View Single Post
Old 21st August 2015, 11:56 PM   #29
Tomtomkent
Philosopher
 
Tomtomkent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,607
Originally Posted by Robert Harris View Post
One of my arguments is that there are no plausible alternatives. Do you dispute that?
Yes.
I also dispute that the reactions are "startle" reactions that require any explanation. I dispute that it is even possible to determine if somebody is startled from the information contained in a film. I certainly dispute that you can tell the people have heard something.

The reactions appear to be expected, given the situation they were in. They fit the human normal range for being in a car in which two people are being shot by three bullets.

I dispute your attempts to try and force subjective memories to fit an imagined scenario to "prove" additional bullets for which there are no evidence.

I am astounded you need me to recap the position I have been consistently voicing.

You claim there is no viable alternative. You have not provided suitable evidence that your claim is itself viable. Or plausible. Or worth considering. I keep asking for evidence that you have noticed something that even needs explaining, other than "confusion to the situation", and all your posts boil down to you really thinking it looks like they are startled, and really thinking they are a special kind of startled that apparently means extra bullets.

I on the other hand do not mistake your opinion for evidence.

I have just as much grounds to claim they must all be reacting to post hypnotic suggestions. Sure, I am not providing any evidence over what it looks like to me. But hey. You have not offered an alternative that is viable to me. So it HAS to be post hypnotic suggestion.

So before you dare to assume I can not possibly disagree with your argument, how about you actually make the foundation. I don't need to look for a plausible alternative to your analysis, before you can support your analysis with evidence. IE to show there is a "startle reaction" to be explained.

Thus far you HAVE NOT. The only person who sees this "anomaly" that needs explaining is you. All your "evidence" assumes as fact the very fact we have been asking you to establish.

Unfortunately much of what you claim to be able to discern from the film footage is fancy and wishful thinking. You try to match testimony and memories to the film with assumptions that every thought can be fitted to which ever pixel is most convenient to you.

But it is all just your opinion. Not evidence. Not a theory. And frankly, not plausible reason to assume there are bullets.

You make no room for the imperfection of memory, to the limitations of accuracy for any humans recollections. You take the expected confusion and try to weave it into a grand claim.

I dispute that.
__________________
@tomhodden

Never look up an E-book because this signature line told you. Especially not Dead Lament (ASIN: B00JEN1MWY). Or A Little Trouble (ASIN: B00GQFZZQW).
Tomtomkent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top