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

Author Topic: Dr. Mantik and the Neuromuscular Spasm Hypothesis  (Read 348 times)

Online Michael T. Griffith

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
    • JFK Assassination Web Page
Re: Dr. Mantik and the Neuromuscular Spasm Hypothesis
« Reply #10 on: June 29, 2020, 10:50:33 AM »
You lied to Dr. Mantik when you said I accused him of being a Holocaust denier.

I was clearly referring to Dr. Mantik and Dr. Fetzer saying the Zapruder film is a hoax. And referring to Dr. Fetzer as being the Holocaust denier, which he is notorious for. And criticizing Dr. Mantik for associating with such a person, whom people knew was unbalanced during the time the worked together.

You are a dishonest person. You withhold information when you want a favorable opinion from Dr. Zacharko. You even lie to Dr. Mantik.

Holy cow, you are the one who is lying. Allow me to quote what you said--I see that, amazingly enough, you still have not removed it:

Quote
The “Experts” this book refers to are world renown experts like Dr. James Fetzer and Dr. David Mantik who have discovered that the Holocaust and the Zapruder film are both hoaxes.

You said that Dr. Mantik has discovered that the Holocaust and the Zapruder film are hoaxes. Those are your words. Dr. Mantik has most certainly discovered that the Zapruder film has been markedly altered, but he has never, ever said the Holocaust is a hoax.

Count yourself very lucky that Dr. Mantik is a kind-hearted gentleman. If you had said this ugly slander about me, you would have heard from my attorney by now.

It says volumes that you don't have the decency to admit you made a slanderous claim about Dr. Mantik but instead are pretending you never said it, even though you did and even though your slanderous words are still there for everyone to read. If you have a lick of common sense, you will apologize and edit your OP to remove the slanderous claim (but, just for the sake of history, I have taken a screecap of your OP).

« Last Edit: June 29, 2020, 11:12:23 AM by Michael T. Griffith »

Online Joe Elliott

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 469
Re: Dr. Mantik and the Neuromuscular Spasm Hypothesis
« Reply #11 on: June 29, 2020, 04:24:19 PM »
Holy cow, you are the one who is lying. Allow me to quote what you said--I see that, amazingly enough, you still have not removed it:

You said that Dr. Mantik has discovered that the Holocaust and the Zapruder film are hoaxes. Those are your words. Dr. Mantik has most certainly discovered that the Zapruder film has been markedly altered, but he has never, ever said the Holocaust is a hoax.

Count yourself very lucky that Dr. Mantik is a kind-hearted gentleman. If you had said this ugly slander about me, you would have heard from my attorney by now.

It says volumes that you don't have the decency to admit you made a slanderous claim about Dr. Mantik but instead are pretending you never said it, even though you did and even though your slanderous words are still there for everyone to read. If you have a lick of common sense, you will apologize and edit your OP to remove the slanderous claim (but, just for the sake of history, I have taken a screecap of your OP).

In order to by slanderous, a claim must not only be negative against a person, it must also be false.

Quote
In Dr. David Mantik’s book:
Assassination Science: Experts Speak Out on the Death of JFK
; The “Experts” this book refers to are world renown experts like Dr. James Fetzer and Dr. David Mantik who have discovered that the Holocaust and the Zapruder film are both hoaxes.
; Yes, Yes, I know. I can’t give Dr. Mantik all the credit for these great discoveries. Some of them were Fetzer’s.

Chapter: How the Film of the Century was Edited
          Note: Well of course the “The Wizard of Oz” was a hoax. Did he think that was all real?

Dr. James Fetzer and Dr. David Mantik did claim to discover two Hoaxes, which, if true, would be the two greatest hoaxes of the twentieth century. Technically, my statement is true. Dr. Fetzer and Dr. Mantik did claim to discover the Zapruder film hoax. And Dr. Fetzer, working on his own, claimed to discover that the Holocaust was a hoax. But of course, in my very next statement, I made it clear that Dr. Mantik was not involved in both of these ‘discoveries’.

There is not a single member on this forum, I warrant, who is unaware of Dr. Fetzer Holocaust denial, or Dr. Mantik’s involvement with the Zapruder film hoax claim. So, it was clear that when I said Mantik did not get credit for these discoveries, it was clearly I was referring to the Holocaust hoax claim that he was not involved with, and not saying he had no involvement with the Zapruder film hoax claim.

I no more meant to say Dr. Mantik was a Holocaust denier than to say that he believed the movie “The Wizard of Oz” portrayed real events, and everyone knows that. But some like to be dishonest and falsely claim they misinterpreted by statement.


All this is just a smoke screen to avoid answering the following two simple questions, which require no research. If what I say is false then prove it by answering these questions:

Questions:

Why should Dr. Mantik and you claim that the fast-neuromuscular spasm in a human has been established as being impossible, or highly unlikely, when this can only be established as impossible or unlikely by running tests on human subjects?

Wouldn’t one have to run these experiments first, before making these claims?



Of course, if I was being slanderous to Dr. Mantik, you can go get out forum’s moderator, Duncan MacRae’s opinion on whether I was slanderous to Dr. Mantik or if you are just throwing up a smoke screen to avoid answering two simple questions. I will accept his judgment.
« Last Edit: June 29, 2020, 04:39:00 PM by Joe Elliott »

Online Michael T. Griffith

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
    • JFK Assassination Web Page
Re: Dr. Mantik and the Neuromuscular Spasm Hypothesis
« Reply #12 on: June 29, 2020, 05:24:58 PM »
In order to by slanderous, a claim must not only be negative against a person, it must also be false.

Dr. James Fetzer and Dr. David Mantik did claim to discover two Hoaxes, which, if true, would be the two greatest hoaxes of the twentieth century. Technically, my statement is true.

This is like trying to get a teenager to admit he lied, or that he horribly misspoke. You said that Mantik and Frazier discovered that the Holocaust and the Zapruder film "are both hoaxes." That is what you said.

Dr. Fetzer and Dr. Mantik did claim to discover the Zapruder film hoax. And Dr. Fetzer, working on his own, claimed to discover that the Holocaust was a hoax. But of course, in my very next statement, I made it clear that Dr. Mantik was not involved in both of these ‘discoveries’.

Uh, no, that is not what you said: You said "some" of "these great discoveries" were Fetzer's. To refresh your memory: "Yes, Yes, I know. I can’t give Dr. Mantik all the credit for these great discoveries. Some of them were Fetzer’s."

There is not a single member on this forum, I warrant, who is unaware of Dr. Fetzer Holocaust denial, or Dr. Mantik’s involvement with the Zapruder film hoax claim. So, it was clear that when I said Mantik did not get credit for these discoveries, it was clearly I was referring to the Holocaust hoax claim that he was not involved with, and not saying he had no involvement with the Zapruder film hoax claim.

Let's read what you said again:

Quote
The “Experts” this book refers to are world renown experts like Dr. James Fetzer and Dr. David Mantik who have discovered that the Holocaust and the Zapruder film are both hoaxes.

So when you went on to say that Dr. Mantik was not responsible for "some" of "these discoveries," it was by no means clear that you were trying to contradict your previous statement that he and Fetzer "discovered that the Holocaust and the Zapruder film are both hoaxes." "Both" implies "two," but your next sentence referred to "some" and "these discoveries."

This would be a whole lot easier if you would just admit that you horribly misspoke.

I no more meant to say Dr. Mantik was a Holocaust denier than to say that he believed the movie “The Wizard of Oz” portrayed real events, and everyone knows that.

I hate to hold you to the actual meaning of words, but when you say you did not "mean" to say Dr. Mantik discovered that the Holocaust and the Zapruder film "are both hoaxes," you are admitting that you said it; but you just said that you did not say it. Just now, you adamantly said that you "clearly" did not say that Dr. Mantik, along with Dr. Fetzer, discovered that the Holocaust and the Zapruder film "are both hoaxes." But you did say that. That is exactly what you said.

However, I do acknowledge that you are now saying that you did not mean to accuse Dr. Mantik of denying the Holocaust. That's all you had to say in your first reply, instead of trying to parse words and weasel-word your way out of admitting that you simply and horribly misspoke.

I am guessing that you simply assumed that since Fetzer has denied the Holocaust, that Mantik has done so as well.

FYI, I don't think that anybody in the research community had any idea that Fetzer denied the Holocaust until 2014 when he wrote the foreword to Kollerstrom's Holocaust-denial book Breaking the Spell. I had many dealings with Fetzer when he first became active on the JFK case. He recruited me to be among his team of researchers (I declined due to time restraints), and he put links to several of my articles on his website. As far as I can tell, Fetzer's Holocaust denialism came some years after he got involved in the JFK case. If he held this view before then, I never saw a hint of it, and I know Dr. Mantik and several others did not either.

I take you at your word that you did not mean to accuse Dr. Mantik of denying the Holocaust, and I will relay this to Dr. Mantik. Although we disagree strongly on the JFK case, you don't strike me as the kind of person who would knowingly falsely accuse someone of something so serious as Holocaust denialism.




« Last Edit: June 29, 2020, 05:30:08 PM by Michael T. Griffith »

 

Mobile View