ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags assassinations , JFK assassination , John F. Kennedy , Kennedy conspiracies

Reply
Old 18th June 2018, 10:30 PM   #601
manifesto
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,906
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
What nobody with a basic command of logic understands is why anyone would cite unreliable witnesses to support their theory. An unreliable witness is worse than no witness because each one you list sets your argument backwards.
Your opinion of said witnesses and their reported observations, Axxman, is completely irrelevant for what my claim was and is.
manifesto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th June 2018, 10:42 PM   #602
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,298
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
If so, why this barrage of accusations from members of your Mighty Church, of Mica Java’s ’piracy’ of some content in some book?
I belong to no "church." How desperate of you.

Since you clearly have time to comment on subjects we all agree are marginally relevant at best, I'm declaring that you have time to address the on-topic subjects I've challenged you on, that you've said you'd get to when time permits.

Time permits. Put up or shut up.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th June 2018, 10:44 PM   #603
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,298
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
Your opinion of said witnesses and their reported observations, Axxman, is completely irrelevant for what my claim was and is.
We're cross-examining your witnesses. If they cannot withstand it, you lose. Witnesses are not presumed to be unimpeachable.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th June 2018, 11:15 PM   #604
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,173
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
Your opinion of said witnesses and their reported observations, Axxman, is completely irrelevant for what my claim was and is.
No it isn't irrelevant at all. You are trying to present your case, and you are presenting these witnesses who you claim back your case. That make us akin to a jury. We find your witnesses either unreliable, not credible or not saying what you claim they are saying.

1. No-one has been able to establish that Hoffman was even present at Dealey Plaza on 11/22. He was never interviewed by any LEO's and didn't come forward until over a decade later....... Witness not present!

2. Bowers was there, and may be a credible witness, but he never said anything to anyone at any time about seeing a shooter or shooters on or near the knoll.......Witness gives non-relevant testimony!

3. Jean Hill is totally unreliable. She changed her story every time she told it, embellishing it with new "facts" each time. That is the very definition of an unreliable witness....... Witness not credible!
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 18th June 2018 at 11:25 PM.
smartcooky is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th June 2018, 11:17 PM   #605
manifesto
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,906
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
We're cross-examining your witnesses. If they cannot withstand it, you lose. Witnesses are not presumed to be unimpeachable.
Again, my claim was and is that they were reported witnesses reporting observing suspect shooters and suspect weapons behind the fence on the knoll.

Your opinion of said witnesses and their reported observations is of no relevance to my claim.

You know this, JayUtah, but you keep acting as if you didn’t.

That makes you a, what, JayUtah?
manifesto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 12:11 AM   #606
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 3,884
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
Again, my claim was and is that they were reported witnesses reporting observing suspect shooters and suspect weapons behind the fence on the knoll.

Your opinion of said witnesses and their reported observations is of no relevance to my claim.
It's relevant in that it means your claim is nasal dirt.

Lying witnesses are liars. You fail Again
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 04:19 AM   #607
bknight
Graduate Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,682
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
No, I do not. Cite it and make your point.

Stop whining.

Yes, you should continue by presenting specific examples of me doing what you are accusing me of doing.

And stop whining.

I have answered this a multiple of times. Do you want me to cite it? Again, I wrote:
My claim was that there is witnesses reporting observing suspect shooters with suspect weapons on the knoll.

I,m NOT claiming this as ”proof” of shooters with rifles on the knoll.
What of this is that you do not understand, bknight?

Be specific. No whining.
First off I read and comprehend very well, I am NOT claiming that you indicate this is proof. However I requested a citation, and you have posted none

If I have time I will search for one of your rant/rail posts you will no doubt indicate I am misrepresenting you, but that is cool the rest of us see what you did(as you will remember).

Last edited by bknight; 19th June 2018 at 04:21 AM.
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 05:04 AM   #608
bknight
Graduate Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,682
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
No, I do not. Cite it and make your point.

Stop whining.

Yes, you should continue by presenting specific examples of me doing what you are accusing me of doing.

And stop whining.

I have answered this a multiple of times. Do you want me to cite it? Again, I wrote:
My claim was that there is witnesses reporting observing suspect shooters with suspect weapons on the knoll.

I,m NOT claiming this as ”proof” of shooters with rifles on the knoll.
What of this is that you do not understand, bknight?

Be specific. No whining.

One citation is requested not 5 or ten, just one.
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 05:15 AM   #609
bknight
Graduate Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,682
Wow, I didn't need much time to find your most recent rant/rail post

Remember this one? concerns the autopsy, where you are ranting on what occurred during the autopsy and railing against the doctors performing said autopsy.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...6#post12320646
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 05:20 AM   #610
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 4,840
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
To knowingly obstruct the truth of the assassination of JFK is taking part in the assassination as accessory after the fact.
Well, that probably leaves you off the hook. You're not very knowledgeable about what actually transpired. No one ever accused a CT of being knowledgeable about the evidence, after all.


Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
Copy a little text from a book in a debate vs. accessory after the fact in a crime against democracy, assassination and coup d’etat?
False dilemma. The appropriate dilemma is pirate a book vs pay for a book. Or coup d'etat vs. lone nut. When do you intend to actually talk about the assassination again? And provide some citations to witnesses who verifiably saw multiple shooters with multiple weapons, per your original claim?


Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
Stealing a book vs stealing the wealth of continents and lifes of millions of human beings?
Not a real comparison again. Another false dilemma. Steal a book vs. buy a book. I'm not even sure what would compare to the claim of stealing the wealth of continents and the lives of millions of humans? Perhaps we could discuss the role of Stalin in the Soviet Union in the famine and how everything is owned by the state vs capitalism, where people own their own production? But that's not relevant to the topic here whatsoever.


Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
Everything gets inverted... As I said ... inverting Reality itself...
Yeah, that happens whenever there's a conspiracy theorist around. Because they have to invert reality to make an argument for anything that supports their cause. "Black is white, up is down" is your mantra. Because if up is up, and white is white, the crime's solution is easily solvable. All the evidence points to Oswald, after all. So, ergo, Oswald did it.

You just want to believe it all points to Oswald because it's all planted or forged or swapped. Believe it all you want. You still haven't been able to prove anything along those lines in your entire posting history here. There's a reason you fail. Fervent wishes don't translate well to reality.

Hank
__________________
I have never ”refused” to provide evidence. I provide evidence if requested to do so in a specific and relevant manner.

Hanks ”method” [of requesting evidence] is not going to [get me to] provide any evidence since it has a completely different purpose. To create the the illusion of me not providing evidence when requested to do so.
- Manifesto

Last edited by HSienzant; 19th June 2018 at 05:34 AM.
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 05:34 AM   #611
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Springwood, NJ
Posts: 30,006
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
As I said, inverting Reality itself.
Yes, you are trying to do that too. That's already been pointed out numerous times. You're showing growth in your admissions.

Why did Oswald murder Officer Tippit and then try to murder more officers in the theater when they had him cornered after the assassination?
RoboTimbo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 05:37 AM   #612
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Springwood, NJ
Posts: 30,006
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
Your opinion of said witnesses and their reported observations is of no relevance to my claim.
Then your claim is of no relevance to the discussion.

Why are CTs so dishonest?
RoboTimbo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 05:45 AM   #613
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 4,840
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
Again, my claim was and is that they were reported witnesses reporting observing suspect shooters and suspect weapons behind the fence on the knoll.

Your opinion of said witnesses and their reported observations is of no relevance to my claim.
Well, you're contradicting your claim from this post where you wrote it was necessary to:
Quote:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...postcount=4231
Cite the evidence. Explain it. Argue for its veracity.
I've bolded the pertinent part now under discussion. When you want us to establish something, the veracity of the witness is important and we must argue for it. When you want to establish something, the veracity of the witness then doesn't matter and we should set that aside. Double-standard much?



We see this as well in your claims about the supposed gunsmoke. You claimed witnesses saw or smelled gunsmoke on the knoll, and as support, you cited a list by a CT named Ed LeDoux which listed numerous witnesses who saw smoke near the TSBD. Your claim:

"Multiple witnesses saw and smelled gunsmoke on and down Hill from the knoll."

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=460

For instance, Earle Brown, the first witness on your list, says nothing about seeing smoke on the cited page, but names the Depository as the source of the gunpowder he smelled.

Here's your link: https://historymatters.com/archive/j...Vol6_0122a.htm

Brown also says he heard three shots.

Did you bother to read it?

You're citing this list by LeDoux as evidence of your claim that there was smoke on (and a shot or shots from) the knoll.

On the next page in his testimony, Brown also names the TSBD as the source of the shots:
https://historymatters.com/archive/j...Vol6_0122b.htm

So we've got a witness who heard three shots, thought the shots came from the Depository, smelled gunpowder that he thought came from the Depository, and he's on your list as supporting shots from the knoll?

He's also got Nolan Potter on the list, and Potter likewise put the source of the smoke as the TSBD. You even admitted in the past Potter was not a knoll witness.

But you cite both Earle Brown and Nolan Potter in trying to defend your claim about gunsmoke on the knoll. That's dishonest. Were you expecting nobody to check your cites?

Hank
__________________
I have never ”refused” to provide evidence. I provide evidence if requested to do so in a specific and relevant manner.

Hanks ”method” [of requesting evidence] is not going to [get me to] provide any evidence since it has a completely different purpose. To create the the illusion of me not providing evidence when requested to do so.
- Manifesto

Last edited by HSienzant; 19th June 2018 at 06:53 AM.
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 05:49 AM   #614
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,298
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
Your opinion of said witnesses and their reported observations is of no relevance to my claim.
The credibility of the witnesses you invoke to support your claim is of critical importance, whether you like it or not. That's how eyewitness testimony works in the real world.

Quote:
That makes you a, what, JayUtah?
What does it make me? You seem to have plenty of time to call me names and try to shove words in my mouth, but little if any time to answer my challenges. So when you said you'd get to those challenges "when time permits," that was a lie. Time clearly permits, but you seem to want to spend it doing other, less productive things.

Last edited by JayUtah; 19th June 2018 at 05:52 AM.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 07:00 AM   #615
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 20,412
Originally Posted by bknight View Post
Wow, I didn't need much time to find your most recent rant/rail post

Remember this one? concerns the autopsy, where you are ranting on what occurred during the autopsy and railing against the doctors performing said autopsy.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...6#post12320646
So you're claiming that they didn't have a drunken elephant in the autopsy room? Cite. Discuss. Illuminate.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 07:10 AM   #616
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,925
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...7#post12317577

Manifesto said: I’m really doing my very best keeping up with your requests. Nice and easy.

'Nice and easy' seems to means, 'not in THIS decade'

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...postcount=4860

Originally Posted by Hans View Post
This is day seventeen of no evidence from manifesto
Manifesto is now up to hundreds of claims with no evidence provided.



We can now add to that another howler

Quote:
I’m really doing my very best keeping up with your requests. Nice and easy.
Quote:
Yes, I’m doing my best to keep up with all of you and all of your crap barrage of “requests” for evidence. Promise.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...postcount=5237

Quote:
This post will be reposted until the questions are answered to H's satisfaction.

Last edited by zooterkin; 20th June 2018 at 03:14 AM. Reason: Fixing broken tag
Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 07:10 AM   #617
bknight
Graduate Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,682
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
So you're claiming that they didn't have a drunken elephant in the autopsy room? Cite. Discuss. Illuminate.
Are you claiming that RFK was a drunken elephant?
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 08:07 AM   #618
Wolrab
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,527
Great, now manifesto will rant for 10 pages about how we can't prove an elephant wasn't in the autopsy room. Perfect for avoiding answering questions asked of him.
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov
Wolrab is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 09:03 AM   #619
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,925
Originally Posted by Wolrab View Post
Great, now manifesto will rant for 10 pages about how we can't prove an elephant wasn't in the autopsy room. Perfect for avoiding answering questions asked of him.
Really? My father knew that Elephant his name was Bhimisi a fine fellow from India who had a particular love for parsnips.
Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 09:16 AM   #620
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 29,407
Originally Posted by Wolrab View Post
Great, now manifesto will rant for 10 pages about how we can't prove an elephant wasn't in the autopsy room. Perfect for avoiding answering questions asked of him.
I was in the autopsy room all that night looking for elephants, and I never found one. Given that the credibility of witnesses is irrelevant, I think that settles the question.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 09:37 AM   #621
Wolrab
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,527
Conflicting witnesses! He will use either/both of you as his need requires.
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov
Wolrab is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 09:38 AM   #622
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 20,412
I realize that it pales in light of the many other logical fallacies employed by the CTs here, but calling the JFK autopsy the "autopsy of the century" is notably stupid. If there were an "autopsy of the century," it would probably be an autopsy for someone whose cause of death was unknown. A guy getting shot live on film and in front of hundreds of witnesses and then dying as a result hardly qualifies as the "autopsy of the century."
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 12:47 PM   #623
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 3,884
Originally Posted by Wolrab View Post
Great, now manifesto will rant for 10 pages about how we can't prove an elephant wasn't in the autopsy room. Perfect for avoiding answering questions asked of him.
Wait, so nobody here finds it the least bit suspicious that there wasn't one elephant in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63 OR in the World Trade Center on 9/11/2001?

It's always the pachyderm you least suspect.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 12:51 PM   #624
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 18,169
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
Wait, so nobody here finds it the least bit suspicious that there wasn't one elephant in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63 OR in the World Trade Center on 9/11/2001?

It's always the pachyderm you least suspect.
And isn't it completely suspicious that not a single investigator stuck a finger in the elephant's trunk?

Page 1 of any forensics handbook.
__________________
"As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets
pgwenthold is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 01:06 PM   #625
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 3,884
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
I realize that it pales in light of the many other logical fallacies employed by the CTs here, but calling the JFK autopsy the "autopsy of the century" is notably stupid. If there were an "autopsy of the century," it would probably be an autopsy for someone whose cause of death was unknown. A guy getting shot live on film and in front of hundreds of witnesses and then dying as a result hardly qualifies as the "autopsy of the century."
You see this argument often with CTists who seem shocked that the best pathologists, detectives, crime-scene technicians, and other "experts" aren't automatically assigned "the big crime" cases. I can't comment on how the rest of the world does things, but in the US crime is handled locally at first. This means that the people working the crime are whomever is available at the time. That's not always a good thing. We get the cops, and pathologists we can afford. The FBI works from regional offices, so the men working Dallas were the ones that happened to be assigned to the Dallas office. The Bureau is not centrally controlled, Hoover not withstanding, it was designed so that the regional offices generated their own local cases instead of waiting for D.C. to assign work. Yes, sometimes D.C. assigns cases, and usually they'll send reinforcements to the local office to assist. The advantage of this system is that the agents at the local office know the local law enforcement, and the local players on both sides of the law.

In the case of JFK, the fact is that Parkland, and Dallas County would probably done a better job with the autopsy than the team at Bethesda. No branch of the US military has a crack-team of pathologists, or any other medical specialists on call for high-profile cases. For those unfamiliar with basic life in the US, the average doctor can make far more money in the civilian word than he or she would in the military. Most military hospitals - even today - are well behind their civilian counterparts in technology, and committed professionals at every level of healthcare simply because the pay sucks.

So in a military hospital it comes down to the luck of the draw. In the JFK's case the team was competent, and there were three of them instead of one or two. The fact that the Navy did the autopsy paid benefits, Humes had the foresight to have a photographer brought in to document the affair because he knew his time was limited with the body, and the stress of that situation would effect his memory later while he was writing up the autopsy for the record. Parkland would not have taken pictures. While the public does not have access to the photos at the moment that will eventually change in a few decades, and those pictures will be there waiting for future historians.

Technical Note: JFK's body was taken out of Parkland at the insistence of Jackie Kennedy, and it was also Jackie who chose Bethesda for the autopsy based on the fact that JFK had served in the Navy. Nobody was going to tell Jackie "no".
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha

Last edited by Axxman300; 19th June 2018 at 01:12 PM.
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 01:14 PM   #626
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,173
Witnesses could not pick the elephant out of a line-up!
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 01:15 PM   #627
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 3,884
Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
And isn't it completely suspicious that not a single investigator stuck a finger in the elephant's trunk?

Page 1 of any forensics handbook.
Clearly the investigation was guided by the shadowy hands of the Deep Pachyderm State, and their allies in Big Peanut.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 01:16 PM   #628
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,925
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
Wait, so nobody here finds it the least bit suspicious that there wasn't one elephant in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63 OR in the World Trade Center on 9/11/2001?

It's always the pachyderm you least suspect.
It was obviously either a scientifically impossible invisible or shape changing elephant OR a very, very small one.
Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 01:16 PM   #629
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 3,884
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Witnesses could not pick the elephant out of a line-up!
Because he didn't have an "E" on his lapel.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 01:35 PM   #630
Pooneil
Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 201
Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
And isn't it completely suspicious that not a single investigator stuck a finger in the elephant's trunk?

Page 1 of any forensics handbook.
[burr]
No one else was in
The room where it happened
The room where it happened
The room where it happened
[/burr]
Pooneil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 01:46 PM   #631
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,173
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
Because he didn't have an "E" on his lapel.
Cite. Explain. Argue for its veracity
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 02:35 PM   #632
Wolrab
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,527
I'm preprotesting the censorship on all the elephant related posts to AAH. Mods are in on the obvious coverup.
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov
Wolrab is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 02:37 PM   #633
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 3,884
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Cite. Explain. Argue for its veracity
I'm wondering how many people smelled peanuts after the shooting.

Also, the HSCA determined that the big difference between elephants and grapes is that grapes are purple, and that means the people who couldn't pick the elephant out in the line-up were color blind.

Seriously, if your conspiracy theory merges seamlessly with elephant jokes you might have a flaw in your logic.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 02:56 PM   #634
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,925
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Cite. Explain. Argue for its veracity
OR simply ignore the question.
Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 02:59 PM   #635
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,967
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
I realize that it pales in light of the many other logical fallacies employed by the CTs here, but calling the JFK autopsy the "autopsy of the century" is notably stupid. If there were an "autopsy of the century," it would probably be an autopsy for someone whose cause of death was unknown. A guy getting shot live on film and in front of hundreds of witnesses and then dying as a result hardly qualifies as the "autopsy of the century."
I guess it's because there's such a wide spectrum of shenanigans that may or may not have happened at the autopsy. Now I'm not much in the O'Connor/Jenkins/David/Custer department, but you can entertain an idea without accepting it. For example, O'Connor's story about seeing General Curtis Lemay smoking a cigar in the autopsy audience.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 03:04 PM   #636
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Springwood, NJ
Posts: 30,006
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
I guess it's because there's such a wide spectrum of shenanigans that may or may not have happened at the autopsy. Now I'm not much in the O'Connor/Jenkins/David/Custer department, but you can entertain an idea without accepting it. For example, O'Connor's story about seeing General Curtis Lemay smoking a cigar in the autopsy audience.
CT thought-farts are definitely entertaining. Not very bright or well thought out, but entertaining. They provide endless material for mockery.
RoboTimbo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 03:07 PM   #637
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 3,884
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
I guess it's because there's such a wide spectrum of shenanigans that may or may not have happened at the autopsy. Now I'm not much in the O'Connor/Jenkins/David/Custer department, but you can entertain an idea without accepting it. For example, O'Connor's story about seeing General Curtis Lemay smoking a cigar in the autopsy audience.
OMG! A 4-Star General was smoking a cigar in 1963, and didn't put it out when asked to...because he was a 4-Star on a military base.

Obvious proof he was somehow in on it, whatever it was.

Or maybe he was using the cigar smoke to hide the scent of peanut-breath on the elephant in the room.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 03:49 PM   #638
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,173
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
I guess it's because there's such a wide spectrum of shenanigans that may or may not have happened at the autopsy.
Were there?

Of course, you have evidence to back that up?... oh wait, that's right. You don't. Its just more of your usual bare assertion

Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Now I'm not much in the O'Connor/Jenkins/David/Custer department, but you can entertain an idea without accepting it. For example, O'Connor's story about seeing General Curtis Lemay smoking a cigar in the autopsy audience.
Not without evidence I can't
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 19th June 2018 at 03:55 PM.
smartcooky is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 03:55 PM   #639
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,173
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
OMG! A 4-Star General was smoking a cigar in 1963, and didn't put it out when asked to...because he was a 4-Star on a military base.

Obvious proof he was somehow in on it, whatever it was.

Or maybe he was using the cigar smoke to hide the scent of peanut-breath on the elephant in the room.
Le May was the source of the smoke the Dealey Plaza witnesses saw.

He was "Badge Man" (the medals on his chest looked like the badge). He was standing behind the stockade fence at the top of the Grassy Knoll smoking a cigar.....
right next to the elephant.
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2018, 04:43 PM   #640
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,304
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Le May was the source of the smoke the Dealey Plaza witnesses saw.

He was "Badge Man" (the medals on his chest looked like the badge). He was standing behind the stockade fence at the top of the Grassy Knoll smoking a cigar.....
right next to the elephant.
I suspect he also rode a motorcycle and kept his radio on.

Eta - As I was posting this it occurred to me that LeMay ran the Manhattan Project. Were there nukes involved in the assassination? We could start a rumor.....
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"

Last edited by Steve; 19th June 2018 at 04:48 PM.
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:20 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.