|
|
Post by Paul Ernst on Dec 11, 2019 18:27:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Ernst on Dec 11, 2019 18:54:21 GMT -5
In this example you can clearly see what I mean. Same photo, same parts. However, the person has turned. (The bullet orbit stays the same)! You see a totally different image and trajectory of the projectile between the first photo and the second.  Cheers, Paul Ernst |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2020 12:42:51 GMT -5
In this example you can clearly see what I mean. Same photo, same parts. However, the person has turned. (The bullet orbit stays the same)! You see a totally different image and trajectory of the projectile between the first photo and the second. Cheers, Paul Ernst
Paul! My former Sancho Panza! Co-founder of JFK Numbers, not too shabby!
The web page below explores the issues of moving from 2D to 3D, a task much more complex than people imagine.
(1) Start drawing vectors in the top right quadrant (Bird's view). Click-drag-unclick.
(2) Raise the elastic cordon in the lower quadrants to higher floors by grabbing them by the short hairs, err, I mean: endpoints.
(3) The mouse wheel is for zooming in/out. Right clicking works, too.
(4) Given the fact that this historic tool is YOURS, questions, petitions, suggestions, criticism are most welcome.
Future Features:
The limo will go crusin' downhill Elm Street with your clicks. A laser red dot will follow the victim's back. Sadly, nobody will have Jack's back. :-(
End Result?
The SBT/MBT will become history. Another of the JFK Numbers will be solved.
Folks: There are 3 possibilities, I hope you know them well. You will be quizzed on this.
-Ramon
JFK Numbers
Disclaimer
Space accuracy: 3 mm, Time accuracy: sub-second.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2020 13:44:57 GMT -5
Paul:
This is an excellent example. It belongs in the category "The Bullshit That We Have Been Fed"
Details later...
-Ramon
JFK Numbers
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2020 14:23:29 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2020 15:01:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Ernst on May 17, 2020 16:50:52 GMT -5
Hi Ramon. Folks: There are 3 possibilities, I hope you know them well. You will be quizzed on this. I do hope so!My exaples concerining models I made in a 3D program not in a 2D model or program or picture like a zap frame and draw a line in it to suposed the trajectory. Do you really believe this picture?  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2020 20:07:20 GMT -5
Hi Ramon. Folks: There are 3 possibilities, I hope you know them well. You will be quizzed on this. I do hope so!![]()
=============
Paul : First, allow me to enunciate the THREE possibilities, once the SBT/MBT has been exhaustively studied by any user in the world who has a browser and, of course, the Authoritative Entities:
- Our Top Universities
- Worldwide centers of scientific research
- Leading Schools of 3D Design (including Dale Myers' Alma Mater)
If you have not, PLEASE read this thread: "The two GUI Tools" The two GUI Tools <<== This is a clickable URL
Scenario: During months the GUI Tool No. 1 (aka Robertson Measurement Tool), whose job is to bring total numerical clarity to the SBT/MBT, with a millimetric (laser based), millisecond precision has failed to produce a solution.
The possibilities are:
(1) There was a trajectory/path within an acceptable degree of colinearity. Gerald Ford and Arlen Specter were correct. One shot pierced the two targets, like a shish kabob.
(2) That trajectory was impossible. No single shot could have done all that.
As many were afraid or pessimistically predicting the ultimate result was:
(3) It is undecidable. The whole problem boils down to the choice of distances and angles [*]
Even worse, the top experts in each field, from the best universities worldwide have embarked in endless academic debates:
"The paper by the Stanford group failed to properly simulate the rotational movement of the projectile inside the first victim's neck. Our calculations show degrees and inches of difference, making the SBT/MBT possible".
"You are using the wrong material for your bullet! The Mannlicher-Carcano bullets are much smoother, so the rotation is longer!"
"The trajectory inside the first victim is a moot point. The calculations so far are based on erroneous measurements as the images from the restored home movies clearly demonstrate the real position of the automobile at the time of the impact(s). It was substantially to closer to Elm Street midline and further downhill than it has been assumed".
and so on, and so forth, and stuff like that...
What do we do?
It is time to bring The Big Guns!
Web Based GUI Tool No. 2
-Ramon
JFK Numbers
[*] The authors of the Eleven Fraudulent Studies have some splainin' to do.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Ernst on May 17, 2020 20:43:29 GMT -5
1. Whe have to deal with the data what is avaible, Ramon wrote!
1A. Compare the data from the FBI re-enactment with the WC data (There is a big difference)!
1B. When was JFK and JBC hit...it is all speculation!
1C. Some others have all ready proved that Myers is wrong at several points.
1D. The HSCA used a margin of error of less than 8 degrees!!!!
1E. What makes Arlan Specter, Dale Myers, Ford, etc weapon specialists, (I have a experience from 38,5 years in the Army and Marines).
1F. The SBT is a theory and nothing more! Believe it or not.
1G. I proved that Dale Myers and some others are wrong at several points.
1H. Follow the law of physics and you will see that bullet not zig zag in the air with a speed of over 2000 Feet/sec hitting no bones!
Further you own me a answer on the posted picture from Dale Myers...Do you believe that?.
@2. I agree not possible that way, from that spot/ the cramped nest.
@3 I agree and whe don’t know the exact timing and angles! That's correct so that also counts for those Acedemic sspecialists!
|
|
