Nonsense

[Bill Miller]

Bill?

I will give you one name because its common knowledge to real students of the assassination ... She is a blood spatter expert ... . Sherry Fiester. She can lead you to more names as she had done me.

Bill Miller

Edited December 5, 2010 by Bill Miller

[Robin Unger]

I understand it's very difficult to find the damaged shape of JFK's head in one frame no matter how

good the quality is with the available material but once you've watched a stable animated GIF from

this horribly sequence it becomes easier i think.

So, please don't feel offended here Robin and Duncan but Robert Harris second point is valid.

The Top of JFK's Skull was seriously damaged after he was shot in the head.

(Hell, til today i've trouble to work on that appaling Zapruder frames even i should be insensitive now somehow)

At first here a composition i made once ago.

And finally the stable sequence of Zapruder frames 327-337.

Parts of the top of the skull was gone when you following the sequence.

It's easier to distinguish between background and JFK's head.

Jackies black collar is of help here.

To Robert:

Is it possible to behave yourself?

You've been put under moderation for a week currently after a short time you are here.

Now your postings must be edited from wise moderators while you insulted Robin Unger who is propably the

most peaceful and well known researcher in the JFK Assassination research.

You saw down the branch you are sitting on with that kind of comments.

Martin

Thanks for the Zoomed GIF Martin.

That makes it much clearer that i was in error, thinking that the collar was visible.

the collar was actually hidden behind the top of kennedy's hair.

Thanks Martin / Duncan.

We all need to be peer reviewed, to keep us honest.

As you would know martin, i have never had a problem admitting i have made a mistake in my analysis.

I just need to be presented with "clear evidence" so that i can make an informed judgement

My error was in trying to see the "Full picture" while only concentrating on one frame !

Robin.

Edited December 5, 2010 by Robin Unger

[Robert Harris]

I understand it's very difficult to find the damaged shape of JFK's head in one frame no matter how

good the quality is with the available material but once you've watched a stable animated GIF from

this horribly sequence it becomes easier i think.

So, please don't feel offended here Robin and Duncan but Robert Harris second point is valid.

The Top of JFK's Skull was seriously damaged after he was shot in the head.

(Hell, til today i've trouble to work on that appaling Zapruder frames even i should be insensitive now somehow)

At first here a composition i made once ago.

And finally the stable sequence of Zapruder frames 327-337.

Parts of the top of the skull was gone when you following the sequence.

It's easier to distinguish between background and JFK's head.

Jackies black collar is of help here.

To Robert:

Is it possible to behave yourself?

You've been put under moderation for a week currently after a short time you are here.

Now your postings must be edited from wise moderators while you insulted Robin Unger who is propably the

most peaceful and well known researcher in the JFK Assassination research.

You saw down the branch you are sitting on with that kind of comments.

Martin

Thanks for the Zoomed GIF Martin.

That makes it much clearer that i was in error, thinking that the collar was visible.

the collar was actually hidden behind the top of kennedy's hair.

Thanks Martin / Duncan.

We all need to be peer reviewed, to keep us honest.

As you would know martin, i have never had a problem admitting i have made a mistake in my analysis.

I just need to be presented with "clear evidence" so that i can make an informed judgement

My error was in trying to see the "Full picture" while only concentrating on one frame !

Robin.

ROFLMAO!!

Yeah, great job "Martin/Duncan".

Gosh, wish I'd a thought of that

[Robin Unger]

Harris

You are now officially on my Ignore list.

Congradulations.

[Martin Hinrichs]

Thanks Martin / Duncan.

We all need to be peer reviewed, to keep us honest.

As you would know martin, i have never had a problem admitting i have made a mistake in my analysis.

I just need to be presented with "clear evidence" so that i can make an informed judgement

My error was in trying to see the "Full picture" while only concentrating on one frame !

Robin.

I thank you Robin for your honesty...as always.

And yes, it's right to be peer reviewed to keep on track.

Many just don't have the ability and the balls to admit anything.

And yes, when you encounter their biased minds too often it's a strenght to

put them on an "Ignore List".

best to you my friend

Martin

Edited December 7, 2010 by Martin Hinrichs

[Bill Miller]

I thank you Robin for your honesty...as always.

And yes, it's right to be peer reviewed to keep on track.

Many just don't have the ability and the balls to admit anything.

There seems to be a pattern whereas people who immediately present videos for Youtube without first seeking peer review so to have their claims tested do tend to not wish to admit their mistakes. It would be interesting to see if Harris has removed any of his errors from Youtube.

Bill

[Bill Miller]

Bill,

On the sidewalk of Elm Street, in front of the pergola, there is a circular patch of concrete. The original pavement that this circular patch has filled in was obviously removed.

Do you know the history of this circular patch at all? I've never read anything about it but seem to recall hearing that it was taken for testing long after the assassination.

Lee

Gary Mack has told me that Penn Jones wrote a few sentences about this in his news letter in either January or February of 1977'. Earl Golz was going to run a story on it and it was Earl who had the section of concrete removed from what I understand. What was discovered was that the mark was a piece of cloth that had been dropped in the concrete before it hardened. Once this was learned, I think Golz dropped the story. I believe Gary said that he has the removed piece of concrete in his office.

If more details want to be known, check with Gary Mack at GMack@JFK.org

Bill

[Robert Harris]

Thanks Martin / Duncan.

We all need to be peer reviewed, to keep us honest.

As you would know martin, i have never had a problem admitting i have made a mistake in my analysis.

I just need to be presented with "clear evidence" so that i can make an informed judgement

My error was in trying to see the "Full picture" while only concentrating on one frame !

Robin.

I thank you Robin for your honesty...as always.

And yes, it's right to be peer reviewed to keep on track.

Many just don't have the ability and the balls to admit anything.

And yes, when you encounter their biased minds too often it's a strenght to

put them on an "Ignore List".

best to you my friend

Martin

Martin, your pretense that you are not part of a team going after "Robert Harris" is embarrassingly transparent. And your endless gushing praise of your partners is only useful if one is seeking a gag reflex.

The fact which your fearless leader is attacking, is infinitely more important than Robin's admission that he was wrong, or Duncan's admission that he was wrong.

It is more important because first, it proves that major damage was inflicted in the rear of the head, well after the 313 explosion had completely subsided. To blow a large piece of skull to the rear, ripping out hair in the upper-superior part of the head, required a great deal of force - more force than can be explained by the momentum of JFK's head being thrown back at less than 13mph.

That was when other skull and tissue were blown to the rear as well, including the piece that Clint Hill saw fall off the rear of the trunk and the piece that landed near Charles Brehm. That is also when the brain tissue was blown to the rear that Jackie caught a glimpse of, provoking her to turn around and retrieve it.

Of slightly less importance, it also explains the discrepancy between what the Parkland doctors saw and what we see in the autopsy photos. That large piece of skull remained connected to the scalp and when it was folded back into place, most of the damage was covered over - exactly as Dr. Boswell explained in his ARRB testimony - and exactly as we see in some of the autopsy photos.

The simple fact is, that while you and your team are trying to mug me, you are actually obstructing my efforts to make this stuff known, which I suppose, was Duncan's main goal anyway.

If you are really concerned about "biased minds", you might want to ask yourself why there are so many facts related to this issue that you and your friends won't even discuss?

[Martin Hinrichs]

Martin, your pretense that you are not part of a team going after "Robert Harris" is embarrassingly transparent. And your endless gushing praise of your partners is only useful if one is seeking a gag reflex.

Robert, i confess we (Team Duncan) have frequent meetings in different locations to brainstorm

your research to debunk it. Unfortunately we run out of our budget in the end of the year and couldn't have held our meeting

in Australia cause Duncan reached his year budget of 15.000.

The fact which your fearless leader is attacking.....snip

As far as i'am concerned my only leader is my wife.

Martin

[Bill Miller]

Martin, your pretense that you are not part of a team going after "Robert Harris" is embarrassingly transparent.

Robert ... you really give yourself way too much importance to this forum.

Bill Miller

[Bill Miller]

Robert, i confess we (Team Duncan) have frequent meetings in different locations to brainstorm

your research to debunk it.

Martin

I bet those meetings take less than a couple of minutes to accomplish that goal.

Bill

[Bill Miller]

Gary Mack,

I think your Inbox is full because I can't seem to reply to the last message you sent me.

Lee

Emailing Gary is always better. He said today that he has sent you a message. I didn't ask specifically, but I'd not be surprised that because the concrete mark was a supposed bullet strike by some is why Gary hung onto it. Its a piece of history even if a false lead.

Think about it ... a bullet won't make a gouge in hardened concrete - maybe chip it at best. A piece of cloth or debris dropped onto wet concrete will leave an indentation where the fallen object lands in it.

Bill

Edited December 9, 2010 by Bill Miller

[Dean Hagerman]

Robert, i confess we (Team Duncan) have frequent meetings in different locations to brainstorm

your research to debunk it. Unfortunately we run out of our budget in the end of the year and couldn't have held our meeting

in Australia cause Duncan reached his year budget of 15.000.

Martin

Don't panick, Martin. I made a few phone calls to you know who ( wink wink ) and our budget has been increased to unlimited funding, effective immediately. The Australian "Vacation" is still all systems go.

The "Get Harris " campaign must continue at all costs. If the world finds out that there was a deranged google eyed finger trembling scissors snipping Venetian blinds mutilating window smashing assassin, the games over.

Carry on with the cause. dib dib

What was the name of the Hotel we are all meeting at in Sydney again?