JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate
Kind of interesting: The dissenting voices on the HSCA
Lance Payette:
--- Quote from: Jake Maxwell on September 06, 2025, 09:21:10 PM ---I appreciate your reasoned response and knowledge on the subject.
I read your article. Makes me wonder if the HSCA dissenters had some hidden agenda, since they seem to have been so bent on dissenting... Thanks for sharing.
--- End quote ---
Jake, you are the first person in, oh, maybe 25 years to use "reasoned response" in reference to a post by Michael! I thank you on behalf of Michael fans everywhere. Now he owes it to you to comment favorably on one of your photo analyses. The ball is in your court, Michael - do not let us down.
I do think the HSCA dissenters had a hidden agenda. It's called "not being made to look like fools."
More seriously, good old Wikipedia has a pretty good overview of the ups and downs of the acoustics evidence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_assassination_Dictabelt_recording#Criticism. I would also invite you to take a look at Mark Tyler's analysis of what he calls the acoustics evidence "red herring": https://www.marktyler.org/mc63/mc63_handbook.pdf (it begins on page 41). Bear in mind, this discredited stuff was the sole basis on which the HSCA found a conspiracy, notwithstanding Andy Purdy admitting even now that "the entire staff wanted and expected to find a conspiracy" and were "shocked" when those damn expert panels didn't take the bait.
You do illustrate the same problem that I had when I was a gung-ho CTer: Folks like Michael, and Simpich, and Newman, and assorted others, certainly sound as though they know what they are talking about (and, as we see here, anyone who disagrees with them is dismissed as "naive," "poorly informed," "not a serious researcher," yada yada). If you take them at face value and lap it up - as I did, for quite a while - it is very easy to be wowed by their work. These guys are the Real Deal! We can trust them as though they were the high priests of our CT religion!
Start looking behind the curtain for yourself, however, and you are likely to have an epiphany: These guys are CRANKS, borderline (or worse) nutcases. Their work is a stream of factoids and speculation that simply won't withstand scrutiny. Unless you are as obsessive-compulsive about the JFKA as they are, you will never be able to expose all their nonsense - and you wouldn't shut them up even if you did.
All you can do is what I have done: pick an assertion here and there and thoroughly check it out. EVERY DAMN TIME, the assertion proves to be false, or so half-assed or misleadingly out of context as to be false. Pretty soon, your favorite high priest - Newman, Di Eugenio, Morley, Armstrong, Michael (?) - is exposed as a CRANK whose agenda - whatever the hell it is - has nothing to do with historical truth.
Just like in a real religion, most CT believers are lazy characters who enjoy the show and would rather trust their priests than think for themselves, not to mention that their conspiracy-prone psychology leads them in this direction anyway. The parallels with real religion are quite stark. Truly, "reasoned response" in the same sentence as "Michael Griffith" is an oxymoron. He is a 32nd-degree CRANK.
Jake Maxwell:
--- Quote from: Lance Payette on September 06, 2025, 09:57:53 PM ---Jake, you are the first person in, oh, maybe 25 years to use "reasoned response" in reference to a post by Michael! I thank you on behalf of Michael fans everywhere. Now he owes it to you to comment favorably on one of your photo analyses. The ball is in your court, Michael - do not let us down.
I do think the HSCA dissenters had a hidden agenda. It's called "not being made to look like fools."
More seriously, good old Wikipedia has a pretty good overview of the ups and downs of the acoustics evidence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_assassination_Dictabelt_recording#Criticism. I would also invite you to take a look at Mark Tyler's analysis of what he calls the acoustics evidence "red herring": https://www.marktyler.org/mc63/mc63_handbook.pdf (it begins on page 41). Bear in mind, this discredited stuff was the sole basis on which the HSCA found a conspiracy, notwithstanding Andy Purdy admitting even now that "the entire staff wanted and expected to find a conspiracy" and were "shocked" when those damn expert panels didn't take the bait.
You do illustrate the same problem that I had when I was a gung-ho CTer: Folks like Michael, and Simpich, and Newman, and assorted others, certainly sound as though they know what they are talking about (and, as we see here, anyone who disagrees with them is dismissed as "naive," "poorly informed," "not a serious researcher," yada yada). If you take them at face value and lap it up - as I did, for quite a while - it is very easy to be wowed by their work. These guys are the Real Deal! We can trust them as though they were the high priests of our CT religion!
Start looking behind the curtain for yourself, however, and you are likely to have an epiphany: These guys are CRANKS, borderline (or worse) nutcases. Their work is a stream of factoids and speculation that simply won't withstand scrutiny. Unless you are as obsessive-compulsive about the JFKA as they are, you will never be able to expose all their nonsense - and you wouldn't shut them up even if you did.
All you can do is what I have done: pick an assertion here and there and thoroughly check it out. EVERY DAMN TIME, the assertion proves to be false, or so half-assed or misleadingly out of context as to be false. Pretty soon, your favorite high priest - Newman, Di Eugenio, Morley, Armstrong, Michael (?) - is exposed as a CRANK whose agenda - whatever the hell it is - has nothing to do with historical truth.
Just like in a real religion, most CT believers are lazy characters who enjoy the show and would rather trust their priests than think for themselves, not to mention that their conspiracy-prone psychology leads them in this direction anyway. The parallels with real religion are quite stark. Truly, "reasoned response" in the same sentence as "Michael Griffith" is an oxymoron. He is a 32nd-degree CRANK.
--- End quote ---
Thank you for the reasoned response... It seems the theory of gunshot recordings on the dictabelt has been thoroughly debunked by most contemporary experts in the field... Was this the only factor that turned the HSCA toward conspiracy?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version