Jump to content
The Education Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Thomas Kroger

Dealing with deniers

Recommended Posts

I guess he liked to go around with a big cowlick sticking out the back of his head, eh?

Many times he didn't have a choice. The cowlick was just there, and stuck out a lot of times. I've seen numerous pictures of JFK with the cowlick sort of sticking up (or sticking straight out), such as this picture taken on 11/22/63:

09a.%2BJFK%2BAnd%2BJackie%2BArrive%2BIn%2BDallas%2BOn%2BNovember%2B22%252C%2B1963.jpg

He has a tuft of hair sticking straight out from his head in this photo?

You're seeing what you want to see, David.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

]

And here's a good "bunching up" photo from the George Jefferies film:

Frame%2BFrom%2BJefferies%2BFilm.jpg

http://Kennedy-Photos.blogspot.com

Good enough. Now let's compare the fold in JFK's jacket above with the folds in his shirt in this photo:

LoweJFKphoto.jpg

Are you claiming these folds are identical, or even similar, David?

Edited by Cliff Varnell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you claiming these folds are identical, or even similar, David?

Yes. They look about the same to me.

Basically, both items are "bunched up" -- his shirt in one instance and his jacket in the Jefferies example.

You mean you think there's a huge difference in the "bunching" there, Clifford? Doesn't look like a big difference to me.

Of course, your argument about Kennedy's shirt is (and always has been) an unprovable one since we can't see the back of JFK's shirt in any of the motorcade photos. Therefore, you cannot possibly prove that it's "impossible" for his shirt to have been bunched-up in unison with his suit coat.

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where is your SBT "bunch" in this [Towner] photo, David?

It's visible in a post-Towner photo--Robert Croft's picture:

15c.%2BCroft%2BPhoto%2BShowing%2BJFK%27s%2BCar%2BOn%2BElm%2BStreet.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He has a tuft of hair sticking straight out from his head in this photo?

I can see what could be considered JFK's cowlick tuft, yes. (Looks kind of like a cowlick tuft to me anyway. But please don't take me to court to try and prove it, because I can't.)

09a.%2BJFK%2BAnd%2BJackie%2BArrive%2BIn%2BDallas%2BOn%2BNovember%2B22%252C%2B1963.jpg

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Altgens photo of JFK on Houston St. Note there is no bunching of the jacket, much less what we see in the shirt-photo.

altgens2.jpg

LoweJFKphoto.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where is your SBT "bunch" in this [Towner] photo, David?

It's visible in a post-Towner photo--Robert Croft's picture:

15c.%2BCroft%2BPhoto%2BShowing%2BJFK%27s%2BCar%2BOn%2BElm%2BStreet.jpg

David, that is the same fold we see in the Towner photo, taken less than 10 seconds earlier.

In Croft the fold is bowed out, not up.

Are you claiming that the fold in this photo is nearly twice the size of the 1.25 inch jacket collar?

post-4811-010756900 1308759359_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't possibly declare there's no bunching of the jacket via that Altgens picture. His jacket might well be bunched up (and probably is). The picture isn't definitive either way. But I will say that the coat seems to be "riding high" on the President's back, as we can't see any of his white shirt collar in that particular photograph.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't be serious with all of this crap, can you Cliff? That Towner photo is a crappy picture compared to the nearly razor-sharp Croft picture. It's difficult to discern the "fold" in Towner, due to the lousy nature of the picture.

I have no idea where you're really going with these arguments anyway, Cliff, because there can be no doubt at all that President Kennedy's jacket IS BUNCHED UP at a point in time that equates to Z161 of the Zapruder Film (via the Croft photo), which is, indeed, a point in time AFTER the Towner image.

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He has a tuft of hair sticking straight out from his head in this photo?

I can see what could be considered JFK's cowlick tuft, yes. (Looks kind of like a cowlick tuft to me anyway. But please don't take me to court to try and prove it, because I can't.)

And you can't prove one way or the other what caused JFK's hair to stick out in Jean's photo.

You can't rule out the possibility that JFK was napping, slumped down in his seat and pushed his shirt and hair up.

You are still stuck with the burden of proof -- show us how a tucked-in custom made dress shirt moves while waving to a crowd from a limo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't possibly declare there's no bunching of the jacket via that Altgens picture. His jacket might well be bunched up (and probably is). The picture isn't definitive either way. But I will say that the coat seems to be "riding high" on the President's back, as we can't see any of his white shirt collar in that particular photograph.

Correct!

We can't see any of his shirt collar + the jacket was flat across his back.

Surely you aren't claiming that those same Jean photo folds are in Altgens.

Of course not. It would be hallucinatory of you to make such a claim, no?

altgens2.jpg

But you are correct in that the shirt collar is not visible in Altgens. But the shirt collar is visible in every film and photo taken after Altgens -- which means the jacket collar dropped.

Edited by Cliff Varnell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are still stuck with the burden of proof -- show us how a tucked-in custom made dress shirt moves while waving to a crowd from a limo.

Why don't YOU do it, Cliff? It's your pet theory that a shirt can't bunch up in unison with a person's suit coat. Looks to me like the burden of proving THAT theory is yours. Which, of course, you can never do, because JFK's "shirt bunching" situation is entirely unique to JFK's body, his clothes, and November 22, 1963.

It's similar to a conspiracy theorist asking an LNer to "prove" for all time the workability of the SBT via on-site rifle tests (which WAS done, fairly well, in Oct. 2004 by the Discovery Channel people in Australia).

But an EXACT to-the-millimeter reconstruction of the SBT is virtually impossible, due to the inherent "We Can't Know" nature surrounding the exact location of the two victims in the car at the precise moment when Oswald's Bullet 399 slammed into both men.

But the SBT is true nonetheless--because it makes by far the most sense when examining the totality of the evidence in this case. ALL other theories fall miles short of the SBT, particularly the theory of THREE bullets mimicking a nice-looking SBT event on Elm Street (i.e., 2 bullets going into Kennedy and not exiting [but getting lost anyway], and yet another bullet hitting Connally in--amazingly--the UPPER BACK, so that it, too, can work its way into the SBT model).

Doesn't that type of "3 Bullet" SBT coincidence seem a little strange--even to the Anybody-But-Oswald conspiracy crowd?

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Nix film captures the moment the jacket collar fell. JFK was talking with Nellie and when he leaned back the jacket dropped.

post-4811-010911400 1308760294_thumb.jpg

post-4811-084720800 1308760327_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But you are correct in that the shirt collar is not visible in Altgens. But the shirt collar is visible in every film and photo taken after Altgens -- which means the jacket collar dropped.

Yes, that's probably true.

Chalk one up for Cliff.

Now, where does Cliff Varnell go from there?

Basic SHIRT/COAT Facts:

1.) There was ONE bullet hole in JFK's upper back (his skin).

2.) There was ONE bullet hole in the back side of JFK's shirt.

3.) There was ONE bullet hole in the back side of JFK's suit coat.

So, ONE bullet must have caused ALL THREE holes, regardless of where on the body and clothing those holes were located.

Correct, Cliff?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are still stuck with the burden of proof -- show us how a tucked-in custom made dress shirt moves while waving to a crowd from a limo.

Why don't YOU do it.

Because you are the one making the claim. It's not my job to prove your assertions incorrect.

It is your job to prove your assertions, not repeat them endlessly without back up.

David, let me help you out. Right now, turn your head to the right. Glance down on your right shoulder-line. Raise your right arm and casually wave a la JFK in the motorcade. Watch the fabric along your shoulder-line indent.

That is what happens when you casually wave your arm, David. Your shirt fabric indents.

Craig has a nice photo of this phenomenon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...