Why do JFK assassination forums draw so many nut cases?

[John Corbett]

No, I get it...

The FBI and Warren Commission did ZERO investigation of one of the most important events in the Depository, in the form of how Oswald left the Depository, because what I wrote above is just completely ridiculous and doesn't give a shockingly tight-fitting reason for it...I get it...

It is only important to someone who doesn't know how to weigh evidence. It's a real nothing burger.

And, even though, in a presidential assassination, Lovelady not telling the authorities in the original 1963 investigation that he saw Oswald exit through the front door is, technically, a with-holding of evidence crime, that HSCA and FBI just decided to not confront Lovelady cause, ah, ehm, they already knew...Yeah, that's the ticket because you know how forgiving those Specter-types are...This is the same FBI that committed Ralph Yates...But, no, I get it...

Still waiting for you to give a credible answer to that...

Billy Lovelady testified that he heard Oswald in the east elevator as he was breaking for lunch but did not actually see him. When asked if he saw Oswald after that his one word answer was "No". He wouldn't have seen Oswald leave building because after the shooting, Gloria Calvary told him and Bill Shelley that the President had been shot and he and Shelley then headed down the Elm. St. extension toward the railroad tracks. It's amazing how you could dream up your BS story from that.

[Martin Weidmann]

It is only important to someone who doesn't know how to weigh evidence. It's a real nothing burger.
Billy Lovelady testified that he heard Oswald in the east elevator as he was breaking for lunch but did not actually see him. When asked if he saw Oswald after that his one word answer was "No". He wouldn't have seen Oswald leave building because after the shooting, Gloria Calvary told him and Bill Shelley that the President had been shot and he and Shelley then headed down the Elm. St. extension toward the railroad tracks. It's amazing how you could dream up your BS story from that.

It is only important to someone who doesn't know how to weigh evidence.

And you know how to weigh evidence? Really?

[John Corbett]

It is only important to someone who doesn't know how to weigh evidence.

And you know how to weigh evidence? Really?

Yes, I do. That's why I was able to figure out a long time ago that LHO killed JFK and that there is zero evidence he had even a single accomplice. I could be convinced otherwise if somebody could present actual evidence to the contrary but it's been almost 63 years since JFK was killed and the chances of that happening get more remote with each passing year.

[Martin Weidmann]

Yes, I do. That's why I was able to figure out a long time ago that LHO killed JFK and that there is zero evidence he had even a single accomplice. I could be convinced otherwise if somebody could present actual evidence to the contrary but it's been almost 63 years since JFK was killed and the chances of that happening get more remote with each passing year.

You do understand that there is a major difference between you thinking that you know how to weigh evidence and demonstrating that you actually can weigh the evidence, right?

Some people think that whatever they believe in is always correct, when in most cases it isn't.

If you really knew how to weigh evidence, you would have been able to answer questions (which you can't and don't) and you would actually be able to present a persuasive argument instead of constantly complaining about people that don't share your opinion.

[John Corbett]

You do understand that there is a major difference between you thinking that you know how to weigh evidence and demonstrating that you actually can weigh the evidence, right?

Some people think that whatever they believe in is always correct, when in most cases it isn't.

I KNOW with 100% certainty that LHO fired the shots that killed JFK. I am 99.99% certain he had no accomplices.

If you really knew how to weigh evidence, you would have been able to answer questions (which you can't and don't) and you would actually be able to present a persuasive argument instead of constantly complaining about people that don't share your opinion.

It's almost impossible to persuade CT cement heads.

[Martin Weidmann]

I KNOW with 100% certainty that LHO fired the shots that killed JFK. I am 99.99% certain he had no accomplices.
It's almost impossible to persuade CT cement heads.

Hilarious!

I KNOW with 100% certainty that

You can assume, conclude, believe or think something, but there is no way that you can "know with 100% certainty" that something happened unless you witnessed it yourself.

It's almost impossible to persuade CT cement heads.

That's just a pathetic coward's excuse for not answering a question.

But thank you for proving my point! 

[John Corbett]

Hilarious!

I KNOW with 100% certainty that

You can assume, conclude, believe or think something, but there no way that you can "know with 100% certainty" that something happened unless you witnessed it yourself.

It's almost impossible to persuade CT cement heads.

That's just a pathetic coward's excuse for not answering a question.

But thank you for proving my point! 

That you're a cement head?