Author Topic: Kennedy Assassination Conspiracies (Read 2193 times)

Sparkey98 · « **on:** January 23, 2011, 07:43:22 PM »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAWdzh-dmSo&feature=related#
Discuss this stuff. Personally, I believe in the "man on the grassy knoll" and that there was two snipers.

Resetti's Replicas · « **Reply #1 on:** January 23, 2011, 07:45:18 PM »

I subscribe to the Red Dwarf theory, that

shot JFK

Sparkey98 · « **Reply #2 on:** January 23, 2011, 08:03:26 PM »

Interesting...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSBXW1-VGmM&feature=related#

frezal · « **Reply #3 on:** January 23, 2011, 09:23:01 PM »

Kennedy was shot by one shooter from the book depository. This one shooter was most likely Lee Harvey Oswald. This is the only theory put forth that matches with the ballistics evidence. The end.

Enigm@ · « **Reply #4 on:** January 23, 2011, 09:27:29 PM »

I think he was killed by Nazi Zombies...

Scrap Daddy · « **Reply #5 on:** January 23, 2011, 09:29:48 PM »

he was never assassinated and has been working as a gas station attendant in Lawton, Oklahoma.

look harder, the proof is there.

Enigm@ · « **Reply #6 on:** January 23, 2011, 09:32:35 PM »

Quote from: Scrap Daddy on January 23, 2011, 09:29:48 PM

he was never assassinated and has been working as a gas station attendant in Lawton, Oklahoma.

look harder, the proof is there.

ORLY? I only live like a mile away from Lawton, so I guess I should check.

Resetti's Replicas · « **Reply #7 on:** January 23, 2011, 09:33:39 PM »

In all seriousness, I do believe that it was just one not-quite-right-in-the-mind guy acting alone.

That was the case with Presidents Garfield & Reagan and Rep. Gifford.

And remember that JFK was riding in a top-down convertible. It doesn't exactly take a genius to pull that off.

Resetti's Replicas · « **Reply #8 on:** January 23, 2011, 09:35:14 PM »

Quote from: Scrap Daddy on January 23, 2011, 09:29:48 PM

he was never assassinated and has been working as a gas station attendant in Lawton, Oklahoma.

look harder, the proof is there.

I heard he got a job as a commercial slogan writer

"Ask not what your Klondike Bar would do for you. Ask what you would do for a Klondike Bar"

frezal · « **Reply #9 on:** January 23, 2011, 09:56:48 PM »

Quote from: Scrap Daddy on January 23, 2011, 09:29:48 PM

he was never assassinated and has been working as a gas station attendant in Lawton, Oklahoma.

look harder, the proof is there.

Lies. He's been living in an old folks home in East Texas.

Pwnator · « **Reply #10 on:** January 23, 2011, 10:31:18 PM »

Quote from: Sypher878 on January 23, 2011, 10:28:06 PM

his head won't go back if he's shot from the back.

FALSE.

As you can see from the orientation of his head, the head's center of gravity is behind the pivot point of his vertebrae. A bullet's momentum is not enough to send his head forward. If the bullet does have that momentum, it will just through the skull. Without control, the head will just flop to the place physics wants it to - to the back.

Your argument is invalid.

Urjak · « **Reply #11 on:** January 23, 2011, 10:36:45 PM »

Quote from: Pwnator on January 23, 2011, 10:31:18 PM

A bullet's momentum is not enough to send his head forward.

Your evidence? Not necessarily saying you are wrong.

Pwnator · « **Reply #12 on:** January 23, 2011, 10:42:12 PM »

That's what my Physics teacher taught us (she used friendlier examples, though). I could use kinematics equations, but that kinda ruins the mood. :P

Mythbusters also disproved it, albeit on a larger scale. That extreme throwback action from the opponents you see from the movies when they're hit by buckshot or .357 rounds - they're fake. Even a deer slug can't make them budge.

Urjak · « **Reply #13 on:** January 23, 2011, 10:46:52 PM »

Quote from: Pwnator on January 23, 2011, 10:42:12 PM

Mythbusters also disproved it, albeit on a larger scale. That extreme throwback action from the opponents you see from the movies when they're hit by buckshot or .357 rounds - they're fake. Even a deer slug can't make them budge.

Mythbuster disproved the idea that a bullet can throw a whole person back with a bullet. They make no comment on whether a head could be blown forward or not.

If you could sight some sort of head-specific proof it would be ideal (not that I don't trust your physics teacher :P).

Pwnator · « **Reply #14 on:** January 23, 2011, 10:53:44 PM »

The basic concept still applies. A person is thrown back because the momentum the bullet carries, when combined with the weight the person has, can still give it a visible final velocity (I mean REALLY getting thrown back. Flopping doesn't count).

This can be better explained if you shift your view from the person shot to the person shooting. If you fire a shotgun, you experience recoil. That recoil is the force felt from Newton's Third Law. Both the shooter and the buckshot experience the same momentum. It's just that you are extremely heavier than the buckshot, which is why you move at an extremely slower velocity (which you can easily control by widening your stance or by shifting your own center of gravity forward). Seeing that the shooter and the person shot have relatively equal masses when compared to the buckshot - if you can't get thrown off by the recoil, the person shot won't get thrown back.

Larrain · « **Reply #15 on:** January 23, 2011, 11:03:01 PM »

Quote from: Pwnator on January 23, 2011, 10:53:44 PM

if you can't get thrown off by the recoil, the person shot won't get thrown back.

Long story short :P

When I saw the first post I really thought ACAMS had created it.

Urjak · « **Reply #16 on:** January 23, 2011, 11:05:39 PM »

But we are only talking about someone's head being pushed forward. When you fire a gun, you feel the recoil. What is to stop this bullet from entering JFK's head, shifting the center of gravity so that the head would flop forwards if left on its own, and then disabling the brain so that the head goes limp?

The necessary force to shift someone's head forward shouldn't need to be all that much.

Pwnator · « **Reply #17 on:** January 23, 2011, 11:15:16 PM »

Aha! And I shall now use the concept of impulse!

When you fall from a skyscraper, you experience a certain amount of momentum. Without any padding to soften your landing, you die. With some padding, you might survive the fall. In both circumstances, you experience an equal amount of impulse, but you experience different amount of forces. In the first instance, you experience a huge force as it took you milliseconds to transfer all your momentum to the ground. In the second instance, you experience a smaller force as it took you a second or more to transfer all your momentum to the ground. The bullet went through the head, meaning it was still transferring momentum inside his head. If the bullet didn't pierce the head, it would've been another story, though I doubt that would still be enough to force his head forward.

frezal · « **Reply #18 on:** January 23, 2011, 11:20:06 PM »

Quote from: Sypher878 on January 23, 2011, 10:28:06 PM

think about it, his head won't go back if he's shot from the back.

i'll miss not knowing him though.

Wrong. As the bullet exits the head, it sprays the brains and junk out creating a rocket-like effect. Thus, the head goes backwards. For a more entertaining explanation:

Urjak · « **Reply #19 on:** January 23, 2011, 11:22:36 PM »

The main issue we have here is speculation. Neither of us actually know how much force a bullet can impart (depends on the bullet I would imagine).

I would argue a bullet could push someone's head forward depending on the gun and bullet type.

EDIT: Frezal's video is good enough for me.