JFK Conspiracy Theories: It Never Ends

Status
Not open for further replies.
That claiming to have 40 or 80 or a billion witnesses without naming all of them so we can scrutinize their statements (and not just his cherry picked and misunderstood quotes) is meaningless.

In Robert's defense, he's posted the whole list to this thread before. However, he plays it as a form of modified Gish gallop, where he will spend a few posts discussing one expert, then as soon as it is debunked, declares victory and moves on to the next one.
 
In Robert's defense, he's posted the whole list to this thread before. However, he plays it as a form of modified Gish gallop, where he will spend a few posts discussing one expert, then as soon as it is debunked, declares victory and moves on to the next one.

Nope sorry, he clearly stated he meant a whole different list of witnesses when it was pointed out to him that many of his 40+ were not Medical witnesses as he insisted on describing them.

If on the other hand he wants to double back, then he should retract and apologise for his continued insistance that he has 40 MEDICAL witnesses when he just meant vanilla witnesses with no medical qualifications.

Either he has lied about the number, or he is falsly attributing them as medical witnesses to give his argument undeserved authority.
 
That claiming to have 40 or 80 or a billion witnesses without naming all of them so we can scrutinize their statements (and not just his cherry picked and misunderstood quotes) is meaningless.


"Well now, that doctor, or nurse or technician really doesn't know what he/she is talking about."

Sorry, but that typical debunking is not a debunking but just more lone nutter bunk.
 
"Well now, that doctor, or nurse or technician really doesn't know what he/she is talking about."

So let me get this straight: I have pointed out you have not supplied 40 MEDICAL witnesses. And you take that to mean I have assumed those witnesses don't know what they are talking about?

Rub those braincells together and see if you can think of a better reason why I am incredulous about medical witnesses you have not named, discussed, or offered any evidence for. Go ahead.

Sorry, but that typical debunking is not a debunking but just more lone nutter bunk.




Hmm. Assuming you mean the less than 15 medical witnesses you have named, which are you talking about there? The ones you have never mentioned? Or the ones whose statements did not mean, or even say what you claimed? Or the ones who changed their stories proving themselves to be unreliable? Or the likes of Crenshaw who you claimed to be lying in interviews when his statements contradicted your own (ie not having played the central role you desribed and creative liense being taken by his co-writers)?

I would suggest the nuttyness is expecting your unsourced, unsupported claim to 40+ Medical witnesses, as often repeated, to hold water untill such a time as you actually list them. You know, like people have been asking for.
 
Ah, yes.
The list I posted up here:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8135237&postcount=4587

Yes, Tomtomkent is right.
The list has been chewed up any number of times.

Has RP posted up anything new since then?

ETA:
Here's the list itself:
The Medical Witnesses


The following quoted from JFK Lancer: http://www.jfklancer.com/ParklandDrs.html

Dr. Carrico:
"I believe there was shredded and macerated cerebral and cerebellar tissues both in the wounds and on the fragments of skull."
"This [wound] was a 5cm by 17cm defect in the posterior skull, the occipital region. There was an absence of the calvarium or skull in this area."
"[There was]...a fairly large wound on the right side of the head in the parietal/occipital area. One could see blood and brains, both cerebellum and cerebrum fragments in that wound."

Adolph Giesecke, Staff Anesthesiologist:
"It seemed that from the vertex to the left ear, and from the browline to the occiput on the left hand side of the head the cranium was entirely missing."

Marion Jenkins (Professor And Chairman Of Anaesthesiology):
"There was a great laceration on the right side of the head (temporal and occipital)...even to the extent that the cerebellum had protruded from the wound. ,,,I really think part of the cerebellum, as I recognized it, was herniated from the wound...."

Charles Baxter, (Professor Of Surgery; Director Of Emergency Room)
"The right temporal and occipital bones were missing and the brain was lying on the table."

Diana Bowron, Parkland Hospital nurse. Nurse Bowron actually cleaned the large defect and packed it with gauze squares in preparing the body for the casket. She vividly remembers that the large head wound was in the right rear part of the skull.

Doris Nelson, the supervising Emergency Room nurse, carefully inspected the body. Ben Bradlee, Jr., asked her, "Did you get a good look at his head injuries?" "A very good look," she replied. "Oh, I did see it. When we wrapped him up and put him in the coffin. I saw his whole head." She was then asked if the alleged autopsy photos were accurate. "No. It's not true. Because there was no hair back there. There wasn't even hair back there. It was blown away. Some of his head was blown away and his brains were fallen down on the stretcher." (Groden and Livingstone 454)






From the HSCA

Paul Peters, (Assistant Professor Of Urology):
"I could see the occipital lobes clearly.... I thought it looked like the cerebellum was injured, or missing, because the occipital lobes seemed almost on the foramen magnum."

Malcolm Perry (Assistant Professor Of Surgery):
"The parietal occipital head wound was largely evulsive and there was visible brain tissue...and some cerebellum."

Dr. Kemp Clark, Associate Professor and Chairman of Neurosurgery:
"There was a large wound beginning in the right occiput extending into the parietal region." "Both cerebral and cerebellar tissues were extruding from the wound."

From: "JFK Conspiracy of Silence Charles A. Crenshaw, M.D.

"Had I been allowed to testify, I would have told them that there is no doubt in my mind that the bullet that killed President Kennedy was shot from the Grassy Knoll area...The entire right hemisphere of his brain was missing...based on my experience with trauma to the head from gunshots, I knew that only a high velocity bullet from a rifle could dissect a cranium that way. Part of his brain, the cerebellum, was dangling from the back of his head...The hundreds of trauma cases involving gunshots that I have seen and treated since 1963 further convince me that my conclusions about President Kennedy's wounds were correct....The men on the Commission heard exactly what they wanted to hear, or what they were instructed to hear and then reported what they wanted to report or what they were instructed to report.... the Warren Report (is) a fable, a virtual insult to the intellilgence of the American People."

Finally: Paul O'Connor, the man whose job it was to extract the brain of the President at Bethesda prior to the autopsy: "My job was to remove the brain... there was no brain to remove. There was no brain."
 
Last edited:
Ah, yes.
The list I posted up here:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8135237&postcount=4587

Yes, Tomtomkent is right.
The list has been chewed up any number of times.

Has RP posted up anything new since then?

ETA:
Here's the list itself:
The Medical Witnesses


The following quoted from JFK Lancer: http://www.jfklancer.com/ParklandDrs.html

Dr. Carrico:
"I believe there was shredded and macerated cerebral and cerebellar tissues both in the wounds and on the fragments of skull."
"This [wound] was a 5cm by 17cm defect in the posterior skull, the occipital region. There was an absence of the calvarium or skull in this area."
"[There was]...a fairly large wound on the right side of the head in the parietal/occipital area. One could see blood and brains, both cerebellum and cerebrum fragments in that wound."

Adolph Giesecke, Staff Anesthesiologist:
"It seemed that from the vertex to the left ear, and from the browline to the occiput on the left hand side of the head the cranium was entirely missing."

Marion Jenkins (Professor And Chairman Of Anaesthesiology):
"There was a great laceration on the right side of the head (temporal and occipital)...even to the extent that the cerebellum had protruded from the wound. ,,,I really think part of the cerebellum, as I recognized it, was herniated from the wound...."

Charles Baxter, (Professor Of Surgery; Director Of Emergency Room)
"The right temporal and occipital bones were missing and the brain was lying on the table."

Diana Bowron, Parkland Hospital nurse. Nurse Bowron actually cleaned the large defect and packed it with gauze squares in preparing the body for the casket. She vividly remembers that the large head wound was in the right rear part of the skull.

Doris Nelson, the supervising Emergency Room nurse, carefully inspected the body. Ben Bradlee, Jr., asked her, "Did you get a good look at his head injuries?" "A very good look," she replied. "Oh, I did see it. When we wrapped him up and put him in the coffin. I saw his whole head." She was then asked if the alleged autopsy photos were accurate. "No. It's not true. Because there was no hair back there. There wasn't even hair back there. It was blown away. Some of his head was blown away and his brains were fallen down on the stretcher." (Groden and Livingstone 454)






From the HSCA

Paul Peters, (Assistant Professor Of Urology):
"I could see the occipital lobes clearly.... I thought it looked like the cerebellum was injured, or missing, because the occipital lobes seemed almost on the foramen magnum."

Malcolm Perry (Assistant Professor Of Surgery):
"The parietal occipital head wound was largely evulsive and there was visible brain tissue...and some cerebellum."

Dr. Kemp Clark, Associate Professor and Chairman of Neurosurgery:
"There was a large wound beginning in the right occiput extending into the parietal region." "Both cerebral and cerebellar tissues were extruding from the wound."From: "JFK Conspiracy of Silence Charles A. Crenshaw, M.D.

"Had I been allowed to testify, I would have told them that there is no doubt in my mind that the bullet that killed President Kennedy was shot from the Grassy Knoll area...The entire right hemisphere of his brain was missing...based on my experience with trauma to the head from gunshots, I knew that only a high velocity bullet from a rifle could dissect a cranium that way. Part of his brain, the cerebellum, was dangling from the back of his head...The hundreds of trauma cases involving gunshots that I have seen and treated since 1963 further convince me that my conclusions about President Kennedy's wounds were correct....The men on the Commission heard exactly what they wanted to hear, or what they were instructed to hear and then reported what they wanted to report or what they were instructed to report.... the Warren Report (is) a fable, a virtual insult to the intellilgence of the American People."

Finally: Paul O'Connor, the man whose job it was to extract the brain of the President at Bethesda prior to the autopsy: "My job was to remove the brain... there was no brain to remove. There was no brain."

There are a lot less than 40 there. No list of 40 MEDICAL witnesses has been provided.

Also note how Paul O'Connor makes the definate statement that the highlighted statements must be wrong. After all if there was no brain how could those other people have seen it?

And once again, the Crenshaw quote is subject to that poetic license he clearly stated in interviews linked to earlier in the thread.

Now Robert, care to supply the rest of those 40+ Medical witnesses yet?
 
There are a lot less than 40 there. No list of 40 MEDICAL witnesses has been provided.

Also note how Paul O'Connor makes the definate statement that the highlighted statements must be wrong. After all if there was no brain how could those other people have seen it?

And once again, the Crenshaw quote is subject to that poetic license he clearly stated in interviews linked to earlier in the thread.

Now Robert, care to supply the rest of those 40+ Medical witnesses yet?

I believe I was on number 14 when a certain thin skinned person cried foul and ended the thread. Not interested in any more of your mis-representations.
 
I believe I was on number 14 when a certain thin skinned person cried foul and ended the thread. Not interested in any more of your mis-representations.

Uhuh. The thing is 40>14

You were upto number 14? Then you have NOT produced 40 Medical witnesses. Each and every claim you made about there being 40+ Medical witnesses was invalid. You are claiming to be supported by evidence you have not produced.

I have no reason to trust you ever intended to produce 26 more medical witnesses. So any time you type "the 40+ Medical witnesses" or "40 Medical witnesses" I read "unsupported claim of witnesses".

There is zero reason, absolutely no reason what so ever, for you not to have posted a list of 40 names. There is zero need to discuss each in turn until after they have been posted.

The reason you are not interested in my "misrepresentations" is because they are perfectly reasonable observations of the evidence for your claim of how many witness testemony you claim to have.

I personally believe you are nothing but a troll spouting lies who has not posted a list because you stupidly called a list of witnesses "Medical" witnesses, and you have no way to support that claim. But feel free to prove me wrong, give me 40 names of medical staff you think support your claim. I will even give you a fighting chance and not discount the 14 who have already been discredited over and over and over again. I wont insist the witnesses have to actually support your claim, and accept those you just think do...

Hell, that may even prove some of the old hands wrong. You might actually, finally, have something new to say instead of repeating the same old dross.
 
Not so, RP.
The post I quoted of yours is from this very thread.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php...postcount=4587

Obviously no one ended the thread, so could you explain just what you mean, please?

The thread was temporarily shut down for a clean up. Nothing unsual and if it were caused by a call of foul it would be for the uncivil tone of some posts and not for the posting of the witnesses one at a time.

Each of those 14 quotes have been disected, and in their natural context, each has been shown to be far from conlusive. Indeed they don't even match each other (as already noted, was there a brain or not?) or to match the description as given by the WC findings.

I note Robert still refuses to give a medical description of the wounds, edfining which areas of the skull he thinks they cover. Why? If he knows what they are not, why can he not type a few short sentences of what the wounds are?

Perchance because a description of the wounds would match those he hopes to discredit the WC with?
 
I'm a little confused as to how Robert can claim somebody ended the thread yet the thread is still going. Either way, until I see a certified long-form original birth certificate for Kennedy then I refuse to believe he was ever our President anyway.
 
I believe I was on number 14 when a certain thin skinned person cried foul and ended the thread. Not interested in any more of your mis-representations.
Wait, what?? It must have ended in different "reality", Robert, because it's obviously still going in this one.
 
I believe I was on number 14 when a certain thin skinned person cried foul and ended the thread. Not interested in any more of your mis-representations.

This thread was not ended (obviously). It was closed down for maybe a day. You did not realize it was open again and decided to go troll the Politics forum instead.

Here's a post Robert made in August on usenet about the thread being closed
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/alt.assassination.jfk/ur5H4bgx9fg/discussion

That was on August 22. I checked at the time and laughed because the thread was clearly open. Robert knew this, too, because he posted in this thread on August 31. To say it was ended is a blatant and obvious lie.
 
This thread was not ended (obviously). It was closed down for maybe a day. You did not realize it was open again and decided to go troll the Politics forum instead.

Here's a post Robert made in August on usenet about the thread being closed
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/alt.assassination.jfk/ur5H4bgx9fg/discussion

That was on August 22. I checked at the time and laughed because the thread was clearly open. Robert knew this, too, because he posted in this thread on August 31. To say it was ended is a blatant and obvious lie.

No. That post is a complete and total fabrication and I suspect you probably know it. I've never even once posted on that board. Never even knew it existed. Your post is a blatant lie.
 
No. That post is a complete and total fabrication and I suspect you probably know it. I've never even once posted on that board. Never even knew it existed. Your post is a blatant lie.

So for clarity, you retract your claim this thread is closed?
 
No. That post is a complete and total fabrication and I suspect you probably know it. I've never even once posted on that board. Never even knew it existed. Your post is a blatant lie.
Hmm...maybe you're right Robert. It could be a KGB plant, or possibly a paid shill posing as a foreigner, posting there to attempt to make you look like a conspiracy theorist.
 
I'm a little confused as to how Robert can claim somebody ended the thread yet the thread is still going. Either way, until I see a certified long-form original birth certificate for Kennedy then I refuse to believe he was ever our President anyway.

Funny you should mention that, because it was also in the moderated Birther thread that Robert claimed this thread had been "closed" or "ended" or whatever exact wording he used. Whereupon a few of us came here to post token messages proving it was open. Robert never acknowledged his lie.

Robert once posted here a copypasted list of 40 "medical" witnesses that was removed on copyright grounds because he'd just lifted it wholesale from another source. Robert complained about being censored, but has never managed to name 40 medical witnesses since then, as he claims exist. Further, we even went a page or two arguing over the semantics of the request to provide one.

In short, his argument has from time to time included claims that he's being inappropriately censored in this thread or that others are preventing him from making his point. I suspect the only reason he's back here is because his hijack of the Birther thread is stuck on his claim to own his original birth certificate, and his stolen-election thread has fetched up hard aground for lack of evidence and a fairly severe political bias. No better time, in my opinion, to fringe-reset the JFK thread and start all over again for the umpteenth time on the same old debunked claims.
 
No better time, in my opinion, to fringe-reset the JFK thread and start all over again for the umpteenth time on the same old debunked claims.

And then when he inevitably gets stuck in this thread again he'll go back to the Birther thread and pretend what happened here never did. It's like one endless feedback loop.
 
Or he'll go back to the election rigging thread.

Guess his reset button broke.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom