|
Post by gillianren on Jul 16, 2007 15:23:43 GMT -4
Which, I believe, actually advances the Single Bullet Theory, given that the bullet travels farther when it doesn't hit bone.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jul 16, 2007 17:54:20 GMT -4
Well one of the best proofs of the SBT in my opinion is that the bullet that hit Gov. Connolly did so sideways. Not exactly the way a bullet usually travels, but exactly how you expect a bullet that has passed through something to be travelling. The clincher is that the only thing between Connolly and a shooter at the rear (which is where the shooter had to be based on the fact the entry wound was in his back) that a bullet could have passed through was Kennedy.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Durnavich on Jul 16, 2007 19:20:59 GMT -4
Look at the left-side image, and see if you can point out where the bullet have exited at the throat - as the SBT proposes - without hitting any vertebrae?The bullet did not smash through and pulverize any of the vertebra, but it may have fractured T1. David O. Davis, consulting radiologist for the HSCA: Full text of Davis report Full text of McDonnel reportThe right T1 transverse process is on the left of the X-ray image. The streak of black overlying it is not the fracture referred to, but the "subcutaneous or interstitial air". Air pockets tend to show up as dark regions in an X-ray. They are sometimes called air shadows:JFK Chest X-rayThe bullet would have entered to the right of the spine passing just by or perhaps grazing the T1 transverse process. It passed over the top of the lung with the shock of the passage bruising it. The strap muscles on the right side of the neck were likewise bruised, and the right side of the trachea was torn at the around the level of the second or third tracheal ring. There was a penetrating wound (meaning punctured, as opposed to blunt trauma) of the throat, a ragged slit in the shirt with the fibers bent outward, and a nick in the lining of left side of the tie. These are all facts that any theory put on the table must explain. The SBT is one such explanation. What is yours?
|
|
|
Post by turbonium on Jul 16, 2007 23:33:11 GMT -4
The neck consists of far more than the spine. The bullet entered the back right side of the neck and crossed over to nearly the middle of the throat in front. As the bullet path was at an angle, it could do this and miss the spine. Ranb Saying "it could do this" is meaningless without actually showing how "it could do this". Below is a diagram which proposes a trajectory in support of the SBT.... mcadams.posc.mu.edu/sbt-faa.jpg
Below are two diagrams which indicate the locations for the entrance and exit wounds in support of the SBT....
www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/concl2.htmNeither source actually illustrates the bullet' path internally, which means they have not validated the SBT trajectory. Joe Durnavich said that Dr. Mantik "needs to consider the problem in 3 dimensions". But that is equally required of supporters of the SBT. Indeed, since the SBT is the original claim, the supporters of the SBT have the original burden of proof.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jul 16, 2007 23:43:09 GMT -4
Perhaps you should stop just reading you own posts then.
|
|
|
Post by turbonium on Jul 17, 2007 0:03:29 GMT -4
Well one of the best proofs of the SBT in my opinion is that the bullet that hit Gov. Connolly did so sideways. Not exactly the way a bullet usually travels, but exactly how you expect a bullet that has passed through something to be travelling. The clincher is that the only thing between Connolly and a shooter at the rear (which is where the shooter had to be based on the fact the entry wound was in his back) that a bullet could have passed through was Kennedy. Dr. Shaw stated that Connally's back wound was "...about a centimeter and a half in its greatest diameter, roughly elliptical in shape." If the bullet had been entirely "sideways" upon impacting Connally's back, the wound would have measured at least 3 cm across its greatest length (or diameter) - since the bullet (CE 399) was 3 cm long. At most, the bullet entered Connally's back tangentially (at an angle), certainly not "sideways".
|
|
|
Post by turbonium on Jul 17, 2007 0:10:02 GMT -4
Perhaps you should stop just reading you own posts then. From someone who considers the sideways bullet an established fact.
|
|
|
Post by turbonium on Jul 17, 2007 1:24:11 GMT -4
Look at the left-side image, and see if you can point out where the bullet have exited at the throat - as the SBT proposes - without hitting any vertebrae?The bullet did not smash through and pulverize any of the vertebra, but it may have fractured T1. David O. Davis, consulting radiologist for the HSCA: Full text of Davis report Full text of McDonnel reportThe right T1 transverse process is on the left of the X-ray image. The streak of black overlying it is not the fracture referred to, but the "subcutaneous or interstitial air". Air pockets tend to show up as dark regions in an X-ray. They are sometimes called air shadows:JFK Chest X-rayThe bullet would have entered to the right of the spine passing just by or perhaps grazing the T1 transverse process. It passed over the top of the lung with the shock of the passage bruising it. The strap muscles on the right side of the neck were likewise bruised, and the right side of the trachea was torn at the around the level of the second or third tracheal ring. There was a penetrating wound (meaning punctured, as opposed to blunt trauma) of the throat, a ragged slit in the shirt with the fibers bent outward, and a nick in the lining of left side of the tie. These are all facts that any theory put on the table must explain. The SBT is one such explanation. What is yours? As usual, there are no interior anatomical diagrams of the proposed bullet trajectory. If the SBT is possible, then the proponents of the SBT would be able to validate it with detailed illustrations. I asked you to point out where the bullet could have exited the throat - at the external location noted by the SBT - without hitting any vertebrae. Or at least - what may have occurred as suggested in your post - just grazing it. You already have some of the measurements, such as the dimensions of the bullet (3 cm long, 6.5 mm diam.) and the entry (back) and exit (front) locations of the SBT (as indicated by the diagrams of Myers, etc.). And you also have anatomical details from the sources you cited above. Are you able to illustrate how the SBT is anatomically possible?
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Jul 17, 2007 16:16:48 GMT -4
I've seen it reproduced.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jul 17, 2007 18:38:34 GMT -4
Well one of the best proofs of the SBT in my opinion is that the bullet that hit Gov. Connolly did so sideways. Not exactly the way a bullet usually travels, but exactly how you expect a bullet that has passed through something to be travelling. The clincher is that the only thing between Connolly and a shooter at the rear (which is where the shooter had to be based on the fact the entry wound was in his back) that a bullet could have passed through was Kennedy. Dr. Shaw stated that Connally's back wound was "...about a centimeter and a half in its greatest diameter, roughly elliptical in shape." If the bullet had been entirely "sideways" upon impacting Connally's back, the wound would have measured at least 3 cm across its greatest length (or diameter) - since the bullet (CE 399) was 3 cm long. At most, the bullet entered Connally's back tangentially (at an angle), certainly not "sideways". Whether it hit on a 45° angle or a 90° angle it is still sideways. A bullet that hit dead on wouldn't have left an elipicial entry wound, it would have left a round one. Stop being picky over language. Maybe if you stopped nit picking the exact wording and instead looked at the intent of the phrase you might find yourself a little closer to reality.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Durnavich on Jul 17, 2007 20:00:43 GMT -4
Are you able to illustrate how the SBT is anatomically possible?
No. As far as I know, nobody as of yet has an accurate model of JFK's spine and thorax. I'm not sure if you can extract the data required to do the analysis you are suggesting from the existing materials. Your particular analysis requires the most accurate models and measurements possible. It doesn't lend itself to "in the ballpark" estimates.
In the meantime, we can take the data that we do have on hand and try to come up with the best explanation or explanations for it always keeping our minds open to the fact that the conclusions may change in the light of better evidence.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Durnavich on Jul 17, 2007 21:43:09 GMT -4
At most, the bullet entered Connally's back tangentially (at an angle), certainly not "sideways".
Cary Zeitlin posted the following to one of the Usenet newsgroups some years ago.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jul 18, 2007 18:31:57 GMT -4
So the only two explanations are a) The shooter was at an extreme angle to Connolly, which is inconsistant with the path of the bullet through him and leads to a really magic bullet that can change directions, or the bullet came from the TSBD but was yawing more than it should have been from a direct undisturbed shot, which means it has to have hit something on the way in, Kennedy. Of course the CT will opt for the least likely, option (a).
|
|
|
Post by turbonium on Jul 19, 2007 3:14:34 GMT -4
So the only two explanations are a) The shooter was at an extreme angle to Connolly, which is inconsistant with the path of the bullet through him ... Why? The entry angle of the bullet is the same in both examples.
|
|
|
Post by donnieb on Jul 19, 2007 17:23:42 GMT -4
So the only two explanations are a) The shooter was at an extreme angle to Connolly, which is inconsistant with the path of the bullet through him ... Why? The entry angle of the bullet is the same in both examples. The entry angle refers to the orientation of the bullet as it entered Connolly's body. The entry direction is the path the bullet followed as it entered. These are quite distinct things. Phantom's explanation (a) is that the entry wound is explained by the entry direction; that is, the bullet was aligned along its axis of motion but entered the body at a sharp angle. Explanation (b) is that the wound's shape was due to the entry angle, i.e. that the bullet was tumbling when it enetered and thus not aligned with its direction of motion. Unfortunately for the CTists, the subsequent path of the bullet through Connolly's body (as determined from his injuries and the photos and film of his position when struck) rules out (a) and is consistent with (b).
|
|