No, I’m not shifting the burden of proof. If you are claiming that the HSCA acoustic evidence have been refuted, you are the one who has to provide the evidence for this.
Lets get this straight!
When the HSCA acoustic report was first outlined, it was taken seriously and considered to be correct. It appeared to indicate that there was at least one additional (fourth) shot, fired at the presidential motorcade, from the Grassy Knoll. The burden of proof belonged to anyone wishing to refute the HSCA.
That challenge was taken up first by the the FBI and then the DOJ who asked the National Academy of Sciences put together a team of leading experts in the field of ballistics, sound engineering, signal processing and acoustical analysis. The team was called the Committee on Ballistic Acoustics(CBA). The CBA absolutely refuted the HSCA report, pointing out a number of faulty assumptions, technical errors and errors in timing, not the least of which is that the piece of audio the HSCA claimed to have included the sounds of the gunshots was shown conclusively to have been recorded at least 60 seconds AFTER the fatal shots were fired. Their report is accepted as correct
even by those who did the work on the HSCA report
I hereby present my evidence - the report of the CBA
http://www.jfk-online.com/nas00.html
Some years laster, Donald B. Thomas (an entomologist) tried his hand at refuting the CBA. He failed, with a report that was full of factual errors and faulty assumptions (hardly surprising for a man who studies bugs and beetles for a living - he was outside of his field and out of his depth.
For balance, here is his report
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/d_b_thomas_report.htm
Next, award winning video analyst and computer animator, Dale Myers did his own comprehensive report and conclusively proved the HCSA's contention that it was Officer McLain who had the stuck microphone was completely wrong and that he could not have been in all the places the HSCA report said he needed to be at the necessary times.
I hereby present my supporting evidence - the report of Dale K Myers
http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/acoustics.htm
And for good measure, here is Myers' take-down of Thomas' rubbish
http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/acoustics_11.htm
Finally, Donald Thomas, tried to refute Dale Myers' analysis and utterly failed to do so. His refutations contain many of the same false assumptions and a large number obvious of factual errors his original flawed work contained
The CBA's findings and the report by Dale Myers completely overturned the HSCA report, they have both met their burden to prove the HSCA wrong. The CBA and Myers' work are now overwhelmingly the accepted view. Anyone who wants to refute them owns the burden of proof... this includes you.
You will, of course, not believe the CBA or Myers, but your beliefs are irrelevant, and are
not evidence.
It is not enough for you to merely proclaim that their work is in error (whether you have read it or not, and I strongly suspect the latter)...
you have to prove it is in error.
It is not enough for you to merely keep harking back to the HSCA report... is has been overturned and totally debunked.
It is not enough for you to dismiss any evidence that you don't like with a wave of your hand.
You have to prove it should be dismissed.
You will, of course, complain about the expertise of these panels because the members qualifications don't meet your personal expectations (or something), but your expectations are not evidence. In fact I find it remarkable that you reject the findings of a panel comprised of people with expertise in ballistics, signal processing an acoustics who were tasked with examining evidence potentially containing gunshots, radio signals and modulated sounds, yet you unquestioningly accept, on the same topics, the unqualified word of a bug collector!
should be capable of answering - like how fast was McClain going - is the very definition of shifting the burden of proof. 
