Posted: Aug 01, 2020 11:51 am
We were discussing the conclusions of the peer reviewed literature. And your assertions that that literature showed that "Linkser and Garwin paper has already been debunked" and that it doesn't even try to account for the forensic findings that the recording matches the timing of the shots.
That is not true, there is no such information in the peer reviewed literature, quite the reverse in fact. Although Thomas stands by his conclusion the literature as a whole, including the opinion of well over a dozen relevantly qualified forensic experts who published on the matter disagrees. If this is not the case we should resolve it in the way we started out - with links to and discussion of the peer reviewed material in question.
On that second point it is true that Thomas claimed to have something like 96% confidence in the conclusion that the sounds matched that of gunshots fired in Dealey plaza, but this is irrelevant to the murder of JFK if the shots took place 30 seconds or a minute after all the wounds were inflicted. Whilst 4% isn't a particularly low chance that needs to be disputed, it is not at all uncommon for published research to report findings with less than 5% chance of being due to the null hypothesis and yet lead to wrong conclusions. This actually happens in the majority of published research anyway.
Experts in the field chose not to pursue this line of enquiry since they had proved the alleged shot sounds did not take place when Kennedy was killed regardless. If you're particularly interested there has been further analysis of the location of the motorbike recording the channel 1 sounds which does not concur with it being in Dealey plaza at the time anyway, e.g. https://thekennedyhalfcentury.com/pdf/K ... search.pdf
That is not true, there is no such information in the peer reviewed literature, quite the reverse in fact. Although Thomas stands by his conclusion the literature as a whole, including the opinion of well over a dozen relevantly qualified forensic experts who published on the matter disagrees. If this is not the case we should resolve it in the way we started out - with links to and discussion of the peer reviewed material in question.
On that second point it is true that Thomas claimed to have something like 96% confidence in the conclusion that the sounds matched that of gunshots fired in Dealey plaza, but this is irrelevant to the murder of JFK if the shots took place 30 seconds or a minute after all the wounds were inflicted. Whilst 4% isn't a particularly low chance that needs to be disputed, it is not at all uncommon for published research to report findings with less than 5% chance of being due to the null hypothesis and yet lead to wrong conclusions. This actually happens in the majority of published research anyway.
Experts in the field chose not to pursue this line of enquiry since they had proved the alleged shot sounds did not take place when Kennedy was killed regardless. If you're particularly interested there has been further analysis of the location of the motorbike recording the channel 1 sounds which does not concur with it being in Dealey plaza at the time anyway, e.g. https://thekennedyhalfcentury.com/pdf/K ... search.pdf