Proof JFK was killed as a result of a conspiracy.

[Jerry Freeman]

Strong personal beliefs are not knowing.

How do you know that? Knowledge is defined  by Webster's as...
 

facts, information, and skills acquired by a person through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject.

Knowledge is acquired by an adversarial process. As Walt stated...there is God or there isn't. It is foolish to state that there is no God when no one can possibly demonstrate this. There is climate change [global warming] or there isn't. It is adversely argued that while there may be climate change, it is not caused by people. On the other hand, it can be argued that CFCs, coal, fossil fuel and other pollutants could be doing the atmosphere no benefit at all.
The Warren Commission Report approached the JFK assassination from only one direction. There was no consideration of any conclusion other than Oswald was the sole assassin. It was a blatant choice..extremely obvious and it remains so. Reasonable doubt did not take a back seat in the so called investigation ...it was not even along for the ride. For the authorities to not arrive at the conclusion that it ultimately did [right or wrong] was just simply unacceptable.
 

[Nicholas Turner]

How do you know that? Knowledge is defined  by Webster's as...
  Knowledge is acquired by an adversarial process. As Walt stated...there is God or there isn't. It is foolish to state that there is no God when no one can possibly demonstrate this. There is climate change [global warming] or there isn't. It is adversely argued that while there may be climate change, it is not caused by people. On the other hand, it can be argued that CFCs, coal, fossil fuel and other pollutants could be doing the atmosphere no benefit at all.
The Warren Commission Report approached the JFK assassination from only one direction. There was no consideration of any conclusion other than Oswald was the sole assassin. It was a blatant choice..extremely obvious and it remains so. Reasonable doubt did not take a back seat in the so called investigation ...it was not even along for the ride. For the authorities to not arrive at the conclusion that it ultimately did [right or wrong] was just simply unacceptable.

You highlight theoretical so best to say what that word actually means which is, from the Oxford English Dictionary

theoretical
adjective

    1 Concerned with or involving the theory of a subject or area of study rather than its practical application.
    ?a theoretical physicist?
    ?the training is practical rather than theoretical?

    1.1 Based on or calculated through theory rather than experience or practice.
    ?the theoretical value of their work?

Theoretical understanding does not mean a belief. Something being theoretical does not mean it is not based on facts and evidence, its just that the nature of the facts and evidence is different from the case of a practical knowledge.

It is indeed foolish to state there is no God but an atheist doesn't state that - being an atheist means having no belief in God. Not sure what your comments regarding climate change has to do with this. Saying you have no belief in something or see no evidence for something does not mean you have a belief in the non existence of something or that there is evidence for the non existence of something.

Conclusions about climate change should be based on scientific evidence i.e. facts and shouldn't be a matter of belief.

If there is sufficient evidence/facts to support a conclusion then it is no longer a belief, that is true, but the statement 'I know there was a conspiracy to murder President Kennedy and cover up the crime.' is a statement of personal belief not a statement of knowledge. It is not a fact but a belief.

[Rob Caprio]

Nope, it is your opinion that the Moorman photo shows a shooter behind Zapruder. It is not a fact no matter how strongly you believe it.

It is a fact that Zapruder testified that a shot came from behind him no matter how much you ignore it.

[Rob Caprio]

In your opinion.

And my opinion.

[Nicholas Turner]

It is a fact that Zapruder testified that a shot came from behind him no matter how much you ignore it.

Its a fact that he said he thought it came from behind him. Its not a fact that it did.

[Bill Chapman]

Bill Newman does not discredit his initial thoughts of where he thought his shots came from in this interview that is 49 years after the fact.  He just does not know.  His initial reaction is that the shots came from the shelter.

His initial interview says that the shots came from the shelter and is corroborated by Mr. Zakpruder's first interview and Warren Commission testimony.

Mr. Zapruder, in 1966 changed his story and agreed with the Warren Commission findings in this interview.  I don't know why he changed his mind, but his initial interview and testimony is corroborated by Mr. Newman.

There is photographic evidence of a person behind Mr. Zapruder, there is film evidence in the Nix Film of a shot being fired, there are the two initial testimony of Mr. Zapruder and Mr. Newman.

There is a photograph that shows what is most likely gunpowder smoke in Dealey Plaza right after the assassination from the San Diego Free Press


There is also testimony from law enforcement officers and secret service officers pointing to shots coming from the right front in the Warren Commission - https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/pdf/WH18_CE_1024.pdf

Secret Service man - Paul E. Landis - "My immediate thought was that the President could not possibly be alive after being hit like he was. I still am not certain from which direction the second shot came, but my reaction at the time was the shot came from somewhere towards the front right-hand side of the road."

Deputy Sherriff - Harold Elkins - "I immediately ran to the area from which it sounded like the shots had been fired. This is an area between the railroad and the Texas School Book Depository which is east of the railroad."

I was addressing point #4 and yet you felt a need to include the other three. Why is that?

As far as Newman goes, he clearly recounts what made him think the shot came from over his head ?It was the visual impact [of the fatal shot] that made me think the shot came down over our head,? he said. ?In all honesty, I have no idea where the shot came from.?---Bill Newman

I'll address your claim of seeing smoke a little later; although Jerry has already shown that the shape your smoke is actually a tree.

[Nicholas Turner]

And my opinion.

Who cares. Still an opinion.

[Keyvan Shahrdar]

I was addressing point #4 and yet you felt a need to include the other three. Why is that?

As far as Newman goes, he clearly recounts what made him think the shot came from over his head ?It was the visual impact [of the fatal shot] that made me think the shot came down over our head,? he said. ?In all honesty, I have no idea where the shot came from.?---Bill Newman

I'll address your claim of seeing smoke a little later; although Jerry has already shown that the shape your smoke is actually a tree.

Those are your opinions not facts.  You are taking what he said 49 years later as gospel.

Mr. Newman's initial statement on TV (a couple hours after the assassination) is that the shots came from the shelter (pergola).  This is an undeniable fact.  He said so.  It is further validated by Mr. Zapruder's initial statement in the same TV newscast that the bullets came from behind him.  Also an undeniable fact.  The Mary Moorman photo shows someone behind him, an undeniable fact.
The following has been proven: 1. Mr. Zapruder said a shot came from behind him. 2. Mr. Newman said a shot came from the shelter, 3. A person is shown in the Mary Moorman photo behind Mr. Zapruder and Ms. Sitsman, 4. The Nix film shows a shot being fired from the shelter, and 5. Photographs show clouds of gunsmoke seconds after the assassination.

There is further proof of a shot from the shelter from testimony said in the Warren Commission by police officers and secret service men.

The five points and the statements of the Warren Commission as a collective show strong evidence of a shot from the pergola and thus strong proof that JFK was killed as a result of a conspiracy.

Bill, you clearly show a disdain for facts.  Why is that?