The Assassination of JFK

[Loyalist]

Those videos show objects which are near optimal for getting them to fall back in the direction they were shot from,

Oh really? Says who?

a light outer shell filled heavy liquid, and a bare-bone skull, both sitting loose on platforms, quite unlike a human head attached to a living body.

True. Yet they still stand as evidence that objects hit by projectiles do not always move in the same direction as the projectile. Why should we assume that the human head could not also react the same way? Actually we don't have to assume anything since it's already been established that it can.

 

[Loyalist]

I think there is a difference between how a body part reacts to trauma and what I was talking about... 'Cone of Particulates'. IOW, how the head and the rest of Kennedy reacted to to the trauma is one thing... the brain matter and skull bits are another.

Most of the brain and skull matter went forward, towards the front of the car. The Zapruder film itself shows that. Sure, there was some back splatter as well but that would not be unusual for a brain coming apart as it did.

 

[Loyalist]

Right, like Jackie crawling out on onto the trunk to recover a chunk of his brain.

Umm...what? Jackie never crawled out to retrieve a chunk of brain. She was just instinctively trying to get away from the horror.

And yeah, the cone of the initial spray suggests a frontal entry too,

Does not.

even despite all the doctoring which was done to the film.

Again...what in the world are you talking about?

 

[Loyalist]

A team of experts assembled by the Discovery Channel has recreated the assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy.
Using modern blood spatter analysis, new artificial human body surrogates, and 3-D computer simulations, the team determined that the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository was the most likely origin of the shot that killed the 35th president of the United States."The question we were trying to answer is, given the spatter evidence in a vehicle, and knowing an individual was sitting at a particular location, is there something we could use to determine where the shot originated?" said Steve Schliebe, a blood spatter and trace evidence specialist with the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department, who was part of the special investigation.
........................................
Schliebe, along with Tom Bevel, an independent expert forensic investigator, were brought in to examine the simulated crime scene. Both scientists had no idea what the experiment was for or that it was a reenactment of the JFK assassination.

The two experts found a simulated gunshot wound to the head that closely matched the wound Kennedy suffered. Most of the simulated body material had spattered forward into the car, consistent with a shot that entered the back of the head and exited toward the front. There was some back-spatter -- material that flew back in the opposite direction of the bullet's trajectory -- but not much.

The general lack of back spatter and the preponderance of spatter in another direction are two of the clues, among others, that the investigators used to pinpoint the origin of the shots.

"After Tom and I looked at the scene, we pointed up and back away from the vehicle," said Schliebe. "Apparently that lined up perfectly with where the sharpshooter had hit the model head."

Along with advances in blood spatter analysis, another advantage modern forensic experts have is simulated body parts.

The team used some of the most advanced artificial human heads in the world for the ballistic tests. Made from a proprietary mixture by Australia-based Adelaide T&E Systems, the heads have three different materials which simulate the brain, skull and external soft tissue (skin) -- that together respond to the trauma the same way a human head would.
The simulated brain material was made from a pig-skin-derived gelatin, dyed green. The skull surrogate is made from a special vinyl ester resin filled with calcium and proprietary fibers. The artificial skin uses a polyurethane and plasticizers to mimic human skin's physical properties. The head was even custom-fitted, based on Kennedy's hat size.

"The heads they used were quite interesting," said Bevel. "They were considerably more sophisticated than anything I've seen before."

In addition to the physical environment, a virtual environment was also set up. A team from Los Angeles-based Creative Differences went to the original Dallas crime scene and took precise measurements of all the angles, distances, wind speed and directions, etc., in the area to create a 3-D model of the crime scene.

To animate it, the team looked at a video of the assassination filmed by Abraham Zapruder. The Zapruder film, as it's called, is generally believed to be the most complete video of the shooting because of its clear view of the motorcade and the height it was shot from.

Only two of the 486 Zapruder frames actually show Kennedy being shot. Computer graphics expert Doug Martin highlighted the red parts of the frames and the blood resulting from the wound, and plotted them onto the computer simulation to see where the fatal shot came from.

"We might never know if Oswald pulled the trigger, but when you look at the wind pattern, the spread of the debris, the angles and distances involved, it's consistent with a shot from the sixth floor depository," said Martin.
​

 

[Loyalist]

True, but the likely location based on the head movement in the films squares with the account of the the small entrance wound in the front and large exit wound in the back from various doctors and nurses ad Parkland hospital and such.

There wasn't a large exit wound in the back, as per the official autopsy. The photos do not show any large exit wound in the back of the head. Those who did the autopsy concluded the following:

Based on the above observations it is our opinion that the deceased died as a result of two perforating gunshot wounds inflicted by high velocity projectiles fired by a person or persons unknown. The projectiles were fired from a point behind and somewhat above the level of the deceased . The observations and available information , do not permit a satisfactory estimate as to the sequence of the two wounds . The fatal missile entered the skull above and to the right of the external occipital protuberance . A portion of the projectile traversed the cranial cavity in a posterior-anterior direction (see lateral skull roentgenograms) depositing minute particles along its path. A portion of the projectile made its exit through the parietal bone on the right carrying with it portions .of cerebrum, skull and scalp. The two wounds of the skull combined with the force of the missile produced extensive fragmentation of the skull, laceration of
the superior saggital sinus, and of the right cerebral hemisphere.
​

John Lattimer was one of the first people to see the autopsy photos and x-rays. LATERAL.GIF is his drawing of the damage to Kennedy’s head.

 

[kylebisme]

...it's already been established that it can.

I read the first few parigraphs and watched some of the video, but neither seemed to be going where you suggested. So, what are you referring me to in that link specifically?

Most of the brain and skull matter went forward, towards the front of the car. The Zapruder film itself shows that. Sure, there was some back splatter as well but that would not be unusual for a brain coming apart as it did.

According to Agent Hill, the guy who crawled up onto the back of the car:

The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car. His brain was exposed. There was blood and bits of brain all over the entire rear portion of the car. Mrs. Kennedy was completely covered with blood. There was so much blood you could not tell if there had been any other wound or not, except for the one large gaping wound in the right rear portion of the head.

Also note his description of the location of the head wound.

Jackie never crawled out to retrieve a chunk of brain.

She most obviously did:

She was just instinctively trying to get away from the horror.

That's what some people absurdly claim, despite the film footage above showing she was reaching out with one hand rather than attempting to pull herself up onto the trunk.

Does not.

It does if you comprhend the physics involved and are willing to admit the logical implcations of them.

Again...what in the world are you talking about?

Something discussed previously in this thread. Feel free to read it and get back to me.

There wasn't a large exit wound in the back, as per the official autopsy.

Sure, but those autopsy records contradict the witness reports from the doctors and nurses at Parkland hospital presented in the documentary I linked in the OP, and the testimony of Agent Hill I quoted above.

 

[al981]

There wasn't a large exit wound in the back, as per the official autopsy. The photos do not show any large exit wound in the back of the head. Those who did the autopsy concluded the following

Did you just say "official" autopsy? because the dallas doctors are on record calling bullshit to anything "official", including the wound to the back of the head.

Your argument is based on calling all of these doctors liars. that doesn't look very good 😉

See below for a previous post i made to blankdodge, who's now gone / defeated from the thread and never did have the guts to respond about these doctor testimonials 😉

How about words straight from the doctors' mouth? Go do your homework and watch the OP's 10 minute video for how the government lied about JFK's neck entrance wound. Be sure to report back what you find.

Oh look Part 2, straight from the doctors themselves: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAW-bxxZfcM&feature=related

Wait, what's that? Part 3 with another doctor saying cover-up with ANOTHER one of JFK's wounds? Maybe Blankdodge will call him a liar, and then case closed 😉
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmMXfBgjsh0#t=1m20s

Another doctor? damn i'm losing count here. blankdodge must be crying now... nah, i think he's just coming up with another dodge. (NOVA footage at the 4 minute mark, linked footage starts at 2 minutes.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzeErwgoAVM#t=2m07s

 

[Loyalist]

I read the first few parigraphs and watched some of the video, but neither seemed to be going where you suggested. So, what are you referring me to in that link specifically?

What the link showed is that Kennedy was undoubtedly shot from the back. Take that with the fact that the Zapruder film shows Kennedy's head apparently moving back.

According to Agent Hill, the guy who crawled up onto the back of the car:

Constrast that with the Zapruder film showing matter being blown upward and forward. Also, consider the testimonies of John and Nellie Connally:

Nellie Connally: Then, I heard a third shot and felt matter cover us

John Connally: Immediately, I could see blood and brain tissue all over the interior of the car and all over our clothes. We were both covered with brain tissue, and there were pieces of brain tissue as big as your little finger. It was something that was unmistakable. There was no question in my mind about what it was.

Secret Service agent Roy Kellerman, who was seated in the front passenger seat, testified that matter went over him:

Senator COOPER. One other question: You said the flurry of shots came in the car. You were leaning forward talking to the driver after the first shot. What made you aware of a flurry of shots?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Senator, between all the matter that was--between all the matter that was blown off from an injured person, this stuff all came over.
Senator COOPER. What was that?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Body matter; flesh.
​

FBI Agent Robert Frazier noted that there was "[SIZE=-1]Blood, tissue, or bone frag. scattered over interior of car and on hood-on visors (both sides of rt visor)"[/SIZE]

She most obviously did:

Hmmm. perhaps. Although the agent never saw it. The alleged piece of skull that is.

It does if you comprhend the physics involved and are willing to admit the logical implcations of them.

Actually, if one truly comprehends the physics involved then the cone of the initial spray suggests a rear entry, not a frontal one.

Something discussed previously in this thread. Feel free to read it and get back to me.

Maybe later.

Sure, but those autopsy records contradict the witness reports from the doctors and nurses at Parkland hospital presented in the documentary I linked in the OP, and the testimony of Agent Hill I quoted above.

I'm sorry, what were the names of those doctors and nurses again? Where can one view their official testimonies?

 

[Loyalist]

Did you just say "official" autopsy? because the dallas doctors are on record calling bullshit to anything "official", including the wound to the back of the head.

Let's see the record. The transcripts please.

Your argument is based on calling all of these doctors liars. that doesn't look very good 😉

Your argument is based on calling the three pathologists who performed the autopsy liars. Not to mention countless others who witnessed the autopsy being performed. That doesn't look very good.😉

 

[kylebisme]

What the link showed is that Kennedy was undoubtedly shot from the back.

It doesn't show that in any tangible way you could point to specifically as I requested though, but rather just in some nebulous way as you continue to refer to it, eh?

Hmmm. perhaps. Although the agent never saw it. The alleged piece of skull that is.

I made no claims of "skull", but rather brain, and Agent Hill said "There was blood and bits of brain all over the entire rear portion of the car."

I'm sorry, what were the names of those doctors and nurses again?

Again, you can see some of them in the documentry I linked in the OP, and there is a complete list of names here. As for testmonies, I'll get you started with the first three:

Dr. William Kemp Clark: I then examined the wound in the back of the President's head. This was a large, gaping wound in the right posterior part, with cerebral and cerebellar tissue being damaged and exposed.

Dr. Robert Nelson McClelland: I was in such a position that I could very closely examine the head wound, and I noted that the right posterior portion of the skull had been extremely blasted. It had been shattered, apparently, by the force of the shot so that the parietal bone was protruded up through the scalp and seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior half, as well as some of the occipital bone being fractured in its lateral haft, and this sprung open the bones that I mentioned in such a way that you could actually look down into the skull cavity itself and see that probably a third or so, at least, of the brain tissue, posterior cerebral tissue and some of the cerebellar tissue had been blasted out.

Dr. Marion Thomas Jenkins: Part of the brain was herniated; I really think part of the cerebellum, as I recognized it, was herniated from the wound; there was part of the brain tissue, broken fragments of the brain tissue on the drapes of the cart on which the President lay.​

Your argument is based on calling the three pathologists who performed the autopsy liars. Not to mention countless others who witnessed the autopsy being performed.

No, he's just suggesting the evidence must have been tampered with at some point, by God knows who. Regardless, names and testimonies?

 

[al981]

Let's see the record. The transcripts please.

Your argument is based on calling the three pathologists who performed the autopsy liars. Not to mention countless others who witnessed the autopsy being performed. That doesn't look very good.😉

Feel free to listen to the words straight from the doctors themselves. I'll quote myself again since you didn't want to view / answer them the first time.

the doctors are also directly contradicting goverment reports and the official autopsy. of course, if you took 10 minutes to listen to their words, you would already know this. i won't be surprised if you make excuses and don't respond about what the doctors are saying in the following links😉 😉 😉 blankdodge didn't address them, and he's off the thread haha. perhaps you can do better.

edit: i'm not calling any pathologists liars. however, their accounts differ from what the dallas doctors saw and operated on in dallas. this means either one group is lying its ass off, or the wounds were altered. ^^

How about words straight from the doctors' mouth? Go do your homework and watch the OP's 10 minute video for how the government lied about JFK's neck entrance wound. Be sure to report back what you find.

Oh look Part 2, straight from the doctors themselves: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAW-bxxZfcM&feature=related

Wait, what's that? Part 3 with another doctor saying cover-up with ANOTHER one of JFK's wounds? Maybe Blankdodge will call him a liar, and then case closed 😉
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmMXfBgjsh0#t=1m20s

Another doctor? damn i'm losing count here. blankdodge must be crying now... nah, i think he's just coming up with another dodge. (NOVA footage at the 4 minute mark, linked footage starts at 2 minutes.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzeErwgoAVM#t=2m07s

 

[Ozoned]

I wish that when people started threads about me, they would at last ask my permission first. Heh. Heh.

 

[Loyalist]

I made no claims of "skull", but rather brain, and Agent Hill said "There was blood and bits of brain all over the entire rear portion of the car."

Hill saw "bits" of brain all over the rear portion of the car, not "chunks".

Dr. William Kemp Clark: I then examined the wound in the back of the President's head. This was a large, gaping wound in the right posterior part, with cerebral and cerebellar tissue being damaged and exposed.

The “gaping” wound was more to the right and top than he described but that is understandable that he would be off by some since Kennedy was lying on his back and the brain matter would have been protruding downward. Clark then went on to say that he felt that the wound was tangential. As he put it: “I defined the word "tangential" as being---striking an object obliquely, not squarely or head on…….The effects of any missile striking an organ or a function of the energy which is shed by the missile in passing through this organ when a bullet strikes the head, if it is able to pass through rapidly without shedding any energy into the brain, little damage results, other than that part of the brain which is directly penetrated by the missile. However, if it strikes the skull at an angle, it must then penetrate much more bone than normal, therefore, is likely to shed more energy, striking the brain a more powerful blow."

A tangential wound , wouldn’t you say?

Dr. Robert Nelson McClelland: I was in such a position that I could very closely examine the head wound, and I noted that the right posterior portion of the skull had been extremely blasted. It had been shattered, apparently, by the force of the shot so that the parietal bone was protruded up through the scalp and seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior half, as well as some of the occipital bone being fractured in its lateral haft, and this sprung open the bones that I mentioned in such a way that you could actually look down into the skull cavity itself and see that probably a third or so, at least, of the brain tissue, posterior cerebral tissue and some of the cerebellar tissue had been blasted out.
​

Mr. SPECTER - In what position was President Kennedy maintained from the time you saw him until the pronouncement of death?
Dr. McCLELLAND - On his back on the cart.
Mr. SPECTER - On his what?
Dr. McCLELLAND - On his back on the stretcher.
Mr. SPECTER - Was he on the stretcher at all times?
Dr. McCLELLAND - Yes.
Mr. SPECTER - In the trauma room No. 1 you described, is there any table onto which he could be placed from the stretcher?
Dr. McCLELLAND - No; generally we do not move patients from the stretcher until they are ready to go into the operating room and then they are moved onto the operating table.
Mr. SPECTER - Well, in fact, was he left on the stretcher all during the course of these procedures until he was pronounced dead?
Dr. McCLELLAND - That's right.
Mr. SPECTER - Then, at any time was he positioned in a way where you could have seen the back of his body?
Dr. McCLELLAND - No.
Mr. SPECTER - Did you observe any gunshot wound on his back?
Dr. McCLELLAND - No.

Mr. SPECTER - Did you observe the condition of the back of the President's head?
Dr. McCLELLAND - Well, partially; not, of course, as I say, we did not lift his head up since it was so greatly damaged. We attempted to avoid moving him any more than it was absolutely necessary, but I could see, of course, all the extent of the wound.

There you have it. An admission that they never got a good view of the back of the President head.

Dr. Marion Thomas Jenkins: Part of the brain was herniated; I really think part of the cerebellum, as I recognized it, was herniated from the wound; there was part of the brain tissue, broken fragments of the brain tissue on the drapes of the cart on which the President lay.

From Warren Commission Exhibit No. 392:

There was a great laceration on the right side of the head (temporal and occipital), causing a great defect in the skull plate so that there was herniation and laceration of great areas of the brain, even to the extent that the cerebellum had protruded from the wound.
Sincerely,
/s/ M. T. Jenkins
M. T. Jenkins, M.D .
​

Also, Jenkins testified to seeing a wound in the left temporal region as well. Which is rather odd , don't you think?

 

[Loyalist]

Feel free to listen to the words straight from the doctors themselves. I'll quote myself again since you didn't want to view / answer them the first time.

No thanks. I already viewed the video in the OP. 9 minutes of my life totally wasted. I should have stopped watching when Uncle Fetzer first appeared. One doctor showed up at the end, but he was just a resident when Kennedy was assassinated. The entirety of his "treatment" of Kennedy was a cutdown on Kennedy's right leg to insert an intravenous line. He then watched as others tried to save the President. His recollections on the matter, written in book form, were denounced by Journal of the American Medical Association

edit: i'm not calling any pathologists liars. however, their accounts differ from what the dallas doctors saw and operated on in dallas. this means either one group is lying its ass off, or the wounds were altered. ^^

How about "none of the above"?

Does the technology even exist today to alter wounds in such a way that the pathologists wouldn't have noticed? Your argument is that the back of Kennedy's head was basically missing. The autopsy photos show otherwise. What technology exists today that would allow such a reconstruction in short order?

 

[kylebisme]

Hill saw "bits" of brain all over the rear portion of the car, not "chunks".

Tomato/tomahto. She had just seen her husband's head blasted apart and was most obviously reaching out in a futile attempt to put the pieces back together.

Anyway, I'm still curious; what were you referring me to in this link, specifically? As long as you refuse to answer that question with more than nebulous claims, I've no interest in addressing the rest of your arguments.

 

[Loyalist]

Anyway, I'm still curious; what were you referring me to in this link, specifically? As long as you refuse to answer that question with more than nebulous claims, I've no interest in addressing the rest of your arguments.

Are you looking for an excuse to avoid having to address the bulk of my arguments?

There is nothing in the link that I provided that directly shows a human head facsimile moving in a direction opposite to that of the projectile that hit it. My initial statement regarding that link implied otherwise. Therefore, I withdraw the link.

Now, would you care to address the rest of my arguments?

 

[kylebisme]

I was simply waiting for you to prove you can muster the intellectual honesty to admit your link doesn't support what you had claimed. On to your dispute with the testimonies; would you please you shade in the approximate location of the cerebellum on this image?

 

[al981]

No thanks. I already viewed the video in the OP. 9 minutes of my life totally wasted. I should have stopped watching when Uncle Fetzer first appeared. One doctor showed up at the end, but he was just a resident when Kennedy was assassinated. The entirety of his "treatment" of Kennedy was a cutdown on Kennedy's right leg to insert an intravenous line. He then watched as others tried to save the President. His recollections on the matter, written in book form, were denounced by Journal of the American Medical Association

How about "none of the above"?

Does the technology even exist today to alter wounds in such a way that the pathologists wouldn't have noticed? Your argument is that the back of Kennedy's head was basically missing. The autopsy photos show otherwise. What technology exists today that would allow such a reconstruction in short order?

Haha. Are you dodging the testimonials of doctors i linked, again, with the piss poor excuse that you don't want to "waste time"? and how many hours have you wasted posting in this thread? Yeah.

The doctors even specify where the wounds appear to be altered and differences in the autopsy. Of course, you would know this if you didn't dodge with excuses and actually listened to their words. oops! guess i was right, dodge dodge dodge looks like we have another dodger who isn't interested in corroborating expert eyewitness facts that contradict his precious government reports 😉 😉 😉

inc more excuses.

here, i'll quote myself again again so you can dodge a 3rd (or is it a 4th?) time. blankdodge, is that you on a smurf account?:

How about words straight from the doctors' mouth? Go do your homework and watch the OP's 10 minute video for how the government lied about JFK's neck entrance wound. Be sure to report back what you find.

Oh look Part 2, straight from the doctors themselves: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAW-bxxZfcM&feature=related

Wait, what's that? Part 3 with another doctor saying cover-up with ANOTHER one of JFK's wounds? Maybe Blankdodge will call him a liar, and then case closed 😉
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmMXfBgjsh0#t=1m20s

Another doctor? damn i'm losing count here. blankdodge must be crying now... nah, i think he's just coming up with another dodge. (NOVA footage at the 4 minute mark, linked footage starts at 2 minutes.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzeErwgoAVM#t=2m07s

 

[Loyalist]

On to your dispute with the testimonies; would you please you shade in the approximate location of the cerebellum on this image?

How about I just direct you to this image? Now, would you please reciprocate and show the approximate locations of the right and left temporal regions?

 

[Loyalist]

Haha. Are you dodging the testimonials of doctors i linked, again, with the piss poor excuse that you don't want to "waste time"? and how many hours have you wasted posting in this thread? Yeah.

The doctors even specify where the wounds appear to be altered and differences in the autopsy. Of course, you would know this if you didn't dodge with excuses and actually listened to their words. oops! guess i was right, dodge dodge dodge looks like we have another dodger who isn't interested in corroborating expert eyewitness facts that contradict his precious government reports 😉 😉 😉

inc more excuses.

here, i'll quote myself again again so you can dodge a 3rd (or is it a 4th?) time. blankdodge, is that you on a smurf account?:

Either put up the transcripts or shut up. I'm not going to waste any more of my time viewing videos looking for details that you should be providing yourself. You're making the claims. Take the time to back them up. Do your own work. Don't expect me to do it for you.

 

[Loyalist]

edit: i'm not calling any pathologists liars. however, their accounts differ from what the dallas doctors saw and operated on in dallas. this means either one group is lying its ass off, or the wounds were altered. ^^

Parkland Doctors Confront the Autopsy Evidence

In 1988, Public Broadcasting's NOVA got permission to show the Parkland doctors the original autopsy photos and x-rays in the National Archives. They were allowed as much time as they wished to view the materials, and then their reactions were filmed.

[FONT=sans-serif, helvetica, arial, ms sans serif][SIZE=+1]Richard Dulaney[/SIZE][/FONT]
"I don't see evidence of any alteration of his wound in these pictures from what I saw in the emergency room."

[FONT=sans-serif, helvetica, arial, ms sans serif][SIZE=+1]Marion Jenkins[/SIZE][/FONT]
"Nothing that I've seen would make me think it had been changed from what happened that day."

[FONT=sans-serif, helvetica, arial, ms sans serif][SIZE=+1]Robert McClelland[/SIZE][/FONT]
"I find no discrepancy between the wounds as they're shown very vividly in these photographs and what I remember very vividly . . . "

[FONT=sans-serif, helvetica, arial, ms sans serif][SIZE=+1]Paul Peters[/SIZE][/FONT]
"Looking at these photos, they're pretty much as I remember President Kennedy at the time."
​

 

[Loyalist]

In 1988 Public Broadcasting's NOVA talked to four of the Parkland doctors and allowed them to examine the autopsy photos and x-rays in the National Archives in Washington. Marion "Pepper" Jenkins (right), one of the witnesses who said he saw cerebellum, explained:

[FONT=sans-serif, helvetica, arial, ms sans serif][SIZE=-1]I did say cerebellum in my first official report. And the cerebellum ordinarily is in a posterior part. And here I know very well that the wound was more anterior than that, but there was a portion of the brain that looked like it had a stalk, and is convoluted to look like what I thought was cerebellum. [/SIZE][/FONT]​

Jenkins' colleague Paul Peters also viewed the materials in the Archives, and told NOVA: " [FONT=sans-serif, helvetica, arial, ms sans serif][SIZE=-1]I said that I thought perhaps part of the cerebellum was missing, and that shows how even a trained observer can make an error in moment of urgency" [/SIZE][/FONT]​

 

[Loyalist]

kylebisme,

Would you please shade in the approximate location of the cerebellum on this image?

 

[kylebisme]

I figured I'd do you one better and mark the various portions of the brain the doctors described here:

Of course you can imagine all those doctors were wrong, and other witness too, but I've no doubt the autopsy photo you presented is a fabrication. Anyway, I've a lan-party to attend, so I'm out for the night. While I'm gone, please address my request here:

Your argument is based on calling the three pathologists who performed the autopsy liars. Not to mention countless others who witnessed the autopsy being performed.

No, he's just suggesting the evidence must have been tampered with at some point, by God knows who. Regardless, names and testimonies?

 

[Loyalist]

but I've no doubt the autopsy photo you presented is a fabrication.

Why? Are you calling the Pathologists who performed the autopsy liars? That is an official autopsy photo.

Anyway, I've a lan-party to attend, so I'm out for the night. While I'm gone, please address my request here:

I'm sorry but I don't understand your request. What exactly is it that you want me to address?