Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10
51
We epistemological types would note that the term "theory" is being tossed around rather loosely by, er, what we might charitably call non-epistemological types.

Since we are dealing with an historical event and a large body of evidence, the scientific definition is not inappropriate:

A theory is "a well-established framework built upon extensive evidence." It is the highest level of scientific understanding short of an observable, scientifically proven fact. The LN narrative is a theory. Certain key aspects of the theory are subject to testing and falsification and have been confirmed.

A hypothesis is "a testable prediction or explanation that is formulated as part of research or experimentation" but has not achieved the status of a theory. The very multiplicity of CT explanations for the JFKA and the extent to which they are debated, as well as the failure of any explanation to convincingly account for Dealey Plaza, shows that none has achieved the status of a theory.

Although Flat Earthers will insist the spherical earth is "just a theory" and thus stands on the same epistemological footing as the flat earth "theory," the fact is that the spherical earth is regarded as an observable, scientifically proven fact while the flat earth is regarded as an absurd myth - not even a hypothesis, let alone a theory.

At this point, to attempt to place any CT explanation on the same footing as the LN narrative, or to use terminology such as "just a theory" in regard to the LN narrative, is completely invalid. Dan has conceded that his LBJ-Byrd-Cason-Shelley scenario is pure speculation and cannot account for Oswald. In epistemological terms, it would be a "wild guess."

Everyone should read Thomas Kuhn's seminal The Structure of Scientific Revolutions and at least some basic works on epistemology. Epistemological ignorance really is at the root of much JFKA debate.

For anyone unfamiliar with this new-wave brand of Lone Nut lunacy, here's a classic example.
From the same post:

" The LN narrative is a theory."

and then this:
"... to use terminology such as "just a theory" in regard to the LN narrative, is completely invalid."

I mean...honestly...how do you begin to deal with this kind of mentality.
In Lance's world I can say "the LN narrative isn't a fact, it's a theory" and that's valid.
But if I say "the LN narrative isn't a fact, it's just a theory", well...that's totally unacceptable  ::)
Oh brother...

It's great fun to point out to the most rabid Nutters it is a theory that Oswald took the shots that killed JFK. They literally cannot deal with this. You can almost hear the tears of frustration hitting the keyboard as Corbett types - 'There are some things for which there is so much evidence that they are no longer theories. Oswald killing JFK is one of those things."
Really?
Are you sure about that?
At least Lance has stayed true to his pretence of being an open-minded Nutter and managed to actually type the sentence about the LN narrative being a theory, even if he immediately retracts it.
"epistemological types"?  :D :D
I do admire the combination of arrogance and dumbness.

Oswald killing JFK is just a theory. That's a fact.
52
Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on Today at 04:12:18 PM
WC defenders ignore or summarily brush aside the fact that on November 16-17, five days before the assassination, David Ferrie spent the weekend with Mafia kingpin Carlos Marcello at Marcello's Churchill Farms estate. Supposedly, the two were discussing "defense strategy" for the final week of Marcello's deportation trial in federal court. However, strangely enough, Marcello’s attorneys were not there.. Humm. . . . Ferrie was no lawyer. It is very hard imagine what legal strategy Marcello and Ferrie could have discussed for two entire days; it is also hard to fathom how a weekend-long legal defense strategy meeting would not have included at least one of Marcello's attorneys. Dr. Richard Mahoney correctly and logically suspects that Marcello and Ferrie were finalizing some of the details of the planned assassination of JFK in Dallas (The Kennedy Brothers: The Rise and Fall of Jack and Bobby, 2017 edition, p. 386).


CTs love when they get a blank sheet of paper they can fill with their wild speculations.

Your lack of education is again showing.

We're hardly talking about a "blank sheet of paper" but about standard deductive analysis of an obviously suspicious event, the kind of analysis that police investigators and district attorneys do every day. It is only logical to believe that if this two-day meeting at Marcello's estate had really been a legal strategy meeting, at least one of Marcello's attorneys would have been there, and not just David Ferrie, who had no legal training of any kind.

Both Marcello and Ferrie are logical suspects in JFK's death. Ferrie had publicly called for JFK's assassination and made a highly suspicious trip to Houston on the night of the assassination. Marcello harbored an intense hatred of the Kennedys, had voiced the desire to see JFK dead, had expressed foreknowledge of a plot to kill JFK, and unwittingly revealed to a federal informant after the assassination that he played a role in JFK's death.

One would have to be quite gullible to believe that a Mafia kingpin like Marcello and a volatile right-winger with no legal background like David Ferrie spent two days at Marcello's estate talking about legal strategy for Marcello's deportation trial.

 


53
I am so impressed by such an articulate response.

Good for you. It was articulated in my original post
Your lame excuse/gaslighting requires no further response
54
lame

I am so impressed by such an articulate response.
55
There was a large hole along he entire upper right side of JFK's head. So yes that large hole extended into the rear portion of JFK's head but it was not limited to the back of his head. The Z-film shows us a large flap of skull hanging down the right side of JFK's head. Bill Newman said he thought his ear had been blown off. I was just covered up by that flap.

Despite what amateur sleuths would have us believe, the large blowout does not tell us where the shot came from. Determining the location of an entrance wound in the head is dirt simple for qualified forensic medical examiners. For starters, fracture lines radiate out from the point of entry. Those radiating lines extend from the entry point in the back of the head. There is also beveling that takes place when a missile passes through the wall of the skull. The beveling in the back of the head was inward, further evidence of a rear entry. Had the missile passed through the wall at the back of JFK's skull in a rearward direction, the beveling would be outward.

Don't you think it's time to put away these silly myths based on what amateurs have concluded the evidence indicates.

lame
56
I am enjoying your open discussion and consideration. Which brings me to this;

One thing that has always bothered me about this case is the conflict/questions concerning the hole at the back of the President's head.
I find it ridiculous to even consider the notion that the top neurological team at Parkland only assumed there was a hole at the right rear.
Utter nonsense. Yet, pictures from Bethesda show the opposite. As we all know a large hole would be indicative of an exit wound from the front.


There was a large hole along he entire upper right side of JFK's head. So yes that large hole extended into the rear portion of JFK's head but it was not limited to the back of his head. The Z-film shows us a large flap of skull hanging down the right side of JFK's head. Bill Newman said he thought his ear had been blown off. I was just covered up by that flap.

Despite what amateur sleuths would have us believe, the large blowout does not tell us where the shot came from. Determining the location of an entrance wound in the head is dirt simple for qualified forensic medical examiners. For starters, fracture lines radiate out from the point of entry. Those radiating lines extend from the entry point in the back of the head. There is also beveling that takes place when a missile passes through the wall of the skull. The beveling in the back of the head was inward, further evidence of a rear entry. Had the missile passed through the wall at the back of JFK's skull in a rearward direction, the beveling would be outward.

Don't you think it's time to put away these silly myths based on what amateurs have concluded the evidence indicates.
57
WC defenders ignore or summarily brush aside the fact that on November 16-17, five days before the assassination, David Ferrie spent the weekend with Mafia kingpin Carlos Marcello at Marcello's Churchill Farms estate. Supposedly, the two were discussing "defense strategy" for the final week of Marcello's deportation trial in federal court. However, strangely enough, Marcello’s attorneys were not there.. Humm. . . . Ferrie was no lawyer. It is very hard imagine what legal strategy Marcello and Ferrie could have discussed for two entire days; it is also hard to fathom how a weekend-long legal defense strategy meeting would not have included at least one of Marcello's attorneys. Dr. Richard Mahoney correctly and logically suspects that Marcello and Ferrie were finalizing some of the details of the planned assassination of JFK in Dallas (The Kennedy Brothers: The Rise and Fall of Jack and Bobby, 2017 edition, p. 386).

CTs love when they get a blank sheet of paper they can fill with their wild speculations.
58
How many times do I have to say they didn't have to know in advance? Did LN Oswald have to know 6 weeks in advance?

It isn't enough to say it. You need a plausible explanation. It seems far fetched that the Mafia or any other entity would have chosen Oswald as their shooter/patsy without knowing in advance he would be handed a golden opportunity to shoot JFK from his workplace. Oswald didn't need to know in advance that taking the job at the TSBD would provide him with that opportunity. Killing JFK would have been the furthest thing on his mind when he took that job. He took it so he could feed his family. So did Oswald just get lucky? Yes, he did and that might seem far-fetched too. If Oswald was the only twisted individual in the country with a propensity to do what he did, it would have been a remarkable piece of bad luck that JFK would cross paths with him. But we don't know how many dozens, maybe hundreds of similarly twisted individuals there were around the country at the time who would have done what Oswald did if given the opportunity. Combine that with a President who had a fondness from riding through crowded urban streets in a slow moving open top car, it doesn't seem remarkable at all that JFK would happen to end up within easy rifle range of one of them. It was Oswald who happened to be the one who won the assassin's lottery.
Quote


What are the odds of many things in the JFKA? What are the odds of the SBT, the Magic Bullet, the Ruby hit, many other aspects of the LN narrative? In the LN scenario, what are the odds TSBD6 would just happen to be an ideal location? One could go on and on.

I just dealt with the issue of odds. I don't need to repeat myself.
Quote

If Oswald was actively on the radar screen of someone like Marcello through Murret, or in communication with pro- or anti-Castro types, they certainly could have known when JFK's trip to Dallas was announced that Oswald was in Dallas and then when he took the job at the TSBD.The job at least placed him in downtown Dallas. Oswald's apparent scouting of the Allright Parking Garage a mere week before the JFKA could suggest he was going to be used "somewhere" in Dallas.

Of all the people the Mafia could have chosen to do a hit, why the hell would they pick somebody like Oswald and why would they pick him without knowing the opportunity he would have one day?

Ditto for the pro/anti/Castro groups.

Why would Oswald be scouting a shooting location without knowing where the motorcade be going or even if there was going to be a motorcade.
Quote

There is "outside the box" thinking, and then there is "so locked into the box that I don't even realize I'm in it" thinking. Yes, I agree, the TSBD was pure happenstance. That does not rule out a plot. Oswald never even filed an application with the Allright garage - he may have just been on an assignment to scout locations, or he may have done this entirely on his own as part of the LN scenario.

I've already said countless times that the time for being open minded about Oswald's innocence expired a long time ago. That is idiotic. So I freely admit I am "locked into the box" of Oswald's guilt. As I said earlier, I leave the door open a very tiny crack to the possibility he was working in cahoots with somebody else. To be convinced of that, I would have to see compelling evidence of that. Wild speculation is a poor substitute for actual evidence.
Quote

The debate will go on unless something definitively proves that the shots could not have been fired by one gunman.

That is problematic because the evidence tells us the shots definitely were fired by one man. There is zero evidence of another. Do you think after 62 years, some additionaly evidence is going to magicly appear that will force us to completely rethink the JFKA.

The evidence is all out on the table. Anybody who thinks there is going to be more forthcoming is fooling themselves. If they can't make their case for conspiracy with what they have now, they never will. There's a greater chance they will find Amelia Earhart and Jimmy Hoffa before anyone finds any credible evidence anyone other than Oswald took part in the JFKA.
Quote

I happened to notice this from Pat Speer at the Ed Forum today. Note that, as others described, two shots happened in such rapid succession that a bystander who was attributing the "first" shot to a firecracker could not even finish his sentence before the next two followed:

Oh, goody. Another witness with another version of how they think it happened. Forgive me if I ignore this one.
Quote
59
Yes, I linked the "5 Investigations" piece here just a couple of days ago as a CT-oriented but reasonably balanced and not-easy-to-dismiss discussion.
60
WC defenders ignore or summarily brush aside the fact that on November 16-17, five days before the assassination, David Ferrie spent the weekend with Mafia kingpin Carlos Marcello at Marcello's Churchill Farms estate. Supposedly, the two were discussing "defense strategy" for the final week of Marcello's deportation trial in federal court. However, strangely enough, Marcello’s attorneys were not there.. Humm. . . . Ferrie was no lawyer. It is very hard imagine what legal strategy Marcello and Ferrie could have discussed for two entire days; it is also hard to fathom how a weekend-long legal defense strategy meeting would not have included at least one of Marcello's attorneys. Dr. Richard Mahoney correctly and logically suspects that Marcello and Ferrie were finalizing some of the details of the planned assassination of JFK in Dallas (The Kennedy Brothers: The Rise and Fall of Jack and Bobby, 2017 edition, p. 386).
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10