Scientific Evidence for "Hydrostatic Shock"

[Iraqgunz]

If I understand correctly I am supposed to be dead right now from some "unseen" trauma that occurred when I got shot, right? Or is this another theory?

[Jim from Houston]

Actually, as I read it, he was responding to you, not Dr. Roberts. Reference his last sentence ("Closing the thread to terminate the discussion is the bullies way out.") with your first ('Nominating this one for thread lock:".

Not the part of his statement that offended me.

"Wow! Two PhDs publishing peer reviewed papers in respected journals and it's all tripe. Go figure. Thirty-nine (39) referenced papers for this article and I'm to conclude that they all refute the author's position. Probably not, since many of them are by the same two authors on related subjects that develop the arguments and describe the experiments.

I guess I am to believe that the United States Military Academy at West Point is not too careful about the credentials of those they choose to lecture there."

This is most certainly not directed at me, and is the "attitude" to which I refer.

[ToddG]

If I understand correctly I am supposed to be dead right now from some "unseen" trauma that occurred when I got shot, right?

[HowardCohodas]

Sorry to have ducked out just as things got rolling. I am, of late, subject to migraines and had to dose up and leave the keyboard.

A couple of thoughts.

• In reference to my background: I was not the academic. I was the engineering manager with the budget to task our research center and to sponsor research at Case and MIT. As such, I sometimes had to referee academic disagreements. Challenging "conventional wisdom" was my job.
• In reference to my attitude: I was offended by having my question dismissed as tripe when, by my standards, it is still a subject of active research. I did violate my own standards by copping an attitude. For this I apologize. For my attitude toward bullying, I do not apologize.
• Todd: Thanks for speaking up for me. It's been a long time since I was characterized as innocent.
• I'm here to learn, for those of you willing to teach. I learn by asking questions. I am in the process of reading many of the other threads on this subject. I'm amazed that there is so much heat in the posts.

Laws of Prediction

1. When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
2. The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.
3. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

[Iraqgunz]

Todd,

I guess that would explain the rash and itching sensations that I have.

[Shawn Dodson]

Wow! Two PhDs publishing peer reviewed papers in respected journals and it's all tripe. Go figure.

I figure the papers aren't being very well received which is why the authors feel compelled to promote them to laymen on internet discussion boards.

[HowardCohodas]

I figure the papers aren't being very well received which is why the authors feel compelled to promote them to laymen on internet discussion boards.

What? Do you have any basis for this conclusion?

I discovered this paper with considerable research. My post is the first I've seen in any forum. I'm not promoting anything. I'm asking questions to get better informed.

Frankly, the purpose of your remark escapes me.

[Shawn Dodson]

Total speculation on my part.

I though I was clear I was commenting about the authors, not you. I apologize for the confusion.

The authors run around internet discussion boards - mostly GlockTalk, and, on rare occasion, this forum, promoting their nonsense.

[ToddG]

I guess that would explain the rash and itching sensations that I have.

Sure it does.

[John_Wayne777]

What? Do you have any basis for this conclusion?

The short version is that Dr. Courtney has posted that information in a number of forums, including AR15.com, TacticalForums.com, etc. While it seems impressive to laymen, when real experts (And I am not one of them) in the treatment of GSW's and ballistics research challenged some of the assertions of the paper no satisfactory explanation could be found.

In other words, a lot of the stuff Dr. Courtney theorizes in his paper doesn't seem to prove true when you examine lots of real life GSWs as DockGKR and others have done. The current state of ballistics knowledge has not been arrived at haphazardly. It's been developed after a lot of careful research including extensive research of real gunshot wounds.