Yesterday, the same channel brought to our attention the fact that Charlie Kirk's executive producer, Andrew Kolvet, is claiming that the surgeon who operated on Kirk found the .30-06 round right under the skin because Charlie Kirk's bone was superhumanly dense and stopped a .30-06 round, thereby saving the lives of those around him.
Uhhhh.....
https://www.foxnews.com/us/charlie-kirk ... l-shooting
Wow, as someone who has watched people on this board pull apart and demolish so many LDS miracle stories, this one reeks to high heaven of bogusness already. It would seem to me that the physics of this simply do not work. So, yes, if it were true, you might say it is a miracle, but--and maybe I am speaking only for myself here--when you get this news from the executive producer of Charlie Kirk's show, not the doctor (who can't violate HIPAA), and the producer does not identify the doctor (how convenient!), well, I think the claim is frankly unbelievable, whether you believe in miracles or not.
This bogus claim also raises other questions. Why come up with the story in the first place? One reason is because the official account makes no sense to a lot of people who are experienced with high-power rifles. And one of the biggest apparent problems is the rifle and its rounds. A .30-06 round from 150 yards should do catastrophic damage to the soft tissue and bone of the target (being the kind of weapon that can put down an elk at 300-500 yards), but Kirk's body experienced relatively little damage. Fatal damage, yes, but not the kind of extensive damage such a round from such a gun would be expected to deal.
So, if the damage to the body does not match the claimed weapon, what do you do? I guess one option is to reframe the evidence itself within a miracle story. Yes, the .30-06 bullet did not do the damage it would normally do, but that is because God wanted to save the people around Charlie Kirk, while letting Charlie himself be murdered in cold blood. So God made Charlie Kirk out of tougher stuff than normal humans, a fact that escaped medical science until this anonymous surgeon violated HIPAA to tell Kirk's executive producer about this miracle.
Really?
I find all of this fascinating partly because this is exactly the kind of story the naïve rubes are told, which will circulate forever. Just like our dearly departed Elvis was sighted at so many convenience stores and bowling alleys, Charlie Kirk was a "man of steel" whose superhumanly dense bone saved the lives of those around him. The martyrdom of Charlie Kirk is well underway. Now there is even a Charlie Kirk miracle.
I join with all of those who deeply regret the monstrous murder of Charlie Kirk happened. It was a horrible, horrible thing, and it has led to further unfortunate and unwanted developments. This cowardly act robbed a spouse of a husband, children of a father, and a lot of young people of their hero. As I said earlier, no sane person would have wanted this to happen, whether they liked Kirk or not. Moreover, no sane person should rejoice in heinous acts of murder. I can understand the need some have to amplify the legacy of Kirk, and I join them inasmuch as I hope his views on free speech are carried forward. I also hope Erika Kirk's message of love and forgiveness at Kirk's memorial are spread and taken to heart. The manufacture of dubious miracle stories, on the other hand, is not particularly useful.