cmumailman (January 7th, 2009 @ 5:29 am)

4. Dr. Cliff Spiegelman & Dr. William James of Texas A&M, Dr. William Tobin of The FBI, and Mr. Stuart Wexler subsequently concluded in May 2007 that "evidence used to rule out a second assassin is fundamentally flawed, and that "many bullets within a box of MC bullets have similar composition." Thus, it was not true that such matches are extraordinarily rare (as per Guinn). Asked & answered.

cmumailman (January 7th, 2009 @ 5:28 am)

2. Randich & Grant also disproved there is little variation in levels within a single bullet. A sample taken from one portion of a bullet might have a level higher or lower than one taken from another portion of the same bullet. Guinn measured bits taken from only a small portion of his test bullets. Fragments with similar levels could have come from different bullets & vice-versa. 3. The number of samples and tests were inadequate to draw the sweeping statistical conclusions Dr. Guinn made.

cmumailman (January 7th, 2009 @ 5:25 am)

1. Dr. Vincent Guinn of the HSCA stated MC bullets were unique because the trace levels of antimony varied. The levels do vary, but so do levels in many jacketed bullets. The levels vary because the amount of antimony has no bearing on the bullet's hardness. The varying levels he found in JFK's fragments did not prove they had come from MC shells; they could have come from many kinds of jacketed rounds.

cmumailman (January 7th, 2009 @ 5:23 am)

"I just asked him for proof that the Scientific community disagrees with the methods that the HSCA used to determine of Oswald's rife was the one that fired the shots. Notice he did not answer." Arther1045 OK if you insist, but this is one case where a paraphrase is more appropriate than a direct citation: Dr. Erik Randich and Dr. Pat Grant of The Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, writing in the Journal of Forensic Science:

grassyknollkiller (January 7th, 2009 @ 4:26 am)

artherhas1045assholes, tell us about your favorite butt-boyfriend dvp1122(AKA vonpeiterlicker), a known dis-agent. The very recent vids by vonpeiterlicker, about 2-3 weeks old, are obvious frauds. artherhas1045assholes had to tell us of their existance. Otherwise, who would know of them?One has Ruby confessing there was no conspiracy. It was very amateurish. How long have you known vonpeiterlicker, artherhas1045assholes? Which one of you is the others bitch?

davidrocknroll (January 7th, 2009 @ 4:13 am)

simple it was planned live with it

cmumailman (January 7th, 2009 @ 4:05 am)

"I just asked him for proof that the Scientific community disagrees with the methods that the HSCA used to determine of Oswald's rife was the one that fired the shots. Notice he did not answer." Arther1045 Oh. Are we going to start debating SPECIFIC points now? Really? Are you sure that's what you want to do here on a DISCUSSION board? Wouldn't it be more appropriate to just call me a 'nut', 'crazy', 'insane', and your latest hurled epithet, 'obsessed'? Are you sure you're feeling all right?

cmumailman (January 7th, 2009 @ 3:52 am)

"I already used citations in the Ruby debate. i noticed you didn't comment on that." Arther1045 No need to comment on something that didn't happen. I invite anyone reading this to fact-check Arther's idea of using a citation. He makes a vague reference to a death bed interview with Ruby, for instance. How is anyone supposed to look that up? If, say, Bugliosi mentions that interview & quotes it, you can cite his book & the page number. Referring vaguely to something isn't the same as citing it.

cmumailman (January 7th, 2009 @ 3:27 am)

"cmum still obsessed I see." Arther1045 "cmum . . . is all over the place." Arther1045 How can I be obsessed & be all over the place at the same time? Are you all over the place?

cmumailman (January 7th, 2009 @ 3:21 am)

"Certainly life is far too short to waste it 'debating' with an abusive potty-mouthed jerk." Well said. Oh, wait--you mean you weren't talking about Arther?

cmumailman (January 7th, 2009 @ 3:17 am)

violajerk: I appreciate the kind words. I consider you worthy but not an adversary. On the one hand, I'm trying to be completely straight with Arther & answer/confront his points. On the other hand, there's a subtle undercurrent in my posts, a kind of intelligence test that Arther is failing miserably. Since his lack of "subtlety" is painfully obvious, I don't know what that says about me. But sometimes when a horse fly is buzzing around your head, at some point you just start swatting at it.

adm7007 (January 7th, 2009 @ 2:11 am)

Frontal shot from the Elm Street storm drain.