Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: The preponderance of the evidence  (Read 8524 times)

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 635
The preponderance of the evidence
« on: March 28, 2019, 02:11:38 PM »
Many years ago I began pursuing my interest in the JFK assassination conspiracy theories by reading quite a few books by, you guessed it, conspiracy theorists. For a long time I was convinced that there just HAD to be a conspiracy. But there wasn't any conspiracy theory that had any credible evidence to support it. All there seemed to be was conjecture and innuendo. One book would claim that LBJ was behind the assassination, another book would claim JEH was the mastermind, and so on. I learned way more than I wanted to know about LBJ, JEH, the oil tycoons, etc. But no credible evidence that would support any of the theories. I was left with a big question mark asking which conspiracy theory was the right one. One day I decided to start fresh with an open mind. I decided that learning more about the evidence that the official investigation turned up was a good starting point. Because all I had learned about the evidence from all the conspiracy books was biased against the official investigation's findings and tried to discredit them. A look at the other side of the controversy (with an open mind) seemed to be the next logical step in my pursuit to know more. So I read the official report and a few books from authors who supported it. What I found was that the preponderance of the evidence points directly at LHO. This was more than just the conjecture and innuendo that I was used to seeing. The preponderance of the evidence is actually overwhelming. The arguments that try to discredit the evidence no longer made sense, but I still try to look for any evidence of a conspiracy with an open mind. That is why I continue to show up here from time to time.

JFK Assassination Forum

The preponderance of the evidence
« on: March 28, 2019, 02:11:38 PM »

Offline Paul May

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 251
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #1 on: March 28, 2019, 02:31:36 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Many years ago I began pursuing my interest in the JFK assassination conspiracy theories by reading quite a few books by, you guessed it, conspiracy theorists. For a long time I was convinced that there just HAD to be a conspiracy. But there wasn't any conspiracy theory that had any credible evidence to support it. All there seemed to be was conjecture and innuendo. One book would claim that LBJ was behind the assassination, another book would claim JEH was the mastermind, and so on. I learned way more than I wanted to know about LBJ, JEH, the oil tycoons, etc. But no credible evidence that would support any of the theories. I was left with a big question mark asking which conspiracy theory was the right one. One day I decided to start fresh with an open mind. I decided that learning more about the evidence that the official investigation turned up was a good starting point. Because all I had learned about the evidence from all the conspiracy books was biased against the official investigation's findings and tried to discredit them. A look at the other side of the controversy (with an open mind) seemed to be the next logical step in my pursuit to know more. So I read the official report and a few books from authors who supported it. What I found was that the preponderance of the evidence points directly at LHO. This was more than just the conjecture and innuendo that I was used to seeing. The preponderance of the evidence is actually overwhelming. The arguments that try to discredit the evidence no longer made sense, but I still try to look for any evidence of a conspiracy with an open mind. That is why I continue to show up here from time to time.

Looking for a conspiracy 56 years since the event is fool hardly. No matter which forum/blog you read, today?s conspiracy arguments are no different than 50 years. There is NO new evidence as the case was solved in 1963. All conspiracy advocates do today is debate the same old theories. It never changes.  Never will.

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 635
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #2 on: March 28, 2019, 02:48:38 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Looking for a conspiracy 56 years since the event is fool hardly. No matter which forum/blog you read, today?s conspiracy arguments are no different than 50 years. There is NO new evidence as the case was solved in 1963. All conspiracy advocates do today is debate the same old theories. It never changes.  Never will.

You are right. However, I don?t think that I yet know everything about the assassination that I would like to know. And I really do want to have an open mind. This is a place where both sides of the controversy can be discussed. So here I am.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #2 on: March 28, 2019, 02:48:38 PM »

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****

  • This Member Has Made
    A Forum Donation!
  • Posts: 6550
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #3 on: March 28, 2019, 05:00:00 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So I read the official report and a few books from authors who supported it. What I found was that the preponderance of the evidence points directly at LHO. This was more than just the conjecture and innuendo that I was used to seeing. The preponderance of the evidence is actually overwhelming.

That's interesting, because when I read the official report and a few books from authors who supported it, it became abundantly clear that,

a) the conclusions of the report aren't supported by the evidence in the hearings and exhibits

b) what little evidence there is that points to LHO is weak and circumstantial and all of it is questionable, arguable, impeachable, or tainted in some way

c) it's not only not "overwhelming", it doesn't even come close to a reasonable doubt standard

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 635
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #4 on: March 28, 2019, 05:19:15 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
That's interesting, because when I read the official report and a few books from authors who supported it, it became abundantly clear that,

a) the conclusions of the report aren't supported by the evidence in the hearings and exhibits

b) what little evidence there is that points to LHO is weak and circumstantial and all of it is questionable, arguable, impeachable, or tainted in some way

c) it's not only not "overwhelming", it doesn't even come close to a reasonable doubt standard

You apparently don?t have an open mind. Nothing that I could say is likely to alter your closed and made up opinion. I respect your opinion but disagree.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #4 on: March 28, 2019, 05:19:15 PM »

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****

  • This Member Has Made
    A Forum Donation!
  • Posts: 6550
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #5 on: March 28, 2019, 05:32:01 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You apparently don?t have an open mind. Nothing that I could say is likely to alter your closed and made up opinion. I respect your opinion but disagree.

Uh....you're the guy who is "convinced" here that you know what happened.  I'm not.  You don't even say what this "preponderance of evidence" is.

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 635
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #6 on: March 28, 2019, 05:42:59 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Uh....you're the guy who is "convinced" here that you know what happened.  I'm not.  You don't even say what this "preponderance of evidence" is.

The evidence is in the official report. You are the one who apparently believes that it is wrong. What evidence do you have to the contrary?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #6 on: March 28, 2019, 05:42:59 PM »

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****

  • This Member Has Made
    A Forum Donation!
  • Posts: 6550
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #7 on: March 28, 2019, 06:04:56 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The evidence is in the official report. You are the one who apparently believes that it is wrong. What evidence do you have to the contrary?

What gave you the idea that I think the evidence is wrong?  The evidence is the evidence.  Which evidence in the official report convinces you of Oswald's guilt and why?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #7 on: March 28, 2019, 06:04:56 PM »

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 635
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #8 on: March 28, 2019, 06:11:37 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
What gave you the idea that I think the evidence is wrong?  The evidence is the evidence.  Which evidence in the official report convinces you of Oswald's guilt and why?

Item b in your first response certainly indicates that you believe the evidence is wrong. Care to expound?

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****

  • This Member Has Made
    A Forum Donation!
  • Posts: 6550
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #9 on: March 28, 2019, 06:19:45 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Item b in your first response certainly indicates that you believe the evidence is wrong. Care to expound?

Do you always answer a question with another question?

What does "evidence is wrong" even mean?  Evidence doesn't have an opinion.

So you're not willing to say what evidence convinces you, just that you're convinced.  Ok.  I don't think that faith is a good way of determining what is true and what is not.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #9 on: March 28, 2019, 06:19:45 PM »

 

Mobile View