Jump to content
The Education Forum

Summary of Results from Oswald's Paraffin Tests


Recommended Posts

From a letter to attorney James Lesar from Bertram H. Schur of the AEC:

The AEC's Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) did provide technical support to the FBI in the performance of neutron activation analyses on the paraffin casts from the right hand, the left hand, and the right cheek of Lee Harvey Oswald. The results of these analyses are discussed in the testimony of John F. Gallagher set forth in "Hearings Before the Commission..." NEITHER AEC NOR ORNL PREPARED ANY REPORT ON THE RESULTS OF THESE ANALYSES.

[emphasis above is mine]

ORNL provided *technical support* only??? Did the FBI perform the ACTUAL test themselves?

The ONLY report on these test results was written by the FBI! This indicates that the "Inconclusive" result on the cheek AND hands was made by the FBI - the very people who did NOT want the tests performed at all. Golly gee whiz, I wonder why not...

This is all explained and documented in Casts of Contention:

http://www.patspeer.com/chapter4e%3Acastsofcontention

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 152
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

From a letter to attorney James Lesar from Bertram H. Schur of the AEC:

The AEC's Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) did provide technical support to the FBI in the performance of neutron activation analyses on the paraffin casts from the right hand, the left hand, and the right cheek of Lee Harvey Oswald. The results of these analyses are discussed in the testimony of John F. Gallagher set forth in "Hearings Before the Commission..." NEITHER AEC NOR ORNL PREPARED ANY REPORT ON THE RESULTS OF THESE ANALYSES.

[emphasis above is mine]

ORNL provided *technical support* only??? Did the FBI perform the ACTUAL test themselves?

The ONLY report on these test results was written by the FBI! This indicates that the "Inconclusive" result on the cheek AND hands was made by the FBI - the very people who did NOT want the tests performed at all. Golly gee whiz, I wonder why not...

This is all explained and documented in Casts of Contention:

http://www.patspeer.com/chapter4e%3Acastsofcontention

Yes, Pat, but as I've already stated repeatedly your dissertation for example scatters information throughout its contents. I've asked you repeatedly to simply POST or post a LINK to the actual documents, but you haven't even done me the courtesy of refusing. Instead you hand us your interpretation of the facts. I've experienced enough of your interpretations to be highly suspicious of them.

And no, it is not "all explained."

Here are a few more questions for you to ignore:

1. In whose employ was V. Guinn when he produced the report you obtained?

2. The section in your linked doc: Oswald's Right Hand Cast

"As the Ba/Sb ratio on both of Oswald's hand casts is nowhere near the ratio for the control casts once washed, and is much more in line with the unwashed casts, it seems more than likely the casts weren't actually washed."

What *precisely* is the "washing" process you refer to, who supposedly did it, but in your opinion "more than likely" didn't perform the washing? And, yes I know what the washing process is that you probably refer to, but I don't want to assume.

3. In the section "The Left Hand Tests" you include a black-bordered box which states:

LHO Left Hand cast:

Back Barium 0.95mg

Palm Barium 2.01mg

Why is there more than twice as much Ba present on the palm than on the back?

4. In this same box, why do you include LHO's LEFT hand and the RIGHT HAND TESTS?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you think the SS agents turned because they heard a bullet whiz by? What does it sound like to have a high-speed bullet pass by?

I had a friend who served in a construction battalion during WWII in the Pacific. He told me that one day he was welding on the blade of a bulldozer, and because of the noise of the engine-driven welder, he couldn't hear much else. But he thought that he was working near a nest of bees...until one of his buddies had him get behind the dozer blade because those weren't bees, those were bullets from a sniper. [The sniper was eliminated and my friend wasn't wounded.] So the sound of a high-speed bullet at close range, when you can't hear the muzzle blast, apparently is much like the sound of a high-speed bee or wasp at close range.

The SS agents would have heard the buzz sound slightly before the pop of breaking the sound barrier, right? Because the bullet would have broken the sound barrier as it exited the rifle's barrel, and it would have taken on the order of tenth of a second for that sound to arrive. (Speed of sound is 1125 ft/s.)

So they would have heard a buzz-pop sound, I guess. Assuming they indeed did hear buzz sound.

BTW, if they did hear the buzz sound, that would support the believe of people like me that the first shot that hit Kennedy was the one to his back.

A pertinent question would be, were the two SS agents riding directly behind JFK (who both turned their heads back) more alarmed than the spectators because they heard the buzz? Or were they more alarmed because of their training and their sense of responsibility? Maybe one way to answer that is to see if other SS agents who would have herd the pop but not the buzz also turned their heads. If not, this would support the notion the the SS agents riding behind JFK did indeed hear the buzz and were responding to it, not the pop. And this would indicate that the shot was from behind... to JFK's back, not his neck.

Edited by Sandy Larsen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you think the SS agents turned because they heard a bullet whiz by? What does it sound like to have a high-speed bullet pass by?

I had a friend who served in a construction battalion during WWII in the Pacific. He told me that one day he was welding on the blade of a bulldozer, and because of the noise of the engine-driven welder, he couldn't hear much else. But he thought that he was working near a nest of bees...until one of his buddies had him get behind the dozer blade because those weren't bees, those were bullets from a sniper. [The sniper was eliminated and my friend wasn't wounded.] So the sound of a high-speed bullet at close range, when you can't hear the muzzle blast, apparently is much like the sound of a high-speed bee or wasp at close range.

The SS agents would have heard the buzz sound slightly before the pop of breaking the sound barrier, right? Because the bullet would have broken the sound barrier as it exited the rifle's barrel, and it would have taken on the order of tenth of a second for that sound to arrive. (Speed of sound is 1125 ft/s.)

So they would have heard a buzz-pop sound, I guess. Assuming they indeed did hear buzz sound.

BTW, if they did hear the buzz sound, that would support the believe of people like me that the first shot that hit Kennedy was the one to his back.

A pertinent question would be, were the two SS agents riding directly behind JFK (who both turned their heads back) more alarmed than the spectators because they heard the buzz? Or were they more alarmed because of their training and their sense of responsibility? Maybe one way to answer that is to see if other SS agents who would have herd the pop but not the buzz also turned their heads. If not, this would support the notion the the SS agents riding behind JFK did indeed hear the buzz and were responding to it, not the pop. And this would indicate that the shot was from behind... to JFK's back, not his neck.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The bullet breaks the sound barrier when it leaves the muzzle of the rifle, but continues to break the sound barrier until it travels far enough that its velocity drops below the speed of sound. In the case of the 6.5mm Carcano M91/38, with a muzzle velocity of roughly 2200 fps, this would be several hundred yards from the muzzle.

Therefore, the "crack" of the bullet breaking the sound barrier is not heard only at the muzzle of a suppressed rifle, it is heard all along the path of the bullet until, of course, it drops below the speed of sound. This is why the only way for a sniper to truly silence a high powered rifle is to be far enough away from his victim that, by the time the bullet reaches the victim, it is travelling at subsonic speeds and completely silent, except for the sound of the bullet striking flesh.

This is the reason for silencing a high powered rifle in the first place. Not only does it silence the muzzle blast, masking the location of the shooter, it also spreads confusion amongst the witnesses, as each witness will hear the "crack" in a different location as the bullet goes by him. Witnesses further down the street, such as James Altgens, would not have heard the first silenced shot at all, as he was nowhere near the path of the bullet (assuming the first shot hit JFK in the back), and that is why he testified the first shot he heard was at the moment he took the Altgens 6 photo. This photo was taken at the same time frame z255 of the Zapruder film was exposed.

See how they did it now, and how they were able to spread confusion, and how they were able to make all those shots appear to be only three shots?

In this video, you can hear the sonic boom or "crack" over several seconds as the sound waves travel back to the shooter. Of course, the suppressor has completely eliminated the muzzle blast of this rifle.

Edited by Robert Prudhomme
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you think the SS agents turned because they heard a bullet whiz by? What does it sound like to have a high-speed bullet pass by?

I had a friend who served in a construction battalion during WWII in the Pacific. He told me that one day he was welding on the blade of a bulldozer, and because of the noise of the engine-driven welder, he couldn't hear much else. But he thought that he was working near a nest of bees...until one of his buddies had him get behind the dozer blade because those weren't bees, those were bullets from a sniper. [The sniper was eliminated and my friend wasn't wounded.] So the sound of a high-speed bullet at close range, when you can't hear the muzzle blast, apparently is much like the sound of a high-speed bee or wasp at close range.

Considering your friend would have made a large target and that he was not hit by any bullets, and that the Arisaka rifle was very accurate, it is possible the sniper shooting at him was several hundred yards away from your friend. At this range, the bullets would be travelling at less than the speed of sound, and no longer making a small sonic boom or "crack" as they passed by. In fact, the "buzzing" noise he described could even be the sound a bullet makes when it is tumbling after travelling so far and losing its gyroscopic stability.

Edited by Robert Prudhomme
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert,

Your understanding of breaking the sound barrier is completely different from mine.

We have a nearby air base, and in the 1960s they were experimenting with breaking the sound barrier. We watched as the aircraft increased speed. Right when they passed the speed of sound, we'd here a big boom. (Well, the boom was delayed due to sound traveling fairly slowly.) After that there were no more booms... they were traveling comfortably at some supersonic speed.

I wonder if another boom (or other sound) occurs when the aircraft drops back down below the speed of sound.

Edited by Sandy Larsen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand what you are saying but, it is a fact that a truly silent shot from a suppressed rifle must be at a distance (often several hundred yards) at which the bullet is no longer travelling at supersonic speeds. This is, on one hand, the downfall of suppressing a high powered rifle and, on the other hand, the reason for suppressing a high powered rifle. If the bullet only made the "crack" as it was leaving the suppressed rifle, it would not be hard to locate.

The video I posted clearly demonstrates the "crack" from the bullet breaking the sound barrier, and the fact you can hear it for several seconds tells me you are hearing the outlying "cracks" as they reach the shooter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Supersonic Crack

Any projectile moving through the air at a velocity greater than the speed of sound (332 to 340 m/s or 1,089 to 1,114 fps in dry, 18 C or 65 degree F air, depending on who one listens to) will create a supersonic crack. Temperature, humidity and atmospheric pressure variations play a role in raising or lowering the speed of sound by a small percentage. In a firearm which lacks a substantial muzzle report (being fired over an open field) the sound resembles the loud tearing of a bed sheet.

Two sounds are actually created, one from the front of the bullet, and one from the rear. Near trees and buildings the sound waves come back as a distinct crack or pop each time the speeding bullet passes some object with a vertical, reflective surface. Once the muzzle report has been diminished the supersonic boom becomes dominant. Curiously, the sounds will now appear to come from the target area, rather than the rifleman's position. Sound moves through our atmosphere at a relatively fixed rate. A sound wave will typically strike one ear a bit before the other.

The human brain is capable of detecting the difference in time between sound impacting one ear and then the other in an increment of as little as one/six-millionth of a second. With time and practice we soon learn to use this ability to pinpoint the source of a sound very accurately. Because a suppressed muzzle report is relatively quiet, the uninitiated will automatically home in on the loudest sound, which in this case is a sonic boom reflecting from the target area. The intense, sharp sound of the bullet's passage will seem much louder than the muzzle report to someone close to the flight path. Indeed, a rapidly moving .308 bullet will sound louder than a .22 LR pistol, to someone who is positioned a few feet from its flight path.

Smaller diameter bullets make less noise than larger diameter bullets. Supersonic is supersonic. A bullet traveling 366 m/s or 1,200 fps will make about the same noise as one traveling 1220 m/s or 4,000 fps. Projectiles that are .308 inch in diameter will be somewhat louder than .223 bullets. There is no technology which can remove the sound of a supersonic projectile, no matter what claims are made to the contrary.

http://www.silencerresearch.com/sound_suppressors_on_high_powered_rifles.htm

Do you see now how a suppressed shot from the Dal-Tex Building could sound like it originated from the Triple Underpass?

Edited by Robert Prudhomme
Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to the Wikipedia article on sonic booms, "It is a common misconception that only one boom is generated during the subsonic to supersonic transition, rather, the boom is continuous along the boom carpet for the entire supersonic flight."

It's no wonder that people believe there is only one boom. It's because that is all they hear, depending upon certain factors. Play the following video to hear a sonic boom:

F-18 Sonic Boom

See... one boom.

If the "boom" is continuous, it's hard to understand why an observer wouldn't hear a continuous sound. But apparently the boom is focused in a way that if two people are separated by some distance and the jet travels along a line intersecting the two, the person nearest the jet will hear a boom first, and the second person will hear a different boom sound later. And yet neither will hear the boom that the other heard. It's as though the boom is focused like a laser beam.

Having given this some thought, I believe that the boom sound is indeed focused. But the focus doesn't have the shape of a line, as is the case with a laser beam. It has the shape of a disc whose surface is perpendicular to the direction the jet is traveling. A disc like this:

800px-FA-18_Hornet_breaking_sound_barrie

Except that the disc extends out a great distance. (BTW, the above is an actual photograph of an F-18 traveling within the sound barrier. This photo is from the Wikipedia article on the sound barrier.)

A person will hear the boom only when the disc passes over him. That is why the two people hear different booms, and not the boom heard by the other.

(The description above is how I believe sonic booms work. I'm pretty sure I'm right. If so, I wish the Wikipedia's sonic boom article would have explained it in such an easy-to-understand manner.)

Now, as for how a person could possibly hear multiple sonic booms, I think the answer lies in reflections. The jet passes overhead and you hear your (first) sonic boom. Later sonic booms could be heard if they are reflected off hard objects back to the person. Robert's article seems to corroborate this. Quoting from it:

"Near trees and buildings the sound waves come back as a distinct crack or pop each time the speeding bullet passes some object with a vertical, reflective surface."

A sentence shortly following that presents a mystery:

"Curiously, the sounds will now appear to come from the target area, rather than the rifleman's position."

Well, if my description of sonic boom behavior above is correct, then this may be curious but it is not without explanation. The bullet, after all, is traveling toward the target. So after you hear your initial boom/crack as the bullet flies past you, any cracks you hear after that will be reflections from locations largely between you and the target. (Or, more accurately, between where the bullet was when you first heard it's sonic boom, and the target.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You may know this from previous posts, but I didn't see it. There are actually two booms and both are audible. The first boom occurs as the air is compressed by the passage of an object and accelerated to the speed of sound, and the second boom occurs as that same air decelerates back down to below the speed of sound. The "boom carpet" is actually cone-shaped and is generated continuously. The booms of course propagate through the atmosphere at the speed of sound, and are heard when the pressure wave reaches the observer. An observer closer to the aircraft will hear the booms before an observer that is further away.

What you are hearing is called an "N"-wave. The vertical line in the "N" represents the airflow increasing to supersonic speed, the first boom occurring at the peak. The downward angular line represents the air slowing toward Mach 1, and the second boom occurs at the lowest point of the "N" and the final line represents the air slowing down until it returns to zero speed.

If you REALLY want to understand this phenomenon, especially sound reflections off of buildings and terrain, read Donald Thomas' book. He definitely knows he's talking about when it comes to the theoretical aspects of acoustics. The company that performed the study hold the patent on a device that has been used by the military for decades. It is used to indicate the relative position of gunfire. It uses the identical equations used to calculate the sounds heard on the dictabelt recordings of the assassination. The device was used to detect and eliminate snipers throughout the Iraq War, and it DOES work.

There are a number of issues with the acoustic analysis of the police dictabelt, so it may or may not be definitive as far as shooter locations.

However, there are two factors that are difficult to dismiss.

1. as mentioned above, in practical use, this process DOES locate the source of gunfire based upon its sound waves

2. As determined by the acoustic analysis, the intervals between the "shots" are such a good match to what is believed the correct time interval between shots that it is difficult to completely dismiss these "shots" as random noise.

IF an actual audio recording of the shots fired in DP exists, then the direction of the shots could be determined because "acoustic analysis" does work 'in the field' as mentioned above.

There WAS a project that intended to make a digital recording of the "original" dictabelt. It apparently has died due to an inability to receive adequate funding.

Edited by Tom Neal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you see now how a suppressed shot from the Dal-Tex Building could sound like it originated from the Triple Underpass?

Yes, I do.

I believe this is why so many of the witnesses stated the shots they heard were either from the TSBD or from down near the rail yard. When you think of it, it was a brilliantly executed plan that allowed for the escape of a shooter from the Dal-Tex Building.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you see now how a suppressed shot from the Dal-Tex Building could sound like it originated from the Triple Underpass?

Yes, I do.

I believe this is why so many of the witnesses stated the shots they heard were either from the TSBD or from down near the rail yard. When you think of it, it was a brilliantly executed plan that allowed for the escape of a shooter from the Dal-Tex Building.

Interesting. Do you have any other evidence that points to the use of the Dal-Tex building by a sniper?

I'll probably be booed for saying this, but I haven't discounted the possibility of James Files being one of the snipers. (I should note that I haven't yet put much time into studying Files' story.) His own involvement (if there was one) might contradict what your saying. But what he says about Charles Roselli shooting from the Dal-Tex building supports it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For Sandy and Bob,

LvR%20Hand%20LHO-2_zpsbgu9u5yc.jpg

Can you make any sense out of this table from Mr. Spear? There's no attribution to anyone else, so he must have made it himself.

Looking at the Ba levels on LHO's left hand (column 3):

Back+Palm+Thumb=3.15 Inside Total: This is mathematically correct. However, it includes the "Back" of the hand as part of the "Inside Total" as well as the thumb.

Row 5 subtracts the palm which=1.14: This is mathematically correct. If you exclude the "palm" then you are calculating the "outside" of the hand. Yet this value includes the same "thumb" value used for the "inside" total.

What does "Outside Surface=.28" refer to when the "back" and "thumb" are ALREADY included?

Doesn't "Inside" refer to the inside of the hand (palm and inside of the fingers), and "Outside" to the back (back of hand and back side of fingers) of the hand?

Edited by Tom Neal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you see now how a suppressed shot from the Dal-Tex Building could sound like it originated from the Triple Underpass?

Yes, I do.

I believe this is why so many of the witnesses stated the shots they heard were either from the TSBD or from down near the rail yard. When you think of it, it was a brilliantly executed plan that allowed for the escape of a shooter from the Dal-Tex Building.

Interesting. Do you have any other evidence that points to the use of the Dal-Tex building by a sniper?

I'll probably be booed for saying this, but I haven't discounted the possibility of James Files being one of the snipers. (I should note that I haven't yet put much time into studying Files' story.) His own involvement (if there was one) might contradict what your saying. But what he says about Charles Roselli shooting from the Dal-Tex building supports it.

Not really, except the Dal-Tex Building would make for a much better shot, with no trees in the way.

http://www.prayer-man.com/sniper-position-in-daltex-building-by-shell-hershorn/#

If there was any doubt as to the origin of the first suppressed shot, most witnesses would believe it came from above them or further down Elm St., as I believe was the intention. If the last shot was a frontal shot and it was unsuppressed, this would likely convince the witnesses that all of the shots had come from further down Elm St.

Why the conspirators would do this, if the plan was to frame a shooter on the 6th floor, is unfathomable in the context of normal thinking, just as the final shot from the front was unfathomable, as it clearly showed shooters in different locations. I believe the original plan was either nothing like the lone nut story, or the shooter that fired the final shot was, as Files claimed, only there as a last resort if everyone else missed.

Edited by Robert Prudhomme
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...