• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

JFK Conspiracy Theories: It Never Ends

Status
Not open for further replies.
Oh so tangible evidence can be denied when it doesnt fit your ct?

Confirmation bias.

The Z film is hardly "tangible": evidence. Nor is it fraud proof. The Best Evidence is the condition of the wounds of the fatal shot to the head, observed and described by the doctors and attendants at Parkland.
 
Nope. Still not answering the question. You still wont explain what evidence you have that the quotes are more accurate than those they contradict.

And a statement that starts with the guy telling us what he would have said IF he had been allowed to testify does not come from the WC itself. Dont be silly.

Oh, and what about all the other doctors' statements that confirm Crenshaw's statements?
 
No. That is quite obviously not what I said. I asked what evidence you have their versions of events are more truthful than the witnessess those statements directly contradict?

You offer no reason to believe their statements (not testemony by the way as there is nothing legally binding about those statements and no ramification for falsehood) over the ones in the Warren Comission, supported by the Zupruder film, autopsy reports, photographic records, etc.

Perhaps you might want to answer the question this time instead of concocting a straw man argument against me.

So you have no evidence of any falsehoods, but only empty blather.
 
Robert has a real problem with the historical record when it clashes with his conspiracy beliefs. There is of course no "routine protocol" to blame lone nuts when a president is assassinated. Investigations are done and blame is assigned to groups or individuals.

The Lincoln assassination was the result of a conspiracy. The 1950 attempt to take the life of Harry Truman by Puerto Rican nationalists was a conspiracy.

The historical record and all subsequent investigations gives us no reason to doubt that lone individuals killed presidents James A. Garfield, William McKinley and John F. Kennedy. (And if we don't limit ourselves to presidential assassinations, we can add Huey Long, Harvey Milk, George Moscone, et al to the list of elected officials brought down by lone gunmen.)

The lone gunman is in fact a specter that haunts the American political and social landscape. Witness the recent case of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. A lone gunman killed John Lennon and lone gunmen attempted to kill George Wallace and Ronald Reagan.

And it was not an "excuse" of the Warren Commission that the Kennedy family would not release the JFK autopsy photos and x-rays. It a historical fact documented in numerous books and other sources, a fact Robert could have easily discovered for himself if he could tear himself away from the scribblings of his beloved conspiracy authors.

It is also untrue that no one on the Commission looked at the photos or x-rays. Earl Warren and chief counsel J. Lee Rankin were allowed (by Robert Kennedy) to review them.

In any case, this is all academic at this point. The autopsy photos and x-rays have been released and reviewed by several panels of experts who have concluded they are consistent evidence of a head shot to the rear.

But in Robert's conspiracy world, the opinions of these experts must be discarded because of the confused, contradictory and, in some cases, confabulated, "testimony" of the Parkland Hospital witnesses, the majority of whom later admitted they were mistaken.

Lone gunman specters are only the imagined workings of the hopelessly delusioned Lone Nutter. What do other assassinations have to do with the JFK assassination in the world of objective rationality? Absolutely nothing.
 
The question about the Zapruder film is still there waiting to be answered. Is your WAG that someone altered the Zapruder film then? Did someone switch Kennedy's head before getting to Parkland? You've still failed to answer the question about why the exit wound and the ejecta are in the right front of Kennedy's head, as seen in the Zapruder film.

Already answered that. The Z film is not the Best Evidence but if accurate, it clearly shows the head of the President blasted by a shot from the front.
 
So you have no evidence of any falsehoods, but only empty blather.

Again, not answering the question: There are apparently two conflicting versions of events. One from the statements you gave. One from statements that directly contradict them.

The evidence AGAINST your quotes includes the autopsy, x-rays, photographic record, and the zupruder film. What evidence supports the statements you posted?

You have obviously decided they are more truthful than the statements they contradict. I am asking you (again) what evidence you have that they are. I am slightly concerned that I have asked this many times and you have not been able or willing to answer, and are determined to answer something entirely different.

This is how it works: Instead of evidence you have supplied claims. Any critical thinker will ask what evidence you have to support the claims being made in those quotes. I haven't said they are false, and claiming I have is an insulting lie. What I have done is pointed out there is evidence against those statements and asked what evidence suopports them. What you have done, three times today, is make a straw man attack claiming I have accussed somebody of telling lies, or of falsehood. If a claim is not supported by evidence the burden of proof is not met, and the claim can be disregarded in the face of statements that are supported by the autopsy, the zupruder film, ballistics evidence, photographic records, etc.

There is unfortunately only one obvious reason why you would do that Robert. So how about you take another crack at actually answering the question this time?
 
Already answered that. The Z film is not the Best Evidence but if accurate, it clearly shows the head of the President blasted by a shot from the front.

So how do you explain the matter ejected from the front of his head?

And despite the name of the book, the Zupruder film IS some of the best evidence.
 
Lone gunman specters are only the imagined workings of the hopelessly delusioned Lone Nutter. What do other assassinations have to do with the JFK assassination in the world of objective rationality? Absolutely nothing.

Absolutely nothing? Other than answering and rebutting your statement about a routine protocol.
 
Oh, and what about all the other doctors' statements that confirm Crenshaw's statements?

Well youu seem to have missed the point again. There are two conflicting versions of events. It doesn't matter which side has how many advocates. It matters what evidence there is to supply either view. The WC conclusions are supported by evidence. What evidence supports the counter-view?

Not claims. Evidence.
 
Thanks to Tomtomken and listbynmdsue for the quotes from Robert Prey.

In fact it's amazing that all those people Robert quotes got such a good look at the "exit wound" on the back of Kennedy's head since Kennedy's body was never turned over at Parkland Hospital during the frantic attempts to resuscitate him. (Posner, p. 288) Or even after Kennedy was dead.

More on Crenshaw here. More on the Parkland head wound witnesses here.

As I recall it, contrary to the statements of McAdams, Crenshaw never backed away from anything he wrote. The critics simply pointed out the the puffery on the book's cover authored by the publisher which claimed or implied that he had a major role. The doctor described what he did in the book which was cutting off clothes, determining a pulse, and inserting an IV. But guys like McAdams, will never admit to their own distortions.
 
You know what, that may have a baring on the reliability of the data after all.

And also; I note that no documentary evidence or physical evidence is offered by RP to support his quotes. Once again we have to assume the interviews he quotes are more reliable and truthful than those they contradict because they fit his story? I

Exactly which quote are you referring to? Name one, please.
 
The question about the Zapruder film is still there waiting to be answered. Is your WAG that someone altered the Zapruder film then? Did someone switch Kennedy's head before getting to Parkland? You've still failed to answer the question about why the exit wound and the ejecta are in the right front of Kennedy's head, as seen in the Zapruder film.

The Zapruder film invalidates Robert's claim of an entry wound on the front of JFK's head.

One of the most important aspects of the Zapruder film, often overlooked by the critics, are the frames immediately after the President was shot in the head. It's very clear on the enhanced frames that there is a wound over the right ear, but the back of the head is clean. That film is incontrovertible evidence that there was no defect [i.e., exit wound] on the rear of the head.

Dr. Michael Baden, Chairman of the HSCA Forensic Panel (Posner, pp. 309-310)

Familial responsibilities beckon but perhaps someone else can find images of those enhanced frames online. I'll try to see what I can find later today.
 
Last edited:
Thanks to Tomtomken and listbynmdsue for the quotes from Robert Prey.



In fact it's amazing that all those people Robert quotes got such a good look at the "exit wound" on the back of Kennedy's head since Kennedy's body was never turned over at Parkland Hospital during the frantic attempts to resuscitate him. (Posner, p. 288) Or even after Kennedy was dead..

So Poser was there and recorded that, and all the 20 or so witnesses are liars, eh? Hey. I got news for you. The liar is Posner. The Bug man even discredits him.
 
The Zapruder invalades Robert's claim of an entry wound on the front of JFK's head.



Familial responsibilities beckon but perhaps someone else can find images of those enhanced frames online. I'll try to see what I can find later today.

Attempts to divert the subject from the statements of witnesses on the scene at Parkland, to varying interpretations of the Z film, are useless. I do not use the Z film to prove conspiracy. I cite the 20 or so witnesses at Parkland. Deal with that, if you can.
 
Well youu seem to have missed the point again. There are two conflicting versions of events. It doesn't matter which side has how many advocates. It matters what evidence there is to supply either view. The WC conclusions are supported by evidence. What evidence supports the counter-view?

Not claims. Evidence.

The consistent contemporaneous observations of first hand witnesses, not subject to forgery or fraud, is not only evidence, it is the Best Evidence.
 
Lone gunman specters are only the imagined workings of the hopelessly delusioned Lone Nutter. What do other assassinations have to do with the JFK assassination in the world of objective rationality? Absolutely nothing.
.
Other than pointing out there are more LN's than conspiracies in such events.
A LN is proof against discovery until they act.
And then it can be too late.
 
So Poser was there and recorded that, and all the 20 or so witnesses are liars, eh? Hey. I got news for you. The liar is Posner.
The witnesess don't have to be lying. That is a false dichotomy. They can simply be remembering wrong or in some cases are being intperted wrong.

Furthermore, its not just Posner. McAdams, who obviosuly makes steam come out of your ears, shows how many witnesses to the shooting saw the wound properly (and a small handful didn't)

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/dpwound.htm

At other times the Drs. do contradict themselves by saying they saw the
wound in the back but the back of the head was never examined.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/faceup.htm

The Bug man even discredits him.

But uses his research in the book quite often. Bugliosi is annoyed with Posner mostly over the Odio interpetation, but he doesn't fault the man's work and used it quite a bit in the book.
 
Already answered that. The Z film is not the Best Evidence but if accurate, it clearly shows the head of the President blasted by a shot from the front.

No, you didn't answer it. The quesion was, Why does the Zapruder film show the right front of his head blowing out? That contradicts the anecdotes you posted about the back of his head having the large exit wound. I didn't ask for your opinion about which direction you thought the bullet came from.

Now answer the question. Why does the Zapruder film contradict the anecdotes you shared? The right front of his head blows out. Did they switch heads before reaching Parkland? Was the Zapruder film faked? Did someone shoot him from the front after the end of the Zapruder film?

Answer those questions, not the one you wish I'd ask.
 
Exactly which quote are you referring to? Name one, please.

What do ou mean? Which quotes do you NOT think need supporting by evidence when weighing them against quotes that ARE supported by evidence? Assume I am talking all the ones from Best Evidence. Or better yet, assume I mean all quotes in all conversations ever.
 
So Poser was there and recorded that, and all the 20 or so witnesses are liars, eh? Hey. I got news for you. The liar is Posner. The Bug man even discredits him.

Once again. What evidence is this based on? When facing two conflicting versions of events what evidence did you use to decide which was true and which was false?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom