Alterationists vs Non-Alternationists?

[James R Gordon]

The "magic bullet" theory is not even anatomically possible, as David W. Mantik, M.D., Ph.D., established long ago.

Jim

Although I absolutely agree with David Mantik, from what I can see, in the article you have a link to David has the entry point in the wrong place.

Both Charles Carrico and Malcolm Perry stated that the entry point was right of center. H6 P. 3 + H3 P. 370. It appears to me that David has it left of center

It does not change his outcome, the SBT is still anatomically impossible. But I felt I should point this error out.

Amendment:-

Having studied the MRI scan, I am probably being a bit finicky. It looks to me now that the entry point may be just right of centre. Neither Perry or Carrico stated exactly how far right the entry point was so David's point could well be where they saw the hole.

I was certainly wrong when I suggested it was left of centre. It certainly is not that.

James.

Edited August 8, 2012 by James R Gordon

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

This is very strange, Cliff. Just to make sure we are on the same page,

I am assuming that JFK was hit four times--once in the back from behind;

once in the throat from in front; and twice in the head, once from in back

and once from the right/front (the right temple shot with a frangible bullet

that created shock waves that blew his brains out his already weakened

cranium to the left/rear, where they impacted Officer Hargis so hard that

he initially believed that he himself had been shot). My assumptions are:

While I am aware that there is discussion of a possible additional shot to

the head around the left temple, I am not taking that for granted. What I

am asserting is that the bullet that hit JFK in the throat appears to have

hit bony structures and fragmented, part going downward into his right

lung, the other upward, which penetrated the tentorium that covers the

cerebellum, in the absence of which even the near-simultanous impact

of two shots (from the rear and from the right front) would not have been

sufficient to rupture the cerebellum, which was observed at Parkland.

That, of course, was the opinion of Robert Livingston, M.D., a world-

authority on the human brain and an expert on wound ballistics. So, as

I thought I had made clear, the bullet that entered the throat is the one

that fragmented, which means that JFK was killed by the causal inter-

action of (at least) three shots: the shot to the throat; the shot to the

back of his head; and the frangible bullet that entered the right temple.

I have also argued that it is most unlikely to have been "an ice bullet",

because it passed through the windshield en route to hitting his throat:

I doubt that an ice bullet could have penetrated the windshield without

fragmenting. Thomas Evan Robinson, the mortician who prepared the

body for burial, observed that JFK had several small puncture wounds

on his face (which he discovered because they leaked embalming fluid),

which David Mantik believes were caused by tiny shards of glass that

were effects of the bullet passing through the windshield. Yes, they had

planned for this shot to go through the windshield and had even moved

General Godfrey McHugh from his normal location between Greer and

Kellerman to the back of the motorcade to remove him as an obstacle.

What kind of argument is this, "No way", business? When we consider

all of the available evidence--the hole in the windshield, the wound to the

throat, the extruding cerebellum observed at Parkland--when we know

that the back wound was 5.5" below the collar and to the right of the

spinal column, I don't see where we have a lot of choices. And "ice

bullets" do not appear to have the properties that would have created

the sequence that Bob Livingston described. I think you make a mistake

by supposing the parameters of the assassination are constrained by

the limits of your imagination. The evidence supports this scenario.

Up to this point, Jim, excellent work.

It cannot have been an ice bullet, because it passed through the windshield en route to its target, as I have explained in a recent article in Veterans Today.

Unless you've offered something new that hasn't been presented in this forum, you haven't made the case for this.

Are you saying the plotters planned for the first shot to go thru the windshield? First-shot/kill-shot thru the windshield? No way...Unless they somehow got extra points for difficulty of shot...

Bob Livingston, M.D., a world authority on the human brain and an expert on wound ballistics, explained to me that it had to have fragmented by hitting bony structures, where part went down into the right lung and the other upward where it penetrated the skull and severed the tough membrane, the tentorium, covering the cerebellum.

This scenario assumes JFK was struck twice in the head, does not take into account the possibility he was struck 3 times, as Horne has speculated.

The neck x-ray shows a completely different set of wounds.

The physicians at Parkland, who were very competent and experienced dealing with gun shot wounds, reported that cerebellar as well as cerebral tissue was extruding from the wound at the back of his head, which could not have occurred had the tentorium not been ruptured--even from the near simultaneous impact of two shots (from the back and the right/front).

And what if there were 3 shots, one of which ruptured the tentorium?

Edited August 9, 2012 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

James,

You mean that, in relation to David's CAT scan, the exit for the "magic bullet"

(entry for the throat wound) should be slightly the opposite side of the trachea?

Thanks for mentioning this. David is here in Madison at present and I will be

sure to bring it up with him. We both appreciate such constructive criticism.

Jim

[Cliff Varnell]

I'm in burgundy

This is very strange, Cliff. Just to make sure we are on the same page,

I am assuming that JFK was hit four times--once in the back from behind;

once in the throat from in front; and twice in the head, once from in back

and once from the right/front (the right temple shot with a frangible bullet

that created shock waves that blew his brains out his already weakened

cranium to the left/rear, where they impacted Officer Hargis so hard that

he initially believed that he himself had been shot). My assumptions are:

While I am aware that there is discussion of a possible additional shot to

the head around the left temple, I am not taking that for granted. What I

am asserting is that the bullet that hit JFK in the throat appears to have

hit bony structures and fragmented, part going downward into his right

lung, the other upward, which penetrated the tentorium that covers the

cerebellum, in the absence of which even the near-simultanous impact

of two shots (from the rear and from the right front) would not have been

sufficient to rupture the cerebellum, which was observed at Parkland.

Jim, you can't assume that JFK was hit only twice in the head.

We don't know, we can't know, how many times he was struck in the head. Your throat wound scenario is based on this 2-head-hit scenario, and it simply is not a fact. It's a thinly supported theory.

There is no evidence that the throat shot struck a bony structure other than the hairline fracture of the right T1 transverse process, as seen on the neck x-ray. That's not going to cause a bullet to fragment.

The trajectory of the air-pocket overlaying the right C7 and T1 transverse processes points directly to the throat entrance wound, at least in this model.

That, of course, was the opinion of Robert Livingston, M.D., a world-

authority on the human brain and an expert on wound ballistics. So, as

I thought I had made clear,

What you made clear is that you are basing this scenario on assumptions.

the bullet that entered the throat is the one that fragmented,

Pure conjecture.

which means that JFK was killed by the causal inter-

action of (at least) three shots: the shot to the throat; the shot to the

back of his head; and the frangible bullet that entered the right temple.

No, Jim, it doesn't "mean" anything certain at all. You've turned your assumptions into certainties with a mere rhetorical turn.

I have also argued that it is most unlikely to have been "an ice bullet",

because it passed through the windshield en route to hitting his throat:

More conjecture. Your shooting scenario is a first-shot/kill-shot plan, right? One and done, best case. Correct?

So you posit an assassination plot where the first shot is going to go thru the windshield. First shot kill-shot thru the windshield?

No way.

I doubt that an ice bullet could have penetrated the windshield without

fragmenting.

Okay. Maybe there was a double blood soluble volley -- one struck JFK in the thoat and the other one -- fired by a nervous shooter -- penetrated the windshield and fragmented completely. I can buy the notion that a nervous shooter hit the windshield -- it could have happened after the throat shot and before Altgens 6.

But I can't buy the idea that the plotters planned to hit the windshield, or that we can say *anything* with certainty.

The blood-soluble Flechette scenario -- suggested by the autopsists themselves -- reconciles more points of evidence.

Edited August 9, 2012 by Cliff Varnell

[Cliff Varnell]

But I can't buy the idea that the plotters planned to hit the windshield, or that we can say *anything* with certainty.

Other than the throat shot was an entrance, of course. The two root facts of the case -- JFK was hit in the back at T3 and was hit in the throat from the front. Those are certainties.

Edited August 9, 2012 by Cliff Varnell

[James R Gordon]

James,

You mean that, in relation to David's CAT scan, the exit for the "magic bullet"

(entry for the throat wound) should be slightly the opposite side of the trachea?

Jim

Jim

David’s idea of using an MRI scan gave me ideas. In my amendment to that post I accepted David’s position. All Perry and Carrico said was that it was slightly right of center. We don’t know how much and therefore David’s position is fine.

Taking the lead from David to use a scan I have also modeled the SBT over an MRI scan. The only points I have not dealt with are:-

a) The damage to the Right Strap Muscle

Nor have I included the real exit point through the throat, which had to be the rear of the trachea. You will find that in my article at the JFK Assassination Forum in the articles section. The article being “The demise of the SBT” You will see there my arguments for the bullet having to exit through the back of the trachea. As far as the SBT goes, that means that the bullet has to enter the trachea through the rear of the trachea. An utter impossibility.

See image below:-

Unfortunately there is a direct line from the position (not taking into account level) of the back wound to the throat exit. And the level is important. The entry not to damage the lung has to be above Costa IR. Actually at the level, not position, that Humes placed it in CE 385. The correct level changes a great deal. So the direct line is a little misleading by suggesting there is a direct path from back to throat.

Also the line does pass over the Apex of the lung, which was bruised.

But there the good news stops for the supporters of the SBT.

a) In order for the bullet to exit through the trachea, as is documented it did, it would have to enter the trachea as indicated. Both Perry, Carrico and Humes are on record stating there was no laceration there. All have stated that the RHS of the trachea was bruised.

The bullet passes so close to the Subclavian artery it would have to be damaged. In addition the bullet is also very close to the Common Carotid artery. Humes is on record saying that no arteries were damaged.

c) The Bullet’s exit trajectory would be left rather than right. There is no way for the bullet to continue on its path to John Connally from this exit trajectory.

Finally, a thank you to David Mantik. I had not thought of this method to illustrate the SBT.

James

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

My replies follow Cliff's comments. I have put them in italics. My posts are being withheld from publication for many hours because I am on "moderation". There appears to be nothing I can do about this. But it means that my posts are not being allowed to be part of the discussion as it develops. That is not right. I request I be taken off "moderation".

I'm in burgundy

This is very strange, Cliff. Just to make sure we are on the same page,

I am assuming that JFK was hit four times--once in the back from behind;

once in the throat from in front; and twice in the head, once from in back

and once from the right/front (the right temple shot with a frangible bullet

that created shock waves that blew his brains out his already weakened

cranium to the left/rear, where they impacted Officer Hargis so hard that

he initially believed that he himself had been shot). My assumptions are:

While I am aware that there is discussion of a possible additional shot to

the head around the left temple, I am not taking that for granted. What I

am asserting is that the bullet that hit JFK in the throat appears to have

hit bony structures and fragmented, part going downward into his right

lung, the other upward, which penetrated the tentorium that covers the

cerebellum, in the absence of which even the near-simultanous impact

of two shots (from the rear and from the right front) would not have been

sufficient to rupture the cerebellum, which was observed at Parkland.

Jim, you can't assume that JFK was hit only twice in the head.

Already in ASSASSINATION SCIENCE (1998), David Mantik had adduced proof of a second shot to the head; and in MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA (2000), he proves (based on beveling and the proper placement of the Harper fragment) that there was shot from behind around the EOP. Those two shots are well-established. I know that Doug and others believe there may have been a thrid shot to the head, but I am not assuming that.

We don't know, we can't know, how many times he was struck in the head. Your throat wound scenario is based on this 2-head-hit scenario, and it simply is not a fact. It's a thinly supported theory.

Well, we know he was hit twice in the head: once in the back of the head around the EOP and once in the

right/temple from the right/front. Charles Crenshaw even observed the entry at the right/temple, describing

it during a television interview. The blow-out at the back of the head resulted as I have described in my post.

There is no evidence that the throat shot struck a bony structure other than the hairline fracture of the right T1 transverse process, as seen on the neck x-ray. That's not going to cause a bullet to fragment.

None of the X-rays is an original. The only one that shows something in this vicinity is in MORTAL ERROR, but to the best of my knowledge, its authenticity has never been estalbished. I can ask David Mantik about it. What we know is that physician after physician reported cerebellar as well as cerebral tissue extruding from the wound.

The trajectory of the air-pocket overlaying the right C7 and T1 transverse processes points directly to the throat entrance wound, at least in this model.

Both the wound to the throat and the entry wound to his head were widely reported on radio and television that day. You should watch the "See it Now" rebroadcasts with Chet Huntley and Frank McGee. The report that he had died from a bullet right through the head that entered at the right temple was attributed to Admiral Burkely.

That, of course, was the opinion of Robert Livingston, M.D., a world-

authority on the human brain and an expert on wound ballistics. So,

as I thought I had made clear,

What you made clear is that you are basing this scenario on assumptions.

From earlier remarks of yours, it was apparent to me that you had never read Doug Weldon's chapter on the limousine in MURDER IN DEALY PLAZA (2000). And from your comments here, I further infer that you are unfamiliar with David's studies of the X-rays and the medical evidence. You are mistaking your ignorance of the evidence for its non-existence.

the bullet that entered the throat is the one that fragmented,

Pure conjecture.

This is a perfect example of your proclivity to assume that you know all there is to know. Cerebellum was extruding from the wound at Parkland. That cannot have been the case unless the tentorium had been ruptured. The tentorium would not have been ruptured by the EOP or right temple shots. I have explained who Bob was and his analysis of the effects.

which means that JFK was killed by the causal inter-

action of (at least) three shots: the shot to the throat; the shot to the

back of his head; and the frangible bullet that entered the right temple.

No, Jim, it doesn't "mean" anything certain at all. You've turned your assumptions into certainties with a mere rhetorical turn.

There is nothing "rhetorical" about anything I have said. The chain of reaoning is impeccable. The extruding cerebellum meant that the tentorim had to have been ruptured. The only way that could have been done--and I doubt that a left/temple shot would matter--is if the throat wound bullet had fragmented and part of it deflected upward to sever the tentorium, whiich Bob Livingston explained.

I have also argued that it is most unlikely to have been "an ice bullet",

because it passed through the windshield en route to hitting his throat:

More conjecture. Your shooting scenario is a first-shot/kill-shot plan, right? One and done, best case. Correct?

This is embarrassing. I am not positing anything. I am discussing the evidence. Who knows which shot was going to take him out? He was shot in the back from the Country Records Building, the wound I discuss in "Reasoning about Assassinations". The throat shot was fired nearly simultaneously and passed through the windshield, which caused small shards of glass to hit JFK in the face.

So you posit an assassination plot where the first shot is going to go thru the windshield. First shot kill-shot thru the windshield?

No way.

There's that "no way" business again. You seem to think that your imagination defines how it was done. You do not appear to be aware of the exensive research on these questions pubished in ASSASSINATIN SCIENCE and MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA. They even moved JFK's military aide to remove an obstacle to hitting JFK. You are not showing I am wrong but revealing you have not done your homework.

I doubt that an ice bullet could have penetrated the windshield without fragmenting.

Okay. Maybe there was a double blood soluble volley -- one struck JFK in the thoat and the other one -- fired by a nervous shooter -- penetrated the windshield and fragmented completely. I can buy the notion that a nervous shooter hit the windshield -- it could have happened after the throat shot and before Altgens 6.

You seem to be willing to make stuff up as you go along. You fault the best research by the most highly qualified students of these aspects of the case--which do do not even appear to have read--and offer silly conjectures. There were no "nervous shooters". The shooters were all extremely competent and you do not even appear to have read Doug Weldon's classic study of the windshield shot and how it was done.

But I can't buy the idea that the plotters planned to hit the windshield, or that we can say *anything* with certainty.

They did not simply plan to hit the windshield. The obtained multiple windshields, as Bob observed in ASSASSINATION SCIENCE, and the throat shot was an integral part of the shooting sequence. No one was supposed to be able to figure it out, but Doug did. Strictly speaking, no empirical knowledge can be known with certainty, but these claims have been established beyond a reasonable doubt.

The blood-soluble Flechette scenario -- suggested by the autopsists themselves -- reconciles more points of evidence.

That is simply false. It does not explain why McHugh was moved. It does not explain the hole in the windshield. It does not explain the extruding cerebellum. It does not explain the small shrapnel wounds in the face. There are no reasonable alternatives. Your "ice bullet" and "blood soluble Flechette" are rhetorical fantasies for which there is no evidence. You need to study the sources I have cited.

Edited August 10, 2012 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

But I can't buy the idea that the plotters planned to hit the windshield, or that we can say *anything* with certainty.

Other than the throat shot was an entrance, of course. The two root facts of the case -- JFK was hit in the back at T3 and was hit in the throat from the front. Those are certainties.

Do you understand inference to the best explanation? The measure of evidential support that applies here is that of maximum likelihood, where the likelihood of an hypothesis h given evidence e is equal to the probability of e if h were true. The hypothesis with the highest likelihood is the best supported and, when the evidence has "settled down", is acceptable in the tenative and fallible fashion of science.

Which means that new evidence or new alternatives may require us to revised our conclusions, rejecting some previoulsy accepted and accepting others previously rejected. When you consider the additional evidence I have identified, I would like to anticipate that you would chanage your mind. That entails taking into account evidence of the kinds I have cited, with which you appear to be completely unfamiliar.

I discuss inference to the best explanation many places, but most accessibly in "Thinking about 'Conspiracy Theories': 9/11 and JFK", which is archived at http://www.scholarsf...erexpandedx.htm The first few sections explain the principle. Scientific reasoning must be based upon all the available relevant evidence, which is a requirement that you have failed to satisfy in your analysis of the throat wound.

Edited August 10, 2012 by James H. Fetzer

[Mike Rago]

The SBT(Single Bullet Theory) has two main components.

The first component is that the bullet passed through the body of JFK by entering his back and exiting his throat.

The second component is that the bullet , after leaving JFK's body then struck Gov. Connally.

That the first part of this theory is true is beyond dispute for the reasonable mind and is overwhelmingly supported and implied by the evidence...two wounds were found in the presidents body but no bullets and no obvious exits. The reasonable mind does not postulate the existence of two disappearing projectiles in an attempt to obey the evidence.

If you do not believe the first component of the SBT is true then you have to come up with a reasonable alternative to explain why the doctors found two wounds, no bullets and no exits. Otherwise, you might as well be supporting a theory that says Greer killed JFK because that is the level of "reasonableness" that the alternative theory commands.

I assure you that two disappearing bullets did not kill the man sitting on the back of this motorcycle.

http://nation.foxnew...n-single-bullet

Accepting the first component as true is not , in any way , a verification of the lone gunman theory. There is plenty of other evidence indicating the existence of multiple assassins. In the end it does more good than harm to accept it.

Please try to keep your responses short.

Edited August 9, 2012 by Mike Rago

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Mike seems oblivious of the mountain of evidence that contradicts

his position. I have cited "Reasoning about Assassinations", which

he can access on-line. If he thinks I have something wrong, then

he can tell us why. Reiterating a false position does not make it true.

These are from "Dealey Plaza Revisited: What happened to JFK?",

http://www.und.edu/org/jfkconference/UNDchapter30.pdf for those

who may be unfamiliar with the location of the cerebellum and the

multiple, consistent reports of extruding cerebellum from Parkland:

[Cliff Varnell]

The SBT(Single Bullet Theory) has two main components.

The first component is that the bullet passed through the body of JFK by entering his back and exiting his throat.

Wrong.

The bullet had to enter the back of the neck. Anywhere on JFK's back would have been below the throat wound, making the trajectory untenable.

Dude, you should do some homework before you post. Seriously...

Edited August 9, 2012 by Cliff Varnell

[Mike Rago]

Wrong.

The bullet had to enter the back of the neck. Anywhere on JFK's back would have been below the throat wound, making the trajectory untenable.

Dude, you should do some homework before you post. Seriously...

If it is wrong then where did the two bullets go?

Edited August 9, 2012 by Mike Rago

[Cliff Varnell]

Wrong.

The bullet had to enter the back of the neck. Anywhere on JFK's back would have been below the throat wound, making the trajectory untenable.

Dude, you should do some homework before you post. Seriously...

If it is wrong then where did the two bullets go?

This has been answered in considerable detail, o Honest Broker.

[Mike Rago]

You cannot answer that question Cliff.

If you were in court and the opposing attorney asked you that simple question and you responded that they were "ice" bullets and simply disappeared, you would lose. Its a losing argument.

The first component of the SBT is a losing argument if you deny it , unless you can come up with a reasonable explanation as to what happened to the bullets. And after you lose that one they will not listen to anything else you have to say.

Edited August 9, 2012 by Mike Rago

[Greg Burnham]

Autopsy Report:

The other missile entered the right superior posterior thorax above

the scapula and traversed the soft tissues of the supra-scapular and

the supra-clavicular portions of the base of the right side of the neck.

This missile produced contusions of the right apical parietal pleura

and of the apical portion of the right upper lobe of the lung. The

missile contused the strap muscles of the right side of the neck,

damaged the trachea and made its exit through the anterior surface of

the neck. As far as can be ascertained this missile struck no bony

structures in its path through the body.

----

Their diagram of this is:

Note the necessity for them to tilt JFK's head forward in order to allow a bullet from BEHIND to

enter where it entered in his back AND then to exit his throat. Remember, this bullet caused NO

broken bones and didn't appear to get deflected by any bone. So, his head must be forward in

order to accommodate their explanation. However, from such an angle of trajectory how is it

remotely possible for said bullet to then wound Governor Connally since Connally was not lying

on the floor at JFK's feet when he was shot?