Handwriting authentication

[Martin Weidmann]

Another fine example of just how shallow the LN mind is.
_ Another fine example of the rampant paranoia that has been washing over CTer/JAQer/TAEer/Oswald Arse Kisser ranks since Day One, and leaving nothing more than crackpot mudslinging behind.

Of course you haven't choir boy, but that's not the point.
_Interested in choir boys I see. Sorry, not on my bucket list

If you start making claims, never mind how pathetic, that are based on a comparison with other documents, your claims is worthless if you can't show that the documents used for the comparision are indeed authentic.
_ You've denied being a CT in the past. So why would you need anything other than what has been forwarded as Oswald docs all these years..

As you can't do that, you've got nothing of any value.
Perhaps you should take it up with the The Portal to Texas History.
_The Portal of Texas History
https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth340016/

Photocopy of handwritten notes by Lee Harvey Oswald. In the notes, Oswald writes of an invitation he received to give a lecture in Russian, his attempts to form a branch of the FPCC, his skills in the field of photography and street agitation, his interests in Communism, his time lived in Russia, and his service in the USMC.
 ----------------------------------------------------------
> Perhaps you would like to share with us where you might find something sinister enough to cause somebody to fake a note about an Oswald lecture that was essentially dripping with braggadocio.

Why you would drag the Patton witnesses into the conversation is a complete mystery to me. None of them can authenticate Oswald's handwriting, right?
_They can all authenticate his face. And just as he was the only gun-toter in sight, I was able to match the handwriting on the MO to the handwriting on the only pertinent docs in sight.

You've denied being a CT in the past. So why would you need anything other than what has been forwarded as Oswald docs all these years..

What a pathetically stupid question to ask. Documents used for comparision for the sole purpose of authenticating other documents should themselves also be authenticated. That's how it works in the real world. It has nothing to do with being either a CT or a LN. Anybody who just blindly accepts something as authentic without actually knowing that it is, is a damned fool.

Perhaps you would like to share with us where you might find something sinister enough to cause somebody to fake a note about an Oswald lecture that was essentially dripping with braggadocio.

Another stupid question. Boy you're on a roll. You've missed the entire point of handwriting authentication. It doesn't matter what type of document you use for comparision, the document - sinister or not - still needs to be authenticated itself before being used.

I was able to match the handwriting on the MO to the handwriting on the only pertinent docs in sight.

Delusions of grandeur aside, now all you have to do is show that those documents were indeed written by Oswald.

It seems LNs like you don't like evidence authentication one bit. Why is that?

[Bill Chapman]

You've denied being a CT in the past. So why would you need anything other than what has been forwarded as Oswald docs all these years..

What a pathetically stupid question to ask. Documents used for comparision for the sole purpose of authenticating other documents should themselves also be authenticated. That's how it works in the real world. It has nothing to do with being either a CT or a LN. Anybody who just blindly accepts something as authentic without actually knowing that it is, is a damned fool.

Perhaps you would like to share with us where you might find something sinister enough to cause somebody to fake a note about an Oswald lecture that was essentially dripping with braggadocio.

Another stupid question. Boy you're on a roll. You've missed the entire point of handwriting authentication. It doesn't matter what type of document you use for comparision, the document - sinister or not - still needs to be authenticated itself before being used.

I was able to match the handwriting on the MO to the handwriting on the only pertinent docs in sight.

Delusions of grandeur aside, now all you have to do is show that those documents were indeed written by Oswald.

"You've missed the entire point of handwriting authentication"
No. You missed the entire point of my feasibility study

The document - sinister or not - still needs to be authenticated itself before being used"
'Before being used' you say
Yeah. In court
You are out of order, mister
This is a discussion forum

[Martin Weidmann]

"You've missed the entire point of handwriting authentication"
No. You missed the entire point of my feasibility study

The document - sinister or not - still needs to be authenticated itself before being used"
'Before being used' you say
Yeah. In court
You are out of order, mister
This is a discussion forum

my feasibility study

LOL

This is a discussion forum

Yes it is, but that doesn't mean that you can make up stuff as you please and make bogus claims.

But thank you for implicitly admitting that your claims, in the real world, are completely without merit.

[Bill Chapman]

my feasibility study

LOL

This is a discussion forum

Yes it is, but that doesn't mean that you can make up stuff as you please and make bogus claims.

But thank you for implicitly admitting that your claims, in the real world, are completely without merit.

----------------------
feasible;
aka probable, likely
----------------------

Yes it is, but that doesn't mean that you can make up stuff as you please and make bogus claims.
_ Show us where I 'made stuff up' or made 'bogus claims' in my MO handwriting comparisons.

[Martin Weidmann]

----------------------
feasible;
aka probable, likely
----------------------

Yes it is, but that doesn't mean that you can make up stuff as you please and make bogus claims.
_ Show us where I 'made stuff up' or made 'bogus claims' in my MO handwriting comparisons.

----------------------
feasible;
aka probable, likely
----------------------

There is nothing feasible, probable or likely in a study based on self-serving assumptions

Yes it is, but that doesn't mean that you can make up stuff as you please and make bogus claims.
_ Show us where I 'made stuff up' or made 'bogus claims' in my MO handwriting comparisons.


Easy... every time you implied and/or claimed the handwriting on the money order to be Oswald's, simply because you assume, without any kind of authentication, that comparison documents were actually written by him.

Just read the previous posts in this thread. Your bogus claims are all over them.

[Bill Chapman]

They didn’t have squat. And neither do you.

I have a groundbreaking study that puts the MO flowing right out of Oswald's pen

[Martin Weidmann]

I have a groundbreaking study that puts the MO flowing right out of Oswald's pen

No, you have delusions of grandeur and seriously need to consider to get help

Btw, where does this "groundbreaking study" show that the pen used to fill out the money order belonged to Oswald?