Pat Speer Posted August 21, 2015 Author Share Posted August 21, 2015 What do you think that shape is in the gif I've created? No thoughts? Nothing? And is it just a coincidence that shape is 15 by 6, when the mythical cowlick entrance is not? What makes you think the "shape" that you are convinced is the entry wound measures exactly 15 by 6 millimeters? And even if it IS the entry wound, why couldn't it be located high on JFK's head, near the cowlick, which is the place on the head that the Clark Panel and the HSCA determined the entry wound was located via OTHER (multiple!) photographs and X-rays? Tell me again why the "shape" you think is the entry wound cannot possibly in a million years be located anywhere near the cowlick area of John F. Kennedy's head. Thank you. Just look at the photo, David. For that shape to be the cowlick entry, the bone in the back ground would have to be the front of the head--as opposed to the posterior cranial fossa. And not only that, the whole left side of the head would have to have been missing. It just doesn't add up. If you want to show how it could add up, then please do. I've been wrong before, and am always willing to learn. As far as the measurements, that the proportions match 15 by 6 is demonstrated on the slide. That it is actually 15 by 6, however, is less solid, and is based on the relative proportions of the shape and the back of Kennedy's head under the assumption the shape is on the back of Kennedy's head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted August 21, 2015 Author Share Posted August 21, 2015 As far as my Gif???? It was there when I posted it, and when I went back and added a second post. You just added a gif file. How did you add yours onto your post? Maybe I did something wrong. I just used the regular image tags --- [ img ] and [ /img ] . I still can't see your GIF in Post #1. Can you see it? Maybe it's a browser thing. I'm using Firefox 40.0. ~shrug~ No, my gif is no longer visible. I could see it yesterday, but it's no longer there. I'm wondering if there isn't a limit on the size of the files on one thread, or something like that. I'll try to get to the bottom of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 Just look at the photo, David. For that shape to be the cowlick entry, the bone in the background would have to be the front of the head--as opposed to the posterior cranial fossa. And not only that, the whole left side of the head would have to have been missing. It just doesn't add up. If you want to show how it could add up, then please do. I've been wrong before, and am always willing to learn. There's no way I can add anything definitive with respect to the F8 photo, and that's because I do not think it is possible to determine the exact location of various parts of President Kennedy's head in that picture. As I said before, I could probably stare at it all day long and it wouldn't help me out much. As far as the measurements, that the proportions match 15 by 6 is demonstrated on the slide. That it is actually 15 by 6, however, is less solid, and is based on the relative proportions of the shape and the back of Kennedy's head under the assumption the shape is on the back of Kennedy's head. Okay. Thanks, Pat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) FYI.... Here is a GIF of the F8 ("Mystery") autopsy photo that I got off of Pat Speer's website. This might be the GIF Pat posted in Post #1 that is no longer showing up.... Edited August 21, 2015 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) Just to illustrate how easy it is to play "Let's Find A Possible Bullet Hole In JFK's Head In The F8 Photo", I don't see why the object within the white circle couldn't be yet another candidate.... Edited August 21, 2015 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted August 21, 2015 Author Share Posted August 21, 2015 Something's wacky, David. I just looked and my gif file is showing up on the first post again. And no, it wasn't the one you posted. It was one in which I only showed the formerly dark area of the photo, now brightened. If you still can't see it, btw, this gif file is on my website at the end of chapter 20. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 Pat: You stil l have not commented on my last question. Most people are wising up about the worthlessness of arguing with DVP. Simply useless. I hope you do also some day. Meanwhile I will bug out of this until you answer my question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) Something's wacky, David. I just looked and my gif file is showing up on the first post again. And no, it wasn't the one you posted. It was one in which I only showed the formerly dark area of the photo, now brightened. If you still can't see it, btw, this gif file is on my website at the end of chapter 20. That is wacky, Pat. I still can't see it. But, anyhow, thanks for leading me to Chapter 20 so I could locate the proper GIF image. I've renamed and re-uploaded the GIF via my Blogger.com site after I downloaded it off of your website. (Maybe EF didn't like the file name or something.) Anyway, here's my Blogspot version (with proper "PatSpeer.com" credit in the file name).... blogspot.com/Autopsy-Photos-Cropped-Via-PatSpeer.com.gif Edited August 22, 2015 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted August 21, 2015 Author Share Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) PS: Perhaps Humes (who orchestrated the photos) asked too much of Stringer, and asked him to capture both the entrance on the back of the head and large defect on top of the head in one shot. Isn't this the payoff? As most of us think, there is no way JFK is in a position at Z 313 to sustain one shot from a FMJ bullet that will do this from the sixth floor. And yes I recall you and this photo from your DVD. Sorry, Jim. I thought it was a rhetorical question. Yes. When one looks at Kennedy's position at frame 312/313, and considers that the fatal bullet supposedly came from six floors up, it's truly hard to believe the bullet would change direction and exit from the top of Kennedy's head. And that's not the only HUGE problem with the scenario pushed by the doctors and Warren Commission. The brain photos--which I know many assume to be fake but bear with me--are purported to demonstrate that no bullet entered low and exited high. That is what the Clark Panel and HSCA believed, and this is undoubtedly one of the main reasons they decided to go with the cowlick entry. If they didn't, they felt, they'd have to assume there'd been two shots to the head, and thus, two shooters. So, much as the autopsy doctors, who knew that sectioning the brain might show there'd been two shots to the head, and therefore never sectioned the brain, the Clark Panel and HSCA Panel (and staff) knew that going with the cowlick entry was the only way to maintain the single-assassin conclusion. And so go with it, they did. Never mind that none of the witnesses to the autopsy saw such a wound. Never mind that they had to blackmail Humes into going along with it in public testimony, and then cut him off when he started to walk it back. Now, there are some, such as Sturdivan, who have convinced themselves that a high-velocity bullet descending from six floors up and entering low on the back of the head might nevertheless exit from the top of the head. But this wasn't borne out by any of the tests performed for the commission. Nor any tests since. While it's true bullet trajectories turn after striking curved surfaces and curve to an even greater degree if the bullet is deformed, this would be an extreme case, whereby a bullet traveling what? 1700 fps would have to make a 45 degree turn within an inch or two of entering the brain, while leaving no readily observable bullet impact on the brain. The brain just doesn't offer enough resistance, IMO, to counteract that much forward momentum if the bullet was traveling nose first. And if it was tumbling, well, that's even worse. While a tumbling bullet might very well change direction within a skull, it could not do so without traveling sideways within the brain, and creating a lot more damage than was noted by the doctors. That's my understanding, anyhow. Edited August 21, 2015 by Pat Speer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) Pat, And, IMO, that total LACK of brain injury in the LOWER sections of JFK's brain is one of the main reasons we can KNOW for certain that the bullet probably did not enter LOW on the head [see the video below]. It must have entered higher up on the President's head, just as the Clark Panel and HSCA concluded (and correctly concluded, IMO).... "On one of the lateral films of the skull (#2), a hole measuring approximately 8 mm. in diameter on the outer surface of the skull and as much as 20 mm. on the internal surface can be seen in profile approximately 100 mm. above the external occipital protuberance. The bone of the lower edge of the hole is depressed. Also there is, embedded in the outer table of the skull close to the lower edge of the hole, a large metallic fragment which on the anteroposterior film (#1) lies 25 mm. to the right of the midline. This fragment as seen in the latter film is round and measures 6.5 mm. in diameter. [...] The foregoing observations indicate that the decedent's head was struck from behind by a single projectile. It entered the occipital region 25 mm. to the right of the midline and 100 mm. above the external occipital protuberance. The projectile fragmented on entering the skull, one major section leaving a trail of fine metallic debris as it passed forward and laterally to explosively fracture the right frontal and parietal bones as it emerged from the head." -- Via the 1968 Clark Panel Report jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-1968-clark-panel-report.html Edited August 21, 2015 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Mileto Posted August 21, 2018 Share Posted August 21, 2018 (edited) Your proposed skull wound location can be right on top of the EOP. The bump under it could be the EOP if it's a slightly tilted perspective making it appear a bit uneven. The camera would then be pointed at the left parietal bone. The area in shadows with your skull wound location could be the lambdoid suture. Joe Riley's left parietal foramen dot location also perfectly fits this. The beveled exit would then be on the upper left on the skull. Edited August 21, 2018 by Micah Mileto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Mileto Posted August 21, 2018 Share Posted August 21, 2018 (edited) On 8/21/2015 at 1:10 PM, David Von Pein said: Just to illustrate how easy it is to play "Let's Find A Possible Bullet Hole In JFK's Head In The F8 Photo", I don't see why the object within the white circle couldn't be yet another candidate.... why can't that be the left parietal foramen like Joe Riley said? Edited August 21, 2018 by Micah Mileto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Mileto Posted October 25, 2020 Share Posted October 25, 2020 On 8/21/2018 at 1:21 PM, Micah Mileto said: Your proposed skull wound location can be right on top of the EOP. The bump under it could be the EOP if it's a slightly tilted perspective making it appear a bit uneven. The camera would then be pointed at the left parietal bone. The area in shadows with your skull wound location could be the lambdoid suture. Joe Riley's left parietal foramen dot location also perfectly fits this. The beveled exit would then be on the upper left on the skull. I can't find any other anatomical landmark which could explain the bony bump in the cranium photos. The bump really does look like the external occipital protuberance, viewed from the side, with the center of the photo being the upper-left-rear of the skull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now