JFK - Inside the target car

[Evan Burton]

This series is starting in the History Channel (Australia) this week.

Have members seen it, and what is their opinion?

This is probably futile but please, PLEASE do NOT try to defend or refute member's opinions on how good the show is. If a person says it ignores all evidence and is worse than a child's attempt to recreate the circumstances and you disagree, then just say that you think the programme covers some aspects well, etc, etc. Please just state your opinion (assuming you care to give one) and leave it at that.

Thank you.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

This series is starting in the History Channel (Australia) this week.

Have members seen it, and what is their opinion?

Dear Mr. Van Winkle: Using Google's SEARCH SITE feature, I entered the words target car and searched this forum.

http://www.google.com/search?q=site:educat...GL_enUS281US281

This is probably futile but please, PLEASE do NOT try to defend or refute member's opinions on how good the show is. If a person says it ignores all evidence and is worse than a child's attempt to recreate the circumstances and you disagree, then just say that you think the programme covers some aspects well, etc, etc. Please just state your opinion (assuming you care to give one) and leave it at that.

Thank you.

I thought there was freedom of expression on this forum. Can moderators now tell us what to say, and what not to say?

[EDIT] If I am allowed to express an opinion, then it is my opinion that the program provides further Proof that the Jet Effect theory is false and that JFK's dramatic backward movement following Z313 was caused by a bullet from the right front.

THe experiments in the program were rigged so that the "body" could not move, but you will see that in EVERY EXPERIMENT the head is driven violently in the same direction as the bullet that strikes it. The FORCE of the bullet is clearly the cause of this reaction.

THese experiments vividly illustrate the FACT that the Jet Effect theory proposed by Alvarez has been completely refuted. It almost goes without saying that it makes the "neuromuscular reaction" theory look even more ridiculous than it already did.

The curious thing about the program is that the presenters are unable to see this, even though it is right in front of their eyes. Instead they regale viewers with mumbo jumbo about blood spatter, which has even less of a scientific basis than the inkblot theory of psychology. ]

Edited November 14, 2009 by J. Raymond Carroll

[Evan Burton]

This series is starting in the History Channel (Australia) this week.

Have members seen it, and what is their opinion?

Dear Mr. Van Winkle: Using Google's SEARCH SITE feature, I entered the words target car and searched this forum.

http://www.google.com/search?q=site:educat...GL_enUS281US281

This is probably futile but please, PLEASE do NOT try to defend or refute member's opinions on how good the show is. If a person says it ignores all evidence and is worse than a child's attempt to recreate the circumstances and you disagree, then just say that you think the programme covers some aspects well, etc, etc. Please just state your opinion (assuming you care to give one) and leave it at that.

Thank you.

I thought there was freedom of expression on this forum. Can moderators now tell us what to say, and what not to say?

Ray - Yes, I know of this thing called Google. This sub-forum being a JFK forum, I thought - perhaps mistakenly - that I could seek opinions from people who have a keen interest in the subject rather than anonymous websites.

And my comments were to try and prevent any argument over my simple query, which happened before when I tried to ask people to give me the basics of the JFK saga. Perhaps that eluded you? In any case, take a pill and calm down - it was a request only.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

take a pill and calm down

Ray - Yes, I know of this thing called Google

I don't think you do, or else you need new eyeglasses. THe link I attached, if you had bothered to open it was LIMITED ENTIRELY TO THIS JFK SUB-Group. As I stated in my post, I used Google's SEARCH THIS SITE feature to search THIS SITE (THE EDUCATION FORUM)

This sub-forum being a JFK forum, I thought - perhaps mistakenly - that I could seek opinions from people who have a keen interest in the subject

Please see my original post, which I was editing while you were busy handing out medical prescriptions.

[Evan Burton]

*sigh*

This is why I don't bother to try and ask questions here. I'll ask elsewhere.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

it is my opinion that the program provides further Proof that the Jet Effect theory is false and that JFK's dramatic backward movement following Z313 was caused by a bullet from the right front.

I would add that the program also suggests (perhaps even proves) that the weapon and ammunition used in the program were not of the same type as the weapon and ammunition used in the murder of JFK

[J. Raymond Carroll]

*sigh*

This is why I don't bother to try and ask questions here. I'll ask elsewhere.

Do that. It is obvious that you are too lazy to read the posts that you are replying to.

[Chris Halbower]

On a side note, I never knew you could use google to search a specific website. The search feature on educationforum is kinda lousy. Thanks for the tip, Raymond.

[Len Colby]

On a side note, I never knew you could use google to search a specific website. The search feature on educationforum is kinda lousy. Thanks for the tip, Raymond.

The EF's search engine is actually quite good and gives more useful results than a Google site search, except for keywords under 4 letters which are blocked. In which case the latter is your best option. You need to click on the "More Search Options" link to get the full search engine.

Evan - Ray does have a point, the show has been discussed here a few times

Ray -Though I think you were right you could have been less sarcastic

Edited November 14, 2009 by Len Colby

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Ray -Though I think you were right you could have been less sarcastic

THanks Len. Then I guess I will have to give up my daily practice of reading the Bible:

Sarcasm appears several times in the Old Testament, for example:

Lo, you see the man is mad; why then have you brought him to me? Do I lack madmen, that you have brought this fellow to play the madman in my presence?

—Achish, king of Gath, I Sam 21:10-15[2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm

[Pat Speer]

*sigh*

This is why I don't bother to try and ask questions here. I'll ask elsewhere.

Evan, I was so irritated by the program I created a whole chapter on my webpage about it.

You can read it here:

http://www.patspeer.com/chapter16c%3Aconfi...ddisappointment

If you don't have the time, you might want to just read the captions to the slides in the chapter.

In short, I found the program to be deliberately deceptive and dishonest. The irony, for me, is that I agreed with the program's central conclusion--that the head shot probably did not come from in front of Kennedy--and was totally prepared to like it. Boy was I disappointed.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

I agreed with the program's central conclusion--that the head shot probably did not come from in front of Kennedy

Pat, in order to sustain the theory that JFK was shot from behind, I have always thought that you need either the Jet Effect theory or the "neuromuscular reaction" theory (or some combination of the two, as the HSCA medical panel claimed) to explain the violent backward "head snap" we see in the Zapruder film. I gather you are arguing that the head shot came from the rear, but I could not find either of these theories discussed in your web article on the "Target Car"

Am I missing something?

[Pat Speer]

I agreed with the program's central conclusion--that the head shot probably did not come from in front of Kennedy

Pat, in order to sustain the theory that JFK was shot from behind, I have always thought that you need either the Jet Effect theory or the "neuromuscular reaction" theory (or some combination of the two, as the HSCA medical panel claimed) to explain the violent backward "head snap" we see in the Zapruder film. I gather you are arguing that the head shot came from the rear, but I could not find either of these theories discussed in your web article on the "Target Car"

Am I missing something?

Ray, I wanted to keep that chapter a commentary on the show. I discuss back and to the left etc. in Chapter 16b.

As discussed, the Zapruder film makes it clear that Kennedy's head goes back and to the left after the fatal head shot. Conspiracy theorists have long held that this means the shot came from the front. Single-assassin theorists, on the other hand, have pointed out that Kennedy's head initially goes forward, and have used supposedly scientific explanations, the "jet effect" and the "neuro-muscular response," to try and explain Kennedy's subsequent backwards movement. When I started suspecting that the head shot hit Kennedy at the supposed exit, one of the first things I did was slap myself at this exit location from behind, to see if this impact would re-create Kennedy's movements. To my surprise, it did.

I subsequently learned that there is a certain elastic recoil in muscle tissue. You stretch it out far enough, and it snaps right back on its own. Some runners learn to use this to their advantage. This led me to believe that Kennedy was hit towards the top of his head, his head was driven down, his chin hit his chest and his head sprang back up from the recoil of his neck muscles.

In July 2007, researcher Gil Jesus alerted the Education Forum to a number of videos he found online, depicting head shots. One of these was news footage of a hostage-taker getting killed by a sniper. The shot came in from the man's right. The man's head turned to his left, traveling with the bullet. Then snapped back to his right, facing the sky as he fell to the ground. Not enough fluid was ejected from his head to create the "jet effect." His body failed to stiffen as in a neuro-muscular response. This video can be viewed here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKTaYzDrnqk

Kennedy contorts in a similar manner, only more vertically. This is consistent with his getting hit more towards the top of his head, at the supposed exit.

Should one continue to doubt such a shot occurred, and insist that the “back-and-to-the-left” movement of Kennedy’s skull could only have come from the front, I suggest a simple test. I’ve done it way too many times. Lean forward 30 degrees…tilt your head 25 degrees to your left… and SLAP the top of your skull above your ear downwards, and see what happens. NO. I'M KIDDING. Don’t do this!!! It hurts a bit. Take my word for it, instead,--your head will bounce right up and throw your body backwards, exactly as Kennedy’s did in the frames after the fatal headshot. (By the way, I'm not just making this up. This unique attribute of tangential hits is mentioned in the online paper Wound Ballistic Simulation by Jorma Jusilla, presented at the University of Helsinki: It states “A tangential hit also causes a torsion motion of the head which can cause serious injuries.” According to Funk and Wagnall’s, the word “torsion” means “The act of twisting.” I say that in case you might need to look it up. I did.)

In retrospect, the mystery over the cause of Kennedy’s back-and-to-the-left movement should have been solved a long time ago. All the debate over the “man behind the picket fence,” the “jet effect” and “neuro-muscular response” would have been unnecessary if someone used some common sense back in 1964. People knew the bullet broke up. People knew that bullets normally pierce a body without imparting enough energy into the body to throw it one way or the other. People knew that, on the other hand, a bullet striking tangentially, creating a gutter wound, and breaking up, could impart enough energy into someone to slap them one way or the other. People knew as well that the Zapruder film showed Kennedy being slapped back into his seat. The problem, one can only guess, is that the people knowing these things were not the same people.

The movements of Kennedy apparent in the Zapruder frames following the head shot, when taken in conjunction with the evidence previously discussed, including the fact that no bloody back spatter emanates from the back of Kennedy's head in the film, can therefore be taken as a clear indication the bullet striking Kennedy at frame 313 struck his skull at the supposed exit, most probably from behind.

[Evan Burton]

Pat - thanks, I'll read that.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Ray, I wanted to keep that chapter a commentary on the show. I discuss back and to the left etc. in Chapter 16b.

THanks Pat.

I think the theory that the fatal shot came from behind has been dealt a fatal blow by the video posted today by Duncan MacRae.

Duncan's video shows what ACTUALLY happens when a man is shot in the head from behind (with a Carcano rifle, I suspect)) and it is the exact opposite of what is seen in the Zapruder film.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15002

Edited November 15, 2009 by J. Raymond Carroll