Boz put it up thinking it is good for his side of the debate, but I beg to differ.
It deals with the considerations that were involved in shooting at moving target that was 88 yards away and where adjusting for gravity was a distinct factor in lining up the shot.
The author actually makes the presumption that Oswald aimed for the top of Kennedy's head, but because he didn't adjust enough for gravity, that he struck Kennedy at the top of the back.
So, Oswald miscalculated on the gravitational side of it. He needed to aim above Kennedy's head, but he didn't know it.
But, Kennedy was also moving forward because the car was moving, and that had to be factored in too. The author figured that the limo traveled two-thirds of a meter during the flight of the bullet. A meter is greater than a yard, so that's over two feet. Without adjusting for that, Oswald would have missed completely. According to the author, Oswald thought of that, and adjusted correctly.
But, another factor that had to be considered was the wind, but the author said nothing about it. How much wind was there? This is according to Gary Mack: "The weather bureau at Love Field data showed winds from the west-northwest gusting up to 20mph."
If the author, in hindsight, didn't even think of wind speed, what reason is there to assume that Oswald did and adjusted for it?
Of course, it's unlikely that Oswald had any advance knowledge of the wind. He'd have had to just sense it right there at the window and adjust for it immediately. But, did he?
But, the author didn't mention that the road was curved, which made the calculation harder. And he also didn't mention that the road wasn't exactly smooth; there was some bumpiness to it. And when you're aiming at something as small as head from that distance, that makes a big difference. One theory has it that the reason the first shot missed is because there of a dip in the road.
And to account for Oswald's ability to do all this, the author cited his Marine training. However, Oswald left the Marines in 1959, so that was over 4 years before, and at his last testing, he scored at the very bottom of the passing range. One point less and he would have failed to achieve even the lowest level of proficiency. And the conditions under which he tested and practiced in the Marines were nothing like the 6th floor conditions.
And after leaving the Marines, the only shooting he admitted to doing was to go on hunting trips with his Russian buddies in which all they could use were shotguns, which has nothing in common with a scoped, high-powered, military rifle. And Oswald never said he hit anything.
The claim is that Oswald was spotted several times at the Sports Dome Rifle Range outside of Dallas. But, how did he get there when he had no car? Furthermore, he couldn't drive. And if anybody drove him, that person would have to be considered an accomplice. That's right; anybody who drove Lee Harvey Oswald to a rifle range without coming forward to provide every detail is an accomplice in the assassination. So, if you assume a driver to the rifle range for Oswald, you kill the lone gunman theory.
But, this range did not involve shooting at moving targets or at targets that were 6 flights below, so the adjustments discussed by the author of the article below, would not have been made. Furthermore, even as late as 2013, the Marines hadn't done much with moving targets:
|
QUANTICO MARINE BASE, Va. -- Marine Corps Warfighting Lab officials demonstrated experimental training techniques for shooting moving targets, a battlefield skill that’s all but ignored in the service’s marksmanship training.
If there is one lesson infantrymen have learned in the past decade of war, it’s that the enemy doesn’t stand still and wait to be shot. They sprint between houses and other available cover, often presenting as small a target as possible.
It has always been a battlefield reality of modern warfare, yet Marine Corps and U.S. Army combat training continues to focus on outdated techniques that largely involve stationary targets.
There is no evidence that in the 1950s Oswald had any practice shooting at moving targets in the Marines or anywhere else.
Now, as far as the sightings of Oswald at the Sports Dome Rifle Range, it's widely known that they had Oswald doubles. Some of the people they claimed to be Oswald didn't even look like him, such as these characters from the Cuban Consulate in Mexico City:
That's right; those guys were both supposed to be Lee Harvey Oswald. They are part of the official records of the House Select Committee on Assassinations. Then, there's this Oswald from the Russian Embassy:
The whole claim that Oswald visited the Sports Dome to practice is completely unfounded and unsubstantiated; it is preposterous that anyone treats it as evidence. The claim that he shot diagonally at other people's targets is also preposterous.
I started going to shooting ranges as a boy with my father, who was a policeman, and most recently, three weeks ago. There is a very serious decorum at shooting ranges. Everyone is holding and using a deadly weapon. Everyone is wearing ear muffs to protect their ears from all the noise. There isn't much interaction between strangers. People keep to themselves at a firing range. But, there is a very high level of respectfulness. and there is no rowdiness. There is no horsing around. It's not that kind of culture. The idea that someone would shoot diagonally at someone else's target is unheard of. And the idea that Lee Harvey Oswald would have done it, that it was his personality to act that way, is from straight out the ass.
Now, here is the article. The gist of it is that the shooting was easy, that your average deer hunter could have done it. Note the author's assumption that the angle of the bullet entering Kennedy's back was 17 degrees even though it is commonly reported as 21 degrees. Remember that we are talking about 6 flights up and more than that since the road descends from the top of Dealey Plaza.
http://www.intuitor.com/student/Oswald%20Problem.php
If there is one lesson infantrymen have learned in the past decade of war, it’s that the enemy doesn’t stand still and wait to be shot. They sprint between houses and other available cover, often presenting as small a target as possible.
It has always been a battlefield reality of modern warfare, yet Marine Corps and U.S. Army combat training continues to focus on outdated techniques that largely involve stationary targets.
There is no evidence that in the 1950s Oswald had any practice shooting at moving targets in the Marines or anywhere else.
Now, as far as the sightings of Oswald at the Sports Dome Rifle Range, it's widely known that they had Oswald doubles. Some of the people they claimed to be Oswald didn't even look like him, such as these characters from the Cuban Consulate in Mexico City:
That's right; those guys were both supposed to be Lee Harvey Oswald. They are part of the official records of the House Select Committee on Assassinations. Then, there's this Oswald from the Russian Embassy:
The whole claim that Oswald visited the Sports Dome to practice is completely unfounded and unsubstantiated; it is preposterous that anyone treats it as evidence. The claim that he shot diagonally at other people's targets is also preposterous.
I started going to shooting ranges as a boy with my father, who was a policeman, and most recently, three weeks ago. There is a very serious decorum at shooting ranges. Everyone is holding and using a deadly weapon. Everyone is wearing ear muffs to protect their ears from all the noise. There isn't much interaction between strangers. People keep to themselves at a firing range. But, there is a very high level of respectfulness. and there is no rowdiness. There is no horsing around. It's not that kind of culture. The idea that someone would shoot diagonally at someone else's target is unheard of. And the idea that Lee Harvey Oswald would have done it, that it was his personality to act that way, is from straight out the ass.
Now, here is the article. The gist of it is that the shooting was easy, that your average deer hunter could have done it. Note the author's assumption that the angle of the bullet entering Kennedy's back was 17 degrees even though it is commonly reported as 21 degrees. Remember that we are talking about 6 flights up and more than that since the road descends from the top of Dealey Plaza.
http://www.intuitor.com/student/Oswald%20Problem.php
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.