JFK assassination and the Orange Lady theory

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
You're taking an object made out of lead, that's designed to flatten and tumble when it enters an object, firing it at several hundred feet PER SECOND, into an object that's denser than the human body that it's designed to flatten inside. And getting it out pristine

An FMJ round is not designed to tumble and flatten. It is what used to be called a "cop killer". They will penetrate "soft" armour. True they contain lead but they have a jacket made of either steel or brass. They usually travel at speeds of well over 1000 fps depending on the grain count so wood penetration without damage would be entirely possible. The SMJ round doesn't tumble but it will flatten after contact with certain materials. The hollow point round is specifically designed to flatten upon contact with most objects. As far as tumbling, that would depend on the rifling of the barrel. Sniper rifles are designed with rifling that would preclude tumbling, since this would disrupt the accuracy of the shot.
Hope this helps. Just my $.02




posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 12:54 PM
link   


you still haven't answered my question, who an which is the lady in orange you are talking of in your thread here


You already know who I am talking about. I answered your question. You posted a picture of her at the end of page 2. Not too many people wearing orange that day.

Your 2 cents is always appreciated Cowboy!

[edit on 25-1-2006 by Excitable_Boy]



posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by longhaircowboy
As far as tumbling, that would depend on the rifling of the barrel. Sniper rifles are designed with rifling that would preclude tumbling, since this would disrupt the accuracy of the shot.
Hope this helps. Just my $.02



I have heard that longer barrels put more of a spin on the bullet which ultimately helps it tumble "once" it strikes something. I remember reading about how some soldiers in Iraq equiped with the shorty M4's stated that the short barrel doesn't put enough spin on the round to make it properly tumble when it hits something. I would also think that the way and place the round strikes, as well as what type of material it is would have a lot to with how round tumbles. A FMJ round is made to penetrate not flatten out unless it hits something very solid like steel, rock, hardwood (not pine) concrete etc..



posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 06:26 PM
link   
Barrel length does play a part but is irrelevant in this case.
An FMJ round can peirce the materials You mentioned but it would depend on the circumstances. You know like how thick is the steel, how far away you are, that sorta thing.
Now pistols that's another thing. they have short barrels but their rifling allows for a shot with very little tumble(generic statement).
The early body armour was called soft because it was not bullet proof merely bullet resistant.
Also take note that blunt rounds like SMJ and hollow point are more apt to tumble because of the aerodynamics.
If Oswald had used an FMJ round from where he was at the velocities at that distance would have put the slug in the floor board of the limo. And I don't mean just laying there.
With the trajectories involved that shot had a very good chance of going thru JFK and Connally but apparently it hit just right to richochet just right and well you know the rest. Magic bullet.



posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 06:31 PM
link   
I'd like to point out that bullets from a rifle travel at speeds in excess of 2000' per second (fps) and in some cases exceed 4000' per second.

The rifles in question probably sent bullets out at 2600 fps to 3200 fps.

Rifling in the barrel contributes to stability in flight and don't have anything to do with creating a tumbling motion in flight.

It's when the bullet strikes a body that all bets are off.
There may be some tumbling there, but probably not.
Depending on bullet construction the bullet may not upset, but it may expand.

The 22 caliber long rifle, the most common round shot in America and probably other parts of the world as far as sports shooting goes travels about 1100 - 1300 fps.
It's been said the 22 calibler LR is the most deadly round in the world.
2-3 days after the fact.
Meaning that the 22 enters the body and is deflected all over the place creating damage in many areas.

Centerfire rifles such as used in the Kennedy assassination pretty much traveled straight in and straight out.

Vis a vis the woman in orange, it looks to me like she knows she's witnessing a terrible thing and is simply wringing her hands....



posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 07:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Desert Dawg
Rifling in the barrel contributes to stability in flight and don't have anything to do with creating a tumbling motion in flight.


But wouldn't a more stable bullet from being spun more be less apt to tumble when it HITS something? I know there are lots of variables, but I was told to think of it like throwing a football. If you don't put a good spin on the ball when thrown it will want to tumble as it's unstable vs. a ball thrown with a good fast spin on it.

This is kind of off topic but along the same lines. Is a boat tail round designed to tumble more when it hits to create more damage?



posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 07:11 PM
link   
The football analogy is actually quite good. Watch a quarterback like Brett Favre. See them guys tryin to catch his pass?
Coincidence- name the Senator who was the biggest supporter of the cop killer bullet ban.
Give up?
Ted Kennedy



posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 08:01 PM
link   
An FMJ round is designed to hit the body, flatten as it's going in, and then once it's INSIDE the body, it rotates 90-180 degrees to cause more damage. It doesn't tumble until AFTER it enters the body/object.



posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 10:27 PM
link   
Nope sorry FMJ rounds were designed specifically NOT TO flatten out on impact. They call them penetration(cop killers, look it up) rounds for a reason. Their design was meant to conform to the Hague Conventions requiring non-expanding ammunition. Or non-fragmentary.
Now you could be meaning a Jacketed Soft Point most commonly used in .357 Mags. They have a 158 grain cartridge and a muzzle velocity of 1395fps.
Or the .380 ACP FMJ Round Nose with a 95 grain cartridge and 1025fps.
Or the 200 grain Jacketed Hollow Point used in the .45 Auto 1325fps.
Note those are all handgun ammo.
The FMJ rounds are classified as ball rounds.
In my Kalishnakov I use 7.62 NATO. It's 148 grain MV of 2750fps. And you should see it rip up a car. I don't use FMJ rounds just the standard. I can also use the 5.52. Those rounds are interchangable with M-16s and most other weapons used in the world.
Wait now I'm confused. what were we discussing? What was JFK shot with again?



posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 10:40 PM
link   
No, you're wrong. FMJ rounds flatten and tumble. They penetrate better, but they still flatten.


A bullet which is fully enclosed in a metal jacket, as are virtually all military rifle bullets today, will start to turn around a lateral axis at some distance after entering the body. Once it starts to turn, the rate of turning increases rapidly; the angle of incidence reaches 90 degrees and the bullet continues turning until it is travelling nearly tail first. After that, it can partly turn several more times before entering the last phase, when it will again be travelling tail first. Depending on its construction, a full-metal-jacketed bullet can deform or break up because of the stresses placed on it during turning, but deformation or break-up of a full-metal-jacketed bullet is a by-product of turning and not an independent process, although, once it happens, the deformation or break-up adds to the wounding effect because of the increase in the surface area of bullet material pressing against the tissues.[20]

www.globalsecurity.org...


US M193 5.56x45mm - This bullet is fired from the US armed forces' first-generation smaller-calibre rifle, the M16A1. The large permanent cavity it produces, shown in the wound profile (Fig. 4), was observed by surgeons who served in Vietnam, but the tissue disruption mechanism responsible was not clear until the importance of bullet fragmentation as a cause of tissue disruption was worked out and described. As shown on the wound profile, this full-metal-jacketed bullet travels point-forward in tissue for about 12cm after which it yaws to 90°, flattens, and breaks at the cannelure (groove around bullet midsection into which the cartridge neck is crimped). The bullet point flattens but remains in one piece, retaining about 60 per cent of the original bullet weight. The rear portion breaks into many fragments that penetrate up to 7cm radially from the bullet path. The temporary cavity stretch, its effect increased by perforation and weakening of the tissue by fragments, then causes a much enlarged permanent cavity by detaching tissue pieces. The degree of bullet fragmentation decreases with increased shooting distance (as striking velocity decreases), as shown in Fig. 5. At a shooting distance over about 100m the bullet breaks at the cannelure, forming two large fragments and, at over 200m, it no longer breaks, although it continues to flatten somewhat, until 400m. This consistent change in deformation/fragmentation pattern has an important forensic application. It can be used to estimate shooting distance if the bullet is recovered in the body and has penetrated only soft tissue.



NATO 7.62x 51mm (West German version) - The design standards for ammunition that can be called "NATO" ammunition do not specify bullet jacket material or jacket thickness. The construction of the West German 7.62 NATO bullet differs from the US 7.62 NATO round in that the jacket material is copper plated steel, whereas the US version is copper (or the so called gilding metal alloy, which is predominantly copper). The West German steel jacket is about 0.020in (0.6mm) thick near the cannelure and the US copper jacket is about 0.032in (0.8mm) thick at the same point. This design difference is responsible for a vast difference in performance in tissue. The German bullet, after travelling point-forward for only about 8cm, yaws and breaks at the cannelure. The flattened point section retains only about 66 percent of the bullet's weight, the remaining 45 per cent becomes fragments (Fig. 8). The wound profile can be described as an enlarged M16 profile (Fig. 3), with dimensions of the tissue disruption increased by 60 per cent (temporary cavity about 22cm diameter; permanent cavity about 11 cm diameter, penetration depth of the bullet point about 58cm).




The longer 5.56mm bullets (M866, SS109) need a higher rotational velocity to maintain stabilisation in air. FN claimed that this faster rotation also causes the SS109 to have a significantly longer path in tissue before marked yaw occurs, thus producing wounds of less severity. This is simply untrue (compare Fig. 6 with Fig. 6). Additional rotation beyond that needed to keep the bullet straight in air appears to have little or no effect on the projectile's behaviour in tissue. However, there is a situation concerning rotation rates whereby these longer 5.66mm bullets can cause increased wound severity. Shooting the SS109 or M865 bullet in the older M16A1 rifle barrel (they are not intended for use in this 7-in- 72in twist barrel, but in the newer M 16A2 1-in-7in twist) produces a bullet spin rate insufficient to stabilise the longer bullets. Such a bullet will yaw up to 70° in its path through air. Striking at this high yaw angle (essentially travelling sideways), these bullets break on contact and the marked fragmentation, acting in synergy with the temporary cavity stretch, causes a large (over 15cm) stellate wound with the loss of considerable tissue (Fackler, M.L., unpublished data, 1988).

www.fen-net.de...

Shall I go on?



posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 10:53 PM
link   
And what was JFK shot with?



posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 11:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by longhaircowboy
In my Kalishnakov I use 7.62 NATO. It's 148 grain MV of 2750fps. And you should see it rip up a car. I don't use FMJ rounds just the standard. I can also use the 5.52. Those rounds are interchangable with M-16s and most other weapons used in the world.
Wait now I'm confused. what were we discussing? What was JFK shot with again?


I thought a NATO 7.62 aka .308 is 7.62x51mm the Warsaw AK round is 7.62x39mm? Is your AK chambered for NATO rounds or something


Also the M16 round is 5.56x49mm or .223 and the soviet small caliber rifle round is 5.45x39mm but his says its actually 5.62 mm in diameter

world.guns.ru...

In looking up the various calibers I saw found this article which explains that 308 is not the same as a NATO 7.62.there are slight differences, and it actually looks like a military 7.62 rifle can shoot 308 no problem, but the 7.62 military rounds are a tighter fight in the chamber, and a 308 can't shoot a 7.62 round because it's too big.
www3.sympatico.ca...



posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 11:38 PM
link   
You're right. I'm a Vietnam vet and when I went in the M-16 only fired the 7.62 but now they have the NATO round which is adaptable to the field between the M-? and AKs. It's a standardization of the ammo used in the field. Which was part of the Hague Convention Protocols.
But I think we're getting away from the real problem since none of this applies to the thread since this ammo was not used in the JFK assasination.
The real problem is what was the Orange lady doing.
My guess is clapping.



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 06:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Excitable_Boy


Speaking of the Zapruder film, did you know that Zapruder said he started filming as they entered the street. It is rather strange that the film cuts to the limo well after it turned into the street.

Wrong. That 40 years of research did not serve you too well Mayet. Look at frame #1 from the Z film:

It is as Zaprueder said it was, he starts filming as the motorcycles in front of the limo enter the street. You can't even see the limo yet!



No I am not wrong, you misread and misquoted me again. As I stated the film cuts to the limo well after the limo has turned into the street.

As for the 40 years of research, why thank you but this time 40 years ago I was a twinkle in my daddy's eye. You presume too much.


You already know who I am talking about. I answered your question. You posted a picture of her at the end of page 2. Not too many people wearing orange that day.




if you are speaking of the above picture you did not clarify at all in fact your words were


Mayet...the quality of that picture is so horrible I can't tell who or what anything in the picture is....In fact, the figure closest to the camera looks like an astronaut with his/her helmet on!


So if you are speaking of the lady in the red coat above, I do apologise but the lady is already named, her name is in fact Jean Hill and she is known as the woman in red, or the lady in red. I do believe though that earlier you did say your lady in question which this thread is supposed to be all about was not jean Hill, perhaps you could indeed clarify that point for everyone to be able to see for themselves who it is you ae speaking of.

Excitable_boy
It wasn't Jean Hill and probably not Beverly Oliver either.












[edit on 26-1-2006 by Mayet]



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 03:21 PM
link   
My God Mayet...you are a piece of work.



No I am not wrong, you misread and misquoted me again. As I stated the film cuts to the limo well after the limo has turned into the street.


I didn't misread or misquote you Mayet. You are WRONG. The film begins with the motorcycles entering the street ahead of the limo (which can't be seen yet in frame #1 of the Z film). I already posted a picture of frame #1. Do I need to do it again? You were wrong. Are you incapable of ever admitting you are wrong?



So if you are speaking of the lady in the red coat above, I do apologise but the lady is already named, her name is in fact Jean Hill and she is known as the woman in red,


Once again Mayet....NO, I am not talking about anyone in that picture as, AGAIN, the quality is so horrible I can't tell what anything is. I will depart for a moment and come back and edit in a frame of the Z film to show you who I mean, even though you already posted a frame from the same film and of the same woman in ORANGE!




[edit on 26-1-2006 by Excitable_Boy]



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 03:25 PM
link   
I see why I confused you now Mayet...you posted it at the bottom of page 1, not page 2....my mistake....

Here is the woman and also the frame where it appears she has fired something at the limo as you can see a trail from her hands to the limo:



Once again, Mayet.....the image you have now posted twice of a red blob with an astronaut is indistinguishable as anything.....



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 03:55 PM
link   

I didn't misread or misquote you Mayet. You are WRONG. The film begins with the motorcycles entering the street ahead of the limo (which can't be seen yet in frame #1 of the Z film). I already posted a picture of frame #1. Do I need to do it again? You were wrong. Are you incapable of ever admitting you are wrong?




No I am not wrong, you misread and misquoted me again. As I stated the film cuts to the limo well after the limo has turned into the street.





Abraham Zapruder told CBS News that he began filming as soon as the President's limousine turned onto Elm Street from Houston Street, as one with the limousine already on Elm Street at Z133. On the day after the assassination, Dan Rather of CBS News watched what was quite possibly an earlier version of the film. Rather reported that in the film he watched that day the limousine "made a turn, a left turn, off Houston Street onto Elm Street." Again, no such event is now seen in the film. In the current film there is a long gap between the earlier motorcycles and the limousine's first appearance at Z133


www.assassinationscience.com...
Good link above for all to read about evidence of alteration in the Zapruder film.


I will depart for a moment and come back and edit in a frame of the Z film to show you who I mean, even though you already posted a frame from the same film and of the same woman in ORANGE!


The quality of the photo you produced is not much better. But to clarify for all people reading this thread, Excitable Boy is talking about Jean Hill, who already has been named. She is well known by Serious researchers by the red coat she is wearing as the woman in red.


[edit on 26-1-2006 by Mayet]

[edit on 26-1-2006 by Mayet]



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 04:11 PM
link   


She is well known by Serious researchers by the red coat she is wearing as the woman in red.


Thank you for clarifying that for everyone, as everyone is not able to decide anything for themselves. The woman is wearing ORANGE Mayet. ORANGE....not red.

Serious researchers? Nice little backhanded dig. If you have something to say, come out and say it. Don't play games.

Again Mayet I will state, as the serious researcher that I am, that you are wrong about the Z film....as it starts WHEN THE MOTORCYLES IN FRONT OF THE LIMO ENTER THE STREET....just as Zaprueder said. You keep saying the film starts with the limo in the street......wrong. Keep up with that serious research and maybe if you look at frame #1 a few more times you will figure out that it is the motorcycles ahead of the limo as it enters the street JUST LIKE ZAPRUEDER SAID!!

Once again also...lady in red? I know of no lady in red, only about the lady in ORANGE which this thread is about!!



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 05:46 PM
link   


If you have something to say, come out and say it. Don't play games.




You put yourself together a 5 minute theory on someone you couldnt bother to do enough research on to find her real name in a blatant attempt to ridicule our Green Man theory.

You tell us your a serious researcher but you resort to everything but research to attack our ideas and Green Man Theory, so for a change why dont you use your serious research and prove to us that Green Man wasnt made invisible by doing what we did for your Orange Lady Theory.

Give us Green Mans real name.

Give us his witness statement.

Warren Omission Report ?


Do something anything with your serious research to show us that Green Man wasnt made invisible,distracted from and ignored for 40 years and maybe someone anyone will see your previous posts for something more than they are.


Your response to this will show everyone the seriousness of your research if they havent already figured it out.



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 07:20 PM
link   


Do something anything with your serious research to show us that Green Man wasnt made invisible,distracted from and ignored for 40 years and maybe someone anyone will see your previous posts for something more than they are.


You serious researchers took "green man" out of the crowd and tried to make him something he's not. He's a spectator clapping as the president goes by. That's why he was "invisible." Because he is and was a NOBODY! And no one distracted anyone from him because HE WAS THERE THE WHOLE TIME!

Explain to me what you even mean by he was made "invisible" and "distracted from." He was THERE THE WHOLE TIME! He was there clapping at the president.

The green man theory should be called the Green Man Fable.





new topics
top topics
 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join