Jason Vermeer Posted June 23, 2006 Share Posted June 23, 2006 Hello Brendan, From the looks of it, it appears you believe in the theory of Oswald acting alone in firing all the shots in Dealey Plaza that day. I also believe Oswald was involved in the assasination events that day -even firing a rifle from the infamous tsbd window- given the weight and nature of the available evidence. I would, however, like to say that in my opinion, a rigorous and thorough look at the totality of the evidence seems to point to at least a minimum of one other individual involved and some of this evidence has been scientifically tested and verified statistically significant. Given the strength of your opinions I've witnessed thus far, my belief is that you have alternative explanations for evidence/variables that would tend to discount a lone gunman. Here are three pieces of evidence that would require alternative explanations for the lone gunman theory to fit...and they happen to be 3 variables that have influenced my belief in more than one shooter in DP that day. I am sincerely curious to read your responses to these.... 1. The most recent acoustics study conducted by D.B. Thomas places gunshot impulses emanating from the TSBD and a shot from the grassy knoll at a 96percent confidence interval. Earlier studies criticized the timing of the dictabelt recording but Thomas lays out how he controls for the extraneous variable. The gunshot impulse on the knoll area was tested and determined to statistically align most closely with that of a .30 cal rifle shot. What is your alternative explanation for the impulse targeted as a .30 caliber shot emanating from the knoll area? 2. Early witness testimony indicates the perception of smoke from the knoll area. Even without photographic evidence, more than one person perceived this. What is your alternative explanation for this witness testimony? 3. Motorcade participants, 2 I believe, perceived the smell of gunsmoke/burned powder as they progressed down elm st. Given the winds in Dealey Plaza that day and the position of the witnesses in the motorcade who indicated when they smelled the smoke, the smoke particles would have had to have dropped 6 stories and traveled crosswind to be perceived by these witnesses. A knoll area shot would appear initially to be more feasible for the detection of smoke given its position, elevation and, again, wind conditions What is your alternative explanation for this testimony? I eagerly await your answers.... Jason Vermeer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brendan Slattery Posted June 23, 2006 Share Posted June 23, 2006 "actually its my Govs theory" Brendan Slattery.Actually Brendan its your Govs theory that LHO, and AN Other fired at Kennedy that day (HSCA final findings) Funny how often this gets ignored, whilst the W/C is held up as a secular Holy graille. Sorry to be so pedantic, I will adress your other points when time allows. Regards, Steve. Because I don't recognize the House's findings as legitimate. Their alleged Knoll shooter was based on faulty dictabelt readings. Further analysis conducted after they had wrapped up proceedings confirmed the earlier mistake. Besides, you don't need a faded dictabelt to tell you what so many earwitnesses in DP heard that day: no shot from the fence area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brendan Slattery Posted June 23, 2006 Share Posted June 23, 2006 Hello Brendan, From the looks of it, it appears you believe in the theory of Oswald acting alone in firing all the shots in Dealey Plaza that day. I also believe Oswald was involved in the assasination events that day -even firing a rifle from the infamous tsbd window- given the weight and nature of the available evidence. I would, however, like to say that in my opinion, a rigorous and thorough look at the totality of the evidence seems to point to at least a minimum of one other individual involved and some of this evidence has been scientifically tested and verified statistically significant. Given the strength of your opinions I've witnessed thus far, my belief is that you have alternative explanations for evidence/variables that would tend to discount a lone gunman. Here are three pieces of evidence that would require alternative explanations for the lone gunman theory to fit...and they happen to be 3 variables that have influenced my belief in more than one shooter in DP that day. I am sincerely curious to read your responses to these.... 1. The most recent acoustics study conducted by D.B. Thomas places gunshot impulses emanating from the TSBD and a shot from the grassy knoll at a 96percent confidence interval. Earlier studies criticized the timing of the dictabelt recording but Thomas lays out how he controls for the extraneous variable. The gunshot impulse on the knoll area was tested and determined to statistically align most closely with that of a .30 cal rifle shot. What is your alternative explanation for the impulse targeted as a .30 caliber shot emanating from the knoll area? 2. Early witness testimony indicates the perception of smoke from the knoll area. Even without photographic evidence, more than one person perceived this. What is your alternative explanation for this witness testimony? 3. Motorcade participants, 2 I believe, perceived the smell of gunsmoke/burned powder as they progressed down elm st. Given the winds in Dealey Plaza that day and the position of the witnesses in the motorcade who indicated when they smelled the smoke, the smoke particles would have had to have dropped 6 stories and traveled crosswind to be perceived by these witnesses. A knoll area shot would appear initially to be more feasible for the detection of smoke given its position, elevation and, again, wind conditions What is your alternative explanation for this testimony? I eagerly await your answers.... Jason Vermeer 1. Read Mike O'Dell's report. The notion of gunshots on that belt is now a minority position. 2. And some of them saw motorcycle exhaust. Even Oliver Stone had to resort to a smoke machine to make this one come true. 3. LHO fired three times; it was a windy, swirly day. If they indeed smelled it, you can't discount that it was Oswald's. Then you had car exhaust, motorcycle exhaust, and bus exhaust on top of it. It was a virtual stew of emissions. And two people out of hundreds is indicative of nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Vermeer Posted June 23, 2006 Share Posted June 23, 2006 (edited) Hello Brendan, From the looks of it, it appears you believe in the theory of Oswald acting alone in firing all the shots in Dealey Plaza that day. I also believe Oswald was involved in the assasination events that day -even firing a rifle from the infamous tsbd window- given the weight and nature of the available evidence. I would, however, like to say that in my opinion, a rigorous and thorough look at the totality of the evidence seems to point to at least a minimum of one other individual involved and some of this evidence has been scientifically tested and verified statistically significant. Given the strength of your opinions I've witnessed thus far, my belief is that you have alternative explanations for evidence/variables that would tend to discount a lone gunman. Here are three pieces of evidence that would require alternative explanations for the lone gunman theory to fit...and they happen to be 3 variables that have influenced my belief in more than one shooter in DP that day. I am sincerely curious to read your responses to these.... 1. The most recent acoustics study conducted by D.B. Thomas places gunshot impulses emanating from the TSBD and a shot from the grassy knoll at a 96percent confidence interval. Earlier studies criticized the timing of the dictabelt recording but Thomas lays out how he controls for the extraneous variable. The gunshot impulse on the knoll area was tested and determined to statistically align most closely with that of a .30 cal rifle shot. What is your alternative explanation for the impulse targeted as a .30 caliber shot emanating from the knoll area? 2. Early witness testimony indicates the perception of smoke from the knoll area. Even without photographic evidence, more than one person perceived this. What is your alternative explanation for this witness testimony? 3. Motorcade participants, 2 I believe, perceived the smell of gunsmoke/burned powder as they progressed down elm st. Given the winds in Dealey Plaza that day and the position of the witnesses in the motorcade who indicated when they smelled the smoke, the smoke particles would have had to have dropped 6 stories and traveled crosswind to be perceived by these witnesses. A knoll area shot would appear initially to be more feasible for the detection of smoke given its position, elevation and, again, wind conditions What is your alternative explanation for this testimony? I eagerly await your answers.... Jason Vermeer 1. Read Mike O'Dell's report. The notion of gunshots on that belt is now a minority position. 2. And some of them saw motorcycle exhaust. Even Oliver Stone had to resort to a smoke machine to make this one come true. 3. LHO fired three times; it was a windy, swirly day. If they indeed smelled it, you can't discount that it was Oswald's. Then you had car exhaust, motorcycle exhaust, and bus exhaust on top of it. It was a virtual stew of emissions. And two people out of hundreds is indicative of nothing. 1.Mike Odell's report is something you got off of McAdams site I believe. There's nothing wrong with that but what you're referencing is not scientific study. You are reading Odell's opinion which he does not subject to scientific scrutiny and does not statistically analyse himself. You picked up the difference didn't you Brendan? Can you give me your source for the "notion of gunshots on the belt is now a minority position" when you have time? What remains unanswered is what YOUR explanation is for the impulse. It's been recorded so what caused it? 2. I love the Oliver Stone line! Spend time in an indoor gun range (even by yourself) with the vent turned off and then tell me guns don't smoke. I take it that you are saying the witnesses saw motorcycle exhaust instead of gunsmoke correct? 3. It kind of seems like you are saying indirectly that it was Oswald's gunsmoke that was perceived if it indeed was perceived correct? I remain open to the possibility that gunsmoke from 6 stories up could be pulled down (rather than up)in some type of odd vortex. Gunsmoke is very distinctively different smell than auto emissions. For your records, there wasn't a bus in front of these men in the motorcade. Your opinion that 2 people's perceptions out of "hundreds" being "indicative of nothing" is patently false. It is data that has to be dealt with given that there isn't a record of "hundreds" of people being asked if they smelled gunsmoke. These men volunteered this information. Hundreds of people saying "I didn't smell anything" might improve your point. Ok Brendan, I think your answer for number 2 is feasible, number 3 would appear to stretch the known variables but answer number one is what I'm most interested in. What do you think caused the impulse if it was not from a .30 caliber rifle? Eagerly await your answer... Jason Vermeer Edited June 23, 2006 by Jason Vermeer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brendan Slattery Posted June 23, 2006 Share Posted June 23, 2006 Mike Odell's report is something you got off of McAdams site I believe. There's nothing wrong with that but what you're referencing is not scientific study. You are reading Odell's opinion which he does not subject to scientific scrutiny and does not statistically analyse himself. You picked up the difference didn't you Brendan? Can you give me your source for the "notion of gunshots on the belt is now a minority position" when you have time? What remains unanswered is what YOUR explanation is for the impulse. It's been recorded so what caused it? I did read O'Dell's report and it is a scientific paper open to criticism and review. Clearly the smoking gun here (pun intended) is Decker's "hold everything secure" line, which happened post-assassination and prior to the suspicious impulses. In other words, game over. The National Academy of Sciences concurred (are they "scientific" enough for you?). By "minority opinion" I'm referring to those of you who reside outside of the reality-based community. Gary Mack's a good guy, but he let emotion get the better of him on this issue. Hell, you guys can't even agree on whose microphone was stuck on. McLain? No. Hargis? No. Any other wild guesses? Now, is it possible that a shot came from the Knoll? Yes, but you won't find it on that belt. The House concluded that the (mythical) Knoll shot missed. Do you agree, or do you cherrypick only the stuff you find useful? What do you think caused the impulse if it was not from a .30 caliber rifle? Eagerly await your answer... Beats me. But it wasn't a rifle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn Meredith Posted June 24, 2006 Share Posted June 24, 2006 I'm keen to learn more details about this lone nut theory of yours. Did Oswald plan to get away with the assassination? Was he planning to flee to the Soviet Union? Who did he plan to meet at the Texas theatre (he was a lone nut, remember), or did he just feel like taking in a movie? You need to flesh out a few more details of your theory. You're not afraid of doing this are you? I eagerly await your reply to these questions. I have some others too. [/color]Mark: We all have these questions. I suspect howver that Mr Slattery does NOT have the answers. But perhaps he'll cite something really authorative, like Gerald Posner Dawn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brendan Slattery Posted June 24, 2006 Share Posted June 24, 2006 I'm keen to learn more details about this lone nut theory of yours. Did Oswald plan to get away with the assassination? Was he planning to flee to the Soviet Union? Who did he plan to meet at the Texas theatre (he was a lone nut, remember), or did he just feel like taking in a movie? You need to flesh out a few more details of your theory. You're not afraid of doing this are you? I eagerly await your reply to these questions. I have some others too. [/color]Mark: We all have these questions. I suspect howver that Mr Slattery does NOT have the answers. But perhaps he'll cite something really authorative, like Gerald Posner Dawn Dawn, aren't you the same flake who likened the US attorney general to a Nazi? After a slur like that, you think I care what you have to say? Go grab your copy of Mein Kampf and take a hike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Feemster Posted June 24, 2006 Share Posted June 24, 2006 Come on Brendan, answer Dawn's question! With just a few dollars in his pocket who was going to help him keep up his lone nut M. O. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Vermeer Posted June 24, 2006 Share Posted June 24, 2006 Mike Odell's report is something you got off of McAdams site I believe. There's nothing wrong with that but what you're referencing is not scientific study. You are reading Odell's opinion which he does not subject to scientific scrutiny and does not statistically analyse himself. You picked up the difference didn't you Brendan? Can you give me your source for the "notion of gunshots on the belt is now a minority position" when you have time? What remains unanswered is what YOUR explanation is for the impulse. It's been recorded so what caused it? I did read O'Dell's report and it is a scientific paper open to criticism and review. Clearly the smoking gun here (pun intended) is Decker's "hold everything secure" line, which happened post-assassination and prior to the suspicious impulses. GOOD LORD! THE CROSS TALK AND THAT ISSUE WAS ADDRESSED SPECIFICALLY IN THE THOMAS STUDY!!!!!! The National Academy of Sciences concurred (are they "scientific" enough for you?). DO YOU KNOW WHAT YEAR THAT WAS?? By "minority opinion" I'm referring to those of you who reside outside of the reality-based community. Gary Mack's a good guy, but he let emotion get the better of him on this issue. Hell, you guys can't even agree on whose microphone was stuck on. McLain? No. Hargis? No. Any other wild guesses? Now, is it possible that a shot came from the Knoll? Yes, but you won't find it on that belt. The House concluded that the (mythical) Knoll shot missed. Do you agree, or do you cherrypick only the stuff you find useful? I'M CHERRYPICKING?!?!??!?!? What do you think caused the impulse if it was not from a .30 caliber rifle? Eagerly await your answer... Beats me. But it wasn't a rifle. OMG!!!! A CLASSIC!!!!!!!!!!!! "IT WALKS LIKE A DUCK, ACTS LIKE A DUCK, QUACKS LIKE A DUCK BUT IT BEATS THE HELL OUT OF ME IF IT WAS A DUCK OR NOT!!!!!!!!!" COME ON AND ADMIT IT BRENDAN. YOU DIDN'T READ THE THOMAS STUDY DID YOU? YOU READ THE REBUTTAL AND YOU CAN'T EVEN ADEQUATELY UNDERSTAND IT BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT IT'S REBUTTING. YOU'RE CITING DATED ACOUSTIC DATA FROM THE NAS. YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT PERCENTAGE OF RESEARCHERS BELIEVE IN THE ACOUSTIC DATA SO YOU JUST MINIMIZED IT WITHOUT HAVING A CLUE. I THOUGHT YOU HAD SOMETHING A LITTLE MORE SOLID. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Raymond Carroll Posted June 24, 2006 Share Posted June 24, 2006 (edited) What do you think caused the impulse if it was not from a .30 caliber rifle? Eagerly await your answer... Beats me. But it wasn't a rifle. For once I agree with Mr. Slattery. I don't believe the HSCA accoustic experts, for the reasons cited, but mainly because I do not believe there were three shots from the TSBD, as the HSCA acoustics experts asserted. Besides, the weapon fired from behind the fence on the grassy knoll may have been a handgun. Edited June 24, 2006 by J. Raymond Carroll Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Vermeer Posted June 24, 2006 Share Posted June 24, 2006 I am not referring to the HSCA acoustic study but rather the study completed by D.B. Thomas. 20 years later. Jason Vermeer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Stapleton Posted June 24, 2006 Share Posted June 24, 2006 Brendan, I'm keen to learn more details about this lone nut theory of yours. Did Oswald plan to get away with the assassination? Was he planning to flee to the Soviet Union? Who did he plan to meet at the Texas theatre (he was a lone nut, remember), or did he just feel like taking in a movie? You need to flesh out a few more details of your theory. You're not afraid of doing this are you? I eagerly await your reply to these questions. I have some others too. Actually it's my govt's theory, which I subscribe to. He didn't plan to get away with it, which accounts for his meandering course of action after the shooting. I think he counted on being killed or apprehended on the spot. Soviet Union? Unlikely. Cuba would have been a likelier destination--but just as futile. What makes you think the Texas Theater was some sort of rendezvous setting? Isn't it likely that he happened upon it and ducked in to escape the heat? Why did he dick around the front of the shoe store if the Theater was his goal? And what kind of "innocent" person, upon learning of the President's shooting/death, decides to take in a movie .. with a gun? The rest of the country was huddled around tv sets. Not good ol' Lee. The idea that Lee counted on being killed or apprehended makes no sense. It implies that Lee had little regard for his self-preservation or liberty. This is inconsistent with his words and actions while in custody. In addition to his protestations of innocence, he complained bitterly of being fitted up in the lineups. You haven't reflected on how an innocent patsy would behave. Despite the efforts of the WC, the Government, the agencies and the media to portray him as a deranged loner, he is in fact the perfect patsy. Why, in your opinion, did Ruby kill Oswald? Doesn't this further reinforce Oswald's patsy status? Dead patsies can't complain about their predicament. In order to fully understand what is really quite a straightforward scenario, you might need to distance yourself from your "reality based community". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn Meredith Posted June 24, 2006 Share Posted June 24, 2006 Mark: We all have these questions. I suspect howver that Mr Slattery does NOT have the answers. But perhaps he'll cite something really authorative, like Gerald Posner Dawn Dawn, aren't you the same flake who likened the US attorney general to a Nazi? After a slur like that, you think I care what you have to say? Go grab your copy of Mein Kampf and take a hike. What the hell are you talking about? I am no fan of the POLICIES of the present administration including the POLICIES if the AG. So, answer the damn question. And quit calling me names. At least I post a real bio. What's your damn claim to fame around here? "PR". That really tells us a lot. Oh I know "PR: for the WC and their apologists. Fortunately this forum has an ignore function for people like you. So long. YOu're just another wanna be disinformationist. They only call names. LIke you did with John G. Nothing at all to add to the debate. Take your own advice why don't you? A hike might just do you some good. Dawn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn Meredith Posted June 24, 2006 Share Posted June 24, 2006 [quote name='J. Raymond Carroll' date='Jun 24 2006, 12:08 PM' post='66346'] [ Besides, the weapon fired from behind the fence on the grassy knoll may have been a handgun. Probably was. I can't see them being stupid enough to risk using any kind of rifle from a location where it could be seen. The murder was an in- our- faces- conspiracy, but some minor precautions were taken. And utilization of a smaller weapon for the frontal shots was one such precaution, I suspect. DAwn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Raymond Carroll Posted June 24, 2006 Share Posted June 24, 2006 Check out the initials. BS I nominate this for "Post of the Year" 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