New Photographic Proof: Todd's Initials on 399!

[W. Tracy Parnell]

Washington Decoded: A Single Photograph Disproves Oliver Stone’s Conspiracy Claim

[Micah Mileto]

https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2019/12/kennedy-assassination-bullets-preserved-digital-form

 

https://catalog.archives.gov/id/305144

 

Having trouble finding more photographs of CE 399 from this angle.

[Micah Mileto]

https://catalog.archives.gov/id/149274356

 

"Due to the large byte size of these records you MUST download and read the NARA_Read_Me.pdf documentation before downloading these records. You will likely experience difficulties in accessing these records if not downloaded correctly"

 

???

[Vince Palamara]

I see the "ET" and, beyond the questions of why others allegedly missed it and the notion that it was added later, even if (if) one concedes this point, there is a whole lot more to the chain of custody of CE399 and other related matters than just this. One is reminded of those who "exposed" the three tramps as just tramps in the movie JFK, as if that debunked the entire movie and all of its many components...epic fail. There is a whole lot to the two and four hour versions of Stone's new doc far beyond just this one component.

[Pat Speer]

2 hours ago, Vince Palamara said:

I see the "ET" and, beyond the questions of why others allegedly missed it and the notion that it was added later, even if (if) one concedes this point, there is a whole lot more to the chain of custody of CE399 and other related matters than just this. One is reminded of those who "exposed" the three tramps as just tramps in the movie JFK, as if that debunked the entire movie and all of its many components...epic fail. There is a whole lot to the two and four hour versions of Stone's new doc far beyond just this one component.

But it's a two-way street. For years researchers pointed to nonsense in the WR and claimed it destroyed the case for a lone assassin. if someone is gonna make a case for conspiracy and load it full of stuff, some of which can be discredited, they are taking that same risk. To quote Donnie Osmond--one bad apple don't spoil the whole bunch. But to some--in this case a mainstream media anxious to dismiss Jim's research and Stone's movie--it can. 

Edited June 12, 2022 by Pat Speer

[Vince Palamara]

40 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

But it's a two-way street. For years researchers pointed to nonsense in the WR and claimed it destroyed the case for a lone assassin. if someone is gonna make a case for conspiracy and load it full of stuff, some of which can be discredited, they are taking that same risk. To quote Donnie Osmond--one bad apple don't spoil the whole bunch--but to some--in this case a mainstream media anxious to dismiss Jim's research and Stone's movie--it can. 

Fair enough. I must admit that I see the "ET" right away and am stunned others who saw the bullet in person missed it...if it was truly there for many decades.

 

 

[Vince Palamara]

44 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

But it's a two-way street. For years researchers pointed to nonsense in the WR and claimed it destroyed the case for a lone assassin. if someone is gonna make a case for conspiracy and load it full of stuff, some of which can be discredited, they are taking that same risk. To quote Donnie Osmond--one bad apple don't spoil the whole bunch--but to some--in this case a mainstream media anxious to dismiss Jim's research and Stone's movie--it can. 

Pat, do you believe that huge E and T were there all this time and everyone missed it? It seems hard to believe.

[Pat Speer]

6 minutes ago, Vince Palamara said:

Pat, do you believe that huge E and T were there all this time and everyone missed it? It seems hard to believe.

Sure. Depending on the lighting, it can be very hard to pick up a faint inscription on metal.

[W. Niederhut]

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

But it's a two-way street. For years researchers pointed to nonsense in the WR and claimed it destroyed the case for a lone assassin. if someone is gonna make a case for conspiracy and load it full of stuff, some of which can be discredited, they are taking that same risk. To quote Donnie Osmond--one bad apple don't spoil the whole bunch. But to some--in this case a mainstream media anxious to dismiss Jim's research and Stone's movie--it can. 

Yes and no.  It depends on whether the "bad apple" is an essential premise of an explanatory theory.

It is much easier to debunk a theory based on empirical evidence than to definitively prove one-- something that requires confirmation by all of the known evidence.

From the philosophy of science, we know that a single false, essential premise/fact effectively invalidates a theory.

This is, certainly, true in the case of the Warren Commission's Lone Assassin-in-the-TSBD theory.

That theory is effectively debunked by a wide array of scientific facts-- e.g., ballistic, acoustic, and video evidence.

But, on the flip side, what comprehensive, alternative theory of JFK's assassination by Oliver Stone, DiEugenio, et.al., has been debunked?  None.

 

 

 

Edited June 12, 2022 by W. Niederhut

[Sandy Larsen]

My question is this: Given that NIST did this work in 2015, why is it that only now we learn that the initials ET were found?

Does anybody know why NIST did this work? (I didn't read Roe's article and don't plan to.)

 

Unfortunately there is no way for us to know if the initials were always there or if they were added as part of an effort to debunk CT work. I'd be satisfied of a debunking if Mantik went again to the Archives, looked at the bullet again, and confirmed that it is REALLY hard to see the initials. (Though that still wouldn't prove that somebody didn't later scratch the initials onto the bullet.)

 

I wonder why Roe didn't post this photo on the forum. I like to have LNers on the forum, but only if they really contribute something useful. This photo, for example.

 

[Micah Mileto]

41 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

My question is this: Given that NIST did this work in 2015, why is it that only now we learn that the initials ET were found?

Does anybody know why NIST did this work? (I didn't read Roe's article and don't plan to.)

 

Unfortunately there is no way for us to know if the initials were always there or if they were added as part of an effort to debunk CT work. I'd be satisfied of a debunking if Mantik went again to the Archives, looked at the bullet again, and confirmed that it is REALLY hard to see the initials. (Though that still wouldn't prove that somebody didn't later scratch the initials onto the bullet.)

 

I wonder why Roe didn't post this photo on the forum. I like to have LNers on the forum, but only if they really contribute something useful. This photo, for example.

 

NIST didn't bother to publish more images of their model of CE 399, and it seems that nobody bothered to ask them for more images.

[Stu Wexler]

The HSCA firearms panel  did a microscopic analysis and reported every nook and cranny they saw on lab reports. They were not specifically looking for initials but they reported everyone but Todd's. David Mantik and Gary Murr looked in person. John Hunt had high resolution photos that are online. And Gregg D. went looking with the same NIST stuff a few months ago only to say he was wrong and did not see them. I am actually hoping he (and Gary M) both comment on this. Did Gregg do a thorough search or only the area he suspected had the initials?

I would normally concede this but all of the above has me a bit suspicious as it came after Stone's film advertised it widely. If Greg and Gary (and Mantik) concede they could have missed it. I am inclined to say it has been missed.

Stu

Edited June 13, 2022 by Stu Wexler

[W. Tracy Parnell]

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I wonder why Roe didn't post this photo on the forum. I like to have LNers on the forum, but only if they really contribute something useful. This photo, for example.

If you want to see the photo just read the article.

[Sandy Larsen]

28 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I wonder why Roe didn't post this photo on the forum. I like to have LNers on the forum, but only if they really contribute something useful. This photo, for example.

 

28 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

If you want to see the photo just read the article.

 

Tracy,

I saw the photo... that wasn't my point.

My point was that it would be good for CTers (and The Truth) if LNers like Roe would post legitimate things like that photo on the forum. (Assuming it's legitimate, of course.) He's posted numerous times and I don't believe I've ever seen anything useful in any of his posts.

 

Edited June 13, 2022 by Sandy Larsen

[Allen Lowe]

10 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Washington Decoded: A Single Photograph Disproves Oliver Stone’s Conspiracy Claim

Wow that’s amazing Tracy. Over the years this bullet has been eyeballed up close - not in a picture - by countless people who never saw these initials. Didn’t I also see you tell the head of elections in Georgia that there were 11,000 missing votes? Oh no, that was Trump. Same difference.