According to a new analysis,
[...] In this paper, simple one-dimensional dynamical models are uniquely applied to study in detail the fatal shot and the motion of the President's head observed in the film. Using known parameters from the crime scene, explicit force calculations are carried out for determining the projectile's retardation during tissue passage along with the resulting transfer of momentum and kinetic energy (KE). The computed instantaneous KE transfer within the soft tissue is found to be consistent with the formation of a temporary cavity associated with the observed explosion of the head, and subsequent quantitative examination of this phenomenon reveals two delayed forces at play in the backward motion of the President following impact. It is therefore found that the observed motions of President Kennedy in the film are physically consistent with a high-speed projectile impact from the rear of the motorcade, these resulting from an instantaneous forward impulse force, followed by delayed rearward recoil and neuromuscular forces.
janrinok: Be prepared for some detailed mathematical proofs, but well within the abilities of our community, and some interesting deductions.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Sunday April 29 2018, @03:01PM (1 child)
To some extent I think most of the argument about irrelevant stuff like bullet physics is to provide distraction from the truly weird stuff involving Oswald and Ruby and their background.
I mean, seriously, the whole Ruby thing is so bizarre.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Sunday April 29 2018, @04:39PM
How much of that is true? How would _you_ know?
I'll plug it again: Gringo: The Dangerous Life of John McAfee, very entertaining story for me at least. McAfee claims in Wikipedia that it is total fiction, doesn't change the entertainment value, and what are celebrities for anyway? We give them enormous money/power they should at least give us some entertainment in return.
The reason I bring it up here is because of its release date: September 2016, more or less perfectly timed to raise a maximal impact media shit-storm of controversy and character smear by November 8, 2016. If you didn't know (I didn't before the film, or if I did I had forgotten) McAfee was running for president (yes, of the United States) in 2016. Now, the question becomes: was this a conservative play against McAfee, or a "radical dude" attempt to increase his chances in November? On November 7 of 2016, I would never have believed the latter, but looking at what we elected on the 8th - it's possible that the film was a Streisand cry to help McAfee's exposure and chances of election.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6071534/ [imdb.com]
🌻🌻 [google.com]