John Hunt, Kennedy Assassination
Investigator, for supplying hard to get material from the
Archives and spotting distracting errors in the text.
If John Hunt is so brilliant then who shot JFK and why?
Did he say? Did he even get to the point of figuring that out?
Evidently not.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
How many snipers and where were they located? For
any credibility we need type of bullet and trajectories.
I've given you some of the answer, with diagrams. You
have produced nothing.
The WCR and HSCA did all that before you. The SOTGK is
just as invisible today as he/she was almost 55 years ago.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
How did they escape with weapons in hand?
I never said they did.
Then what happened to all those many rifles used in the
"classic triangulation of fire" ambush that according to
mft turned into a 20 gun fusillade from all sides?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Should be easy questions to answer for both of you
mentally superior researchers. Remember once you
bash and trash the WCR and HSCA, et al, you have an
obligation to explain every detail of what actually took
place. Just being two of numerous naysayers is boring
and unconvincing.
I have exaplained more details than most have, but I don't
have all the answers.
You've had 5 decades to figure it out. What's the problem,
are you a slow thinker?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
By the way, what you didn't notice in Hunt's article is
revealing of your inability to digest all pertinent info in
his presentation. You claim he destroys the WCR but
also your argument about Connally's back wound.
No.
We disagree on some details.
What details?
Post by Anthony Marsh
He calls into question the SBT. I offer an alternative.
What alternative?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Hunt is just one more CT who gets lost in deep minutia
Great idea. If anyone dissents at all, just call them crazy.
All they have to do is present factual evidence.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
and has no rational alternative to offer. Why don't both
of you get back to us when you have some information
about who organized the ambush and how they pulled
it off.
I am still working on it.
After 50 years? I thought you had all the answers a long time ago.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Why don't YOU release all the files?
I'm not POTUSA.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Sometimes it is only by seeing the released files
that I learn new facts.
Why do you need new facts? That means your old facts didn't work
out and you're desperately hoping new facts would come along!
Sounds like a lot of CTs have been stalling for time.
Anthony Marsh
2018-07-09 19:42:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Breakability: CE-399 and the Diminishing Velocity Theory
John Hunt
https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/Breakability/Breakability.htm
The Single-Bullet Theory
I don't know why you posted this. It destroys the WC.
John Hunt is an excellent researcher and I helped him
with his research and he helped me. One sentence
typifies the difference between the conspiracy researchers
and the WC defenders: Mr. John Hunt, Kennedy Assassination
Investigator, for supplying hard to get material from the
Archives and spotting distracting errors in the text.
If John Hunt is so brilliant then who shot JFK and why?
Did he say? Did he even get to the point of figuring that out?
Evidently not.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
How many snipers and where were they located? For
any credibility we need type of bullet and trajectories.
I've given you some of the answer, with diagrams. You
have produced nothing.
The WCR and HSCA did all that before you. The SOTGK is
just as invisible today as he/she was almost 55 years ago.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
How did they escape with weapons in hand?
I never said they did.
Then what happened to all those many rifles used in the
"classic triangulation of fire" ambush that according to
mft turned into a 20 gun fusillade from all sides?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Should be easy questions to answer for both of you
mentally superior researchers. Remember once you
bash and trash the WCR and HSCA, et al, you have an
obligation to explain every detail of what actually took
place. Just being two of numerous naysayers is boring
and unconvincing.
I have exaplained more details than most have, but I don't
have all the answers.
You've had 5 decades to figure it out. What's the problem,
are you a slow thinker?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
By the way, what you didn't notice in Hunt's article is
revealing of your inability to digest all pertinent info in
his presentation. You claim he destroys the WCR but
also your argument about Connally's back wound.
No.
We disagree on some details.
What details?
Post by Anthony Marsh
He calls into question the SBT. I offer an alternative.
What alternative?
It's called the Modified Single Bullet Theory.
One shot goes through JFK's torso and then through Connally's torso.
Then the second shot hits Connally's wrist.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Hunt is just one more CT who gets lost in deep minutia
Great idea. If anyone dissents at all, just call them crazy.
All they have to do is present factual evidence.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
and has no rational alternative to offer. Why don't both
of you get back to us when you have some information
about who organized the ambush and how they pulled
it off.
I am still working on it.
After 50 years? I thought you had all the answers a long time ago.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Why don't YOU release all the files?
I'm not POTUSA.
POTUS is not supposed to be in charge. Obey the law.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Sometimes it is only by seeing the released files
that I learn new facts.
Why do you need new facts? That means your old facts didn't work
out and you're desperately hoping new facts would come along!
Sounds like a lot of CTs have been stalling for time.
There are still some missing facts, destroyed documents and destroyed
evidence.
mainframetech
2018-07-10 03:37:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Breakability: CE-399 and the Diminishing Velocity Theory
John Hunt
https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/Breakability/Breakability.htm
The Single-Bullet Theory
I don't know why you posted this. It destroys the WC.
John Hunt is an excellent researcher and I helped him
with his research and he helped me. One sentence
typifies the difference between the conspiracy researchers
and the WC defenders: Mr. John Hunt, Kennedy Assassination
Investigator, for supplying hard to get material from the
Archives and spotting distracting errors in the text.
If John Hunt is so brilliant then who shot JFK and why?
Did he say? Did he even get to the point of figuring that out?
Evidently not.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
How many snipers and where were they located? For
any credibility we need type of bullet and trajectories.
I've given you some of the answer, with diagrams. You
have produced nothing.
The WCR and HSCA did all that before you. The SOTGK is
just as invisible today as he/she was almost 55 years ago.
Which really means that they accomplished the job they were intended
to handle with the public.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
How did they escape with weapons in hand?
I never said they did.
Then what happened to all those many rifles used in the
"classic triangulation of fire" ambush that according to
mft turned into a 20 gun fusillade from all sides?
WRONG! Don't even begin to use my name as having mentioned "classic
triangulation of fire". That's your blat, not mine. And the "fusillade"
was also not my idea, I'm repeating what I read in a book which I've
identified.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Should be easy questions to answer for both of you
mentally superior researchers. Remember once you
bash and trash the WCR and HSCA, et al, you have an
obligation to explain every detail of what actually took
place. Just being two of numerous naysayers is boring
and unconvincing.
You don't get to specify the rules for other people's statements.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
I have exaplained more details than most have, but I don't
have all the answers.
You've had 5 decades to figure it out. What's the problem,
are you a slow thinker?
I see you're going back to being a wise-ass. It doesn't become you.
Try solving things, it's more adult.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
By the way, what you didn't notice in Hunt's article is
revealing of your inability to digest all pertinent info in
his presentation. You claim he destroys the WCR but
also your argument about Connally's back wound.
No.
We disagree on some details.
What details?
Post by Anthony Marsh
He calls into question the SBT. I offer an alternative.
What alternative?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Hunt is just one more CT who gets lost in deep minutia
Great idea. If anyone dissents at all, just call them crazy.
All they have to do is present factual evidence.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
and has no rational alternative to offer. Why don't both
of you get back to us when you have some information
about who organized the ambush and how they pulled
it off.
I am still working on it.
After 50 years? I thought you had all the answers a long time ago.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Why don't YOU release all the files?
I'm not POTUSA.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Sometimes it is only by seeing the released files
that I learn new facts.
Why do you need new facts? That means your old facts didn't work
out and you're desperately hoping new facts would come along!
Sounds like a lot of CTs have been stalling for time.
claviger
2018-07-10 19:53:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Breakability: CE-399 and the Diminishing Velocity Theory
John Hunt
https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/Breakability/Breakability.htm
The Single-Bullet Theory
I don't know why you posted this. It destroys the WC.
John Hunt is an excellent researcher and I helped him
with his research and he helped me. One sentence
typifies the difference between the conspiracy researchers
and the WC defenders: Mr. John Hunt, Kennedy Assassination
Investigator, for supplying hard to get material from the
Archives and spotting distracting errors in the text.
If John Hunt is so brilliant then who shot JFK and why?
Did he say? Did he even get to the point of figuring that out?
Evidently not.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
How many snipers and where were they located? For
any credibility we need type of bullet and trajectories.
I've given you some of the answer, with diagrams. You
have produced nothing.
The WCR and HSCA did all that before you. The SOTGK is
just as invisible today as he/she was almost 55 years ago.
Which really means that they accomplished the job they
were intended to handle with the public.
Is "they" the WCR and HSCA, or the snipers?
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
How did they escape with weapons in hand?
I never said they did.
Then what happened to all those many rifles used in the
"classic triangulation of fire" ambush that according to
mft turned into a 20 gun fusillade from all sides?
WRONG! Don't even begin to use my name as having mentioned
"classic triangulation of fire". That's your blat, not mine.
The CTOF has been around for a long time and used by one of
the sources you like.
Post by mainframetech
And the "fusillade" was also not my idea, I'm repeating what I
read in a book which I've identified.
Fusillade means a whole bunch of shots at the same time. You
give support to a couple of CT authors who claim there were a
lot more snipers and shots fired than the 3 heard by a majority
of witnesses.
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Should be easy questions to answer for both of you
mentally superior researchers. Remember once you
bash and trash the WCR and HSCA, et al, you have an
obligation to explain every detail of what actually took
place. Just being two of numerous naysayers is boring
and unconvincing.
You don't get to specify the rules for other people's statements.
Yes I do, in the sense that logic requires assertions be supported
with facts.
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
I have exaplained more details than most have, but I don't
have all the answers.
You've had 5 decades to figure it out. What's the problem,
are you a slow thinker?
I see you're going back to being a wise-ass. It doesn't become you.
Try solving things, it's more adult.
Actually that comment was made to Marsh but all CTs welcome
to respond. Try solving the total number of shots and matching
them to locations were snipers were located. IOW try making an
effort to be a competent detective.
mainframetech
2018-07-12 02:41:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Breakability: CE-399 and the Diminishing Velocity Theory
John Hunt
https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/Breakability/Breakability.htm
The Single-Bullet Theory
I don't know why you posted this. It destroys the WC.
John Hunt is an excellent researcher and I helped him
with his research and he helped me. One sentence
typifies the difference between the conspiracy researchers
and the WC defenders: Mr. John Hunt, Kennedy Assassination
Investigator, for supplying hard to get material from the
Archives and spotting distracting errors in the text.
If John Hunt is so brilliant then who shot JFK and why?
Did he say? Did he even get to the point of figuring that out?
Evidently not.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
How many snipers and where were they located? For
any credibility we need type of bullet and trajectories.
I've given you some of the answer, with diagrams. You
have produced nothing.
The WCR and HSCA did all that before you. The SOTGK is
just as invisible today as he/she was almost 55 years ago.
Which really means that they accomplished the job they
were intended to handle with the public.
Is "they" the WCR and HSCA, or the snipers?
The shooters.
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
How did they escape with weapons in hand?
On the GK they simply put the weapons in the trunk of a nearby car,
and drove away...hastily.
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Then what happened to all those many rifles used in the
"classic triangulation of fire" ambush that according to
mft turned into a 20 gun fusillade from all sides?
WRONG! Don't even begin to use my name as having mentioned
"classic triangulation of fire". That's your blat, not mine.
The CTOF has been around for a long time and used by one of
the sources you like.
Not by me.
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
And the "fusillade" was also not my idea, I'm repeating what I
read in a book which I've identified.
Fusillade means a whole bunch of shots at the same time. You
give support to a couple of CT authors who claim there were a
lot more snipers and shots fired than the 3 heard by a majority
of witnesses.
Now you're finally getting it.
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Should be easy questions to answer for both of you
mentally superior researchers. Remember once you
bash and trash the WCR and HSCA, et al, you have an
obligation to explain every detail of what actually took
place. Just being two of numerous naysayers is boring
and unconvincing.
You don't get to specify the rules for other people's statements.
Yes I do, in the sense that logic requires assertions be supported
with facts.
You can make rules for what you will listen to or believe, but you
cannot make rules for what someone else will say or do. Is that clear
enough? That right is in the hands of the moderator.
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
I have explained more details than most have, but I don't
have all the answers.
You've had 5 decades to figure it out. What's the problem,
are you a slow thinker?
I see you're going back to being a wise-ass. It doesn't become you.
Try solving things, it's more adult.
Actually that comment was made to Marsh but all CTs welcome
to respond. Try solving the total number of shots and matching
them to locations were snipers were located. IOW try making an
effort to be a competent detective.
That was done but you missed it or ignored it. The shots that struck
in the plaza were listed, and as to where they came from, only a fool
would ask that, since it's after the fact and we don't have any of the
shooters or witnesses in custody.

Chris
bigdog
2018-07-13 00:56:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Breakability: CE-399 and the Diminishing Velocity Theory
John Hunt
https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/Breakability/Breakability.htm
The Single-Bullet Theory
I don't know why you posted this. It destroys the WC.
John Hunt is an excellent researcher and I helped him
with his research and he helped me. One sentence
typifies the difference between the conspiracy researchers
and the WC defenders: Mr. John Hunt, Kennedy Assassination
Investigator, for supplying hard to get material from the
Archives and spotting distracting errors in the text.
If John Hunt is so brilliant then who shot JFK and why?
Did he say? Did he even get to the point of figuring that out?
Evidently not.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
How many snipers and where were they located? For
any credibility we need type of bullet and trajectories.
I've given you some of the answer, with diagrams. You
have produced nothing.
The WCR and HSCA did all that before you. The SOTGK is
just as invisible today as he/she was almost 55 years ago.
Which really means that they accomplished the job they
were intended to handle with the public.
Is "they" the WCR and HSCA, or the snipers?
The shooters.
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
How did they escape with weapons in hand?
On the GK they simply put the weapons in the trunk of a nearby car,
and drove away...hastily.
Oh, we're back on the GK. I guess when no evidence is required, you can
put shooters just about any place you want.
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Then what happened to all those many rifles used in the
"classic triangulation of fire" ambush that according to
mft turned into a 20 gun fusillade from all sides?
WRONG! Don't even begin to use my name as having mentioned
"classic triangulation of fire". That's your blat, not mine.
The CTOF has been around for a long time and used by one of
the sources you like.
Not by me.
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
And the "fusillade" was also not my idea, I'm repeating what I
read in a book which I've identified.
Fusillade means a whole bunch of shots at the same time. You
give support to a couple of CT authors who claim there were a
lot more snipers and shots fired than the 3 heard by a majority
of witnesses.
Now you're finally getting it.
Maybe someday you will, but I doubt it.
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Should be easy questions to answer for both of you
mentally superior researchers. Remember once you
bash and trash the WCR and HSCA, et al, you have an
obligation to explain every detail of what actually took
place. Just being two of numerous naysayers is boring
and unconvincing.
You don't get to specify the rules for other people's statements.
Yes I do, in the sense that logic requires assertions be supported
with facts.
You can make rules for what you will listen to or believe, but you
cannot make rules for what someone else will say or do. Is that clear
enough? That right is in the hands of the moderator.
You don't seem to have any rules for what your theories. You go with
whatever floats your boat.
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
I have explained more details than most have, but I don't
have all the answers.
You've had 5 decades to figure it out. What's the problem,
are you a slow thinker?
I see you're going back to being a wise-ass. It doesn't become you.
Try solving things, it's more adult.
Actually that comment was made to Marsh but all CTs welcome
to respond. Try solving the total number of shots and matching
them to locations were snipers were located. IOW try making an
effort to be a competent detective.
That was done but you missed it or ignored it. The shots that struck
in the plaza were listed, and as to where they came from, only a fool
would ask that, since it's after the fact and we don't have any of the
shooters or witnesses in custody.
or evidence.

bigdog
2018-07-11 02:05:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Breakability: CE-399 and the Diminishing Velocity Theory
John Hunt
https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/Breakability/Breakability.htm
The Single-Bullet Theory
I don't know why you posted this. It destroys the WC.
John Hunt is an excellent researcher and I helped him
with his research and he helped me. One sentence
typifies the difference between the conspiracy researchers
and the WC defenders: Mr. John Hunt, Kennedy Assassination
Investigator, for supplying hard to get material from the
Archives and spotting distracting errors in the text.
If John Hunt is so brilliant then who shot JFK and why?
Did he say? Did he even get to the point of figuring that out?
Evidently not.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
How many snipers and where were they located? For
any credibility we need type of bullet and trajectories.
I've given you some of the answer, with diagrams. You
have produced nothing.
The WCR and HSCA did all that before you. The SOTGK is
just as invisible today as he/she was almost 55 years ago.
Which really means that they accomplished the job they were intended
to handle with the public.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
How did they escape with weapons in hand?
I never said they did.
Then what happened to all those many rifles used in the
"classic triangulation of fire" ambush that according to
mft turned into a 20 gun fusillade from all sides?
WRONG! Don't even begin to use my name as having mentioned "classic
triangulation of fire". That's your blat, not mine. And the "fusillade"
was also not my idea, I'm repeating what I read in a book which I've
identified.
That's your problem. You seem to be willing to buy into any story you
read, no matter how nutty, as long as it doesn't have Oswald as one of the
shooters. You don't even care that the theories you are advocating for
today are incompatible with the ones you were pushing a month ago or a
year ago. You've moved your frontal shooter from the GK, to a storm drain
beyond the underpass, and now have him on the SoGK. If all this so called
evidence is so compelling, why do you have to keep revising your beliefs.
Why can't you stick with one story the way the LNs have for over 50 years.
Oswald did it. By himself. That has always been the LN position and it has
required no revisions since the public was told that was what happened
within 12 hours of the crime.
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Should be easy questions to answer for both of you
mentally superior researchers. Remember once you
bash and trash the WCR and HSCA, et al, you have an
obligation to explain every detail of what actually took
place. Just being two of numerous naysayers is boring
and unconvincing.
You don't get to specify the rules for other people's statements.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
I have exaplained more details than most have, but I don't
have all the answers.
You've had 5 decades to figure it out. What's the problem,
are you a slow thinker?
I see you're going back to being a wise-ass. It doesn't become you.
Try solving things, it's more adult.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
By the way, what you didn't notice in Hunt's article is
revealing of your inability to digest all pertinent info in
his presentation. You claim he destroys the WCR but
also your argument about Connally's back wound.
No.
We disagree on some details.
What details?
Post by Anthony Marsh
He calls into question the SBT. I offer an alternative.
What alternative?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Hunt is just one more CT who gets lost in deep minutia
Great idea. If anyone dissents at all, just call them crazy.
All they have to do is present factual evidence.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
and has no rational alternative to offer. Why don't both
of you get back to us when you have some information
about who organized the ambush and how they pulled
it off.
I am still working on it.
After 50 years? I thought you had all the answers a long time ago.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Why don't YOU release all the files?
I'm not POTUSA.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Sometimes it is only by seeing the released files
that I learn new facts.
Why do you need new facts? That means your old facts didn't work
out and you're desperately hoping new facts would come along!
Sounds like a lot of CTs have been stalling for time.
mainframetech
2018-07-12 02:41:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Breakability: CE-399 and the Diminishing Velocity Theory
John Hunt
https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/Breakability/Breakability.htm
The Single-Bullet Theory
I don't know why you posted this. It destroys the WC.
John Hunt is an excellent researcher and I helped him
with his research and he helped me. One sentence
typifies the difference between the conspiracy researchers
and the WC defenders: Mr. John Hunt, Kennedy Assassination
Investigator, for supplying hard to get material from the
Archives and spotting distracting errors in the text.
If John Hunt is so brilliant then who shot JFK and why?
Did he say? Did he even get to the point of figuring that out?
Evidently not.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
How many snipers and where were they located? For
any credibility we need type of bullet and trajectories.
I've given you some of the answer, with diagrams. You
have produced nothing.
The WCR and HSCA did all that before you. The SOTGK is
just as invisible today as he/she was almost 55 years ago.
Which really means that they accomplished the job they were intended
to handle with the public.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
How did they escape with weapons in hand?
I never said they did.
Then what happened to all those many rifles used in the
"classic triangulation of fire" ambush that according to
mft turned into a 20 gun fusillade from all sides?
WRONG! Don't even begin to use my name as having mentioned "classic
triangulation of fire". That's your blat, not mine. And the "fusillade"
was also not my idea, I'm repeating what I read in a book which I've
identified.
That's your problem. You seem to be willing to buy into any story you
read, no matter how nutty, as long as it doesn't have Oswald as one of the
shooters. You don't even care that the theories you are advocating for
today are incompatible with the ones you were pushing a month ago or a
year ago.
I would think with your wonderfully logical mind, you would be able to
point out the problem in detail so you could blat it out to the high
heavens.
Post by bigdog
You've moved your frontal shooter from the GK, to a storm drain
beyond the underpass, and now have him on the SoGK. If all this so called
evidence is so compelling, why do you have to keep revising your beliefs.
If one is to be an amateur detective, one has to learn that it's
foolish to cling to old ideas when better evidence comes along, but you
still cling to the WCR theories, limiting yourself to the 54 year old
story.
Post by bigdog
Why can't you stick with one story the way the LNs have for over 50 years.
Oswald did it. By himself. That has always been the LN position and it has
required no revisions since the public was told that was what happened
within 12 hours of the crime.
Ah, but it has had many excuses made over the years. LNs do indeed
fester in place.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Should be easy questions to answer for both of you
mentally superior researchers. Remember once you
bash and trash the WCR and HSCA, et al, you have an
obligation to explain every detail of what actually took
place. Just being two of numerous naysayers is boring
and unconvincing.
You don't get to specify the rules for other people's statements.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
I have exaplained more details than most have, but I don't
have all the answers.
You've had 5 decades to figure it out. What's the problem,
are you a slow thinker?
I see you're going back to being a wise-ass. It doesn't become you.
Try solving things, it's more adult.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
By the way, what you didn't notice in Hunt's article is
revealing of your inability to digest all pertinent info in
his presentation. You claim he destroys the WCR but
also your argument about Connally's back wound.
No.
We disagree on some details.
What details?
Post by Anthony Marsh
He calls into question the SBT. I offer an alternative.
What alternative?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Hunt is just one more CT who gets lost in deep minutia
Great idea. If anyone dissents at all, just call them crazy.
All they have to do is present factual evidence.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
and has no rational alternative to offer. Why don't both
of you get back to us when you have some information
about who organized the ambush and how they pulled
it off.
I am still working on it.
After 50 years? I thought you had all the answers a long time ago.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Why don't YOU release all the files?
I'm not POTUSA.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Sometimes it is only by seeing the released files
that I learn new facts.
Why do you need new facts? That means your old facts didn't work
out and you're desperately hoping new facts would come along!
Sounds like a lot of CTs have been stalling for time.
WRONG! There was a situation where the old evidence wasn't as strong
as the new, and so a flexible person will go with the newer and better
evidence rather than moulder in place.

Chris
bigdog
2018-07-13 00:50:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Breakability: CE-399 and the Diminishing Velocity Theory
John Hunt
https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/Breakability/Breakability.htm
The Single-Bullet Theory
I don't know why you posted this. It destroys the WC.
John Hunt is an excellent researcher and I helped him
with his research and he helped me. One sentence
typifies the difference between the conspiracy researchers
and the WC defenders: Mr. John Hunt, Kennedy Assassination
Investigator, for supplying hard to get material from the
Archives and spotting distracting errors in the text.
If John Hunt is so brilliant then who shot JFK and why?
Did he say? Did he even get to the point of figuring that out?
Evidently not.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
How many snipers and where were they located? For
any credibility we need type of bullet and trajectories.
I've given you some of the answer, with diagrams. You
have produced nothing.
The WCR and HSCA did all that before you. The SOTGK is
just as invisible today as he/she was almost 55 years ago.
Which really means that they accomplished the job they were intended
to handle with the public.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
How did they escape with weapons in hand?
I never said they did.
Then what happened to all those many rifles used in the
"classic triangulation of fire" ambush that according to
mft turned into a 20 gun fusillade from all sides?
WRONG! Don't even begin to use my name as having mentioned "classic
triangulation of fire". That's your blat, not mine. And the "fusillade"
was also not my idea, I'm repeating what I read in a book which I've
identified.
That's your problem. You seem to be willing to buy into any story you
read, no matter how nutty, as long as it doesn't have Oswald as one of the
shooters. You don't even care that the theories you are advocating for
today are incompatible with the ones you were pushing a month ago or a
year ago.
I would think with your wonderfully logical mind, you would be able to
point out the problem in detail so you could blat it out to the high
heavens.
Why don't we start with your ever changing frontal shooter. Originally you
had him on the GK along with most of the CT world. More recently you moved
him to the storm drain beyond the underpass. Now you have him moving to
the SoGK. Someday you might even find a location for him that actually
works and for which there is real evidence.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
You've moved your frontal shooter from the GK, to a storm drain
beyond the underpass, and now have him on the SoGK. If all this so called
evidence is so compelling, why do you have to keep revising your beliefs.
If one is to be an amateur detective, one has to learn that it's
foolish to cling to old ideas when better evidence comes along, but you
still cling to the WCR theories, limiting yourself to the 54 year old
story.
My story is supported by real evidence. Once you find the right answer,
you don't have to keep changing it.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Why can't you stick with one story the way the LNs have for over 50 years.
Oswald did it. By himself. That has always been the LN position and it has
required no revisions since the public was told that was what happened
within 12 hours of the crime.
Ah, but it has had many excuses made over the years. LNs do indeed
fester in place.
No excuses needed. We aren't the ones who need excuses to dismiss solid
evidence.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Should be easy questions to answer for both of you
mentally superior researchers. Remember once you
bash and trash the WCR and HSCA, et al, you have an
obligation to explain every detail of what actually took
place. Just being two of numerous naysayers is boring
and unconvincing.
You don't get to specify the rules for other people's statements.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
I have exaplained more details than most have, but I don't
have all the answers.
You've had 5 decades to figure it out. What's the problem,
are you a slow thinker?
I see you're going back to being a wise-ass. It doesn't become you.
Try solving things, it's more adult.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
By the way, what you didn't notice in Hunt's article is
revealing of your inability to digest all pertinent info in
his presentation. You claim he destroys the WCR but
also your argument about Connally's back wound.
No.
We disagree on some details.
What details?
Post by Anthony Marsh
He calls into question the SBT. I offer an alternative.
What alternative?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Hunt is just one more CT who gets lost in deep minutia
Great idea. If anyone dissents at all, just call them crazy.
All they have to do is present factual evidence.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
and has no rational alternative to offer. Why don't both
of you get back to us when you have some information
about who organized the ambush and how they pulled
it off.
I am still working on it.
After 50 years? I thought you had all the answers a long time ago.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Why don't YOU release all the files?
I'm not POTUSA.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Sometimes it is only by seeing the released files
that I learn new facts.
Why do you need new facts? That means your old facts didn't work
out and you're desperately hoping new facts would come along!
Sounds like a lot of CTs have been stalling for time.
WRONG! There was a situation where the old evidence wasn't as strong
as the new, and so a flexible person will go with the newer and better
evidence rather than moulder in place.
You've never had evidence, old or new. It's all conjuncture. That's why
you continue to wander aimlessly having rejected the only right answer
there is. There is no hope for you.
mainframetech
2018-07-02 02:23:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Breakability: CE-399 and the Diminishing Velocity Theory
John Hunt
https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/Breakability/Breakability.htm
The Single-Bullet Theory
A CT finally emerges with the truth. Thank you Claviger for your
changing of sides!

Chris
Loading...