So, what?....every conspiracy can be easily explained? I do think that we went to the moon and the jury is still out on the Loch Ness monster or whatever the heck is in that lake but JFK?
Kevin, you are the gun expert. You have seen the Zapruder film. Have you ever in all of your shooting history seen a person's head snap back when I shot comes from the back? Posner's book is full of crap. We all know why JFK, MLK and RFK were killed. It's so obvious.
Hmm, now admittedly, I know little about the conspiracies involved (a bit before my time)...and I'm by no means an expert regarding bodies being shot (I'm not a hunter, and have never had to shoot anything more threatening than paper and bottles). But if you get punched in the back, rear-ended in a car, or pretty much what have you, you're head will tend to snap back (while your torso, which is of greater mass, continues to advance forward).
So, I would say "yes, available logic and physics would dictate that ones head would snap back". I suppose, theoretically, if you're dealing with a very small caliber at an extremely high velocity, the bullet might just zip through with no apparent movement of the target. But apparently that wasn't the case (you implied that the head moved, and that moving back was unexpected).
I'm also assuming that when you say shot in the back, you don't mean "in the back of the head", which would change the calculus.
Of course, Bill's point was that logic and rational thought does not enter in the arena of conspiracy, so maybe this exercise is pointless. And besides, this topic is a bit morbid.
I imagine if you asked your average person in the 1800s, 1700s, 1600s, 1500s, etc., their opinions on matters of general importance, you'd still get the occasionally enlightened view shining in a general sea of manure.
People love to believe garbage as long as it vindicates their "rightness". Ask the "witches" at Salem how their peers handled that one.
Yes, you'd think in 2007 we'd all be able to see and think clearly, but I think by default we're still huddled in the cave and hooting out at the darkness, making up reasons for How Things Are.
Critical thinking is a skill to be nurtured and developed. It needs to be sharpened and honed to stay keen. If one is not taught to think, then you end up with a mind that sponges up the juciest and most exciting explanations as truth. Facts and logic are just too boring and difficult to bother with when there's an unbelievable secret reality out there for the taking.
At least that's what the Yeti told me, and I believe him.
Note:
All avatars and any images or other media embedded in comments were hosted on the JS-Kit website and have been lost;
references to haloscan comments have been partially automatically remapped, but accuracy is not guaranteed and corrections are solicited.
If you notice any problems with this page or wish to have your home page link updated, please contact John Hardin <jhardin@impsec.org>
JS-Kit/Echo comments for article at http://smallestminority.blogspot.com/2007/04/bills-still-got-it.html (3 comments)
Tentative mapping of comments to original article, corrections solicited.
So, what?....every conspiracy can be easily explained? I do think that we went to the moon and the jury is still out on the Loch Ness monster or whatever the heck is in that lake but JFK?
Kevin, you are the gun expert. You have seen the Zapruder film. Have you ever in all of your shooting history seen a person's head snap back when I shot comes from the back? Posner's book is full of crap. We all know why JFK, MLK and RFK were killed. It's so obvious.
Hmm, now admittedly, I know little about the conspiracies involved (a bit before my time)...and I'm by no means an expert regarding bodies being shot (I'm not a hunter, and have never had to shoot anything more threatening than paper and bottles). But if you get punched in the back, rear-ended in a car, or pretty much what have you, you're head will tend to snap back (while your torso, which is of greater mass, continues to advance forward).
So, I would say "yes, available logic and physics would dictate that ones head would snap back". I suppose, theoretically, if you're dealing with a very small caliber at an extremely high velocity, the bullet might just zip through with no apparent movement of the target. But apparently that wasn't the case (you implied that the head moved, and that moving back was unexpected).
I'm also assuming that when you say shot in the back, you don't mean "in the back of the head", which would change the calculus.
Of course, Bill's point was that logic and rational thought does not enter in the arena of conspiracy, so maybe this exercise is pointless. And besides, this topic is a bit morbid.
I imagine if you asked your average person in the 1800s, 1700s, 1600s, 1500s, etc., their opinions on matters of general importance, you'd still get the occasionally enlightened view shining in a general sea of manure.
People love to believe garbage as long as it vindicates their "rightness". Ask the "witches" at Salem how their peers handled that one.
Yes, you'd think in 2007 we'd all be able to see and think clearly, but I think by default we're still huddled in the cave and hooting out at the darkness, making up reasons for How Things Are.
Critical thinking is a skill to be nurtured and developed. It needs to be sharpened and honed to stay keen. If one is not taught to think, then you end up with a mind that sponges up the juciest and most exciting explanations as truth. Facts and logic are just too boring and difficult to bother with when there's an unbelievable secret reality out there for the taking.
At least that's what the Yeti told me, and I believe him.
Note: All avatars and any images or other media embedded in comments were hosted on the JS-Kit website and have been lost; references to haloscan comments have been partially automatically remapped, but accuracy is not guaranteed and corrections are solicited.
If you notice any problems with this page or wish to have your home page link updated, please contact John Hardin <jhardin@impsec.org>