Jump to content
The Education Forum

A simple question to James DiEugenio


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 125
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

This is the kind of person PB is.  First he writes this: Analytical thinking isn't your strong point, is it Jim?

Then he cuts out the following:

Hey Paul, you claim to be a scientist right?  (Of course, a scientist who, unlike everyone else, still somehow claims some validity for the CBLA.)  Now, when you look at the Z film, somehow that does not say anything to you?  JFK is hit like a thunderclap, his entire body is smashed backward and lifted slightly upward and to his left, with such force that it bounces off the seat; motorcycle policemen are hit with blood and issue with such force that they think they were hit themselves.  And somehow that is one shooter. With the TSBD behind the limo?

Now, before you run into the arms of the lying Alvarez or the phony Sturdivan, you know the whole "jet effect" and neuromuscular reaction has been discredited by Aguilar  and Robertson and also on TV in ITTC.  (But I know you will run there anyway,  since you cannot do anything else.)

Now, if there is one shooter, then why did all those witnesses run to the GK, many more than went to the TSBD.  (Which is another indication that you are wrong with your first point.)

Besides that, then what about the testimony that will live forever in the minds of anyone who was interested in this case back then.  A guy named Sam Holland, and the seven other witnesses who saw smoke from the GK. (like Simmons.) Sam actually ran over there if you recall.  And he saw those footprints which looked like they were going back and forth.  And then you match this up with Bowers, and the false SS ID and the guy talking into what looked like a radio mike etc. I mean that was all established back in 1967.

I have saved Baker's best for last: He says one shooter, seen by a few and in perfect alignment. Say this: what chutzpah this guy has. He must think we are idiots. One shooter from the rear who rammed JFK backwards into his seat. Yeah sure.  Second, the only witness in 55 years who said LHO was in that window was Brennan.  Not only was Brennan not able to ID Oswald at the phony line ups--which is incredible on its face--but as Ian Griggs writes, there is a real question if he was even at a line up. And the FBI gave up on trying to determine how his story ever got to the police in the first place.  Now if you balance all the problems with Brennan,  with the impossibility of Oswald being on the sixth floor--which has been proven by a slew of writers--like say Roffman, way back when, then, puhlease Mr Baker. Third, do you really think we buy Dale Myers and his phony cartoon about the alignment? Bob Harris destroyed that fake rendition years ago.  So did Pat Speer. Larry Schnapf will be bringing a computer simulation out that will show the Single Bullet Fantasy was not possible.

As per reading my book, c'mon, you don't really think I buy that do you?  Can I give you a quiz? Try something else.

Reminds me of what DVP does on his web site.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

JFK is hit like a thunderclap, his entire body is smashed backward and lifted slightly upward and to his left

Choice words, as always, Jim. 

I've written about the physics behind the head shot before. Do a search, I'm not repeating it here. Nevertheless, let me ask you a pertinent question:

What velocity would you expect a bullet weighing 0.05kg to impart on a weight of 5kg,  fired from a distance of 81 metres with a muzzle velocity of 700 metres per second? Making it simple, assume we're talking about a closed system uninfluenced by the effects of gravity and anything else, inside a vacuum. Keep the bullet speed constant. Those variables are almost negligible in this context.

There's a simple equation that will help you with this. You can research it. You are a researcher, after all. 

Let's have an answer, Jim. No more of those evasive tactics you employed on Black Op Radio during the 'debate' with McAdams.

Answer the question. I challenge you.

Edited by Paul Baker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/14/2018 at 3:38 PM, James DiEugenio said:

One shooter from the rear who rammed JFK backwards into his seat

You've watched too many films, Jim. I'm still waiting for your answer. Basic physics. Very basic. Use your computer. Search for 'the principle of the conservation of momentum'. I'll tell you what, I'll do that for you. https://www.dummies.com/education/science/physics/how-the-principle-of-conservation-of-momentum-works/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Paul Baker said:

You've watched too many films, Jim. I'm still waiting for your answer. Basic physics. Very basic. Use your computer. Search for 'the principle of the conservation of momentum'. I'll tell you what, I'll do that for you. https://www.dummies.com/education/science/physics/how-the-principle-of-conservation-of-momentum-works/

The only entrance wound identified in the back of the head was too low to correspond with a shot from the Sixth Floor. The autopsy pathologists placed the small head wound low in the occipital area, while the official story  requires the entry exist in the right parietal area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Paul Baker said:

Jim, as usual, avoids reality. HIs motivation fascinates me more that that of Lee Harvey Oswald. He can't, and won't, answer a very simple question. End of.

Paul,

I am no fan of Jim, but in the interest of fairness there is a JFK conference today (if I remember right) and he may be in attendance there.

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...