Jump to content
The Education Forum

Mike Rago

One Post per Day
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Mike Rago

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

4,483 profile views
  1. This is the post that started this thread on its hijacked course. Mr. DiEugenio went out of his way to attack 3 other members with false assertions. Does he really think that all of DVP's ideas lack any credible evidence? Of course not, there is credible evidence to suspect Oswald. There is also credible evidence to suspect a gunman on the knoll who used a handgun(not a rifle) and credible evidence to suspect Zapruder. When a member makes a post in a thread, and in that post he attacks other members, then those other members are going to respond.
  2. We need the photograph to show us both the orientation of JFK's body and his jacket at the time he was shot. Without the photograph all we have is a jacket with a hole in it.
  3. I didn't ask you if there was a contradiction, I asked you which carried more weight, the physical evidence or the photographic evidence? The discussion is about how do we "weigh" the evidence. "Weighing" the evidence is not microanalyzing the evidence. It is part of the process of finding the facts.
  4. Agree, physical evidence trumps photographic evidence, sometimes. Why do I say sometimes? Lets pretend we have a bullet hole in a shirt and we also have a video of the shooting. Here is a picture of JFK's jacket hanging on a hanger. It shows the bullet hole in the back. And here is a photograph of the President riding in his car seconds before he was shot in the back. The photo shows the jacket was bunched up in the back. Which carries more weight, the actual jacket with the bullet hole or the picture which shows how the jacket was oriented when the bu
  5. Mr. DiEugenio, I think your post violates the rules but I am not sure. Here is the rule that I think you are breaking.... Accusations of Member Credibility:- Members that post and/or imply that a fellow member of this forum is using an alias on this forum or an alias elsewhere designed to deceive members at forum or any other forum, and/or that he/she may be paid to post on this forum:- Also, it is completely off the topic of this thread.
  6. It is not just about evidence. You have to know how to "weigh" the evidence. For instance, photographic evidence should hold more weight than any other type of evidence. Evidence from the scene of the crime should hold more weight as well.
  7. Focus you research on Zapruder. He is and always has been the key to solving this crime. Try to figure out exactly what Zapruder did in the seconds after he got down from the pedestal. Zapruder is the "elephant in the room". Since words matter let me spell it out. The phrase "elephant in the room" is an idiom that we use when talking about a single instance of something that is an obvious, unavoidable truth that people still insist on not talking about. The phrase comes from the idea that having an elephant in your living room is a large obvious problem but it is easier to not talk about
  8. There is only one shooter in the Moorman photo but it is not the figure on the extreme left. All of the evidence we have tells us that no shot was fired from that location. Two of the acoustic experts claimed that a shot came from that location but the photographic evidence does not support that acoustic conclusion. What evidence you ask? For starters, the Moorman photo. The Moorman photo was taken about 400 milliseconds after the supposed shot was fired from that locaiton (according to the acoustic evidence). 400 milliseconds is about the time it takes to blink your eye. In the Moo
  9. Correcting some information from the previous post which left the impression that the bullet could not have passed through the neck because of all the soft tissue in the way. The key here is , "soft tissue". I am including strap muscle in my definition of "soft tissue" and I do not know if that is correct but it is not bone. 1 The Bethesda autopsy physicians attempted to probe the bullet hole in the base of Kennedy's neck above the scapula, but were unsuccessful as it passed through neck strap muscle. They did not perform a full dissection or persist in tracking, as throughout the autopsy,
  10. Barry, In the comments section of your article you point to the article by Michael Schweitzer and state your belief that the CIA killed John Kennedy. Link to Schweitzer article you reference http://www.facebook....563254230367331 Your $25,000 offer is to prove that Oswald killed the president. As I understand it, you are not proposing that you can prove that the CIA killed John Kennedy. You are not proposing that you can prove that the CIA killed Kennedy are you?
  11. I suggest you read the thread. You can do that...can't you? The do a bit of research and educate yourself. Not that interested. I do not think you really know what you are talking about. You are being too protective of your data, indicating something is not quite right.
  12. You cannot even define the axis of the entrance pupil? I would think it would be perpindicular to the entrance pupil.
  • Create New...