Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton


      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team

Michael Walton

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Michael Walton

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

2,454 profile views
  1. The Paine Files

    Jim you said you have new info above. What do you mean by that?
  2. Tracking Oswald Part 5

    Just my IMO but I think you both have valid points. The photo may have been taken a little higher up than my illustration: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7Hr9Lrku-Cxdm9ZalJTSWU3cms/view One thing that sways me in my illustration is the leathery lined section in the open head photo. I believe that looks like the back of his neck and you can also see those lines in the photo that shows the back of the head with his matted hair laying over the wound (the same photo I used in the illustration). I also happen to believe that there was a tangential wound from the front that hit in the temple area and slice through his head and came out the back, hence, that rounded beveled hole you see in the illustration above. If it did happen that way, it'd be amazing to find just where in the hell that bullet went when it came out. I know this is all speculation from all of us of course, but as you may have seen in that video i posted where it shows a guy's head flying backward from a frontal shot, somewhere along the way a shot hit JFK from the front pushing his head backward like in the Z film.
  3. Tracking Oswald Part 5

    Micah and Sandy - so what is your own personal interpretation of the photo? Micah - please don't post endless testimony and clips of text. Just what do you personally think the photo shows in your own words? And Sandy?
  4. Tracking Oswald Part 5

    Uhh, no, Micah. You're reading way too much into this with way too many so-called "experts" saying it's this or that or something else. It's his head, Micah. The back of his head. That round shape is the blowout from the bullet hole. Look at my illustration above. It's not hard to figure out. That's a flap, Micah, with the bone underneath. Pat Speer wrote about this too. Look it up on his website.
  5. Tracking Oswald Part 5

    Since we are on the head wounds here, I wanted to put this up. I have always thought this was a decent illustration of two photos combined, not because I made it, but because the so-called "mystery" photo - who Baden couldn't even orient in 1978 (and BTW, every time I see that guy advertised on a TV show I never watch his xxxx) - HAS to be oriented some how. Meaning, if we are to believe that that photo is genuine (and I think it is) then it has to somehow be reconciled with the other autopsy photos that are available. So this illustration below is that reconciliation. PS - this is a large animated GIF so let it load as it may take a moment if you're on a slow connection speed: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7Hr9Lrku-Cxdm9ZalJTSWU3cms
  6. Tracking Oswald Part 5

    Mike - this is a particularly useful video IMO. Did you make it? Yes
  7. This breaking news sounds like pure Italian hokum to me.
  8. Tracking Oswald Part 5

    I'm not saying here that it's impossible for a rear shot to the head to not make a head move backward. But this show is par for the course, meaning it's utter horsexxxx. Ballistics gel in no way mimics the actual human body with gristle, bone, and taunt muscles. All you have to do is look at the Z film to see that JFK - before 313 - was not a blubbery mass of rubber bouncing here and to. He was actually stunned and looks stiffened...how do we know that? Watch his right arm collapse when the head shot hits. So he was not a blubbery mass like this xxxxing show portrays it to be. Meanwhile, how do you explain live human bodies reacting to a shot from the front as well as the back as seen below? https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7Hr9Lrku-CxNm9MNTY3UHVrR1k and https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7Hr9Lrku-CxU0V1ck1GZFN6TWM
  9. Methodology

    This belongs over in the Math or Egypt forums. Or in a new one called My Fantasy World.
  10. David Giglio Interviews Jim DIEugenio

    Chris and Dave, I stand by what I said earlier. The case was not all that hard to pull off. You set the stage, get a patsy in place, the shooters come out and do what they do, then fade away. The government, in cahoots with the media did the rest, causing subterfuge for the past 50 plus years. That's all. People like you two and many others (the Harvey and Lee crowd; the Jackie shot JFK crowd; and many others) have grossly muddled this case, ruining the outstanding work that's been done by real researchers. So yes, this thread deserves to be pinned at the top of this forum so that folks can read what really happen before they start finding the silliness like the Z film was recorded at 48 FPS and 67% of the frames were removed, that blobs were painted onto the film, that Oswald had a clone from Hungary, and the clone's Mom had a unibrow and smiled a lot, and all of the other nonsense (e.g., muck).
  11. David Giglio Interviews Jim DIEugenio

    This thread should be renamed The Kennedy Assassination A Primer and pinned to the top of this forum. Not only does JD cover the case well but Giglio has some outstanding links to other resources. Yet, only 300 odd views of it. Meanwhile, the craziness and zaniness on this forum continues with, for example, Chris carrying on with the ridiculous Towner Frame Split thread - 13,000 views and counting. That's why it's even more important to pin this to the top so there's some kind of balance before visitors start wading through the muck.
  12. I recently led the effort at the company I work for to live stream an event on Facebook. It happened this past week after planning it for almost one year. Have you ever thought about putting this event on Facebook Live for those who cannot attend?
  13. Michael Walton

    Mike, come on. This whole forum is about the JFK assassination. We should try to stick to that topic. Test out your new-fangled software or gadget or gizmo elsewhere. You have plenty of off-line options. Then when it works and if you want to somehow incorporate this gizmo into your JFK research, great. I mean think about it. You and me and others are not the only ones who visit this site. Tom Graves also called you out a while back on how you posted 7 or 10 empty "reserve" posts on a thread. It was like - WTF? There should be a certain etiquette to *how* you use a forum and Graves's call out and mine are two examples of how you don't seem to understand or are too stubborn to consider the point we're trying to get across. But now you'll once again accuse me of being arrogant or a playground basher or whatever without holding up the mirror to see the point I and others have tried to make with you all along.
  14. David Talbot's posting today from Italy

    Meanwhile, Dulles -- for some unexplained reason -- was operating out of a secret CIA facility in northern Virginia on that fateful day, even though Kennedy had pushed him out of government two years before. And then he goes on to be part of the WC. Talk about the fox guarding the hen house.
  15. Michael Walton

    When it works, great, then use it. Don't make it a post though - it just disrupts the thread. Who cares if you're "testing" something. I don't and I'm sure others don't either.