Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Conspiracy Theories
 You conspiricy guys should be all over this.
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Previous Page | Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 4

JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED

2418 Posts

Posted - 05/17/2007 :  22:16:22   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send JEROME DA GNOME a Private Message  Reply with Quote
The photo of Oswald in the doorway of the depository building moments before the shooting published in LIFE magazine October 2, 1964 was proof enough that he was not the shooter.



What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell
Go to Top of Page

j911ob
Skeptic Friend

223 Posts

Posted - 05/17/2007 :  22:19:34   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send j911ob a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by ktesibios

You have no reason to conclude that the claiims of a spy-novel writing lifelong fantasist like Hunt are correct, either.

If this "confession" can be corroborated by independent evidence then it would be worth more consideration. Unless and until that happens, claims of "case closed" are much more reflective of a personal commitment to the paranoid conspiracist mode of thought than they are reflective of the evidence.

Regarding the bullet tests, it seems to me that this new analysis means that neither the hypothesis that the bullet fragments were from no more than two bullets nor the hypothesis that they were from three or more has been falsified. That leaves us in exactly the same place we would be had no NAA analysis been undertaken at all, that is, stuck with considering the same old entire body of evidence.


Yes you are right, im sorry. Ill go back to sleep. Oswald sprinkled his magic dust on his bullets and riddled daily plaza with bullets with just three shots. They didnt lose JFKs brain. The emergency room staff didnt describe a different wound to the autopsy. The doctor didnt see a bullet hole in the limousine windshield. It was all just a silly fantasy. Go back to sleep america, your government loves you. They are peace loving hippies.

"Any pressurized can exposed to heat will explode like a grenade. Even a sealed bag of potato chips, if not melted by direct flame, can 'pop' with quite a report." - Kookbreaker at JREF, responding to reports of explosions in the towers.
Go to Top of Page

ktesibios
SFN Regular

USA
505 Posts

Posted - 05/17/2007 :  23:45:07   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send ktesibios a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Got anything substantive to say, or will it just be yet another order of well-done straw men for you, P'doh?

Let me try to put it in words of short syllables for you. The purpose of the NAA analysis was to find out if the possibility that the bullet fragments came from more than two bullets could be proven false. The conclusion drawn at the time was that it had been proven false.

If it turns out that this conclusion could not be drawn on the basis of the NAA analysis, it doesn't mean that the fragments have been proven to have come from three or more bullets. It means that this possibility can't be ruled out.

"Not proven false" and "proven true" are not the same thing. The most that we can conclude is that both possibilities- two or fewer bullets and three or more bullets- have come through the test still standing, which means that the only way of working it out is to consider the entire available body of evidence.

As for Hunt, surely you're aware of the old legal principle that the testimony of an accomplice is insufficient for a conviction unless independently corroborated.

Now go look up the words "hypothesis" and "falsify", get yourself a copy of Logic Made Easy and come back when you've learned something about how to reason.

"The Republican agenda is to turn the United States into a third-world shithole." -P.Z.Myers
Go to Top of Page

j911ob
Skeptic Friend

223 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  00:02:36   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send j911ob a Private Message  Reply with Quote
How exactly do you lose the presidents brain? Is it like when you get off a bus and as it drives away you remember you have left your bag on it?

"Any pressurized can exposed to heat will explode like a grenade. Even a sealed bag of potato chips, if not melted by direct flame, can 'pop' with quite a report." - Kookbreaker at JREF, responding to reports of explosions in the towers.
Go to Top of Page

filthy
SFN Die Hard

USA
14408 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  02:38:52   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send filthy a Private Message  Reply with Quote
The Magic Bullet.
The Single Bullet Theory (pejoratively referred to as the magic bullet theory by critics and conspiracy theorists) is thought to be an essential element of the Warren Commission theory that only one assassin was responsible for the assassination of United States President John F. Kennedy.

The theory, generally credited to Warren Commission staffer Arlen Specter (now a US Senator), posits that a single bullet, known as "Warren Commission Exhibit 399" (also known as "CE399"), caused all of the non-fatal wounds in both President John F. Kennedy and Governor John Connally. The fatal head wound to the President was caused by another bullet.

According to the single bullet theory, a one-inch long, copper jacketed, lead core 6.5 millimeter rifle bullet fired from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository passed through President Kennedy's neck, Governor Connally's chest and wrist and embedded itself in the Governor's thigh. In doing so, the bullet traversed 15 layers of clothing, 7 layers of skin, approximately 15 inches of tissue, struck a tie knot, removed 4 inches of rib and shattered a radius bone. The bullet that is supposed to have done all this damage was found on Governor Connally's stretcher in the corridor at the Parkland Hospital in Dallas. It became a key Commission exhibit, identified as CE399. Its copper jacket was completely intact. The bullet's nose appeared normal but the tail was compressed laterally on one side (see below: Theorized Path).
I don't have much of a problem with this. The range was very short and the cartridge was a relatively hot one. The bullet, at around 160 grains, would have good enough ballistics to have done all of the described damage. If I recall correctly (I'm going to look this up) the muzzle velocity is something like 2,000 feet per second, give or take a little.

Where I get hung up is with the rifle. 4.8 to 7 seven seconds for two (I'm not counting the first one) aimed shots is is a pretty short time for it's type of an action (manual bolt, on a rattle & clank, military surplus piece, with what appeared to be a cheap telescopic sight). It can be done, certainly -- I'm sure that I could do it, given the chance to become familiar with the rifle -- but it would take a reasonably skilled marksman. Was Ozwald that good? I don't know, nor, it seems, does anyone else.

You fire, work the bolt while recovering from the recoil, re-aquire the moving target in the cheap 'scope and fire again, and so forth. Even at that spitting-distance range, that third shot was either skill or luck, if it came from Ozwald. And assuming that the time estiments are accurate, of course.

The first shot is considered to have missed everything, and that's the one that should have been the meat shot. No excuse for missing due to the short range and having plenty of time to set it up. This casts serious doubt on Ozwald's marksmanship. The next two would be hurried and therefore less likely to be accurate. Of course they were, wherever they came from.

At the same time, we cannot forget that there were 3 spent cartridge cases found on the floor beneath Ozwald's window, matching his rifle's chamber.

You can get good and crazy messing around with this stuff. The bullshit has been flying around for lo, these many decades now, and I've pretty much tuned it out. But if it can be diffinitivly demonstrated that a second rifle might have been involved, I'll tune back in again.




"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)

"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres


"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude

Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,

and Crypto-Communist!

Go to Top of Page

Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist

USA
4955 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  03:28:11   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Cuneiformist a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME

The photo of Oswald in the doorway of the depository building moments before the shooting published in LIFE magazine October 2, 1964 was proof enough that he was not the shooter.
You're joking, right? You think that this is proof:



It takes about 5 seconds of searching to find this:



Oops. And now that your "proof enough" is shown to be utterly wrong, I assume that you-- like all conspiracy buffs-- won't abandon your position but will just shift to new arguments?
Go to Top of Page

Ghost_Skeptic
SFN Regular

Canada
510 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  04:16:18   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Ghost_Skeptic a Private Message  Reply with Quote
There was an item on JREF about a lengthy book by Vincent Bugliosi (who prosecuted Charles Manson) on the subject. He wrtote the book after discovering a bunch of lawers overwelmingly mistrusted the Warren Commision report althoug alsmost none of them had read it. Bugliosi's conclusion after thorough research - Oswald did it and acted alone.

"You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. / You can send a kid to college but you can't make him think." - B.B. King

History is made by stupid people - The Arrogant Worms

"The greater the ignorance the greater the dogmatism." - William Osler

"Religion is the natural home of the psychopath" - Pat Condell

"The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter" - Thomas Jefferson
Go to Top of Page

Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend

Sweden
9687 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  05:11:08   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Dr. Mabuse an ICQ Message Send Dr. Mabuse a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by ktesibios
As for Hunt, surely you're aware of the old legal principle that the testimony of an accomplice is insufficient for a conviction unless independently corroborated.
Besides, j911ob has forgotten that hearsay does not count as evidence in scientific circles. And as has been said a number of times already, "Proof" only matters in mathematics and whisky. The mission of SFN is to evaluate the truth-claim using science and logic.
It seems to me that j911ob's claims fail on both accounts.

Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3

"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse

Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder.
Go to Top of Page

JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED

2418 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  08:24:11   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send JEROME DA GNOME a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Cuneiformist---I could be wrong about this; but,

The link presents a picture of Lovelady in 1971 as proof that he was wearing a shirt that may be representative of the LIFE photo.

This is the original photo of Lovelady taken by the FBI wearning a shirt which corresponds with his testimony.

http://tinyurl.com/you98k

This shirt does not correspond with the LIFE photo.


What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell
Go to Top of Page

Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist

USA
4955 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  09:04:33   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Cuneiformist a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME

Cuneiformist---I could be wrong about this; but,

The link presents a picture of Lovelady in 1971 as proof that he was wearing a shirt that may be representative of the LIFE photo.

This is the original photo of Lovelady taken by the FBI wearning a shirt which corresponds with his testimony.

http://tinyurl.com/you98k

This shirt does not correspond with the LIFE photo.


Yeah, you're wrong. Apparently, when he went in to talk to the FBI, he "had not been told to wear the same shirt he had worn on the day of the assassination."
Go to Top of Page

beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard

USA
3834 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  13:23:14   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send beskeptigal a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by j911ob

So in your world:

old equals confused

incontinent equals confession cant be trusted
No, you've cherry picked and misquoted me both.

Deteriorating health with advanced age are indeed correlated with deteriorating brain function. Why would your body deteriorate and not your brain? And I was discussing probabilities, not "old equals confused".

Originally posted by j911ob

former drug addict equals dishonest
Left out a few details again. Add in 20 years of drug addiction, 10 years of dealing, and "broke...borrowed money for plane ticket"; then change "equals" to "more likely then not" and you will have accurately paraphrased my post.

MmmmmmKay?

Originally posted by j911ob

So you just stated as fact that he was confused with no evidence whatsoever.
Apparently you are having trouble with reading comprehension and still missing the point. Let me try again. Which explanation is more likely?

Originally posted by j911ob

I have seen many people die from old age. Strangely enough, not one of them made a tape saying they were involved in a murder.
Well, that's certainly strong evidence. This is so irrelevant one must question your critical thinking skills.

Originally posted by j911ob

Hunt was suspected of involvement for many years. You have no reason to dismiss his confession. Please try again.
That's a good one.


Go to Top of Page

beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard

USA
3834 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  13:28:15   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send beskeptigal a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by j911ob

How exactly do you lose the presidents brain? Is it like when you get off a bus and as it drives away you remember you have left your bag on it?
You could leave it in the autopsy room or separate it from the body for any number of plans for future examination, and it could have then found it's way to the same location where destruction of body parts every hospital with a surgery department has.


Go to Top of Page

JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED

2418 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  18:55:03   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send JEROME DA GNOME a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Cuneiformist---

Billy Nolan Lovelady died in January, 1979, during the House Select Committee on Assassinations hearings.

(hum this part)

DUN DUN DUNNNN


"Unfortunately, Lovelady was not able to confirm this as he died just before the publication of the HSCA report. He died of a heart-attack aged 42 in January, 1979."

www.angelfire.com/blog2/jfk/teach.htm


Heart attack, at 42, during the hearings?


Seems like every loose end becomes frayed and never tied up.

What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell
Go to Top of Page

JohnOAS
SFN Regular

Australia
800 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  22:17:49   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit JohnOAS's Homepage Send JohnOAS a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME




Heart attack, at 42, during the hearings?


Seems like every loose end becomes frayed and never tied up.


That's an awesome point. It would seem brain loss is not restricted to JFK's.

John's just this guy, you know.
Go to Top of Page

filthy
SFN Die Hard

USA
14408 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  22:42:42   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send filthy a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Heart attacks at even younger ages are not all that uncommon. I'd like to see an autopsy report before I made any claims about it, one way or another.

If one is of the right mind-set, every shadow contains a snake.




"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)

"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres


"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude

Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,

and Crypto-Communist!

Go to Top of Page
Page: of 4 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.42 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000