Discussion:
Trying to locate all the doctors/experts on the autopsy
(too old to reply)
Piotr Mancini
2017-08-06 22:31:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
One of the JFK Numbers initiatives is to have all Notable Doctors (those
who have touched the X-rays and/or have expert knowledge them) donating a
3-Dimensional model of the victim's cranium and cerebrum to the National
Archives.

So far I have located the names below:

- Dr. Gary Aguilar
- Dr. Michael Baden
- Dr. Michael Chesser
- Dr. Peter Cummings
- Dr. David Mantik
- Joseph Riley, PhD
- Dr. Randolph Robertson
- Dr. Cyril Wecht

My sources at the Archives assure me that this project is pre-approved,
including by the Kennedys, PROVIDED that experts from all sides (there are
3 groups) agree to co-sign the donation.

These are the members of the HSCA Forensic Pathology Panel:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_Select_Committee_on_Assassinations#Forensic_Pathology_Panel

Dr. Earl Rose died recently. Are there any of the others still around?

What we intend to do is replicate this trip:


TIA,

-Ramon
Piotr Mancini
2017-08-07 22:46:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Piotr Mancini
My sources at the Archives assure me that this project is pre-approved,
including by the Kennedys, PROVIDED that experts from all sides (there are
3 groups) agree to co-sign the donation.
Which are those groups? I am glad that you inquiring people asked.

• LNs. Doctor Peter Cummings and his Boston University Team.

• CTs who believe the X-rays are genuine. Doctors Randolph Robertson
and Joseph Riley (former active a.a.j. poster).

• CTs who contend that the X-rays have been manipulated/falsified
in some way. Doctors David Mantik and Michael Chesser.

So far, my only contacts are those of the CT persuasion but am trying to
reach to our esteemed counterpart across the aisle, since their John
Hancock is essential. Paul Kirk and Caroline will not approve our requests
(bringing a high film digitizer to the sacred room and donating a 3D model
of the cranium to the National Archives) if they are coming from my side
only.

I am also working with Doctors Cyril Wecht and Gary Aguilar. Their
position is the same as mine: Let SCIENCE (aka the QUALIFIED researchers,
who are NOT physicians) decide the X-rays' genuity (*).

-Ramon

(*)Yes, I am aware that "genuity" is not a word, but it should be.
Anthony Marsh
2017-08-09 02:26:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Piotr Mancini
My sources at the Archives assure me that this project is pre-approved,
including by the Kennedys, PROVIDED that experts from all sides (there are
3 groups) agree to co-sign the donation.
Which are those groups? I am glad that you inquiring people asked.
No one asked. You are replying to yourself.
Post by Piotr Mancini
• LNs. Doctor Peter Cummings and his Boston University Team.
• CTs who believe the X-rays are genuine. Doctors Randolph Robertson
and Joseph Riley (former active a.a.j. poster).
• CTs who contend that the X-rays have been manipulated/falsified
in some way. Doctors David Mantik and Michael Chesser.
Alterationists.
Post by Piotr Mancini
So far, my only contacts are those of the CT persuasion but am trying to
reach to our esteemed counterpart across the aisle, since their John
Hancock is essential. Paul Kirk and Caroline will not approve our requests
(bringing a high film digitizer to the sacred room and donating a 3D model
of the cranium to the National Archives) if they are coming from my side
only.
I don't get the point of your project.
Many experts already marked on demonstration skulls where they thought
the wounds were. If we can't get an exhumation we need to examine the
body in place.
Post by Piotr Mancini
I am also working with Doctors Cyril Wecht and Gary Aguilar. Their
position is the same as mine: Let SCIENCE (aka the QUALIFIED researchers,
who are NOT physicians) decide the X-rays' genuity (*).
Did you ever hear of the HSCA?
Post by Piotr Mancini
-Ramon
(*)Yes, I am aware that "genuity" is not a word, but it should be.
Piotr Mancini
2017-08-10 13:08:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Did you ever hear of the HSCA?
Yes, we all have, and we have also learned about the substantial progress
of science and technology since then.

The objective of JFK Numbers is to use technology, and most specially
science that HAS NOT been used in these 54 years. Not only that, but the
individuals (scientists, organizations AND The People) who have been
banned since 1964 will not only participate but take over the
investigation.

For the first time, We The People are taking control and responsibility
over the definite solution of the case (*).

-Ramon

(*) From the numerical point of view. I always add this because otherwise
the historians, political scientists, sociologists, journalists, lawyers,
etc., get pissed at me.
GKnoll
2017-08-10 21:51:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
Did you ever hear of the HSCA?
Yes, we all have, and we have also learned about the substantial progress
of science and technology since then.
The objective of JFK Numbers is to use technology, and most specially
science that HAS NOT been used in these 54 years. Not only that, but the
individuals (scientists, organizations AND The People) who have been
banned since 1964 will not only participate but take over the
investigation.
For the first time, We The People are taking control and responsibility
over the definite solution of the case (*).
-Ramon
(*) From the numerical point of view. I always add this because otherwise
the historians, political scientists, sociologists, journalists, lawyers,
etc., get pissed at me.
Will you please tell us who are the people behind JFK Numbers. The
people you report to.
Anthony Marsh
2017-08-10 21:57:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
Did you ever hear of the HSCA?
Yes, we all have, and we have also learned about the substantial progress
of science and technology since then.
The objective of JFK Numbers is to use technology, and most specially
science that HAS NOT been used in these 54 years. Not only that, but the
individuals (scientists, organizations AND The People) who have been
banned since 1964 will not only participate but take over the
investigation.
For the first time, We The People are taking control and responsibility
over the definite solution of the case (*).
-Ramon
(*) From the numerical point of view. I always add this because otherwise
the historians, political scientists, sociologists, journalists, lawyers,
etc., get pissed at me.
Well, are you rich enough to hire the top acoustical experts? No, which
is why we had to create the HSCA to use the authority and money of the
Congress to hire BBN and thus PROVE the grassy knoll shot.
Only a couple of morons here claim the grassy knoll shot does not mean
conspiracy. 7 out of 12 on the HSCA said it does.
OHLeeRedux
2017-08-11 16:59:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
Did you ever hear of the HSCA?
Yes, we all have, and we have also learned about the substantial progress
of science and technology since then.
The objective of JFK Numbers is to use technology, and most specially
science that HAS NOT been used in these 54 years. Not only that, but the
individuals (scientists, organizations AND The People) who have been
banned since 1964 will not only participate but take over the
investigation.
For the first time, We The People are taking control and responsibility
over the definite solution of the case (*).
-Ramon
(*) From the numerical point of view. I always add this because otherwise
the historians, political scientists, sociologists, journalists, lawyers,
etc., get pissed at me.
Well, are you rich enough to hire the top acoustical experts? No, which
is why we had to create the HSCA to use the authority and money of the
Congress to hire BBN and thus PROVE the grassy knoll shot.
Only a couple of morons here claim the grassy knoll shot does not mean
conspiracy. 7 out of 12 on the HSCA said it does.
The silly "acoustic evidence" was debunked soon after the HSCA folded, and
that was all they had. (No. You did not "debunk the debunkers." You did
nothing.) They even had to say that the supposed Grassy Knoll shot missed,
because the medical evidence shows no shots from the front, without
dispute.

Go ahead and sputter "False." We take nothing you say seriously anymore.
Anthony Marsh
2017-08-12 15:02:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by OHLeeRedux
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
Did you ever hear of the HSCA?
Yes, we all have, and we have also learned about the substantial progress
of science and technology since then.
The objective of JFK Numbers is to use technology, and most specially
science that HAS NOT been used in these 54 years. Not only that, but the
individuals (scientists, organizations AND The People) who have been
banned since 1964 will not only participate but take over the
investigation.
For the first time, We The People are taking control and responsibility
over the definite solution of the case (*).
-Ramon
(*) From the numerical point of view. I always add this because otherwise
the historians, political scientists, sociologists, journalists, lawyers,
etc., get pissed at me.
Well, are you rich enough to hire the top acoustical experts? No, which
is why we had to create the HSCA to use the authority and money of the
Congress to hire BBN and thus PROVE the grassy knoll shot.
Only a couple of morons here claim the grassy knoll shot does not mean
conspiracy. 7 out of 12 on the HSCA said it does.
The silly "acoustic evidence" was debunked soon after the HSCA folded, and
False. I pointed out the errors that the Ramsey Panel made and both BBN
and the 2 experts as well as Blakey stand by the acoustical evidence.
Post by OHLeeRedux
that was all they had. (No. You did not "debunk the debunkers." You did
nothing.) They even had to say that the supposed Grassy Knoll shot missed,
because the medical evidence shows no shots from the front, without
dispute.
They said that because they fudged the medical evidence when they were
preparing to endorse the WC. The acoustical evidence came as a surprise at
the last minute and they could not fit it into their very flawed shooting
sequence. Hence putting their SBT at frame Z-190 when we can see JFK
seated upright and not hit before he went behind the sign. I told the HSCA
all of this at the time, but it was too late because they were already
writing their report.
Post by OHLeeRedux
Go ahead and sputter "False." We take nothing you say seriously anymore.
OHLeeRedux
2017-08-13 13:30:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
8:02 AMAnthony Marsh
Post by OHLeeRedux
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
Did you ever hear of the HSCA?
Yes, we all have, and we have also learned about the substantial progress
of science and technology since then.
The objective of JFK Numbers is to use technology, and most specially
science that HAS NOT been used in these 54 years. Not only that, but the
individuals (scientists, organizations AND The People) who have been
banned since 1964 will not only participate but take over the
investigation.
For the first time, We The People are taking control and responsibility
over the definite solution of the case (*).
-Ramon
(*) From the numerical point of view. I always add this because otherwise
the historians, political scientists, sociologists, journalists, lawyers,
etc., get pissed at me.
Well, are you rich enough to hire the top acoustical experts? No, which
is why we had to create the HSCA to use the authority and money of the
Congress to hire BBN and thus PROVE the grassy knoll shot.
Only a couple of morons here claim the grassy knoll shot does not mean
conspiracy. 7 out of 12 on the HSCA said it does.
The silly "acoustic evidence" was debunked soon after the HSCA folded, and
False.


I told you that your sputtering "False" means nothing. Your credibility is
nil.


I pointed out the errors that the Ramsey Panel made and both BBN and the 2
experts as well as Blakey stand by the acoustical evidence.


You also pointed out to us that Pesident Clinton was never impeached.
Yeah, you're a great source of information.
Post by OHLeeRedux
that was all they had. (No. You did not "debunk the debunkers." You did
nothing.) They even had to say that the supposed Grassy Knoll shot missed,
because the medical evidence shows no shots from the front, without
dispute.
They said that because they fudged the medical evidence when they were
preparing to endorse the WC. The acoustical evidence came as a surprise at
the last minute and they could not fit it into their very flawed shooting
sequence. Hence putting their SBT at frame Z-190 when we can see JFK
seated upright and not hit before he went behind the sign. I told the HSCA
all of this at the time, but it was too late because they were already
writing their report.



You had no input whatsoever in the HSCA. But if you want to involve
yourself in its very flawed conclusions, go right ahead. It merely
confirms that you have no crefibility at all.
Anthony Marsh
2017-08-14 16:52:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by OHLeeRedux
8:02 AMAnthony Marsh
Post by OHLeeRedux
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
Did you ever hear of the HSCA?
Yes, we all have, and we have also learned about the substantial progress
of science and technology since then.
The objective of JFK Numbers is to use technology, and most specially
science that HAS NOT been used in these 54 years. Not only that, but the
individuals (scientists, organizations AND The People) who have been
banned since 1964 will not only participate but take over the
investigation.
For the first time, We The People are taking control and responsibility
over the definite solution of the case (*).
-Ramon
(*) From the numerical point of view. I always add this because otherwise
the historians, political scientists, sociologists, journalists, lawyers,
etc., get pissed at me.
Well, are you rich enough to hire the top acoustical experts? No, which
is why we had to create the HSCA to use the authority and money of the
Congress to hire BBN and thus PROVE the grassy knoll shot.
Only a couple of morons here claim the grassy knoll shot does not mean
conspiracy. 7 out of 12 on the HSCA said it does.
The silly "acoustic evidence" was debunked soon after the HSCA folded, and
False.
I told you that your sputtering "False" means nothing. Your credibility is
nil.
I backed it up with an essay as did Don Thomas.
Post by OHLeeRedux
I pointed out the errors that the Ramsey Panel made and both BBN and the 2
experts as well as Blakey stand by the acoustical evidence.
You also pointed out to us that Pesident Clinton was never impeached.
Yeah, you're a great source of information.
Post by OHLeeRedux
that was all they had. (No. You did not "debunk the debunkers." You did
nothing.) They even had to say that the supposed Grassy Knoll shot missed,
because the medical evidence shows no shots from the front, without
dispute.
They said that because they fudged the medical evidence when they were
preparing to endorse the WC. The acoustical evidence came as a surprise at
the last minute and they could not fit it into their very flawed shooting
sequence. Hence putting their SBT at frame Z-190 when we can see JFK
seated upright and not hit before he went behind the sign. I told the HSCA
all of this at the time, but it was too late because they were already
writing their report.
You had no input whatsoever in the HSCA. But if you want to involve
I was one of the people who lobbied for the formation of the HSCA and
our Massachusetts chapter of CCI helped convince Speaker O'Neil to form
the HSCA. WHile you were working for the cover-up.
Post by OHLeeRedux
yourself in its very flawed conclusions, go right ahead. It merely
confirms that you have no crefibility at all.
I don't want crefibility from you, whatever you think that means.
OHLeeRedux
2017-08-15 00:24:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by OHLeeRedux
8:02 AMAnthony Marsh
Post by OHLeeRedux
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
Did you ever hear of the HSCA?
Yes, we all have, and we have also learned about the substantial progress
of science and technology since then.
The objective of JFK Numbers is to use technology, and most specially
science that HAS NOT been used in these 54 years. Not only that, but the
individuals (scientists, organizations AND The People) who have been
banned since 1964 will not only participate but take over the
investigation.
For the first time, We The People are taking control and responsibility
over the definite solution of the case (*).
-Ramon
(*) From the numerical point of view. I always add this because otherwise
the historians, political scientists, sociologists, journalists, lawyers,
etc., get pissed at me.
Well, are you rich enough to hire the top acoustical experts? No, which
is why we had to create the HSCA to use the authority and money of the
Congress to hire BBN and thus PROVE the grassy knoll shot.
Only a couple of morons here claim the grassy knoll shot does not mean
conspiracy. 7 out of 12 on the HSCA said it does.
The silly "acoustic evidence" was debunked soon after the HSCA folded, and
False.
I told you that your sputtering "False" means nothing. Your credibility is
nil.
I backed it up with an essay as did Don Thomas.
Anyone can write gibberish. The "acoustic evidence" was debunked,
notwithstanding your desperate clinging to it.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by OHLeeRedux
I pointed out the errors that the Ramsey Panel made and both BBN and the 2
experts as well as Blakey stand by the acoustical evidence.
You also pointed out to us that Pesident Clinton was never impeached.
Yeah, you're a great source of information.
Post by OHLeeRedux
that was all they had. (No. You did not "debunk the debunkers." You did
nothing.) They even had to say that the supposed Grassy Knoll shot missed,
because the medical evidence shows no shots from the front, without
dispute.
They said that because they fudged the medical evidence when they were
preparing to endorse the WC. The acoustical evidence came as a surprise at
the last minute and they could not fit it into their very flawed shooting
sequence. Hence putting their SBT at frame Z-190 when we can see JFK
seated upright and not hit before he went behind the sign. I told the HSCA
all of this at the time, but it was too late because they were already
writing their report.
You had no input whatsoever in the HSCA. But if you want to involve
I was one of the people who lobbied for the formation of the HSCA and
our Massachusetts chapter of CCI helped convince Speaker O'Neil to form
the HSCA. WHile you were working for the cover-up.
False.
g***@gmail.com
2017-08-15 00:28:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by OHLeeRedux
8:02 AMAnthony Marsh
Post by OHLeeRedux
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
Did you ever hear of the HSCA?
Yes, we all have, and we have also learned about the substantial progress
of science and technology since then.
The objective of JFK Numbers is to use technology, and most specially
science that HAS NOT been used in these 54 years. Not only that, but the
individuals (scientists, organizations AND The People) who have been
banned since 1964 will not only participate but take over the
investigation.
For the first time, We The People are taking control and responsibility
over the definite solution of the case (*).
-Ramon
(*) From the numerical point of view. I always add this because otherwise
the historians, political scientists, sociologists, journalists, lawyers,
etc., get pissed at me.
Well, are you rich enough to hire the top acoustical experts? No, which
is why we had to create the HSCA to use the authority and money of the
Congress to hire BBN and thus PROVE the grassy knoll shot.
Only a couple of morons here claim the grassy knoll shot does not mean
conspiracy. 7 out of 12 on the HSCA said it does.
The silly "acoustic evidence" was debunked soon after the HSCA folded, and
False.
I told you that your sputtering "False" means nothing. Your credibility is
nil.
I backed it up with an essay as did Don Thomas.
Post by OHLeeRedux
I pointed out the errors that the Ramsey Panel made and both BBN and the 2
experts as well as Blakey stand by the acoustical evidence.
You also pointed out to us that Pesident Clinton was never impeached.
Yeah, you're a great source of information.
Post by OHLeeRedux
that was all they had. (No. You did not "debunk the debunkers." You did
nothing.) They even had to say that the supposed Grassy Knoll shot missed,
because the medical evidence shows no shots from the front, without
dispute.
They said that because they fudged the medical evidence when they were
preparing to endorse the WC. The acoustical evidence came as a surprise at
the last minute and they could not fit it into their very flawed shooting
sequence. Hence putting their SBT at frame Z-190 when we can see JFK
seated upright and not hit before he went behind the sign. I told the HSCA
all of this at the time, but it was too late because they were already
writing their report.
You had no input whatsoever in the HSCA. But if you want to involve
I was one of the people who lobbied for the formation of the HSCA and
our Massachusetts chapter of CCI helped convince Speaker O'Neil to form
the HSCA. WHile you were working for the cover-up.
Post by OHLeeRedux
yourself in its very flawed conclusions, go right ahead. It merely
confirms that you have no crefibility at all.
I don't want crefibility from you, whatever you think that means.
Marsh still has not admitted that hears the "Hold everything secure
crosstalk", which BBN has admitted hearing. About the only person on the
planet who has not admitted hearing it is Marsh.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1TIa7EkAi5lbFB2akVHcHlpUm8/view?usp=sharing
Anthony Marsh
2017-08-15 15:58:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by g***@gmail.com
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by OHLeeRedux
8:02 AMAnthony Marsh
Post by OHLeeRedux
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
Did you ever hear of the HSCA?
Yes, we all have, and we have also learned about the substantial progress
of science and technology since then.
The objective of JFK Numbers is to use technology, and most specially
science that HAS NOT been used in these 54 years. Not only that, but the
individuals (scientists, organizations AND The People) who have been
banned since 1964 will not only participate but take over the
investigation.
For the first time, We The People are taking control and responsibility
over the definite solution of the case (*).
-Ramon
(*) From the numerical point of view. I always add this because otherwise
the historians, political scientists, sociologists, journalists, lawyers,
etc., get pissed at me.
Well, are you rich enough to hire the top acoustical experts? No, which
is why we had to create the HSCA to use the authority and money of the
Congress to hire BBN and thus PROVE the grassy knoll shot.
Only a couple of morons here claim the grassy knoll shot does not mean
conspiracy. 7 out of 12 on the HSCA said it does.
The silly "acoustic evidence" was debunked soon after the HSCA folded, and
False.
I told you that your sputtering "False" means nothing. Your credibility is
nil.
I backed it up with an essay as did Don Thomas.
Post by OHLeeRedux
I pointed out the errors that the Ramsey Panel made and both BBN and the 2
experts as well as Blakey stand by the acoustical evidence.
You also pointed out to us that Pesident Clinton was never impeached.
Yeah, you're a great source of information.
Post by OHLeeRedux
that was all they had. (No. You did not "debunk the debunkers." You did
nothing.) They even had to say that the supposed Grassy Knoll shot missed,
because the medical evidence shows no shots from the front, without
dispute.
They said that because they fudged the medical evidence when they were
preparing to endorse the WC. The acoustical evidence came as a surprise at
the last minute and they could not fit it into their very flawed shooting
sequence. Hence putting their SBT at frame Z-190 when we can see JFK
seated upright and not hit before he went behind the sign. I told the HSCA
all of this at the time, but it was too late because they were already
writing their report.
You had no input whatsoever in the HSCA. But if you want to involve
I was one of the people who lobbied for the formation of the HSCA and
our Massachusetts chapter of CCI helped convince Speaker O'Neil to form
the HSCA. WHile you were working for the cover-up.
Post by OHLeeRedux
yourself in its very flawed conclusions, go right ahead. It merely
confirms that you have no crefibility at all.
I don't want crefibility from you, whatever you think that means.
Marsh still has not admitted that hears the "Hold everything secure
crosstalk", which BBN has admitted hearing. About the only person on the
planet who has not admitted hearing it is Marsh.
We talked about this crosstalk at the conference, but Steve was vague
about exactly what words he could hear.


Here's what Steve later wrote:

Tony Marsh, I want you to copy and paste this, or do whatever you have
to do -- so that I don't ever have to read--or hear-ever again that I have
not been "clear enough" when describing the words I hear from the ch. 2
transmission made at 12:30/31 by Dallas County Sheriff Bill Decker.

Are you ready, Tony?

Have you got your computer ready to make this a permanent fixture in
your files?

Okay...

Here goes:

The entire ch.2 transmission, the second of two made by Decker after the
dispatcher couldn't "quite understand all of it" reads as follows:

"Have-um station 5 to move all **men available** out of my department,
back into the railroad yards **in an effort** to try to determine -- just
what and where it happened down there and **hold everything secure until
the homicide and other investigators can get there** ."

The words with ** around them are the words I have been pointing out
over the years that I can hear buried beneath the noise. The words "men
available" and "in an effort" are MUCH fainter and more difficult to hear
than the words "hold everything secure until the homicide and other
investigators can get there."


Here is my brief transcript comparing channel one to channel two. I
clearly list the words **hold everything secure until the homicide and
other investigators can get there** and note that just the word **secure**
was repeated by the skipping needle so it is another repeat missed by
Ramsey. The word **secure** is 3.4 seconds after the first utterance of
the word.


Loading Image...
Post by g***@gmail.com
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1TIa7EkAi5lbFB2akVHcHlpUm8/view?usp=sharing
Piotr Mancini
2017-09-16 13:19:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
Did you ever hear of the HSCA?
Yes, we all have, and we have also learned about the substantial progress
of science and technology since then.
The objective of JFK Numbers is to use technology, and most specially
science that HAS NOT been used in these 54 years. Not only that, but the
individuals (scientists, organizations AND The People) who have been
banned since 1964 will not only participate but take over the
investigation.
For the first time, We The People are taking control and responsibility
over the definite solution of the case (*).
-Ramon
(*) From the numerical point of view. I always add this because otherwise
the historians, political scientists, sociologists, journalists, lawyers,
etc., get pissed at me.
Well, are you rich enough to hire the top acoustical experts?
Actually ...

(a) I trust that JFK Numbers will someday (the sooner the better) have the
support of a group that has a heck of a lot more money than the Koch
brothers:

We The People

(b) Additionally, coming from the FOSS (aka FLOSS) crowd, my first attempt
is to get:

- World Class Experts
- Working for Free

Which is why I am courting Richard Stallman to join the cause. All RMS has
to do is snap his fingers and legions of adoring geek followers worldwide
will start cranking code and drawing a model of Dealey Plaza that will put
the one by Myers and PBS to national shame and expose them for the fraud
they are.

"Hmm, Mr. Myers (or Cold Case) why exactly did you make that choice of
distance and angles here?"

Those 3D models were conceived with the sole purpose of producing
preordained results. Same a Boston University's disgraceful attack against
science and The Truth:

http://youtu.be/mpbOYLE7ATk

Don't believe me? They can shut me up anytime they desire. In the immortal
words of Jerry Maguire/Tom Cruise:

SHOW ME THE FILES !!!

-Ramon
JFK Numbers
Anthony Marsh
2017-09-17 00:32:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
Did you ever hear of the HSCA?
Yes, we all have, and we have also learned about the substantial progress
of science and technology since then.
The objective of JFK Numbers is to use technology, and most specially
science that HAS NOT been used in these 54 years. Not only that, but the
individuals (scientists, organizations AND The People) who have been
banned since 1964 will not only participate but take over the
investigation.
For the first time, We The People are taking control and responsibility
over the definite solution of the case (*).
-Ramon
(*) From the numerical point of view. I always add this because otherwise
the historians, political scientists, sociologists, journalists, lawyers,
etc., get pissed at me.
Well, are you rich enough to hire the top acoustical experts?
Actually ...
(a) I trust that JFK Numbers will someday (the sooner the better) have the
support of a group that has a heck of a lot more money than the Koch
No such group exists.

In case you didn't get my point, the HSCA refused to pay the acoustical
scientist $50,000 to do a more advanced study after they found the grassy
knoll shot. So I wrote the computer program myself to test other locations
for shooters. But the government is still withholding the HSCA data and
tapes.
Post by Piotr Mancini
We The People
(b) Additionally, coming from the FOSS (aka FLOSS) crowd, my first attempt
- World Class Experts
- Working for Free
Which is why I am courting Richard Stallman to join the cause. All RMS has
to do is snap his fingers and legions of adoring geek followers worldwide
will start cranking code and drawing a model of Dealey Plaza that will put
the one by Myers and PBS to national shame and expose them for the fraud
they are.
Well, that alone would be worth a million dollars.
Post by Piotr Mancini
"Hmm, Mr. Myers (or Cold Case) why exactly did you make that choice of
distance and angles here?"
Those 3D models were conceived with the sole purpose of producing
preordained results. Same a Boston University's disgraceful attack against
Not sure what you mean. Too cryptic and paranoid even for me.
Yes BU is extreme right. So what?
Post by Piotr Mancini
http://youtu.be/mpbOYLE7ATk
Don't believe me? They can shut me up anytime they desire. In the immortal
SHOW ME THE FILES !!!
-Ramon
JFK Numbers
Piotr Mancini
2017-08-10 13:08:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
No one asked. You are replying to yourself.
That's nothing! You should see me in person. I hold:

- soliloquies
- serenades
- diatribes
- debates
- monologues
- duologues
- discourses
- lectures

with my alter ego and my nom de plume.

-Ramon
Piotr Mancini
2017-08-10 18:46:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't get the point of your project.
This should help all of us to digest the situation:



-Ramon
Piotr Mancini
2017-08-10 18:53:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't get the point of your project.
Many experts already marked on demonstration skulls where they thought
the wounds were.
My point exactly. For the first time ever, we intend to bring a top
quality, state of the art film digitizer to The Archives. The 2 X-rays
(the most famous in history) will be the sole input of the process. In
short, we will be bringing a 3rd. dimension to the official facsimile of
the cranium and cerebrum.

Nobody has ever made this type of historical donation. I believe I have
the green light to proceed. All we need is about $5K (*) and several John
Hancocks: the more the merrier BUT by uniquely qualified individuals.

What can we do with that 3D model? Other than put it on the Internet you
mean? Well, we could superimpose it to a scene equivalent to this, in the
most accurate (millimetric, millisecond) fashion:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0BydXldbRY__vSDY1dHAzWXNTdlU

Here's another objective, for the hands-on types out there:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22405-only-for-geeks-and-frustrated-physicians/

https://www.slicer.org (**)
Loading Image...
Loading Image...
Loading Image...
Loading Image...

-Ramon

(*) It was $10K, I negotiated 50% pro-bono, 50% cold cash.
(**) Many thanks to Harvard!
GKnoll
2017-08-11 00:55:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't get the point of your project.
Many experts already marked on demonstration skulls where they thought
the wounds were.
My point exactly. For the first time ever, we intend to bring a top
quality, state of the art film digitizer to The Archives. The 2 X-rays
(the most famous in history) will be the sole input of the process. In
short, we will be bringing a 3rd. dimension to the official facsimile of
the cranium and cerebrum.
Nobody has ever made this type of historical donation. I believe I have
the green light to proceed. All we need is about $5K (*) and several John
Hancocks: the more the merrier BUT by uniquely qualified individuals.
What can we do with that 3D model? Other than put it on the Internet you
mean? Well, we could superimpose it to a scene equivalent to this, in the
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0BydXldbRY__vSDY1dHAzWXNTdlU
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22405-only-for-geeks-and-frustrated-physicians/
https://www.slicer.org (**)
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Download.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-App+Data-Files.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Express.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slices-Rotating.png
-Ramon
(*) It was $10K, I negotiated 50% pro-bono, 50% cold cash.
(**) Many thanks to Harvard!
You keep using the word "we". Who is this "we"? Who are your handlers?
If you are going to ask for people to give you money you better be very
clear (and truthful) about who "we" are.
Piotr Mancini
2017-09-16 13:20:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by GKnoll
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't get the point of your project.
Many experts already marked on demonstration skulls where they thought
the wounds were.
My point exactly. For the first time ever, we intend to bring a top
quality, state of the art film digitizer to The Archives. The 2 X-rays
(the most famous in history) will be the sole input of the process. In
short, we will be bringing a 3rd. dimension to the official facsimile of
the cranium and cerebrum.
Nobody has ever made this type of historical donation. I believe I have
the green light to proceed. All we need is about $5K (*) and several John
Hancocks: the more the merrier BUT by uniquely qualified individuals.
What can we do with that 3D model? Other than put it on the Internet you
mean? Well, we could superimpose it to a scene equivalent to this, in the
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0BydXldbRY__vSDY1dHAzWXNTdlU
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22405-only-for-geeks-and-frustrated-physicians/
https://www.slicer.org (**)
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Download.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-App+Data-Files.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Express.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slices-Rotating.png
-Ramon
(*) It was $10K, I negotiated 50% pro-bono, 50% cold cash.
(**) Many thanks to Harvard!
You keep using the word "we". Who is this "we"? Who are your handlers?
If you are going to ask for people to give you money you better be very
clear (and truthful) about who "we" are.
Let me put it this way, esteemed gkno. After years of work, against all
odds, I find myself in the presence of greatness. The group of people with
whom I am working cannot possibly be higher, specially the autopsy
experts. The only way to add more influential people and groups, would be
if we had a Kennedy, and even that support is not really that far. NO, I
am not talking activism, but they should provide authorization for JFK
Numbers' plan IF and only IF I can get the other side of the aisle to
join.

See this video and comment:



NOTE: those 2 targets of JFK Numbers', let's say displeasure (more like
whining, stomping my feet and holding my breath until my face turned blue)
for a short while, are off the hook. We are working together as brothers
again.

Next challenge: to bring our esteemed fellows of the LN persuasion into a
group whose sole interest is to reach:

- The Truth
- The Whole Truth
- Nothing But The Truth

(from the NUMERIC point of view).

-Ramon
JFK Numbers (for now, speaking on my behalf only)
bigdog
2017-09-17 00:14:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by GKnoll
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't get the point of your project.
Many experts already marked on demonstration skulls where they thought
the wounds were.
My point exactly. For the first time ever, we intend to bring a top
quality, state of the art film digitizer to The Archives. The 2 X-rays
(the most famous in history) will be the sole input of the process. In
short, we will be bringing a 3rd. dimension to the official facsimile of
the cranium and cerebrum.
Nobody has ever made this type of historical donation. I believe I have
the green light to proceed. All we need is about $5K (*) and several John
Hancocks: the more the merrier BUT by uniquely qualified individuals.
What can we do with that 3D model? Other than put it on the Internet you
mean? Well, we could superimpose it to a scene equivalent to this, in the
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0BydXldbRY__vSDY1dHAzWXNTdlU
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22405-only-for-geeks-and-frustrated-physicians/
https://www.slicer.org (**)
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Download.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-App+Data-Files.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Express.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slices-Rotating.png
-Ramon
(*) It was $10K, I negotiated 50% pro-bono, 50% cold cash.
(**) Many thanks to Harvard!
You keep using the word "we". Who is this "we"? Who are your handlers?
If you are going to ask for people to give you money you better be very
clear (and truthful) about who "we" are.
Let me put it this way, esteemed gkno. After years of work, against all
odds, I find myself in the presence of greatness. The group of people with
whom I am working cannot possibly be higher, specially the autopsy
experts. The only way to add more influential people and groups, would be
if we had a Kennedy, and even that support is not really that far. NO, I
am not talking activism, but they should provide authorization for JFK
Numbers' plan IF and only IF I can get the other side of the aisle to
join.
http://youtu.be/77lbknXimaw
NOTE: those 2 targets of JFK Numbers', let's say displeasure (more like
whining, stomping my feet and holding my breath until my face turned blue)
for a short while, are off the hook. We are working together as brothers
again.
Next challenge: to bring our esteemed fellows of the LN persuasion into a
- The Truth
- The Whole Truth
- Nothing But The Truth
(from the NUMERIC point of view).
-Ramon
JFK Numbers (for now, speaking on my behalf only)
Most LNs learned the truth a long time ago. We've been waiting for the
rest of you to catch up. But if you want my blessing to continue your
snipe hunt, you have it. Just don't expect me to join you.
Anthony Marsh
2017-09-17 00:30:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by GKnoll
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't get the point of your project.
Many experts already marked on demonstration skulls where they thought
the wounds were.
My point exactly. For the first time ever, we intend to bring a top
quality, state of the art film digitizer to The Archives. The 2 X-rays
(the most famous in history) will be the sole input of the process. In
short, we will be bringing a 3rd. dimension to the official facsimile of
the cranium and cerebrum.
Nobody has ever made this type of historical donation. I believe I have
the green light to proceed. All we need is about $5K (*) and several John
Hancocks: the more the merrier BUT by uniquely qualified individuals.
What can we do with that 3D model? Other than put it on the Internet you
mean? Well, we could superimpose it to a scene equivalent to this, in the
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0BydXldbRY__vSDY1dHAzWXNTdlU
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22405-only-for-geeks-and-frustrated-physicians/
https://www.slicer.org (**)
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Download.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-App+Data-Files.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Express.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slices-Rotating.png
-Ramon
(*) It was $10K, I negotiated 50% pro-bono, 50% cold cash.
(**) Many thanks to Harvard!
You keep using the word "we". Who is this "we"? Who are your handlers?
If you are going to ask for people to give you money you better be very
clear (and truthful) about who "we" are.
Let me put it this way, esteemed gkno. After years of work, against all
odds, I find myself in the presence of greatness. The group of people with
whom I am working cannot possibly be higher, specially the autopsy
Ever hear of Dale Mysers? Get him to upload his 3D model.
Post by Piotr Mancini
experts. The only way to add more influential people and groups, would be
if we had a Kennedy, and even that support is not really that far. NO, I
There is a Kenneedy you can get, for about $10. Robert Kennedy Jr. He's
been making very cheap local commercials.
Post by Piotr Mancini
am not talking activism, but they should provide authorization for JFK
Numbers' plan IF and only IF I can get the other side of the aisle to
join.
How many Numbers are you up to now? 5?
Post by Piotr Mancini
http://youtu.be/77lbknXimaw
NOTE: those 2 targets of JFK Numbers', let's say displeasure (more like
whining, stomping my feet and holding my breath until my face turned blue)
for a short while, are off the hook. We are working together as brothers
again.
Next challenge: to bring our esteemed fellows of the LN persuasion into a
- The Truth
- The Whole Truth
- Nothing But The Truth
(from the NUMERIC point of view).
Make a movie.
Post by Piotr Mancini
-Ramon
JFK Numbers (for now, speaking on my behalf only)
Mitch Todd
2017-08-11 01:41:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't get the point of your project.
Many experts already marked on demonstration skulls where they thought
the wounds were.
My point exactly. For the first time ever, we intend to bring a top
quality, state of the art film digitizer to The Archives. The 2 X-rays
(the most famous in history) will be the sole input of the process. In
short, we will be bringing a 3rd. dimension to the official facsimile of
the cranium and cerebrum.
Nobody has ever made this type of historical donation. I believe I have
the green light to proceed. All we need is about $5K (*) and several John
Hancocks: the more the merrier BUT by uniquely qualified individuals.
What can we do with that 3D model? Other than put it on the Internet you
mean? Well, we could superimpose it to a scene equivalent to this, in the
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0BydXldbRY__vSDY1dHAzWXNTdlU
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22405-only-for-geeks-and-frustrated-physicians/
https://www.slicer.org (**)
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Download.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-App+Data-Files.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Express.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slices-Rotating.png
-Ramon
(*) It was $10K, I negotiated 50% pro-bono, 50% cold cash.
(**) Many thanks to Harvard!
I'm not sure why you think it would work. Slicer looks to be
designed for MRI/CAT/PET scan data, not for a pair of x-rays.
CT scans use a large number of x-ray exposures to create a
cross-section of the body in a certain plane, and multiple
slices (hence the name) so derived can be stacked together to
get a model. But that takes a very large number of exposures
from many different angles. I don't think that there's enough
information in a pair of x-rays to do the same. I went to the
Slicer site to see if they had an example where AP and lateral
x-rays were used to knit together a 3d model. Nada, zippo,
bupkis.

Paul Seaton had tried something like this a number of years
ago; the result was almost completely useless.

BTW, I've run into a couple of folks who've been to see
the autopsy materials, Form what I recall, the archives
will not let you take any sort of duplication device into
the room. Wouldn't a film scanner fall into that category?
Anthony Marsh
2017-08-11 18:31:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't get the point of your project.
Many experts already marked on demonstration skulls where they thought
the wounds were.
My point exactly. For the first time ever, we intend to bring a top
quality, state of the art film digitizer to The Archives. The 2 X-rays
(the most famous in history) will be the sole input of the process. In
short, we will be bringing a 3rd. dimension to the official facsimile of
the cranium and cerebrum.
Nobody has ever made this type of historical donation. I believe I have
the green light to proceed. All we need is about $5K (*) and several John
Hancocks: the more the merrier BUT by uniquely qualified individuals.
What can we do with that 3D model? Other than put it on the Internet you
mean? Well, we could superimpose it to a scene equivalent to this, in the
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0BydXldbRY__vSDY1dHAzWXNTdlU
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22405-only-for-geeks-and-frustrated-physicians/
https://www.slicer.org (**)
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Download.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-App+Data-Files.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Express.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slices-Rotating.png
-Ramon
(*) It was $10K, I negotiated 50% pro-bono, 50% cold cash.
(**) Many thanks to Harvard!
I'm not sure why you think it would work. Slicer looks to be
designed for MRI/CAT/PET scan data, not for a pair of x-rays.
CT scans use a large number of x-ray exposures to create a
cross-section of the body in a certain plane, and multiple
slices (hence the name) so derived can be stacked together to
get a model. But that takes a very large number of exposures
from many different angles. I don't think that there's enough
information in a pair of x-rays to do the same. I went to the
Slicer site to see if they had an example where AP and lateral
x-rays were used to knit together a 3d model. Nada, zippo,
bupkis.
That's not polite. Trying to confuse him with facts. He never studied
science.
Post by Mitch Todd
Paul Seaton had tried something like this a number of years
ago; the result was almost completely useless.
He doesn't even know Paul Seaton and can't look up his work on Google.
Post by Mitch Todd
BTW, I've run into a couple of folks who've been to see
the autopsy materials, Form what I recall, the archives
will not let you take any sort of duplication device into
the room. Wouldn't a film scanner fall into that category?
Something like that. Are you aware of the ARRB's work.
We need government muscle. Can't get it with Nazis in charge.
Piotr Mancini
2017-09-16 13:21:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitch Todd
Paul Seaton had tried something like this a number of years
ago; the result was almost completely useless.
Was this JFK related? I need to get in touch with him.

-Ramon
Anthony Marsh
2017-09-17 00:28:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Mitch Todd
Paul Seaton had tried something like this a number of years
ago; the result was almost completely useless.
Was this JFK related? I need to get in touch with him.
What? Have you ever read his articles? Do you know how to use Google?
If not then yse BING. But don't be a Yahoo.
Post by Piotr Mancini
-Ramon
Mitch Todd
2017-09-17 22:11:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Mitch Todd
Paul Seaton had tried something like this a number of years
ago; the result was almost completely useless.
Was this JFK related? I need to get in touch with him.
Well, you could just bother to google "Paul Seaton JFK"
Anthony Marsh
2017-09-19 12:22:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Mitch Todd
Paul Seaton had tried something like this a number of years
ago; the result was almost completely useless.
Was this JFK related? I need to get in touch with him.
Well, you could just bother to google "Paul Seaton JFK"
Wimpy. Why doesn't he ask us to publicly post his phone number?
Piotr Mancini
2017-09-16 13:22:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't get the point of your project.
Many experts already marked on demonstration skulls where they thought
the wounds were.
My point exactly. For the first time ever, we intend to bring a top
quality, state of the art film digitizer to The Archives. The 2 X-rays
(the most famous in history) will be the sole input of the process. In
short, we will be bringing a 3rd. dimension to the official facsimile of
the cranium and cerebrum.
Nobody has ever made this type of historical donation. I believe I have
the green light to proceed. All we need is about $5K (*) and several John
Hancocks: the more the merrier BUT by uniquely qualified individuals.
What can we do with that 3D model? Other than put it on the Internet you
mean? Well, we could superimpose it to a scene equivalent to this, in the
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0BydXldbRY__vSDY1dHAzWXNTdlU
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22405-only-for-geeks-and-frustrated-physicians/
https://www.slicer.org (**)
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Download.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-App+Data-Files.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Express.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slices-Rotating.png
-Ramon
(*) It was $10K, I negotiated 50% pro-bono, 50% cold cash.
(**) Many thanks to Harvard!
I'm not sure why you think it would work. Slicer looks to be
designed for MRI/CAT/PET scan data, not for a pair of x-rays.
CT scans use a large number of x-ray exposures to create a
cross-section of the body in a certain plane, and multiple
slices (hence the name) so derived can be stacked together to
get a model. But that takes a very large number of exposures
from many different angles. I don't think that there's enough
information in a pair of x-rays to do the same. I went to the
Slicer site to see if they had an example where AP and lateral
x-rays were used to knit together a 3d model. Nada, zippo,
bupkis.
Paul Seaton had tried something like this a number of years
ago; the result was almost completely useless.
BTW, I've run into a couple of folks who've been to see
the autopsy materials.
Who? They have to be recognized experts (I have "recruited" them all,
those from my side, anyway) and contrary to all other evidence, for the
autopsy material Kennedy authorization is required.
Post by Mitch Todd
For what I recall, the archives
will not let you take any sort of duplication device into
the room. Wouldn't a film scanner fall into that category?
That was then and this is now. Either Urban Legend of actual policy stated
that a secret deal was reached between Ted Kennedy and the keepers, The
famous "Deed of Gift". However, I have been repeatedly told, in writing
and by phone that the Archives have absolutely no problem with me bringing
a top quality film digitizer, which they would have to certify, obviously.

"We would use the newest, latest and greatest medical film FDA approved
digitizers in the world – Vidar. In fact their newest model, the
Edge. Vidar controls 80% of the worldwide marketplace for medical film
digitizers."

The absolute must is that the petition (being rather clever, I added a
donation back to The Archives) must have be of an inclusive nature.

My designated contact at The Archives underscored this when I asked his
advice:

"THAT IS THE WAY TO DO IT, Mr. HERRERA"

To all requests I made, he replied comfortably:

"I DON'T SEE WHY NOT"

I almost fell on my hindquarters (*)

-Ramon
JFK Numbers

(*)Jim Di is having a ball with all this, after all he was the one who
"discovered" me. Keeps on saying: "Ramon, ask and you shall receive".
Won't clarify the precise nature of his cryptic comment, though.
Anthony Marsh
2017-09-17 00:28:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't get the point of your project.
Many experts already marked on demonstration skulls where they thought
the wounds were.
My point exactly. For the first time ever, we intend to bring a top
quality, state of the art film digitizer to The Archives. The 2 X-rays
(the most famous in history) will be the sole input of the process. In
short, we will be bringing a 3rd. dimension to the official facsimile of
the cranium and cerebrum.
Nobody has ever made this type of historical donation. I believe I have
the green light to proceed. All we need is about $5K (*) and several John
Hancocks: the more the merrier BUT by uniquely qualified individuals.
What can we do with that 3D model? Other than put it on the Internet you
mean? Well, we could superimpose it to a scene equivalent to this, in the
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0BydXldbRY__vSDY1dHAzWXNTdlU
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22405-only-for-geeks-and-frustrated-physicians/
https://www.slicer.org (**)
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Download.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-App+Data-Files.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Express.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slices-Rotating.png
-Ramon
(*) It was $10K, I negotiated 50% pro-bono, 50% cold cash.
(**) Many thanks to Harvard!
I'm not sure why you think it would work. Slicer looks to be
designed for MRI/CAT/PET scan data, not for a pair of x-rays.
CT scans use a large number of x-ray exposures to create a
cross-section of the body in a certain plane, and multiple
slices (hence the name) so derived can be stacked together to
get a model. But that takes a very large number of exposures
from many different angles. I don't think that there's enough
information in a pair of x-rays to do the same. I went to the
Slicer site to see if they had an example where AP and lateral
x-rays were used to knit together a 3d model. Nada, zippo,
bupkis.
Paul Seaton had tried something like this a number of years
ago; the result was almost completely useless.
BTW, I've run into a couple of folks who've been to see
the autopsy materials.
Who? They have to be recognized experts (I have "recruited" them all,
those from my side, anyway) and contrary to all other evidence, for the
autopsy material Kennedy authorization is required.
Post by Mitch Todd
For what I recall, the archives
will not let you take any sort of duplication device into
the room. Wouldn't a film scanner fall into that category?
That was then and this is now. Either Urban Legend of actual policy stated
that a secret deal was reached between Ted Kennedy and the keepers, The
famous "Deed of Gift". However, I have been repeatedly told, in writing
and by phone that the Archives have absolutely no problem with me bringing
a top quality film digitizer, which they would have to certify, obviously.
"We would use the newest, latest and greatest medical film FDA approved
digitizers in the world – Vidar. In fact their newest model, the
Edge. Vidar controls 80% of the worldwide marketplace for medical film
digitizers."
The absolute must is that the petition (being rather clever, I added a
donation back to The Archives) must have be of an inclusive nature.
My designated contact at The Archives underscored this when I asked his
"THAT IS THE WAY TO DO IT, Mr. HERRERA"
"I DON'T SEE WHY NOT"
I almost fell on my hindquarters (*)
-Ramon
JFK Numbers
(*)Jim Di is having a ball with all this, after all he was the one who
"discovered" me. Keeps on saying: "Ramon, ask and you shall receive".
Won't clarify the precise nature of his cryptic comment, though.
Stand back everybody. It's a Battle of the Aliases.
Mitch Todd
2017-09-17 22:13:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't get the point of your project.
Many experts already marked on demonstration skulls where they thought
the wounds were.
My point exactly. For the first time ever, we intend to bring a top
quality, state of the art film digitizer to The Archives. The 2 X-rays
(the most famous in history) will be the sole input of the process. In
short, we will be bringing a 3rd. dimension to the official facsimile of
the cranium and cerebrum.
Nobody has ever made this type of historical donation. I believe I have
the green light to proceed. All we need is about $5K (*) and several John
Hancocks: the more the merrier BUT by uniquely qualified individuals.
What can we do with that 3D model? Other than put it on the Internet you
mean? Well, we could superimpose it to a scene equivalent to this, in the
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0BydXldbRY__vSDY1dHAzWXNTdlU
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22405-only-for-geeks-and-frustrated-physicians/
https://www.slicer.org (**)
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Download.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-App+Data-Files.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Express.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slices-Rotating.png
-Ramon
(*) It was $10K, I negotiated 50% pro-bono, 50% cold cash.
(**) Many thanks to Harvard!
I'm not sure why you think it would work. Slicer looks to be
designed for MRI/CAT/PET scan data, not for a pair of x-rays.
CT scans use a large number of x-ray exposures to create a
cross-section of the body in a certain plane, and multiple
slices (hence the name) so derived can be stacked together to
get a model. But that takes a very large number of exposures
from many different angles. I don't think that there's enough
information in a pair of x-rays to do the same. I went to the
Slicer site to see if they had an example where AP and lateral
x-rays were used to knit together a 3d model. Nada, zippo,
bupkis.
Paul Seaton had tried something like this a number of years
ago; the result was almost completely useless.
BTW, I've run into a couple of folks who've been to see
the autopsy materials.
Who? They have to be recognized experts (I have "recruited" them all,
those from my side, anyway) and contrary to all other evidence, for the
autopsy material Kennedy authorization is required.
If they want to contact you on this, I'm pretty sure
they will. If they don't want to, they won't. It's up
to them.
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Mitch Todd
For what I recall, the archives
will not let you take any sort of duplication device into
the room. Wouldn't a film scanner fall into that category?
That was then and this is now. Either Urban Legend of actual policy stated
that a secret deal was reached between Ted Kennedy and the keepers, The
famous "Deed of Gift". However, I have been repeatedly told, in writing
and by phone that the Archives have absolutely no problem with me bringing
a top quality film digitizer, which they would have to certify, obviously.
"We would use the newest, latest and greatest medical film FDA approved
digitizers in the world – Vidar. In fact their newest model, the
Edge. Vidar controls 80% of the worldwide marketplace for medical film
digitizers."
The absolute must is that the petition (being rather clever, I added a
donation back to The Archives) must have be of an inclusive nature.
My designated contact at The Archives underscored this when I asked his
"THAT IS THE WAY TO DO IT, Mr. HERRERA"
"I DON'T SEE WHY NOT"
I almost fell on my hindquarters (*)
I'd really like to see the entire conversation on that.
Like I said, Everything I've ever read or been told
about the autopsy materials delivered by the Deed of
Gift says that researchers are not allowed to take
copies of the photos and x-rays. Were that not true,
I'd expect other researchers would have caught on
and we'd be inundated with high-quality copies of
the x-rays and photos. Further, IIRC, the Archives
made high-quality digital copies of the autopsy photos
and x-rays at the very end of the ARRB effort. If
that's the case, why would you even need to bring a
digitizer? Why not just ask for copies of the scans?
I guess the way to sum up is to say, I'll believe
it when I actually see it.

That being said, I noticed you didn't respond to my
question as to how you think that Slicer is really
going to help you with just two lateral views an one
AP view. Have you actually asked the guys behind it
whether it will work as you assume. And have you
received a positive reply from them? Or any reply at
all?
Post by Piotr Mancini
-Ramon
JFK Numbers
(*)Jim Di is having a ball with all this, after all he was the one who
"discovered" me. Keeps on saying: "Ramon, ask and you shall receive".
Won't clarify the precise nature of his cryptic comment, though.
As we all know, Jim is a well-known expert on
medical forensics and tomography....not.
bigdog
2017-09-18 20:14:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't get the point of your project.
Many experts already marked on demonstration skulls where they thought
the wounds were.
My point exactly. For the first time ever, we intend to bring a top
quality, state of the art film digitizer to The Archives. The 2 X-rays
(the most famous in history) will be the sole input of the process. In
short, we will be bringing a 3rd. dimension to the official facsimile of
the cranium and cerebrum.
Nobody has ever made this type of historical donation. I believe I have
the green light to proceed. All we need is about $5K (*) and several John
Hancocks: the more the merrier BUT by uniquely qualified individuals.
What can we do with that 3D model? Other than put it on the Internet you
mean? Well, we could superimpose it to a scene equivalent to this, in the
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0BydXldbRY__vSDY1dHAzWXNTdlU
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22405-only-for-geeks-and-frustrated-physicians/
https://www.slicer.org (**)
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Download.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-App+Data-Files.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Express.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slices-Rotating.png
-Ramon
(*) It was $10K, I negotiated 50% pro-bono, 50% cold cash.
(**) Many thanks to Harvard!
I'm not sure why you think it would work. Slicer looks to be
designed for MRI/CAT/PET scan data, not for a pair of x-rays.
CT scans use a large number of x-ray exposures to create a
cross-section of the body in a certain plane, and multiple
slices (hence the name) so derived can be stacked together to
get a model. But that takes a very large number of exposures
from many different angles. I don't think that there's enough
information in a pair of x-rays to do the same. I went to the
Slicer site to see if they had an example where AP and lateral
x-rays were used to knit together a 3d model. Nada, zippo,
bupkis.
Paul Seaton had tried something like this a number of years
ago; the result was almost completely useless.
BTW, I've run into a couple of folks who've been to see
the autopsy materials.
Who? They have to be recognized experts (I have "recruited" them all,
those from my side, anyway) and contrary to all other evidence, for the
autopsy material Kennedy authorization is required.
If they want to contact you on this, I'm pretty sure
they will. If they don't want to, they won't. It's up
to them.
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Mitch Todd
For what I recall, the archives
will not let you take any sort of duplication device into
the room. Wouldn't a film scanner fall into that category?
That was then and this is now. Either Urban Legend of actual policy stated
that a secret deal was reached between Ted Kennedy and the keepers, The
famous "Deed of Gift". However, I have been repeatedly told, in writing
and by phone that the Archives have absolutely no problem with me bringing
a top quality film digitizer, which they would have to certify, obviously.
"We would use the newest, latest and greatest medical film FDA approved
digitizers in the world – Vidar. In fact their newest model, the
Edge. Vidar controls 80% of the worldwide marketplace for medical film
digitizers."
The absolute must is that the petition (being rather clever, I added a
donation back to The Archives) must have be of an inclusive nature.
My designated contact at The Archives underscored this when I asked his
"THAT IS THE WAY TO DO IT, Mr. HERRERA"
"I DON'T SEE WHY NOT"
I almost fell on my hindquarters (*)
I'd really like to see the entire conversation on that.
Like I said, Everything I've ever read or been told
about the autopsy materials delivered by the Deed of
Gift says that researchers are not allowed to take
copies of the photos and x-rays. Were that not true,
I'd expect other researchers would have caught on
and we'd be inundated with high-quality copies of
the x-rays and photos. Further, IIRC, the Archives
made high-quality digital copies of the autopsy photos
and x-rays at the very end of the ARRB effort. If
that's the case, why would you even need to bring a
digitizer? Why not just ask for copies of the scans?
I guess the way to sum up is to say, I'll believe
it when I actually see it.
That being said, I noticed you didn't respond to my
question as to how you think that Slicer is really
going to help you with just two lateral views an one
AP view. Have you actually asked the guys behind it
whether it will work as you assume. And have you
received a positive reply from them? Or any reply at
all?
Post by Piotr Mancini
-Ramon
JFK Numbers
(*)Jim Di is having a ball with all this, after all he was the one who
"discovered" me. Keeps on saying: "Ramon, ask and you shall receive".
Won't clarify the precise nature of his cryptic comment, though.
As we all know, Jim is a well-known expert on
medical forensics and tomography....not.
One of my main gripes is that the autopsy evidence was deeded to the
Kennedy family to make available at their discretion. In what other murder
case has this ever been done? I don't know what the law is and what the
normal procedure is for retention of autopsy evidence but I have a hard
time believing the normal procedure is to give the materials to the family
of the victim. I wonder if at this late date a Freedom of Information
lawsuit could be filed challenging the legality of gifting these materials
to the Kennedy family. It seems to me these should become part of the
public record.
Mitch Todd
2017-09-19 01:17:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't get the point of your project.
Many experts already marked on demonstration skulls where they thought
the wounds were.
My point exactly. For the first time ever, we intend to bring a top
quality, state of the art film digitizer to The Archives. The 2 X-rays
(the most famous in history) will be the sole input of the process. In
short, we will be bringing a 3rd. dimension to the official facsimile of
the cranium and cerebrum.
Nobody has ever made this type of historical donation. I believe I have
the green light to proceed. All we need is about $5K (*) and several John
Hancocks: the more the merrier BUT by uniquely qualified individuals.
What can we do with that 3D model? Other than put it on the Internet you
mean? Well, we could superimpose it to a scene equivalent to this, in the
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0BydXldbRY__vSDY1dHAzWXNTdlU
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22405-only-for-geeks-and-frustrated-physicians/
https://www.slicer.org (**)
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Download.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-App+Data-Files.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Express.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slices-Rotating.png
-Ramon
(*) It was $10K, I negotiated 50% pro-bono, 50% cold cash.
(**) Many thanks to Harvard!
I'm not sure why you think it would work. Slicer looks to be
designed for MRI/CAT/PET scan data, not for a pair of x-rays.
CT scans use a large number of x-ray exposures to create a
cross-section of the body in a certain plane, and multiple
slices (hence the name) so derived can be stacked together to
get a model. But that takes a very large number of exposures
from many different angles. I don't think that there's enough
information in a pair of x-rays to do the same. I went to the
Slicer site to see if they had an example where AP and lateral
x-rays were used to knit together a 3d model. Nada, zippo,
bupkis.
Paul Seaton had tried something like this a number of years
ago; the result was almost completely useless.
BTW, I've run into a couple of folks who've been to see
the autopsy materials.
Who? They have to be recognized experts (I have "recruited" them all,
those from my side, anyway) and contrary to all other evidence, for the
autopsy material Kennedy authorization is required.
If they want to contact you on this, I'm pretty sure
they will. If they don't want to, they won't. It's up
to them.
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Mitch Todd
For what I recall, the archives
will not let you take any sort of duplication device into
the room. Wouldn't a film scanner fall into that category?
That was then and this is now. Either Urban Legend of actual policy stated
that a secret deal was reached between Ted Kennedy and the keepers, The
famous "Deed of Gift". However, I have been repeatedly told, in writing
and by phone that the Archives have absolutely no problem with me bringing
a top quality film digitizer, which they would have to certify, obviously.
"We would use the newest, latest and greatest medical film FDA approved
digitizers in the world ??? Vidar. In fact their newest model, the
Edge. Vidar controls 80% of the worldwide marketplace for medical film
digitizers."
The absolute must is that the petition (being rather clever, I added a
donation back to The Archives) must have be of an inclusive nature.
My designated contact at The Archives underscored this when I asked his
"THAT IS THE WAY TO DO IT, Mr. HERRERA"
"I DON'T SEE WHY NOT"
I almost fell on my hindquarters (*)
I'd really like to see the entire conversation on that.
Like I said, Everything I've ever read or been told
about the autopsy materials delivered by the Deed of
Gift says that researchers are not allowed to take
copies of the photos and x-rays. Were that not true,
I'd expect other researchers would have caught on
and we'd be inundated with high-quality copies of
the x-rays and photos. Further, IIRC, the Archives
made high-quality digital copies of the autopsy photos
and x-rays at the very end of the ARRB effort. If
that's the case, why would you even need to bring a
digitizer? Why not just ask for copies of the scans?
I guess the way to sum up is to say, I'll believe
it when I actually see it.
That being said, I noticed you didn't respond to my
question as to how you think that Slicer is really
going to help you with just two lateral views an one
AP view. Have you actually asked the guys behind it
whether it will work as you assume. And have you
received a positive reply from them? Or any reply at
all?
Post by Piotr Mancini
-Ramon
JFK Numbers
(*)Jim Di is having a ball with all this, after all he was the one who
"discovered" me. Keeps on saying: "Ramon, ask and you shall receive".
Won't clarify the precise nature of his cryptic comment, though.
As we all know, Jim is a well-known expert on
medical forensics and tomography....not.
One of my main gripes is that the autopsy evidence was deeded to the
Kennedy family to make available at their discretion. In what other murder
case has this ever been done? I don't know what the law is and what the
normal procedure is for retention of autopsy evidence but I have a hard
time believing the normal procedure is to give the materials to the family
of the victim. I wonder if at this late date a Freedom of Information
lawsuit could be filed challenging the legality of gifting these materials
to the Kennedy family. It seems to me these should become part of the
public record.
IIRC, the Deed of Gift was challenged a couple of times, but was upheld. I
think it all boils down to one passage in The Great Gatsby: "the rich are
different from you and me." Then again, if I were in the Kennedys'
position, I wouldn't want the innards of my favorite sun put on
photographic display on every streetcorner and website, either.
Anthony Marsh
2017-09-20 00:11:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by bigdog
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't get the point of your project.
Many experts already marked on demonstration skulls where they thought
the wounds were.
My point exactly. For the first time ever, we intend to bring a top
quality, state of the art film digitizer to The Archives. The 2 X-rays
(the most famous in history) will be the sole input of the process. In
short, we will be bringing a 3rd. dimension to the official facsimile of
the cranium and cerebrum.
Nobody has ever made this type of historical donation. I believe I have
the green light to proceed. All we need is about $5K (*) and several John
Hancocks: the more the merrier BUT by uniquely qualified individuals.
What can we do with that 3D model? Other than put it on the Internet you
mean? Well, we could superimpose it to a scene equivalent to this, in the
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0BydXldbRY__vSDY1dHAzWXNTdlU
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22405-only-for-geeks-and-frustrated-physicians/
?????????? https://www.slicer.org?? (**)
?????????? http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Download.png
?????????? http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-App+Data-Files.png
?????????? http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Express.png
?????????? http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slices-Rotating.png
-Ramon
(*) It was $10K, I negotiated 50% pro-bono, 50% cold cash.
(**) Many thanks to Harvard!
I'm not sure why you think it would work. Slicer looks to be
designed for MRI/CAT/PET scan data, not for a pair of x-rays.
CT scans use a large number of x-ray exposures to create a
cross-section of the body in a certain plane, and multiple
slices (hence the name) so derived can be stacked together to
get a model. But that takes a very large number of exposures
from many different angles. I don't think that there's enough
information in a pair of x-rays to do the same. I went to the
Slicer site to see if they had an example where AP and lateral
x-rays were used to knit together a 3d model. Nada, zippo,
bupkis.
Paul Seaton had tried something like this a number of years
ago; the result was almost completely useless.
BTW, I've run into a couple of folks who've been to see
the autopsy materials.
Who? They have to be recognized experts (I have "recruited" them all,
those from my side, anyway) and contrary to all other evidence, for the
autopsy material Kennedy authorization is required.
If they want to contact you on this, I'm pretty sure
they will. If they don't want to, they won't. It's up
to them.
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Mitch Todd
For what I recall, the archives
will not let you take any sort of duplication device into
the room. Wouldn't a film scanner fall into that category?
That was then and this is now. Either Urban Legend of actual policy stated
that a secret deal was reached between Ted Kennedy and the keepers, The
famous "Deed of Gift". However, I have been repeatedly told, in writing
and by phone that the Archives have absolutely no problem with me bringing
a top quality film digitizer, which they would have to certify, obviously.
"We would use the newest, latest and greatest medical film FDA approved
digitizers in the world ??? Vidar. In fact their newest model, the
Edge. Vidar controls 80% of the worldwide marketplace for medical film
digitizers."
The absolute must is that the petition (being rather clever, I added a
donation back to The Archives) must have be of an inclusive nature.
My designated contact at The Archives underscored this when I asked his
?????????? "THAT IS THE WAY TO DO IT, Mr. HERRERA"
?????????? "I DON'T SEE WHY NOT"
I almost fell on my hindquarters (*)
I'd really like to see the entire conversation on that.
Like I said, Everything I've ever read or been told
about the autopsy materials delivered by the Deed of
Gift says that researchers are not allowed to take
copies of the photos and x-rays. Were that not true,
I'd expect other researchers would have caught on
and we'd be inundated with high-quality copies of
the x-rays and photos. Further, IIRC, the Archives
made high-quality digital copies of the autopsy photos
and x-rays at the very end of the ARRB effort. If
that's the case, why would you even need to bring a
digitizer? Why not just ask for copies of the scans?
I guess the way to sum up is to say, I'll believe
it when I actually see it.
That being said, I noticed you didn't respond to my
question as to how you think that Slicer is really
going to help you with just two lateral views an one
AP view. Have you actually asked the guys behind it
whether it will work as you assume. And have you
received a positive reply from them? Or any reply at
all?
Post by Piotr Mancini
-Ramon
JFK Numbers
(*)Jim Di is having a ball with all this, after all he was the one who
"discovered" me. Keeps on saying: "Ramon, ask and you shall receive".
Won't clarify the precise nature of his cryptic comment, though.
As we all know, Jim is a well-known expert on
medical forensics and tomography....not.
One of my main gripes is that the autopsy evidence was deeded to the
Kennedy family to make available at their discretion. In what other murder
case has this ever been done? I don't know what the law is and what the
normal procedure is for retention of autopsy evidence but I have a hard
time believing the normal procedure is to give the materials to the family
of the victim. I wonder if at this late date a Freedom of Information
lawsuit could be filed challenging the legality of gifting these materials
to the Kennedy family. It seems to me these should become part of the
public record.
IIRC, the Deed of Gift was challenged a couple of times, but was upheld.
I think it all boils down to one passage in The Great Gatsby: "the rich
are different from you and me." Then again, if I were in the Kennedys'
position, I wouldn't want the innards of my favorite sun put on
photographic display on every streetcorner and website, either.
Oh, you mean like The National Enquirer? That already happened, so why
can't they NOW release ALL the autopsy photos? The way Groden used them
was to argue conspiracy. So if they reject conspiracy shouldn't releasing
ALL the photos dispute conspiracy?

If they refuse to release them that proves conspiracy. Rock meet hard
place.
Anthony Marsh
2017-09-19 12:51:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't get the point of your project.
Many experts already marked on demonstration skulls where they thought
the wounds were.
My point exactly. For the first time ever, we intend to bring a top
quality, state of the art film digitizer to The Archives. The 2 X-rays
(the most famous in history) will be the sole input of the process. In
short, we will be bringing a 3rd. dimension to the official facsimile of
the cranium and cerebrum.
Nobody has ever made this type of historical donation. I believe I have
the green light to proceed. All we need is about $5K (*) and several John
Hancocks: the more the merrier BUT by uniquely qualified individuals.
What can we do with that 3D model? Other than put it on the Internet you
mean? Well, we could superimpose it to a scene equivalent to this, in the
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0BydXldbRY__vSDY1dHAzWXNTdlU
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22405-only-for-geeks-and-frustrated-physicians/
https://www.slicer.org (**)
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Download.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-App+Data-Files.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Express.png
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slices-Rotating.png
-Ramon
(*) It was $10K, I negotiated 50% pro-bono, 50% cold cash.
(**) Many thanks to Harvard!
I'm not sure why you think it would work. Slicer looks to be
designed for MRI/CAT/PET scan data, not for a pair of x-rays.
CT scans use a large number of x-ray exposures to create a
cross-section of the body in a certain plane, and multiple
slices (hence the name) so derived can be stacked together to
get a model. But that takes a very large number of exposures
from many different angles. I don't think that there's enough
information in a pair of x-rays to do the same. I went to the
Slicer site to see if they had an example where AP and lateral
x-rays were used to knit together a 3d model. Nada, zippo,
bupkis.
Paul Seaton had tried something like this a number of years
ago; the result was almost completely useless.
BTW, I've run into a couple of folks who've been to see
the autopsy materials.
Who? They have to be recognized experts (I have "recruited" them all,
those from my side, anyway) and contrary to all other evidence, for the
autopsy material Kennedy authorization is required.
If they want to contact you on this, I'm pretty sure
they will. If they don't want to, they won't. It's up
to them.
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Mitch Todd
For what I recall, the archives
will not let you take any sort of duplication device into
the room. Wouldn't a film scanner fall into that category?
That was then and this is now. Either Urban Legend of actual policy stated
that a secret deal was reached between Ted Kennedy and the keepers, The
famous "Deed of Gift". However, I have been repeatedly told, in writing
and by phone that the Archives have absolutely no problem with me bringing
a top quality film digitizer, which they would have to certify, obviously.
"We would use the newest, latest and greatest medical film FDA approved
digitizers in the world – Vidar. In fact their newest model, the
Edge. Vidar controls 80% of the worldwide marketplace for medical film
digitizers."
The absolute must is that the petition (being rather clever, I added a
donation back to The Archives) must have be of an inclusive nature.
My designated contact at The Archives underscored this when I asked his
"THAT IS THE WAY TO DO IT, Mr. HERRERA"
"I DON'T SEE WHY NOT"
I almost fell on my hindquarters (*)
I'd really like to see the entire conversation on that.
Like I said, Everything I've ever read or been told
about the autopsy materials delivered by the Deed of
Gift says that researchers are not allowed to take
copies of the photos and x-rays. Were that not true,
I'd expect other researchers would have caught on
and we'd be inundated with high-quality copies of
the x-rays and photos. Further, IIRC, the Archives
made high-quality digital copies of the autopsy photos
and x-rays at the very end of the ARRB effort. If
that's the case, why would you even need to bring a
digitizer? Why not just ask for copies of the scans?
I guess the way to sum up is to say, I'll believe
it when I actually see it.
That being said, I noticed you didn't respond to my
question as to how you think that Slicer is really
going to help you with just two lateral views an one
AP view. Have you actually asked the guys behind it
whether it will work as you assume. And have you
received a positive reply from them? Or any reply at
all?
Post by Piotr Mancini
-Ramon
JFK Numbers
(*)Jim Di is having a ball with all this, after all he was the one who
"discovered" me. Keeps on saying: "Ramon, ask and you shall receive".
Won't clarify the precise nature of his cryptic comment, though.
As we all know, Jim is a well-known expert on
medical forensics and tomography....not.
One of my main gripes is that the autopsy evidence was deeded to the
Kennedy family to make available at their discretion. In what other murder
case has this ever been done? I don't know what the law is and what the
normal procedure is for retention of autopsy evidence but I have a hard
time believing the normal procedure is to give the materials to the family
of the victim. I wonder if at this late date a Freedom of Information
lawsuit could be filed challenging the legality of gifting these materials
to the Kennedy family. It seems to me these should become part of the
public record.
Been there, done that. If they belong to the Kennedy family why are they
in the National Archives? Not a safe place to store things. Remember how
Kennedy's brain went missing?
Anthony Marsh
2017-09-19 12:21:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Mitch Todd
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't get the point of your project.
Many experts already marked on demonstration skulls where they thought
the wounds were.
My point exactly. For the first time ever, we intend to bring a top
quality, state of the art film digitizer to The Archives. The 2 X-rays
(the most famous in history) will be the sole input of the process. In
short, we will be bringing a 3rd. dimension to the official
facsimile of
the cranium and cerebrum.
Nobody has ever made this type of historical donation. I believe I have
the green light to proceed. All we need is about $5K (*) and several John
Hancocks: the more the merrier BUT by uniquely qualified individuals.
What can we do with that 3D model? Other than put it on the Internet you
mean? Well, we could superimpose it to a scene equivalent to this, in the
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0BydXldbRY__vSDY1dHAzWXNTdlU
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22405-only-for-geeks-and-frustrated-physicians/
???????? https://www.slicer.org?? (**)
???????? http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Download.png
???????? http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-App+Data-Files.png
???????? http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slicer-Express.png
???????? http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Slices-Rotating.png
-Ramon
(*) It was $10K, I negotiated 50% pro-bono, 50% cold cash.
(**) Many thanks to Harvard!
I'm not sure why you think it would work. Slicer looks to be
designed for MRI/CAT/PET scan data, not for a pair of x-rays.
CT scans use a large number of x-ray exposures to create a
cross-section of the body in a certain plane, and multiple
slices (hence the name) so derived can be stacked together to
get a model. But that takes a very large number of exposures
from many different angles. I don't think that there's enough
information in a pair of x-rays to do the same. I went to the
Slicer site to see if they had an example where AP and lateral
x-rays were used to knit together a 3d model. Nada, zippo,
bupkis.
Paul Seaton had tried something like this a number of years
ago; the result was almost completely useless.
BTW, I've run into a couple of folks who've been to see
the autopsy materials.
Who? They have to be recognized experts (I have "recruited" them all,
those from my side, anyway) and contrary to all other evidence, for the
autopsy material Kennedy authorization is required.
If they want to contact you on this, I'm pretty sure
they will. If they don't want to, they won't. It's up
to them.
Post by Piotr Mancini
Post by Mitch Todd
For what I recall, the archives
will not let you take any sort of duplication device into
the room. Wouldn't a film scanner fall into that category?
That was then and this is now. Either Urban Legend of actual policy stated
that a secret deal was reached between Ted Kennedy and the keepers, The
famous "Deed of Gift". However, I have been repeatedly told, in writing
and by phone that the Archives have absolutely no problem with me bringing
a top quality film digitizer, which they would have to certify, obviously.
"We would use the newest, latest and greatest medical film FDA approved
digitizers in the world ??? Vidar. In fact their newest model, the
Edge. Vidar controls 80% of the worldwide marketplace for medical film
digitizers."
The absolute must is that the petition (being rather clever, I added a
donation back to The Archives) must have be of an inclusive nature.
My designated contact at The Archives underscored this when I asked his
???????? "THAT IS THE WAY TO DO IT, Mr. HERRERA"
???????? "I DON'T SEE WHY NOT"
I almost fell on my hindquarters (*)
I'd really like to see the entire conversation on that.
Like I said, Everything I've ever read or been told
about the autopsy materials delivered by the Deed of
Gift says that researchers are not allowed to take
copies of the photos and x-rays. Were that not true,
I'd expect other researchers would have caught on
and we'd be inundated with high-quality copies of
the x-rays and photos. Further, IIRC, the Archives
Yes, we HAVE been inundated by high-quality COPIES of the autopsy photos.
So what? You are not allowed to see them because you are a WC defender.
McAdams had a chance to buy them but he refused.
Post by Mitch Todd
made high-quality digital copies of the autopsy photos
and x-rays at the very end of the ARRB effort. If
that's the case, why would you even need to bring a
digitizer? Why not just ask for copies of the scans?
Well, John Hunt HAS made high resolution scans of the evidence at the
National Archives, but there are still restrictions.
Post by Mitch Todd
I guess the way to sum up is to say, I'll believe
it when I actually see it.
No, you won't. You are not allowed to actually see it.
Because you are a WC defender. I was allowed to see it
because I am a conspiracy kook. Would you like to apply to be a
conspiracy kook?
Post by Mitch Todd
That being said, I noticed you didn't respond to my
question as to how you think that Slicer is really
going to help you with just two lateral views an one
AP view. Have you actually asked the guys behind it
whether it will work as you assume. And have you
received a positive reply from them? Or any reply at
all?
Post by Piotr Mancini
-Ramon
JFK Numbers
(*)Jim Di is having a ball with all this, after all he was the one who
"discovered" me. Keeps on saying: "Ramon, ask and you shall receive".
Won't clarify the precise nature of his cryptic comment, though.
As we all know, Jim is a well-known expert on
medical forensics and tomography....not.
mainframetech
2017-08-08 16:41:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Piotr Mancini
One of the JFK Numbers initiatives is to have all Notable Doctors (those
who have touched the X-rays and/or have expert knowledge them) donating a
3-Dimensional model of the victim's cranium and cerebrum to the National
Archives.
- Dr. Gary Aguilar
- Dr. Michael Baden
- Dr. Michael Chesser
- Dr. Peter Cummings
- Dr. David Mantik
- Joseph Riley, PhD
- Dr. Randolph Robertson
- Dr. Cyril Wecht
My sources at the Archives assure me that this project is pre-approved,
including by the Kennedys, PROVIDED that experts from all sides (there are
3 groups) agree to co-sign the donation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_Select_Committee_on_Assassinations#Forensic_Pathology_Panel
Dr. Earl Rose died recently. Are there any of the others still around?
http://youtu.be/mpbOYLE7ATk
TIA,
-Ramon
It's a complete waste of time if they are going to se the limited photos
and X-rays in the archive. Those films have been declared as incorrect
and duplicates by the people that took them. Jerrol Custer for the
X-rays, and photographers who were ordered to sign off that all photos
were present when they had stated there were many missing photos.

To determine what was learned at the autopsy, talk to the enlisted men
who were present on the autopsy team. The officers were ordered to state
incorrect conclusions when they KNEW that they were wrong.


Chris
Anthony Marsh
2017-08-09 11:55:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mainframetech
Post by Piotr Mancini
One of the JFK Numbers initiatives is to have all Notable Doctors (those
who have touched the X-rays and/or have expert knowledge them) donating a
3-Dimensional model of the victim's cranium and cerebrum to the National
Archives.
- Dr. Gary Aguilar
- Dr. Michael Baden
- Dr. Michael Chesser
- Dr. Peter Cummings
- Dr. David Mantik
- Joseph Riley, PhD
- Dr. Randolph Robertson
- Dr. Cyril Wecht
My sources at the Archives assure me that this project is pre-approved,
including by the Kennedys, PROVIDED that experts from all sides (there are
3 groups) agree to co-sign the donation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_Select_Committee_on_Assassinations#Forensic_Pathology_Panel
Dr. Earl Rose died recently. Are there any of the others still around?
http://youtu.be/mpbOYLE7ATk
TIA,
-Ramon
It's a complete waste of time if they are going to se the limited photos
and X-rays in the archive. Those films have been declared as incorrect
and duplicates by the people that took them. Jerrol Custer for the
X-rays, and photographers who were ordered to sign off that all photos
were present when they had stated there were many missing photos.
False.
Post by mainframetech
To determine what was learned at the autopsy, talk to the enlisted men
who were present on the autopsy team. The officers were ordered to state
incorrect conclusions when they KNEW that they were wrong.
Chris
Anthony Marsh
2017-08-09 11:56:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mainframetech
Post by Piotr Mancini
One of the JFK Numbers initiatives is to have all Notable Doctors (those
who have touched the X-rays and/or have expert knowledge them) donating a
3-Dimensional model of the victim's cranium and cerebrum to the National
Archives.
- Dr. Gary Aguilar
- Dr. Michael Baden
- Dr. Michael Chesser
- Dr. Peter Cummings
- Dr. David Mantik
- Joseph Riley, PhD
- Dr. Randolph Robertson
- Dr. Cyril Wecht
My sources at the Archives assure me that this project is pre-approved,
including by the Kennedys, PROVIDED that experts from all sides (there are
3 groups) agree to co-sign the donation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_Select_Committee_on_Assassinations#Forensic_Pathology_Panel
Dr. Earl Rose died recently. Are there any of the others still around?
http://youtu.be/mpbOYLE7ATk
TIA,
-Ramon
It's a complete waste of time if they are going to se the limited photos
and X-rays in the archive. Those films have been declared as incorrect
and duplicates by the people that took them. Jerrol Custer for the
X-rays, and photographers who were ordered to sign off that all photos
were present when they had stated there were many missing photos.
To determine what was learned at the autopsy, talk to the enlisted men
who were present on the autopsy team. The officers were ordered to state
incorrect conclusions when they KNEW that they were wrong.
What do they call that in logic when you declare that the evidence is
fake and then you cite said evidence to prove your conclusions?
Is that selection bias or just old fashioned hypocrisy?

What hole in the forehead/temple? There can be no hole because you say
that photo is fake.
Post by mainframetech
Chris
Loading...