Motion Stabilization Of The Critical Frames

Kennedy

I motion stabilized the critical frames of the JFK shooting. The shot caused the cameraman to jerk.

You can see that he was hit in the head from the front by an incendiary round, which caught fire, exploded his head, and jerked it backwards.

He was slumped forward from a previous rear shot. The incendiary device struck him in the front of the skull and lodged there. You can see flames shooting out of the front of his skull in each subsequent frame. His skull was jerked sharply backwards over the next quarter of a second, and by the last frame you can see that much of his skull is gone.

Oswald was behind him.

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

40 Responses to Motion Stabilization Of The Critical Frames

  1. jack b :-) says:

    It’s bush’s fault.

  2. Laz says:

    He was doomed when he approved the issue of silver certificates (i.e. real non-federal reserve currency)

  3. Eric Barnes says:

    Richard Sprague did a great job on the JFK Assassination and related events.
    http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/ToA/

  4. omnologos says:

    what’s the vertical black line in frame 4?

  5. Traitor In Chief says:

    The autopsy photos are online. He had been shot in the throat, and reacting to that wound with Jackie attending to him when he is hit in the right front forehead, throwing his head back, blowing the back of his skull off, and ejecting much of his brain. He has what looks like a single entry wound in the back of his neck, but this could have been an exit wound also. The large hole in his anterior throat is said to be for a tracheotomy but one can only wonder why as he would have been clearly DOA. The autopsy report recorded a tiny entry wound where the tracheotomy incision was ostensibly created.

    http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/factoid5.htm

  6. Aurora Svant says:

    Well, it seems the front wound is consistent with an exit wound, as the following experiment shows :

    part 1 (grassy knoll gunman would have killed Jackie as well) : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RCX3RdVHqo

    part 2 (re-creation with shooter sitting at Harvey’s location surprisingly consistent with recorded facts) : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RX2phbWmgA

    It seems surprising, but it was a fair experiment and showed it is plausible.

    • juergenuie says:

      Interesting, but the theory that Jackie would have been killed from a shot coming from the Grassy Knoll is clearly incorrect. If you look at the Zapruder Film, her head is clearly in front of JFK. You could even say that she might have been hit at that point, if a shot would be from the back. Jackie would have also receive a lot of the matter flying forward.
      Even the photo from Mary Moorman (9:53) shows Jackie’s head clearly in front of JFK’s head Jackie’s moved forward at the time when Mary Moorman is seen in the Zapruder Film. It looks like that Jackie is trying to listen, with her right ear in front of JFK’s head.

      If one part in a reconstruction is flawed how could one believe everything else?.

    • His head was thrown backwards. The very bright incendiary device which exploded his head entered from the front.

    • juergenuie says:

      Bodyguard Clint Hill: Material from the presidents head gone to the right REAR. … Jackie tried to retrieve this from the BACK of the car.

  7. Perfekt says:

    Sorry, I see what I should see if a bullet entered the back of the head and shattered. Since the car is moving in high speed, his head falls backward when no longer held in positon by muscles and other tissue.

    • You would probably also expect to have your head ripped off when you fall asleep on airplane at 600 MPH.

    • SilverBear says:

      The limo was not moving at a high speed. SS Agents were able to keep apace on foot, until after the assassination, when the driver speeded up.

      Many people who have no experience with firearms have no idea the amount of kinetic energy delivered by a rifle bullet. Even if JFK were, in fact, hit with a round from the Carcano rifle that was alleged to be Oswald’s weapon in the assassination, the energy delivered ( with a muzzle velocity of 2,300 ft/s, delivering 1,897 ft·lb of force) does not simply kill a man like a heart attack would. Especially if it hits bone (like a skull), the transfer of force will knock the target forward in the direction of the bullet, irrespective of any muscle relaxation or muscle spasm.

      And it’s not really disputed that most of the skull and brain matter –that was ejected by the force of the head shot– was blasted backwards onto the trunk of the limo. The physics necessary for a rear shot to produce these effects simply don’t exist in our space/time universe.

    • juergenuie says:

      Watch “Zapruder Film Slow Motion” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iU83R7rpXQY and you can see that his body and head is bend forward (image 313) when the bullet hit.

      What high speed? The bodyguard Clint Hill jump after the third shot onto the car when Jackie climbs up from her seat onto the back of the car.
      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2236766/Clint-Hill-Jackie-Kennedys-bodyguard-reveals-decades-guilt-49th-anniversary-JFKs-assassination.html
      “‘Blood, brain matter and bone fragments exploded from back of his head’

      • SilverBear says:

        Thank you for fleshing out my comment with a couple good links, juergenuie. It’s always better to give people an avenue for research.

  8. Andy DC says:

    I have seen that shot quite a few times. Common sense would seem to dictate the shot was from the front, based on the way his head reacted.

  9. John Silver says:

    All right, a crime was committed.
    Qui bono?

    • …the forces of darkness, that’s all I really know…his assassination was a dividing mark in the history of the United States, between general trust in our government and deep distrust of it (by the saner half of the populace, it is now apparent, to me).

    • Eric Barnes says:

      There were a number of vested interests that wanted him gone.
      The CIA, the FBI, the Mafia, strenuously anti-communist people in the defense department and their contractors. Probably very high people in one or all of these organizations.

      JFK was brave and idealistic, but not terribly smart.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_Kennedy_assassination_conspiracy_theory

      The loss of his fathers advice because of stroke may have left him without a rudder.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_P._Kennedy,_Sr.

      There are numerous books on the Kennedy family which provide excellent background to the politics and mindset of both JFK and the Kennedy’s.

      It all makes for very good reading.

    • Mike Mangan says:

      LBJ! Johnson was about to be exposed by the Kennedy machine for his various criminal machinations and dumped off the ticket. Who was the one guy that had access to all of the needed elements in the CIA, the Mafia, and the Dallas Police Department? LBJ. Who had the most to lose if Kennedy lived? LBJ. Who had the most to gain from his death? LBJ. It was a team effort, but one man stood to gain all in the end.

      • John Silver says:

        I think you nailed it!

      • Ben says:

        To gain all that power, and then not run in 1968? Come on…

        If one goes to all that trouble to acquire power, one is not then going to give up the power.

        If one is power hungry, one remains power hungry.

        Look Ma, I’m cured and headed back to Texas.

        • Vietnam was a complete disaster and Johnson had no chance of winning an election, even after another Kennedy was assassinated during the primary.

          Bobby Kennedy would have easily won the 1968 Dem primary – if he hadn’t been murdered. Just a coincidence, no doubt.

  10. The “consensus” explanation for the killing of JFK was just a prelude to the madness of the “global warming” delusion of today, one of an as-yet uncounted number of such events. (I can tell you the last one, too, before the “global warming” debate-war of the last few years: The public debate, and legal smackdown, of “Intelligent Design”, which was also a subornation of true science to a favored dogma, against deliberate design of things in the “natural” world.) We are in the middle of a playing out of Leftist false dogma now, but the bigger picture is a general incompetence on all sides, across all the sciences, due to long-nurtured dogmas and the determined ignoring and dismissing of contrary evidence. The books of Ignatius Donnelly, Charles Fort, Immanuel Velikovsky and Dewey B. Larson should have been required reading, and serious, determined study, by every student of physical science over the last 130 years. And my unprecedented research is the confirmation of all the truthseekers, like them, who have struggled against the consensus of their day for more solid ground to stand on. If academic scientists cannot stand up and reverse the climate consensus–and it looks rather like they can’t, and won’t–then not just climate science will have failed, but the entire academic system in which it is embedded, and all the other sciences, especially the earth and life sciences.

    • Jeffk says:

      The Discovery Channel or another cable did a reenactment using the latest scientific knowledge and proved the shots came from the Book Depository as suspected. The angle of the trajectory, the skull exploding and the head jerking back involuntarily were all proven.
      But I know how we feel about some other scientists. Don’t let that cloud your judgement.

      • I always trust appeals to authority over my own eyes

        Sent from my Virgin Mobile Android-Powered Device

      • GoneWithTheWind says:

        Well ! That settles it. The Discovery channel did a reenactment and the call on the field has been reaffirmed. What a suprise. I don’t know about you but I certainly expect that deer I shoot to lurch in my direction from the effect of the shot. You would have to be clueless to not know he was shot from the front. As someone else pointed out to shoot three shots in five seconds and hit your mark with that rifle at that angle is incredible. In fact the FBI tried to duplicate the shot with more then one expert marksman and was unable to. Then there is the problem with the magic bullet. The magic bullet was a necessity because clearly there were at least four shots but that would mean a second shooter so the Warren commission simply allowed that a single bullet changed trajectory three times and solved that little problem. Then there is the matter of Oswalds last words which were that he was framed and he was going to give information that would expose the real killers. But wait! But wait! Within minutes of saying that Oswald was shot by a low level Mafia guy. Who could have seen that coming. Then we find out the Mafia guy is dying from cancer… Hmmmm… So someone gave this dying Mafia guy something in exchange for him shooting Oswald then sitting out his last days in prison. But who could have done that? DUH! The Mafia.

        The Mafia killed Kennedy because Joe Kennedy made a deal with the Chicago mob that they would elect JFK in return for being left alone. But after JFK got elected not only did he go after the Mafia but he started screwing around with the Mafia Kingpin’s main squeeze (Marilyn Monroe). Under Mafia rules that means death and that’s what he got. Two shooters and Oswald wasn’t even one of them, he was a patsy. Simple as that.

  11. SilverBear says:

    There seems to be a great divide amongst humans with regard to rational thought and analysis. Only a tiny minority are willing to “go where” those tools take them. Most people, instead, use them as excuses: excuses why they SHOULDN’T consider (for themselves) any explanation for anything, if not given the Seal of Approval by authority figures. “After all, those Experts already figured it out! They rationally analyzed it! If _you_ disagree, then you ought to be banished from the tribe!”

    Maybe human psychology just isn’t really suited to anything more complex than a hunter-gatherer lifestyle. I don’t really know, But. . . “I don’t know,” despite considering this issue. What bothers me, as a pro-human sort of guy, are all the people who don’t WANT to know anything but what their tribal chieftains tell them.
    😦

  12. Brad says:

    With all due respect, “incendiary round”? Much like CAGW, that’s just making shit up.

  13. Brad says:

    Another way of interpreting the video.

    • SilverBear says:

      A way contrary to physics! Try this all day long with a .22 rifle and hard-shelled container full of jello (to keep the cost of the experiment low, and legal) and tell me what percentage of results you get that conform to this odd notion that a secondary impact (that the bullet exiting the back of his head –impacting yet another layer of bone) will move an object in the direction _opposite_ to the direction of the applied force.

  14. benfrommo says:

    I think most people realize that there was funny business in the assassination. If for no other reason, the fact that it was physically impossible to shoot the rifle he did shoot in the time span given that should answer that question for us. Even the best marksman in the world could not shoot the gun as fast as Lee Harvey Oswald did on that fateful day, and having watched the Mythbuster’s take on it and several other documentaries I can confirm that not one documentary or scientist has ever given a plausible explanation on how Lee Harvey Oswald somehow managed to get 3 shots off in the time span he did.

    The second you have one glaring hole in the official story is the second it all breaks down. Sure, other sources have proven “its possible” that the shot came from behind, but they also never proved conclusively that the grassy knoll shot did not happen either. Its all a red herring in the end, because to punch holes in the official story is as easy as showing that someone else had to take a shot. It does not matter if that shot actually killed the president, what matters is that there was another shot and the official investigation never even mentioned it.

    And that is the problem right there. Besides the glaring inconsistencies in the evidence, you also have a situation where its physically impossible for this to even occur as written. There was a poll I saw about 2 years ago where they found that 75% of Americans believe that there “was more to the story on the assassination than what was stated. To think that 3/4 of Americans distrust our leaders….its almost scary.

    • omnologos says:

      Another question I have is…what a fantastic coincidence for it all to happen exactly more or less in the exact front of Zapruder’s camera. Or alternatively, the position chosen by Zapruder to shoot the motorcade had something to do with the position chosen by the assassins to shoot the President (I am not suggesting Zapruder was involved – I am saying that he and the assassins might have followed similar lines of thought in were best to place themselves).

      It is also particularly glaring the fact that the first shot made the President motionless, so the second brain-bursting hit became much easier.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s