Cliff Varnell Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 There are causes and there are effects. You insist the initial conditions included this bunching, but the effects of any bunching were not present. Jim, you're over-thinking this and abusing the word "bunching" to boot. There is no rational discussion to be had here. Craig acknowledges that the Elm St. photos show JFK's jacket collar in a normal position just above the base of the neck. That's a fact. A very very sinister fact. Because if JFK's jacket collar were in a normal position just above the base of the neck how could there be multiple inches of both shirt and jacket fabric bunched entirely above the SBT inshoot at the base of the neck? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 There are causes and there are effects. You insist the initial conditions included this bunching, but the effects of any bunching were not present. Jim, you're over-thinking this and abusing the word "bunching" to boot. There is no rational discussion to be had here. Craig acknowledges that the Elm St. photos show JFK's jacket collar in a normal position just above the base of the neck. That's a fact. A very very sinister fact. Because if JFK's jacket collar were in a normal position just above the base of the neck how could there be multiple inches of both shirt and jacket fabric bunched entirely above the SBT inshoot at the base of the neck? Its called a FOLD cliff, and that simple FOLD kills your decades old fantasy. Learn to accept defeat with grace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 There are causes and there are effects. You insist the initial conditions included this bunching, but the effects of any bunching were not present. So your hypothesis cannot possibly be correct. How do you know the effects of the fold were not present. You don't know WHERE the entry wound REALLY is... The fold in Betzner is no hypothesis. It a proven...unimpeachable...fact based on the unbending laws of light and shadow and the specific angle of incidence seen in Betzner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 There are causes and there are effects. You insist the initial conditions included this bunching, but the effects of any bunching were not present. Jim, you're over-thinking this and abusing the word "bunching" to boot. There is no rational discussion to be had here. Craig acknowledges that the Elm St. photos show JFK's jacket collar in a normal position just above the base of the neck. That's a fact. A very very sinister fact. Because if JFK's jacket collar were in a normal position just above the base of the neck how could there be multiple inches of both shirt and jacket fabric bunched entirely above the SBT inshoot at the base of the neck? Its called a FOLD cliff, Two folds. The shirt and the jacket. 3+" each. Entirely above the SBT inshoot at the base of the neck even though the jacket collar -- as you stipulate -- was in a normal position just above the base of the neck. The burden of proof is on Tink Thompson to show us how a half-foot wad of clothing fabric and JFK's jacket collar occupied the same physical space at the same time. Tink? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Hagerman Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 Craig acknowledges that the Elm St. photos show JFK's jacket collar in a normal position just above the base of the neck. This has always been the reason I have always backed Cliff in his and Craigs on going debate Even Craig has to admit that Croft does NOT show the fold or bunching that Craig claims Betzner shows How in the world could JFKs tailor made clothes all of the sudden fold and bunch up in the 2 seconds (probably less then 2 seconds) between Croft and Betzner? I know Craig is smart enough to know how impossible that would be I have no idea why he still claims that its possible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 Craig acknowledges that the Elm St. photos show JFK's jacket collar in a normal position just above the base of the neck. This has always been the reason I have always backed Cliff in his and Craigs on going debate Even Craig has to admit that Croft does NOT show the fold or bunching that Craig claims Betzner shows How in the world could JFKs tailor made clothes all of the sudden fold and bunch up in the 2 seconds (probably less then 2 seconds) between Croft and Betzner? I know Craig is smart enough to know how impossible that would be I have no idea why he still claims that its possible Croft shows the same fold as Betzner Dean. In fact it was the fold in Croft that made me realize the neck shadow was missing in Betzner. And of course the missing neck shadow in Betzner was the nail in the coffin for cliff's (and it appears your) fantasy. Learn to live with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 Craig acknowledges that the Elm St. photos show JFK's jacket collar in a normal position just above the base of the neck. This has always been the reason I have always backed Cliff in his and Craigs on going debate Even Craig has to admit that Croft does NOT show the fold or bunching that Craig claims Betzner shows How in the world could JFKs tailor made clothes all of the sudden fold and bunch up in the 2 seconds (probably less then 2 seconds) between Croft and Betzner? I know Craig is smart enough to know how impossible that would be I have no idea why he still claims that its possible Thank you for your support, Dean. I appreciate it very much. I think Errol Morris should do a documentary on Craig Lamson and the effects of hard-right ideology on human cognition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 There are causes and there are effects. You insist the initial conditions included this bunching, but the effects of any bunching were not present. Jim, you're over-thinking this and abusing the word "bunching" to boot. There is no rational discussion to be had here. Craig acknowledges that the Elm St. photos show JFK's jacket collar in a normal position just above the base of the neck. That's a fact. A very very sinister fact. Because if JFK's jacket collar were in a normal position just above the base of the neck how could there be multiple inches of both shirt and jacket fabric bunched entirely above the SBT inshoot at the base of the neck? Its called a FOLD cliff, Two folds. The shirt and the jacket. 3+" each. Entirely above the SBT inshoot at the base of the neck even though the jacket collar -- as you stipulate -- was in a normal position just above the base of the neck. The burden of proof is on Tink Thompson to show us how a half-foot wad of clothing fabric and JFK's jacket collar occupied the same physical space at the same time. Tink? Same physical space? Earth to cliff...Earth to cliff.... One fold. I can't prove one way or the other the condition of the shirt nor will I try. Of course neither can you. SBT shootin? Sheesh cliff. Learn to read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 Craig acknowledges that the Elm St. photos show JFK's jacket collar in a normal position just above the base of the neck. This has always been the reason I have always backed Cliff in his and Craigs on going debate Even Craig has to admit that Croft does NOT show the fold or bunching that Craig claims Betzner shows How in the world could JFKs tailor made clothes all of the sudden fold and bunch up in the 2 seconds (probably less then 2 seconds) between Croft and Betzner? I know Craig is smart enough to know how impossible that would be I have no idea why he still claims that its possible Thank you for your support, Dean. I appreciate it very much. I think Errol Morris should do a documentary on Craig Lamson and the effects of hard-right ideology on human cognition. We KNOW what fantasy a hard left ideology has imparted upon cliff varnell. It ain't pretty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Hagerman Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 Craig acknowledges that the Elm St. photos show JFK's jacket collar in a normal position just above the base of the neck. This has always been the reason I have always backed Cliff in his and Craigs on going debate Even Craig has to admit that Croft does NOT show the fold or bunching that Craig claims Betzner shows How in the world could JFKs tailor made clothes all of the sudden fold and bunch up in the 2 seconds (probably less then 2 seconds) between Croft and Betzner? I know Craig is smart enough to know how impossible that would be I have no idea why he still claims that its possible Croft shows the same fold as Betzner Dean. In fact it was the fold in Croft that made me realize the neck shadow was missing in Betzner. And of course the missing neck shadow in Betzner was the nail in the coffin for cliff's (and it appears your) fantasy. Learn to live with it. There is not a 3+ inch fold in Croft! No amount of posts that you make can change that Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Hagerman Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 Craig acknowledges that the Elm St. photos show JFK's jacket collar in a normal position just above the base of the neck. This has always been the reason I have always backed Cliff in his and Craigs on going debate Even Craig has to admit that Croft does NOT show the fold or bunching that Craig claims Betzner shows How in the world could JFKs tailor made clothes all of the sudden fold and bunch up in the 2 seconds (probably less then 2 seconds) between Croft and Betzner? I know Craig is smart enough to know how impossible that would be I have no idea why he still claims that its possible Thank you for your support, Dean. I appreciate it very much. I think Errol Morris should do a documentary on Craig Lamson and the effects of hard-right ideology on human cognition. Anytime Cliff And I can see Craig right now calling us all wingnuts who live on Fantasy Island together Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 There is not a 3+ inch fold in Croft! No amount of posts that you make can change that Craig You are correct, no amount of posts showing the 3"+ fold of fabric found in Betzner can ever change the minds of some ct's regardless of the fact that this fold exists. They simply can't overcome the the fantasy world they live in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 Anytime Cliff And I can see Craig right now calling us all wingnuts who live on Fantasy Island together Welcome home.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 Its called a FOLD cliff, Two folds. The shirt and the jacket. 3+" each. Entirely above the SBT inshoot at the base of the neck even though the jacket collar -- as you stipulate -- was in a normal position just above the base of the neck. The burden of proof is on Tink Thompson to show us how a half-foot wad of clothing fabric and JFK's jacket collar occupied the same physical space at the same time. Tink? Same physical space? Earth to cliff...Earth to cliff.... Attn Tink: please note the rhetoric. Don't hold your breath waiting for an actual argument and certainly you will never see any kind of replication involving custom made clothing, because, as Craig Lamson has discovered many times, he can't get custom made clothing to move more than a fraction of an inch. One fold. I can't prove one way or the other the condition of the shirt nor will I try. Of course neither can you. Attn Tink: The bullet hole in the jacket is 4.125" below the bottom of the collar. The bullet hole in the shirt is 4" below the bottom of the collar. You don't need anyone to draw you a diagram as to the significance of this, I'm sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 (edited) Tink, I'd like to share a couple of photos with you. Here's JFK in the motorcade. His jacket was bunched up. His jacket collar was pushed up above the top of his shirt collar. The jacket collar is clearly not in a normal position just above the base of the neck, as there is no shirt collar visible in the back. Here's JFK on a plane. My, what a big bulging shirt bunch almost entirely above the bottom of the shirt collar. As we can see in both these photos, Tink, when the shirt or jacket was bunched up significantly the bunch was well above the bottom of the shirt collar. So: since JFK's jacket collar was in a normal position just above the base of his neck on Elm St., how could multiple inches of shirt AND jacket fabric possibly bunch up entirely above the base of the neck? Edited December 1, 2011 by Cliff Varnell 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