Have you considered taking yourself of to a eminent psychologist - the way your mind works would be useful for scienctific endevour and discovery.....
(11-26-2016, 03:32 AM)Ben Holmes Wrote: [ -> ] (11-26-2016, 01:22 AM)Patrick C Wrote: [ -> ]Ben Holmes Wrote:Of course he can't. Patrick's a coward, just like most believers.
Bull shit
Ben Holmes Wrote:I can give a credible and reasonable answer to anything they can dare to ask about the case or evidence... the opposite simply isn't true.
Bull shit - you can do no such thing.
Ben Holmes Wrote:It's simply a FACT that a majority of witnesses who were recorded in print in the first two days pointed to the Grassy Knoll
Absolute bull shit. Making stuff up like that just make you look like an idiot.
Ben Holmes Wrote:Patrick refuses to admit it - indeed, he's publicly stated the opposite. A provable lie on his part.
Believers are forced to run, because the evidence simply doesn't support their faith.
And they aren't honest enough to admit it.
You are so full of tripe Ben. I do hope one day we can engage in a public debate on this case...though I think you struggle with the concept of debate.
And still no answer to the question...
Patrick proves me right virtually everytime he posts... The coward STILL can't answer the question, or quote where he previously did...
Are you still banging on about McAdams and the location of the head wound? I have answered that question several times. As it seems I frequently do, even though nothing penetrtaes your thick skull.
The fatal shot fired by lone assassin Lee Harvey Oswald caused a parietal exit wound which "somewhat" extended into the temporal and occipital regions according to the medical report. However McAdams addresses this subject on his web site. The semantics are perhaps significant here and his last sentence rather telling.
Conspiracy kooks who support the ridiculous notion that Kennedy was shot from the front will see their argument fails - especially when one considers the simple fact that the back of the head would largely not be visible to the medical staff at Parkland.
The unadulterated Zapruder film clear shows the back of Kennedy's head intact. As does Nix. The back of the head is in shade as the limo is heading into the early afternoon sun.
How McAdams described the wound is on his web site:-
Quote
*Conspiracy books assume that "occipital" must mean the area of the occipital bone. Thus an "occipital" wound must imply missing occipital bone. Yet the House Select Committee Forensic Pathology Panel clearly isn't using the word in this way.Likewise, in the late 1960s, four eminent forensic pathologists examined the autopsy materials at the request of Attorney General Ramsey Clark. They concluded:
Quote:The foregoing observations indicate that the decedent's head was struck from behind a single projectile. It entered the occipital region 25 mm to the right of the midline and 100 mm. above the external occipital protuberance. The projectile fragmented on entering the skull, one major section leaving a trail of fine metallic debris as it passed forward and laterally to explosively fracture the right frontal and parietal bones as it emerged from the head.
Yet 100 mm. (about four inches) above the external occipital protuberance is in fact parietal bone. This is the exact point of entrance in the drawing done by Ida Dox for the House Select Committee (see above, right). Yet it is in the "occipital region."
The Boston Globe, in an article addressing this issue, noted the following:
Quote:To critics of the official investigations, it is inconceivable that the presumably skilled Dallas doctors, conversant with anatomical terms, would consistently misuse words like "cerebellum" and "occipital" and say that the wound extended into the back of the head if, in fact, it did not.But speaking to the occipital question, Grossman [one of the Parkland doctors and] a neurosurgeon, suggested that part of the confusion surrounding the location of the head wound could be the result of the imprecision with which the term "occipital" is used. While the occiput refers specifically to a bone in the lower back section of the head, Grossman said many doctors loosely use the term to refer to "the back fifth of the head . . . there is this ambiguity about what constitutes the occipital and parietal area . . . It's all very imprecise." (Boston Sunday Globe, June 21, 1981.)
Grossman's position is supported by the "Glossary" of medical definitions offered by the House Select Committee on Assassinations:Occipital-parietalThe upper, back part of the head and skull.Occipital regionThe back part of the head.See the House Select Committee, Volume 7, page 213.Of course, the issue is much like that of witnesses who said the large defect was in the "back" of the head. "Back" can mean occipital bone, or it can mean the top of the head toward the back. Back can mean "posterior," in other words.What the conspiracy theorists are doing is to exploit the imprecision of the English language to argue for wounds that fit their theories.*
End quote
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/occipital.htm
I think that about wraps up my involvement in this "non subject", if you bozos want to consider believing in fairy tales and wrap youselves up in illusions that is up to you.
Here is where Doris Nelson who wrapped up JFK's head before they put the body in the coffin - placed the wound.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/nelson.jpg
Right above the ear.
One for you "GK gunman, back of the head was blown" out dim witts to consider hey.