Let's agree on the basics. The melon moves towards the gun, right?
If you push a tipsy object it is going to fall in the direction it is weighted towards. If you shoot a solid, grounded object it will fly away from you and the projectile.
So now you can point me to your series of bookmarks by objective investigators showing how the divine light of truth only shines through your government and out the mouths of their appointed propagandists on the 6PM news.....
Let us not forget Newton's 3rd Law.If you shoot a solid, grounded object it will fly away from you and the projectile. I think that's pretty self evident what I am saying here.
Assuming the gun and shooter are at rest, the force on the bullet is equal to that on the gun-shooter. This is due to Newton's third law of motion (For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction). Consider a system where the gun and shooter have a combined mass M and the bullet has a mass m. When the gun is fired, the two systems move away from one another with new velocities V and v respectively. But the law of conservation of momentum states that the magnitudes of their momenta must be equal:
Since force equals the rate of change in momentum and the initial momenta are zero, the force on the bullet must therefore be the same as the force on the gun/shooter.
Let us not forget Newton's 3rd Law.
Exactly. Just pointing out that if the President moved away from the shooter then the shooter would need to move in the opposite direction with equal force. Anyone who has shot a rifle knows you do not fly back when you shoot it.The problem with Newton's laws is that they are idealized laws for point masses, and are not that useful in describing what happens in a complex elastic system that is in contact with other systems.
The melon here moves towards the gun. So the fact that Kennedy's head moves towards Oswald is not evidence that someone other than Oswald fired that shot.
The problem is that you are not even addressing the point of the video I am talking about. If you watch the entire Zapruder film you will see (a few frames after the segment you posted) Kennedy's head is flung backwards so violently it is up over the rear of the seat. That is the part where Jackie begins to scramble towards the back of the car.
Many "conspiracy theories" online seem of deeply flawed logic. Eg, how could someone plant airplane parts all around the Pentagon to hide the fact it was really hit by a missile before reporters arrived? And yet other conspiracy theories seem to be very much factually grounded and very much worthy of objective investigation. Eg, was Kennedy the first victim of gunfire in history to be flung towards the direction of the projectile?
Watch the Zapruder film. Anyone can see Kennedy's head is blow backwards almost immediately after your clip ends. You deliberately posted that clip instead of the entire video for a reason. The entire Zapruder film indicates a massive impact wound directed from the front.
Your melon test only proves you are capable of putting up straw men and distractions, not debating facts.
The issue of the blood splatter is an issue of contention and is one of the reasons people believe the Zapruder film may have been doctored.
In 1998, Roland Zavada, a product engineer from Kodak who led the team that invented Kodachrome II, studied the film at the behest of the National Archives and concluded that the film was an “in camera original” and that any alleged alterations were not feasible. Any attempt to create a false "in camera original" by copying Zapruder's film would leave visible artifacts of "image structure constraints of grain; [and] contrast and modulation transfer function losses.…It has no evidence of optical effects or matte work including granularity, edge effects or fringing, [or] contrast buildup
Again, triangulation as taught and practiced by professional assassins.
Again, a melon is hardly a good choice to examine the kinetic forces at play when a human head is shot from an unknown angle and distance.
So in other words, no you don't have anything to back up your theory."Any documentation to back up this theory?"
This is pretty standard knowledge for those trained in assassination of moving targets. Now, do you need documented evidence that the tires on my car are really round? Because you know, without such evidence it's only a "theory". If you have no knowledge or nothing to contribute why are you on the thread?
Kennedy, Gulf of Tonkin, Watergate, Iran Contra, Clinton murders, fake WMD claims, fake Bin Laden take-out, Seal Team 6, fast and furious, Benghazi, NSA Prism. This is basically a trial and your defendant has absolutely no credibility left. None. You are a group applogizing for known criminals, murderers and bonafide liars.
And you will need more than your opinion to sway most peoples thoughts on this forum."A lot of people may believe in bunk but that doesn't change the fact that it is bunk!"
Sound to me like the boot-licking dunces that believe a gullible dupe fired an inacurate WW2 rifle striking the president and Connally (with magic bullets) at distances near 100M. A weapon that even the govenment claims takes 2.3 seconds to cycle. If you believe in the lone gunman theory, you're not just anti-scientific. You're downright stupid.
I don't need to trust any government claim, only physics."And you will need more than your opinion to sway most peoples thoughts on this forum."
Sure! If you can provide me with *any* reason why *anyone* would treat US Govermnet claims on *anything* with any seriousness in the year 2013 I would be happy to reciprocate the favour! You see, faith and credibility are fickle things and you've been running on E for a very, very long time now.