The problem isn't you, CTers - it's your dang brain

[John Mytton]

Mr. Griffith... Lance Payette's point, which may have went over your head, is that your percentage of those who believe Kennedy was assassinated as a result of a conspiracy means nothing when 98% of those polled have only heard terms like "grassy knoll" and "magic bullet" and have no idea who Ruth Paine and J.D. Tippit are.

Yeah this, the other day Griffith posted his JFKA poll statistics and I pointed out that barely anyone of those polled actually know this case and I'm guessing that less than 1% have even read the Warren Report, so the information they have isn't exactly balanced and comes primarily from CT lies like Stone's JFK movie. It's like Lance says, there's an anonymous phone poll and some uninformed citizen who is only aware of the CT side and has a basic mistrust of the Government will reply "sure there was a Conspiracy"
Even myself in the early days believed in conspiracy but as time went on and I did actual research, I came to another conclusion, for instance;

• Kennedy's head goes initially forward.
• A bullet lacks the kinetic energy to throw anyone around like a rag doll.
• The authenticated autopsy photos show no exit wound to the back of Kennedy's head.
• The backyard photos showing Oswald holding the murder weapon have been authenticated 7 ways to Sunday.
• Oswald ordered, purchased and possessed the murder weapon
• Oswald killed Tippit and if Oswald wasn't in flight, why would he feel the need to kill?
• Oswald's confirmable lies while in custody.

I literally have dozens more of these facts which refute any conspiracy.

The CT's use what is known as circular logic and based on their belief that Oswald is innocent come to their conclusion that every fact that convicts Oswald must be false and since there is a mountain of evidence convicting Oswald, in turn there must be a mountain of evidence which is the product of fakery and lies. Just for example look at Griffith who literally believes that practically every single piece of evidence has been faked, like the Zapruder film, backyard photos, autopsy photos, autopsy X-rays, rifle documents the list is near endless. But when Griffith is asked how it was done, how it was planned and who had the ability to alter this massive pile of evidence, he just stares at you blankly and then goes off in search of more fakery and then seeks confirmation bias from his equally Kooky mates.

JohnM

[Lance Payette]

I finally located the book that I read a few years ago and would highly recommend to all:

Real Enemies: Conspiracy Theories and American Democracy, World War I to 9/11, by Kathryn Olmstead, https://www.amazon.com/Real-Enemies-Conspiracy-Theories-Democracy/dp/0199753954.

The point she makes is that, in every instance, there actually was malfeasance and cover-up that gave rise to wild conspiracy theories - but the wild conspiracy theories were totally unrelated to the actual malfeasance and cover-up, and the folks who screwed up could have avoided a lot of grief and wild speculation just by being honest and transparent from the get-go.

These sorts of threads always - ALWAYS - immediately turn into ad hominem catfights because CTers think they are being attacked. Those who react most strongly are always - ALWAYS - precisely who and what the professional literature is describing (and at some level they realize this, which is why they kick and scream).

It is simply a scientific truth that there is such a thing as aberrant conspiratorial thinking, and it rears its head again and again on forums such as this. I think it behooves everyone to recognize that those who propound these wild theories and make these irrational arguments are simply not thinking the same way most of us do.

There are NUMEROUS scholarly but non-technical and non-argumentative books such as the above that examine conspiratorial thinking and explain the differences between aberrant and non-aberrant. The problem is, those who would benefit the most from reading them are the least likely to do so.

[Tom Graves]

[...]

In my humble opinion, before the Administrations of The Traitorous Orange Bird (rhymes with "Xxxx"), conspiracy theorists who hated the American government (can you say the evil, evil CIA?) did so largely because they didn't realize the nature of the Communist threat against us and our NATO allies since 1959, and even if they did have an inkling, thought we should be fighting against it according to Queensbury Rules.

[Jarrett Smith]

Yeah this, the other day Griffith posted his JFKA poll statistics and I pointed out that barely anyone of those polled actually know this case and I'm guessing that less than 1% have even read the Warren Report, so the information they have isn't exactly balanced and comes primarily from CT lies like Stone's JFK movie. It's like Lance says, there's an anonymous phone poll and some uninformed citizen who is only aware of the CT side and has a basic mistrust of the Government will reply "sure there was a Conspiracy"
Even myself in the early days believed in conspiracy but as time went on and I did actual research, I came to another conclusion, for instance;

• Kennedy's head goes initially forward.
• A bullet lacks the kinetic energy to throw anyone around like a rag doll.
• The authenticated autopsy photos show no exit wound to the back of Kennedy's head.
• The backyard photos showing Oswald holding the murder weapon have been authenticated 7 ways to Sunday.
• Oswald ordered, purchased and possessed the murder weapon
• Oswald killed Tippit and if Oswald wasn't in flight, why would he feel the need to kill?
• Oswald's confirmable lies while in custody.

I literally have dozens more of these facts which refute any conspiracy.

The CT's use what is known as circular logic and based on their belief that Oswald is innocent come to their conclusion that every fact that convicts Oswald must be false and since there is a mountain of evidence convicting Oswald, in turn there must be a mountain of evidence which is the product of fakery and lies. Just for example look at Griffith who literally believes that practically every single piece of evidence has been faked, like the Zapruder film, backyard photos, autopsy photos, autopsy X-rays, rifle documents the list is near endless. But when Griffith is asked how it was done, how it was planned and who had the ability to alter this massive pile of evidence, he just stares at you blankly and then goes off in search of more fakery and then seeks confirmation bias from his equally Kooky mates.

JohnM

Kennedy definitely had a hole in the back of his head, too many witnesses saw it. If you look at a good copy of the Moorman photo you can see the defect. I still think that back of the head picture was taken after the morticians started reconstructing the head.





Mr. Hill:
The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying the rear seat of the car.
His brain was exposed. There was blood and bits of brain all over the entire rear portion
of the car. Mrs. Kennedy was completely covered with blood. There was so much blood
you could not tell if there had been any other wound or not, except for the one large
gaping wound in the right rear portion of the head.