Sandy Larsen Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 22 minutes ago, Robin Unger said: BE2 Crop Colorized. Looking down into the skull cavity it appears to show the remaining brain left inside the skull. ? With colorization, a lot of what I thought was hair now looks like blood vessels. Like what we are seeing is the underside of scalp that normally interfaces with the skull. But there's not enough room for that folded-back scalp to be put back into place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrej Stancak Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said: This man ain't no Texan! If the video serves a useful purpose (like showing what a human head does when hit by a high powered rifle) I think the file should remain. Though there certainly should be a warning. Sandy: the man who was shot while the video was made had a family, maybe children and a wife, and certainly parents. You would need to go and ask them if they are happy to display in slow motion this man's shooting by a criminal organisation such as ISIS for the purpose of discussions among lay people. If the video is continued to be displayed, those forum members knowing but ignoring and not protesting this fact actually continue the spreading of ISIS crimes. The research ethics says that a researcher cannot have any advantage (e.g., in showing some novel findings) from unethical conduct. It is very unethical to display ISIS killings in slow motion for "educational purposes" as if this was an educational material. I have suggested Michael to find alternative ways to demonstrate his point. This could entail a visit to the university library and search through the medical forensics books which teach the doctors how different gunshots appear on the head. Michael could have a chance to go deeper into the problem and maybe the rest of community could benefit from his knowledge. I am familiar with dead bodies since I went through a one-year neuroanatomy course which included working with cadavers and detailed inspections, particularly of the brain. I also work with chronic pain patients and know what human suffering means. It is not about my personal sensitivity, it is about differentiating what is ethical and what is not. Michael: may I request again to remove the video or the section showing the ISIS execution of someone who was innocent in our eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 1 hour ago, Andrej Stancak said: Sandy: the man who was shot while the video was made had a family, maybe children and a wife, and certainly parents. You would need to go and ask them if they are happy to display in slow motion this man's shooting by a criminal organisation such as ISIS for the purpose of discussions among lay people. If the video is continued to be displayed, those forum members knowing but ignoring and not protesting this fact actually continue the spreading of ISIS crimes. The research ethics says that a researcher cannot have any advantage (e.g., in showing some novel findings) from unethical conduct. It is very unethical to display ISIS killings in slow motion for "educational purposes" as if this was an educational material. I have suggested Michael to find alternative ways to demonstrate his point. This could entail a visit to the university library and search through the medical forensics books which teach the doctors how different gunshots appear on the head. Michael could have a chance to go deeper into the problem and maybe the rest of community could benefit from his knowledge. I am familiar with dead bodies since I went through a one-year neuroanatomy course which included working with cadavers and detailed inspections, particularly of the brain. I also work with chronic pain patients and know what human suffering means. It is not about my personal sensitivity, it is about differentiating what is ethical and what is not. Michael: may I request again to remove the video or the section showing the ISIS execution of someone who was innocent in our eyes. Andrej, I respect your opinion. But my code of ethics don't lie with yours. If I were brutally executed and a film of it served some educational purpose, with little chance of it going viral, I would not be opposed to it being used that way. And I would feel the same way about a family member. (Not to imply they would feel that way too.) At least that way my brutal demise wouldn't have been entirely in vain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrej Stancak Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 35 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said: Andrej, I respect your opinion. But my code of ethics don't lie with yours. If I were brutally executed and a film of it served some educational purpose, with little chance of it going viral, I would not be opposed to it being used that way. And I would feel the same way about a family member. (Not to imply they would feel that way too.) At least that way my brutal demise wouldn't have been entirely in vain. Well, thanks for letting me know your opinion. I have checked the EF rules on this point, and they appear not cover this specific case. Time to ask the administrator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Mileto Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 (edited) 7 hours ago, Robin Unger said: Nova Cold Case JFK It looks like the skull cavity on the 3d Model skull is larger than the five-inch skull cavity required to show both the alleged cowlick entry wound and the alleged beveled exit in the frontal-parietal area. Is this a EOP version of the hypothetical frontal view of the skull photographs? Edited December 4, 2017 by Micah Mileto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted December 4, 2017 Author Share Posted December 4, 2017 Andrej I'll try to put warnings up from now on. Remember Kennedy and Oswald had families too. Sandy FWIW thanks for that. I'm only doing this for educational purposes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrej Stancak Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 47 minutes ago, Michael Walton said: Andrej I'll try to put warnings up from now on. Remember Kennedy and Oswald had families too. Sandy FWIW thanks for that. I'm only doing this for educational purposes. Thanks, Michael, for responding to my previous posts. Placing a warning would be all right if the distressing content would be the only issue. The further issues which the warnings do not alleviate are the protection of family members from displaying publicly the execution of their relative to which they did not have a chance to consent, and the fact that the video was recorded with an evil purpose by a criminal organisation, and by posting their video you say it does not matter to you. You are right that we wish to solve the murders of President Kennedy, Lee Oswald, and J.D. Tippitt. However, in the process of doing so, we cannot refer to materials such as this execution video. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 20 hours ago, Chris Davidson said: In other words, picture the top of JFK's head height, landing below his chin in this photo. The angle is not possible shooting over the bubbletop support from the triple underpass into JFK's head at 3.27ft above the ground in extant z313. A more likely location would be between the extended red lines with JFK plotted at z313. Just picture the guy standing up in the limo facing towards a shooter right before he get's shot in the right temple. Higher up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted December 4, 2017 Author Share Posted December 4, 2017 (edited) Wow never saw that. Very interesting view of bridge in relation to where car was at 313. Limo would have been right where that car is next to middle guy's neck tie. Edited December 4, 2017 by Michael Walton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 3 hours ago, Chris Davidson said: Higher up. Top: Costner's position viewed from the approx Elm street location. Bottom: Complete building. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted December 4, 2017 Author Share Posted December 4, 2017 6 hours ago, Micah Mileto said: It looks like the skull cavity on the 3d Model skull is larger than the five-inch skull cavity required to show both the alleged cowlick entry wound and the alleged beveled exit in the frontal-parietal area. Is this a EOP version of the hypothetical frontal view of the skull photographs? Micah, the open cranium photo is NOT the front of the head. Please go to Pat Speer's website and read and look and you'll find it is the rear right side of the head. That half-hole shape in it is a beveled out shoot. You can see below the same photo above combined with another autopsy photo to give you an approximation of what it looked like if you literally peeled back the scalp to see the massive hole. WARNING TO SENSITIVE VIEWERS - PLEASE DO NOT LOOK ANY FURTHER. VIEWER DISCRETION IS ADVISED!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Mileto Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 17 minutes ago, Michael Walton said: Micah, the open cranium photo is NOT the front of the head. Please go to Pat Speer's website and read and look and you'll find it is the rear right side of the head. That half-hole shape in it is a beveled out shoot. You can see below the same photo above combined with another autopsy photo to give you an approximation of what it looked like if you literally peeled back the scalp to see the massive hole. WARNING TO SENSITIVE VIEWERS - PLEASE DO NOT LOOK ANY FURTHER. VIEWER DISCRETION IS ADVISED!! That photo must be situated showing more of the top of the head, most likely with his chin resting on his chest. The uncropped photo shows the autopsy table underneith the presumed occipital area, rather than just his neck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted December 4, 2017 Author Share Posted December 4, 2017 6 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said: That photo must be situated showing more of the top of the head, most likely with his chin resting on his chest. The uncropped photo shows the autopsy table underneith the presumed occipital area, rather than just his neck. Yes. But to integrate it into the other photo, you do what's called cropping. Illustrators do this all the time. Otherwise, if you did not crop then it looks like two photos just thrown on top of each other. I thought you'd understand this but looks like I'm mistaken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Mileto Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 2 minutes ago, Michael Walton said: Yes. But to integrate it into the other photo, you do what's called cropping. Illustrators do this all the time. Otherwise, if you did not crop then it looks like two photos just thrown on top of each other. I thought you'd understand this but looks like I'm mistaken. The photo-composite posted above cannot be the true orientation of the skull photographs, because they do not show the back of the neck, just the autopsy table and a little formaldehyde jar. This doesn't mean it doesn't show the back of the head, just that the camera would have been pointed towards the top of the head as it was supported by the head brace, perhaps with the chin resting on the chest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted December 5, 2017 Author Share Posted December 5, 2017 49 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said: The photo-composite posted above cannot be the true orientation of the skull photographs, because they do not show the back of the neck, just the autopsy table and a little formaldehyde jar. This doesn't mean it doesn't show the back of the head, just that the camera would have been pointed towards the top of the head as it was supported by the head brace, perhaps with the chin resting on the chest. I am not going to say you are wrong. But I am also not going to say you are right. I think what I have is reasonably accurate - not 100%. And yes, I agree it's possible that the open cranium photo needs to be tilted and reoriented to bring the beveled hole upward somewhat. However, you're free to get some graphics software and create your own version and share and compare here. 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