Conspiracy JFK Forum Site

Yes and no.

Statistics: Posted by Ray Mitcham — Sat Jul 16, 2016 3:59 pm

---

via ConspiracyJFKForum.com http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=43&p=759#p759

Patrick C wrote:

Ben Holmes wrote:Then why are you refusing (as I predicted) to answer the points I raised?

Not refusing at all, I have not looked at all your points because I have other things to do - like work!



I may or I may not get round to it. I may dip into a few.

What is the largest foreign object seen in the AP X-ray?



I've asked the question repeatedly, and you've run away every single time. You pick what you think are the easiest questions to answer, and run away from the rest.



That's not what people confident in their knowledge of the case will do... that's a tactic of someone desperately afraid of being nailed on a point they can't explain.



(Of course, judging on how badly you get savaged on issues you're willing to debate, it's no wonder that you're 'topic shy'...)

Patrick C wrote:

There is little point in discussing these crackpot theories - it is why most decent authors on this subject steer clear of forums like this.

So your theory is that "decent authors" are willing to spend the time writing a book, but unwilling to debate others in a forum that disallows ad hominem attacks... is that your theory???

Patrick C wrote:

Ben Holmes wrote:Tell us how identical sized helmets can differ in size depending on the distance...

I think you have missed my point. I merely stated that we should reasonably expect that Chaney's white helmet would be even larger if he was in the position you think he should be in in the Z film. I disagree. As it is - it is barely 10% bigger 1.1cm rather than 1cm in the 35 x 24 cm photo in the LIFE book I referenced.

You confirm your admission that it's larger - DESPITE YOUR CLAIM THAT HE'S FURTHER AWAY...



So explain it.



Or run away again...



Such as the question on the fairing... which CONFIRMS that Chaney is 'larger' than Hargis... yet you claim Chaney is further away...



This isn't 'opinion' Patrick... this is science... either explain why Chaney is larger than Hargis, or admit that your belief in where you think he was is flat wrong, and he's EXACTLY where your deceiving eyes place him.

Statistics: Posted by Ben Holmes — Sat Jul 16, 2016 3:59 pm

---

via ConspiracyJFKForum.com http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=95&p=758#p758

The pigeons of course heard the bangs from inside the 6th floor and were startled......



If only they has been asked, we would know if there were just 2 shots or just 3 shots....



Bad joke by the way.....

Statistics: Posted by Patrick C — Sat Jul 16, 2016 3:58 pm

---

via ConspiracyJFKForum.com http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=87&p=757#p757

Can you determine the sequence, or are you saying there are issues that would cloud that determination anyway.....?

Statistics: Posted by Patrick C — Sat Jul 16, 2016 3:56 pm

---

via ConspiracyJFKForum.com http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=43&p=756#p756

Patrick stated, "Of course I use the word POSSIBLE because NON OF US KNOW and WILL NEVER KNOW exactly how the boxes were assembled / moved / stacked ....NOBODY WAS THERE when he did it. Neither do we know where Oswald assembled the rifle - it is POSSIBLE it could have been on the 7th floor."



Then considering Alfred Hitchcock was alive in 1963, I suppose it's possible he coordinated the pigeons on the TSBD's roof and had them fly into the 6th floor's open window and they set up the snipers nest.... After all, who would know more about building nests than birds?

Statistics: Posted by Lee Abbott — Sat Jul 16, 2016 3:48 pm

---

via ConspiracyJFKForum.com http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=87&p=755#p755

no.

Statistics: Posted by Ray Mitcham — Sat Jul 16, 2016 2:26 pm

---

via ConspiracyJFKForum.com http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=43&p=754#p754

Are you assuming that the sequence of the shots in time was C133A, C133B, C133C......?

Statistics: Posted by Patrick C — Sat Jul 16, 2016 2:19 pm

---

via ConspiracyJFKForum.com http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=43&p=753#p753

I think you have tried to make my point look silly and failed.



I have never suggested that Oswald would not use is arms and hands - if he had to lift the boxes he would have to - as he would have done with the box closest to the window on which he rested (probably).



Many of the boxes were already stacked - these are what I am referring to. And I think it is entirely reasonable to suggest that because boxes were already stacked Oswald could have pushed them with his shoulder, thighs or feet and this could (just could) be why there are few prints.



Of course I use the word POSSIBLE because NON OF US KNOW and WILL NEVER KNOW exactly how the boxes were assembled / moved / stacked ....NOBODY WAS THERE when he did it. Neither do we know where Oswald assembled the rifle - it is POSSIBLE it could have been on the 7th floor.



So ALL WE HAVE is possibilities for how an end result came to be. Period.

Statistics: Posted by Patrick C — Sat Jul 16, 2016 2:15 pm

---

via ConspiracyJFKForum.com http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=87&p=752#p752

SBF . Single Bullet Factoid.

Statistics: Posted by Ray Mitcham — Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:57 pm

---

via ConspiracyJFKForum.com http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=95&p=751#p751

Sorry for the delay been away on business.



To help you.



In C133c the sun is at higher than in C133A. This is shown by the shadows of the overhead cables on the stair post.



The shadows of fixed objects in C133C, show that the azimuth of the sun is 250˚ - 5˚ (Warren Commission said the camera was pointing 70˚ North, and sun is approx 5˚ right of camera.)



The shadow of the cables on the stair-post in C133A are approx 6” higher than in C133C.



To achieve, this the sun must have moved 5˚ West. i.e. Azimuth of 250˚, and several degrees lower in the sky.



(See NASA Solar Position Calculator site- http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/grad/solcalc/azel.html



insert “Dallas” 30 March 1963. 15.27.26

Note Azimuth (245˚) and Sun Elevation. (31.88˚)



Then insert time as 15.52.05. Azimuth (250˚) and Elevation (27.53)



Results show that the sun moved 5˚ West and the elevation sank from 31.88˚ to 27.53˚.



Oswald is standing in roughly the same place in both photos.



As the elevation of the sun in C133A is 3.72˚ lower than in C133C, then his shadow should be shorter than in C133A.



It isn't. It is longer.



If the sun moved 5˚ West, then the shadow of the stair-post would have disappeared behind the stair-post



It doesn't.



If the photos were taken from the same position, the shadows of Oswald in all three photos are askew. Oswald's shadow in C133A should be less acute (i.e closer to the line of his body) than in C133B and C133A.



It isn't.



(If you disagree with the approximate distance of 6" between the shadows then please provide your evidence.)

Statistics: Posted by Ray Mitcham — Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:47 pm

---

via ConspiracyJFKForum.com http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=43&p=750#p750