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 !MOD BOX WARNING!

Reply
Old 25th February 2018, 11:11 AM   #281
SpitfireIX
Illuminator
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
Posts: 4,248
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
This information about Allen Dulles I know from David Talbot's Devil's Chessboard. It's not like the book doesn't have a citation chapter, you know. It's an actual work of history.

Talbot is not a professional historian; he's a journalist. That aside, Reclaiming History also has citations, you know. Do you take everything in that work as gospel?
__________________
Handy responses to conspiracy theorists' claims:
1) "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage
2) "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." --Wolfgang Pauli
3) "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." --Inigo Montoya
SpitfireIX 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 25th February 2018, 11:23 AM   #282
SpitfireIX
Illuminator
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
Posts: 4,248
From a review of The Devil's Chessboard by J. R. Seeger in Studies in Intelligence:

The Devil’s Chessboard is really two very different books in one. The first half of the book is a detailed description of the early leadership of the CIA with very specific attention (as stated in the title) to Allen Dulles and the way he ran the CIA in the 1950s and first years of 1960s. Along with the detailed background on Dulles—including tracking his work against Nazi Germany and the early days of the Cold War—we are given profiles of Richard Helms, William Colby, and James J. Angleton, as well as a number of CIA foot soldiers whose work in the Cold War is used to set the stage for the second half of the book. . . .

Unfortunately, The Devil’s Chessboard will serve as a textbook for many conspiracy theory devotees and others who are convinced “a secret government” runs the United States from the shadows. It is equally unfortunate that a book whose important research provides an auspicious beginning ends with speculation and conjecture.
__________________
Handy responses to conspiracy theorists' claims:
1) "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage
2) "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." --Wolfgang Pauli
3) "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." --Inigo Montoya
SpitfireIX 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 25th February 2018, 12:29 PM   #283
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 3,824
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
This information about Allen Dulles I know from David Talbot's Devil's Chessboard. It's not like the book doesn't have a citation chapter, you know. It's an actual work of history.
Hey look, citations!

Mark Lane's a lying idiot1

So is Harold Weisberg and David Talbot2

Hank
____________
1 Author's opinion
2 Ibid
__________________
"Looks like we're really in nut country now, Toto."

Last edited by HSienzant; 25th February 2018 at 12:31 PM.
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 25th February 2018, 12:33 PM   #284
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 3,824
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
This information about Allen Dulles I know from David Talbot's Devil's Chessboard. It's not like the book doesn't have a citation chapter, you know. It's an actual work of history.
Now that your argument is ridiculed into dust1, how about you answer one simple question2:

How many of those citations did you actually verify3, or did you simply accept everything Talbot said on faith4, simply assuming his citations support his claims5?

It sure looks more impressive with citations6,7!

Hank
_____________

1 Author's opinion.
2 You probably won't, however.
3 Probably none.
4 this almost certain.
5 This is most likely.
6 Mark Lane figured that out back in Rush to Judgment.
7 Most people won't bother to check.
__________________
"Looks like we're really in nut country now, Toto."

Last edited by HSienzant; 25th February 2018 at 12:52 PM.
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 25th February 2018, 01:15 PM   #285
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 3,824
Originally Posted by SpitfireIX View Post
Talbot is not a professional historian; he's a journalist. That aside, Reclaiming History also has citations, you know. Do you take everything in that work as gospel?
Funny, so does the Warren Report.

That's the funny thing about his claims.

He clearly has a double standard for everything.

CT works: Has citations, must be true!
Anything Else: lying scum!


Hank
__________________
"Looks like we're really in nut country now, Toto."
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 25th February 2018, 01:20 PM   #286
MicahJava
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,632
Originally Posted by SpitfireIX View Post
From a review of The Devil's Chessboard by J. R. Seeger in Studies in Intelligence:

The Devil’s Chessboard is really two very different books in one. The first half of the book is a detailed description of the early leadership of the CIA with very specific attention (as stated in the title) to Allen Dulles and the way he ran the CIA in the 1950s and first years of 1960s. Along with the detailed background on Dulles—including tracking his work against Nazi Germany and the early days of the Cold War—we are given profiles of Richard Helms, William Colby, and James J. Angleton, as well as a number of CIA foot soldiers whose work in the Cold War is used to set the stage for the second half of the book. . . .

Unfortunately, The Devil’s Chessboard will serve as a textbook for many conspiracy theory devotees and others who are convinced “a secret government” runs the United States from the shadows. It is equally unfortunate that a book whose important research provides an auspicious beginning ends with speculation and conjecture.
For example?
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 25th February 2018, 02:21 PM   #287
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,089
Originally Posted by HSienzant View Post
Thanks for your layman's analysis, which will be given all the attention it deserves (none).

You've previously argued the HSCA forensic pathology panel (and forensic pathologists in general) don't know how to read X-rays.

So you're now substituting your layman's opinion for their expert opinion?

Hilarious.

Hank
There are certain folks who hold very strong opinions on subjects where they have no idea what they're talking about.

It's like my RW friend that believes anyone in California can walk into a gunshow and pay cash for a machinegun and walk out with it no questions asked.

It does not matter that he is as wrong as wrong gets, it's what he believes and nothing is going to change that.

MJ has strong opinions on firearms, ballistics, GSW's and marksmanship and it's clear he isn't doing anything more than parroting some other CTist jive from someone just as ill-informed as they are.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong 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 25th February 2018, 03:33 PM   #288
SpitfireIX
Illuminator
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
Posts: 4,248
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
For example?

I don't have any examples at the moment. I haven't read the book, and I don't plan to.

That's irrelevant, however; the burden of proof is on you to show that the claims about Dulles are accurate. It's not on anyone else to show that they're inaccurate. Your weak appeal to authority argument doesn't even begin to do that.
__________________
Handy responses to conspiracy theorists' claims:
1) "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage
2) "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." --Wolfgang Pauli
3) "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." --Inigo Montoya
SpitfireIX 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 25th February 2018, 05:32 PM   #289
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 7,734
Seriously, MicahJava brings nothing new to the table. So far, absolutely everything he brings has been repeatedly and thoroughly debunked - scientifically, historically and literally.

ALL of the verifiable evidence points to Lee Harvey Oswald firing three, and only three bullets at JFK from the sixth floor of the TSBD, missing with the first, wounding both JFK and Governor Connally with the second, and fatally wounding JFK with the third. That evidence is irrefutable;

1. the gun, a 6.5×52mm Mannlicher–Carcano, the only one found
2. the sniper's lair where the gun was found
3. the witnesses who saw the gun poking out of the window
4. the witnesses near the TSBD who heard the shots and stated they came from the TSBD
5. the witness on the floor directly below hearing the shots, the bolt being worked and the casings landing on the floor above him
6. the fact that no bullets from any other gun was found
7. the forensics linking the bullets (6.5 x 52mm) and bullet fragments to the gun (a 6.5×52mm Mannlicher–Carcano)
8. the records linking the gun (a 6.5×52mm Mannlicher–Carcano) to LHO
9. the actions of LHO before and after the assassination
10. the forensic evidence from JFK's wounds showing the direction the bullet came from behind and with an elevation of about 17°

There is zero verifiable evidence for any other shooters on the day; LHO acted alone on that day. No suppressors, no invisible bullets, no invisible shooter on the Grassy Knoll.

Most important, MicahJava keeps bringing up "evidence" that actually debunks his theories... case in point, the acoustic testing done by the HSCA.

That series of acoustic tests CLEARLY shows that listeners can be mistaken about where they hear loud gunshots coming from... it was actually a conclusion the testers themselves came to. I argue that this means listeners near the Grassy Knoll were hearing echoes of shots that came from the TSBD. Equally, it also means that listeners near the TSBD could have been mistaken, and that the echoes led them to believe the shots were coming from there instead of from the Grassy Knoll; as a skeptic, I must accept this, and taken on its own, this is a reasonable conclusion. However, unlike MicahJava, I also accept that there are other factors that must also be taken into consideration.

1. There were eye-witnesses who saw the shooter and his gun in the corner, 6th floor window of the TSBD. There were witnesses on the Grassy Knoll and behind the stockade fence at the top in it. NOT ONE HEARD OR SAW A SHOOTER.

2. We KNOW that three shots must have been fired from the 6th floor snipers lair, because the bullet fragments found match that rifle both in rifling and metallurgically. This means that if there was a shooter firing from the Grassy Knoll, there would have been HUGE number of people who heard shots coming from two different directions. Only 4% of the witnesses claim this.

3. If the only shots were fired from the Grassy Knoll (assuming the TSBD sniper's lair was a setup to frame Oswald) then the VAST MAJORITY of ear witnesses would have heard the shots coming from there, even the witnesses near the TSBD. The reason for this is simple acoustical physics... the speed of sound v the distance covered. The main reflective echo source was the large flat, front of the railway overbridge at the other end of Dealy Plaza. The TSBD itself is also a large reflective echo source.


NOTE: Sound radiates in waves travelling in all directions. This diagram is purely to show path lengths of sounds and not directions of reflected waves

In this diagram, the shooter is at the red X and an example ear-witness near to he TSBD is represented by the green X.

a2 = the path length from an alleged GN shooter directly to the TSBD witness
a1 + b1 = the path length from an alleged GN shooter to the TSBD witness via an echo from the TSBD.

They are virtually the same. If the shots were fired ONLY from the Grassy Knoll, the incident sound of the shots, and their echoes off the TSBD would not only have arrived so close to simultaneously that ear-witnesses could not have told them apart - "b'bang" - but the amplitude of the echoes would have been about the same and many of the ear-witnsses would have been confused about the direction.

a3 + b2 = the path length from an alleged GN shooter to the TSBD witness via an echo from the railway over-bridge.

This is a long path with a delay of about 0.8 - 1 second, and would also appear to come from the direction of the Grassy Knoll (the Knoll and the over-bridge were in the same quarter as viewed from the TSBD

The result of this scenario would have been

i. A huge majority of ear witnesses saying that the shots came from the direction of the Grassy Knoll, and

ii A huge number of people reporting the hearing of shots from two directions.

In both cases, this is not what happened. Now lets have a look what happens when we place the shooter at the corner of the TSBD.



Now we see that any ear-witness near the TSBD has no echo to confuse them. They hear it coming from the TSBD. The most significant echo they have to deal with is one that travels all the way from the TSBD to the over-bridge on the other side of Dealey Plaza and back, a distance that will attenuate the sound, making the echo detectably quieter. However any ear-witness at the Grassy Knoll still has to contend with considerably louder echoes from the over-bridge.

The result of this scenario is that ear-witnesses near the TSBD are far less likely to be confused about direction (which is why more weight must be placed on what they report) but witnesses near the Grassy Knoll are far more likely to be confused about direction. Furthermore, very few witness would be likely to report two different directions. This is EXACTLY what happened.

Ergo, there was only one shooter, and that shooter was in the TSBD and NOT on the Grassy Knoll, and this is fully backed up by all other evidence.

Now, whether or not LHO was part of a wider conspiracy is open to question. There are some indications, but there is no direct smoking gun. I leave that question open.


Edited by Loss Leader:  Image resized for readability. Please use IMGW tag for large images. The above is IMGW=500.
__________________
► 9/11 was a terrorist attack by Islamic extremists; 12 Apollo astronauts really did walk on the Moon; JFK was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald,who acted alone.
► Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed. - Jay Utah
► Heisenberg's Law - The weirdness of the Universe is inversely proportional to the scale at which you observe it, or not.

Last edited by Loss Leader; 25th February 2018 at 08:06 PM.
smartcooky 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 25th February 2018, 07:33 PM   #290
Axxman300
Master Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 2,573
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
This information about Allen Dulles I know from David Talbot's Devil's Chessboard. It's not like the book doesn't have a citation chapter, you know. It's an actual work of history.
You should try the non-kook shelves of the library:

From the man himself:

The Craft of Intelligence: America's Legendary Spy Master on the Fundamentals of Intelligence Gathering for a Free World
by Allen Dulles

The Secret Surrender
by Allen Dulles


The Marshall Plan
by Allen W. Dulles and Michael Wala


Great Spy Stories
by Allen Dulles



The Brothers: John Foster Dulles, Allen Dulles, and Their Secret World War
by Stephen Kinzer


Allen Dulles: Spymaster: The Life and Times of the First Civilian Director of the CIA
by Peter Grose


Allen Dulles
by James Srodes


Gentleman Spy: The Life of Allen Dulles
by Peter Grose


From Hitler's Doorstep: The Wartime Intelligence Reports of Allen Dulles, 1942–1945
by Neal H. Petersen


There are a few more, but this will get you started.

I know you won't bother to read any of them, but someone else might be interested.
__________________
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 25th February 2018, 07:35 PM   #291
Axxman300
Master Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 2,573
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
https://i.imgur.com/7MP45wx.png

If it's not a depressed hole in the skull, what is it? Looks more like a wound than anything the cowlickers have brought to the table.
Not a bullet hole. We have a good idea of what a bullet hole in the skull looks like from the other side of this same x-ray. You have nothing.
__________________
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 25th February 2018, 08:08 PM   #292
Loss Leader
Do you want to date my Avatar?
Moderator
 
Loss Leader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 24,995
Mod WarningSince this thread tends to be picture-heavy, let me just remind people to use IMGW tags instead of IMG. As an example:

[imgw=500]Pictureurl.com[/imgw]

Thank you.
Posted By:Loss Leader
__________________
I have the honor to be
Your Obdt. St

L. Leader
Loss Leader 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 25th February 2018, 08:43 PM   #293
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 7,734
Originally Posted by Loss Leader View Post
Mod WarningSince this thread tends to be picture-heavy, let me just remind people to use IMGW tags instead of IMG. As an example:

[imgw=500]Pictureurl.com[/imgw]

Thank you.
Posted By:Loss Leader
Never knew about that trick. Does this mean I can post images without having to use photoshop to resize them?
__________________
► 9/11 was a terrorist attack by Islamic extremists; 12 Apollo astronauts really did walk on the Moon; JFK was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald,who acted alone.
► Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed. - Jay Utah
► Heisenberg's Law - The weirdness of the Universe is inversely proportional to the scale at which you observe it, or not.
smartcooky 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 25th February 2018, 10:40 PM   #294
MicahJava
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,632
Originally Posted by SpitfireIX View Post
Talbot is not a professional historian; he's a journalist. That aside, Reclaiming History also has citations, you know. Do you take everything in that work as gospel?
Too bad you'll never be able to say anything unproving a shred of material from Talbot.

Back to the wounds, Bugliosi says that the autopsy doctors intentionally lied about the location of the entry wound because of personal spite from getting it wrong. Do you believe that BS?
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 25th February 2018, 10:58 PM   #295
MicahJava
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,632
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
Not a bullet hole. We have a good idea of what a bullet hole in the skull looks like from the other side of this same x-ray. You have nothing.
What "other side of the same X-ray"? Jesus, you guys are worse at this than a bot.
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 25th February 2018, 11:07 PM   #296
MicahJava
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,632
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Seriously, MicahJava brings nothing new to the table. So far, absolutely everything he brings has been repeatedly and thoroughly debunked - scientifically, historically and literally.

ALL of the verifiable evidence points to Lee Harvey Oswald firing three, and only three bullets at JFK from the sixth floor of the TSBD, missing with the first, wounding both JFK and Governor Connally with the second, and fatally wounding JFK with the third. That evidence is irrefutable;

1. the gun, a 6.5×52mm Mannlicher–Carcano, the only one found
2. the sniper's lair where the gun was found
3. the witnesses who saw the gun poking out of the window
4. the witnesses near the TSBD who heard the shots and stated they came from the TSBD
5. the witness on the floor directly below hearing the shots, the bolt being worked and the casings landing on the floor above him
6. the fact that no bullets from any other gun was found
7. the forensics linking the bullets (6.5 x 52mm) and bullet fragments to the gun (a 6.5×52mm Mannlicher–Carcano)
8. the records linking the gun (a 6.5×52mm Mannlicher–Carcano) to LHO
9. the actions of LHO before and after the assassination
10. the forensic evidence from JFK's wounds showing the direction the bullet came from behind and with an elevation of about 17°

There is zero verifiable evidence for any other shooters on the day; LHO acted alone on that day. No suppressors, no invisible bullets, no invisible shooter on the Grassy Knoll.

Most important, MicahJava keeps bringing up "evidence" that actually debunks his theories... case in point, the acoustic testing done by the HSCA.

That series of acoustic tests CLEARLY shows that listeners can be mistaken about where they hear loud gunshots coming from... it was actually a conclusion the testers themselves came to. I argue that this means listeners near the Grassy Knoll were hearing echoes of shots that came from the TSBD. Equally, it also means that listeners near the TSBD could have been mistaken, and that the echoes led them to believe the shots were coming from there instead of from the Grassy Knoll; as a skeptic, I must accept this, and taken on its own, this is a reasonable conclusion. However, unlike MicahJava, I also accept that there are other factors that must also be taken into consideration.

1. There were eye-witnesses who saw the shooter and his gun in the corner, 6th floor window of the TSBD. There were witnesses on the Grassy Knoll and behind the stockade fence at the top in it. NOT ONE HEARD OR SAW A SHOOTER.

2. We KNOW that three shots must have been fired from the 6th floor snipers lair, because the bullet fragments found match that rifle both in rifling and metallurgically. This means that if there was a shooter firing from the Grassy Knoll, there would have been HUGE number of people who heard shots coming from two different directions. Only 4% of the witnesses claim this.

3. If the only shots were fired from the Grassy Knoll (assuming the TSBD sniper's lair was a setup to frame Oswald) then the VAST MAJORITY of ear witnesses would have heard the shots coming from there, even the witnesses near the TSBD. The reason for this is simple acoustical physics... the speed of sound v the distance covered. The main reflective echo source was the large flat, front of the railway overbridge at the other end of Dealy Plaza. The TSBD itself is also a large reflective echo source.


NOTE: Sound radiates in waves travelling in all directions. This diagram is purely to show path lengths of sounds and not directions of reflected waves

In this diagram, the shooter is at the red X and an example ear-witness near to he TSBD is represented by the green X.

a2 = the path length from an alleged GN shooter directly to the TSBD witness
a1 + b1 = the path length from an alleged GN shooter to the TSBD witness via an echo from the TSBD.

They are virtually the same. If the shots were fired ONLY from the Grassy Knoll, the incident sound of the shots, and their echoes off the TSBD would not only have arrived so close to simultaneously that ear-witnesses could not have told them apart - "b'bang" - but the amplitude of the echoes would have been about the same and many of the ear-witnsses would have been confused about the direction.

a3 + b2 = the path length from an alleged GN shooter to the TSBD witness via an echo from the railway over-bridge.

This is a long path with a delay of about 0.8 - 1 second, and would also appear to come from the direction of the Grassy Knoll (the Knoll and the over-bridge were in the same quarter as viewed from the TSBD

The result of this scenario would have been

i. A huge majority of ear witnesses saying that the shots came from the direction of the Grassy Knoll, and

ii A huge number of people reporting the hearing of shots from two directions.

In both cases, this is not what happened. Now lets have a look what happens when we place the shooter at the corner of the TSBD.



Now we see that any ear-witness near the TSBD has no echo to confuse them. They hear it coming from the TSBD. The most significant echo they have to deal with is one that travels all the way from the TSBD to the over-bridge on the other side of Dealey Plaza and back, a distance that will attenuate the sound, making the echo detectably quieter. However any ear-witness at the Grassy Knoll still has to contend with considerably louder echoes from the over-bridge.

The result of this scenario is that ear-witnesses near the TSBD are far less likely to be confused about direction (which is why more weight must be placed on what they report) but witnesses near the Grassy Knoll are far more likely to be confused about direction. Furthermore, very few witness would be likely to report two different directions. This is EXACTLY what happened.

Ergo, there was only one shooter, and that shooter was in the TSBD and NOT on the Grassy Knoll, and this is fully backed up by all other evidence.

Now, whether or not LHO was part of a wider conspiracy is open to question. There are some indications, but there is no direct smoking gun. I leave that question open.


Edited by Loss Leader:  Image resized for readability. Please use IMGW tag for large images. The above is IMGW=500.
I find it amusing that you can only make the official story work by posting a wall of text parroting the official story in a way that overflows with misleading and controversial statements (or at least a string of words resembling a sentence). May as well try the thumb-fell-off trick at the Disability office. See look no thumb.
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 25th February 2018, 11:11 PM   #297
MicahJava
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,632
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
There are certain folks who hold very strong opinions on subjects where they have no idea what they're talking about.

It's like my RW friend that believes anyone in California can walk into a gunshow and pay cash for a machinegun and walk out with it no questions asked.

It does not matter that he is as wrong as wrong gets, it's what he believes and nothing is going to change that.

MJ has strong opinions on firearms, ballistics, GSW's and marksmanship and it's clear he isn't doing anything more than parroting some other CTist jive from someone just as ill-informed as they are.
One sign that you know what you're talking about is that you know what you don't know. Do you?
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 25th February 2018, 11:55 PM   #298
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 7,734
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
I find it amusing that you can only make the official story work by posting a wall of text parroting the official story
The official story works because it is supported by the evidence at every step. Not only that, it is entirely self-consistent.

The unmitigated tripe you have tried to peddle here is distinctly lacking in any evidence, and your attempts to provide support has been self-contradictory. Furthermore, you have either refused, or have simply been unable to answer important questions pertaining to your "theories".

When are you going to answer our questions?
When are you going to support your theories with hard evidence?
When are you going to provide a narrative of exactly what you think happened?

I am pretty sure that the answer to all three of those questions is....never!

Firstly, you are too gutless to answer the tough questions, secondly you don't have any supporting evidence, and thirdly because you operate the same way that all other CTs operate; they have a desperate need to pretend they have secret knowledge and to control the debate in such a way as to be able to move the goalposts when needed. If they commit themselves to a theory and a narrative, they know that skeptics will tear them both to shreds, and the goalposts will be stuck.

Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
misleading and controversial statements
Which statements are misleading?

Which statements are controversial?

Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
(or at least a string of words resembling a sentence)
Which sentences are you taking about?

These are all more questions that you will be too gutless to answer!
__________________
► 9/11 was a terrorist attack by Islamic extremists; 12 Apollo astronauts really did walk on the Moon; JFK was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald,who acted alone.
► Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed. - Jay Utah
► Heisenberg's Law - The weirdness of the Universe is inversely proportional to the scale at which you observe it, or not.
smartcooky 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 26th February 2018, 02:28 AM   #299
Tomtomkent
Philosopher
 
Tomtomkent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,406
Why is "Parroting" the WC narrative a bad thing?

It is the best explanation of the evidence. If it was mutable and pliable it would not be a good theory.

Which is why MicahJava's posts fail to work. They Gish-gallop away and never offer anything that can be nailed down to cohesive narrative.

He won't show us a precise location for the wounds.
He won't show us any evidence of another weapon, or any bullets fired by them.
He won't identify an alternative or additional shooting location.

All we get is conspiracy innuendo.
__________________
@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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th February 2018, 02:45 AM   #300
Cosmic Yak
Graduate Poster
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 1,996
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
For example?
You could always try reading the review. There are several examples in it.
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak 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 26th February 2018, 04:33 AM   #301
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 3,824
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Too bad you'll never be able to say anything unproving a shred of material from Talbot.
Your 'expert', your contention, your burden of proof. Nobody has to "unprove" anything Talbot or you or any other CT asserts.

You keep forgetting to check for logical fallacies before you post.

Hank
__________________
"Looks like we're really in nut country now, Toto."
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 26th February 2018, 04:34 AM   #302
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 3,824
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
I find it amusing that you can only make the official story work by posting a wall of text parroting the official story in a way that overflows with misleading and controversial statements (or at least a string of words resembling a sentence). May as well try the thumb-fell-off trick at the Disability office. See look no thumb.
Not an adequate response.
__________________
"Looks like we're really in nut country now, Toto."
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 26th February 2018, 07:11 AM   #303
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Perfection, NV
Posts: 28,655
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
One sign that you know what you're talking about is that you know what you don't know. Do you?
You apparently don't know how many entrance and exit wounds the official evidence (which you've been citing) shows. Of the many things you don't know, did you know that you didn't know that one?
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 26th February 2018, 09:18 AM   #304
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,089
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
One sign that you know what you're talking about is that you know what you don't know. Do you?
Now you're working Donald Rumsfeld's side of the street?

I'm well aware that there's always something new to learn and I'm a willing student.

When something is posted in this thread that doesn't conform to reality wrt the fields I cited in my post I'm under no obligation to take the assertions based on ignorance as fact.

Case in point, your ventriloquist suppressor. I've posted many times about the unreliability of earwitness accounts and even related one of my most embarrassing moments related to reporting what I believed was a shotgun being fired close to my home. I've been writing about it in this thread for several years but evidently you learned nothing from it because you revisit the same earwitness jive over and over.

I'd say there is someone in this thread that not only doesn't know what they don't know they're unwilling to learn from someone that does.

Straight up, it may be I have more years of suppressor experience than you have years on this planet. 50+ years at this point. Who would be more likely to know the subject matter, the guy with 50 + years of hands on knowledge or the person who read about it from poorly informed sources?
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong 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 26th February 2018, 12:17 PM   #305
bknight
Muse
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 526
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
Now you're working Donald Rumsfeld's side of the street?

I'm well aware that there's always something new to learn and I'm a willing student.

When something is posted in this thread that doesn't conform to reality wrt the fields I cited in my post I'm under no obligation to take the assertions based on ignorance as fact.

Case in point, your ventriloquist suppressor. I've posted many times about the unreliability of earwitness accounts and even related one of my most embarrassing moments related to reporting what I believed was a shotgun being fired close to my home. I've been writing about it in this thread for several years but evidently you learned nothing from it because you revisit the same earwitness jive over and over.

I'd say there is someone in this thread that not only doesn't know what they don't know they're unwilling to learn from someone that does.

Straight up, it may be I have more years of suppressor experience than you have years on this planet. 50+ years at this point. Who would be more likely to know the subject matter, the guy with 50 + years of hands on knowledge or the person who read about it from poorly informed sources?
Typical CT behavior, willfully ignorant and they don't know it or don't wish to accept the fact that they are wrong.
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 26th February 2018, 12:23 PM   #306
Axxman300
Master Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 2,573
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
What "other side of the same X-ray"? Jesus, you guys are worse at this than a bot.
The one with the damage from the bullet.
__________________
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 26th February 2018, 12:29 PM   #307
Axxman300
Master Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 2,573
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
I find it amusing that you can only make the official story work by posting a wall of text parroting the official story in a way that overflows with misleading and controversial statements (or at least a string of words resembling a sentence). May as well try the thumb-fell-off trick at the Disability office. See look no thumb.
It's not a wall of text, it's data supporting his point (which happens to be reality). This is what happens when someone has to over-explain the painfully obvious.

He has pointed out that ear-witness testimony in the JFK-Assassination is worthless as a single data point. When combined with the physical evidence most of the ear-witness testimony falls away and is explained by the echo chamber that is Dealey Plaza.

If you want to blow it off because the information is over your head that's your business, but you are in no position to look down your nose at his post based on your track record with basic facts.
__________________
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 26th February 2018, 12:30 PM   #308
Axxman300
Master Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 2,573
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
One sign that you know what you're talking about is that you know what you don't know. Do you?
How about addressing the hundreds of counter points you've run away from?
__________________
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 26th February 2018, 05:24 PM   #309
MicahJava
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,632
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
Now you're working Donald Rumsfeld's side of the street?

I'm well aware that there's always something new to learn and I'm a willing student.

When something is posted in this thread that doesn't conform to reality wrt the fields I cited in my post I'm under no obligation to take the assertions based on ignorance as fact.

Case in point, your ventriloquist suppressor. I've posted many times about the unreliability of earwitness accounts and even related one of my most embarrassing moments related to reporting what I believed was a shotgun being fired close to my home. I've been writing about it in this thread for several years but evidently you learned nothing from it because you revisit the same earwitness jive over and over.

I'd say there is someone in this thread that not only doesn't know what they don't know they're unwilling to learn from someone that does.

Straight up, it may be I have more years of suppressor experience than you have years on this planet. 50+ years at this point. Who would be more likely to know the subject matter, the guy with 50 + years of hands on knowledge or the person who read about it from poorly informed sources?
The ventriloquist suppressor is possible, but your assertion is that there is no direct evidence for it.

What about Connally's repeated statements?

A. Connally said the shot that struck him occurred very shortly after first loud report he heard.

B. Connally said that he did not hear the shot that struck him.

C. Connally said that he heard two loud shots, the second one is apparently describing the z313 shot.

D. Connally said the single bullet theory could not be true unless the first loud shot missed.

E. Going to the dozens of other witnesses who gave a thorough description of the shooting, there is very little to zero indication that

F. I have not found any evidence for any loud report before Z190-224. Maybe Connally's quick head turn at z160 is something, but that can be discounted if it doesn't match the rest of the evidence.

I know about the phrase "you never hear the one that hits you", but show me any early statement by Connally describing what happened and try to fit it into a scenario without any loud shot before ~z190-224.
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 26th February 2018, 05:25 PM   #310
MicahJava
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,632
BTW the only reason I'm skeptical of the ventriloquist suppressor as a good explanation for the grassy knoll loud report phenomenon is because I have a hard time discounting all the statements about smoke on the knoll, some of them happening very early on on news reports and written statements/interview summaries.

Last edited by MicahJava; 26th February 2018 at 05:28 PM.
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 26th February 2018, 05:40 PM   #311
MicahJava
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,632
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Too bad you'll never be able to say anything unproving a shred of material from Talbot.

Back to the wounds, Bugliosi says that the autopsy doctors intentionally lied about the location of the entry wound because of personal spite from getting it wrong. Do you believe that BS?
No replies to this comment? Seriously. Reclaiming history, page 395.

Excerpt from Vincent Bugliosi:

Quote:
How have the three autopsy pathologists reacted to this apparent gaffe in their report? Not very well, I’m afraid. By and large, most people don’t want to admit they made a mistake. The three autopsy surgeons were no exception.* When asked about the discrepancy in 1977, both Drs. Humes and Boswell repeated their 1964 testimony, insisting that the entrance wound was low in the skull (this time both said the wound was slightly below the external occipital protuberance)75 and that the photographs were misleading—a consistent theme in numerous subsequent interviews.76 An HSCA memo says that Dr. Humes, obviously reluctant to second-guess what he had written fourteen years earlier, stated categorically “that his physical measurements are correct and emphasized that he had access to the body itself and made the measurements of the actual head region.” In addition, he said that “photographs and X-rays have inherent limitations which are not present when one is examining the subject.”77 Also, in 1978, Dr. Finck testified to the HSCA that the entrance wound was low in the back of the head, identifying a small piece of white brain tissue, seen in autopsy photographs near the hairline, as the point of entry.78 Finck, too, pointed out to the committee that interpreting photographs of the body after the fact is never as good as examining the actual body, and chalked up the discrepancy as “the difference between the interpretation of photographs and the [actual] autopsy wounds.”79
Even Bugliosi didn't go so far as to claim the autopsy pathologists were simply wrong because of memory issues. Because that's stupid.
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 26th February 2018, 05:57 PM   #312
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 7,734
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
What about Connally's repeated statements?

A. Connally said the shot that struck him occurred very shortly after first loud report he heard.
The second shot struck him after he hears the first shot, that missed

Ever heard of the speed of sound....its 1100 fps

The muzzle velocity of a 6.5 x 52 round from a Mannlicher-Carcano is 2300 fps

DO THE MATH

Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
B. Connally said that he did not hear the shot that struck him.
See previous comment

Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
C. Connally said that he heard two loud shots, the second one is apparently describing the z313 shot.
Evidence?

The number of shots he heard is irrelevant. many people hear a different number of shots than were fired

Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
D. Connally said the single bullet theory could not be true unless the first loud shot missed.
It did miss. Maybe he missed hearing the second one. Its sound would have arrived about 1/8 sec after he was hit. I think he would have been somewhat preoccupied at the time the sound arrived seeing as he had just suffered a bullet wound.
__________________
► 9/11 was a terrorist attack by Islamic extremists; 12 Apollo astronauts really did walk on the Moon; JFK was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald,who acted alone.
► Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed. - Jay Utah
► Heisenberg's Law - The weirdness of the Universe is inversely proportional to the scale at which you observe it, or not.

Last edited by smartcooky; 26th February 2018 at 06:03 PM.
smartcooky 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 26th February 2018, 05:58 PM   #313
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 7,734
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
No replies to this comment?
There were replies... you just ignored them.
__________________
► 9/11 was a terrorist attack by Islamic extremists; 12 Apollo astronauts really did walk on the Moon; JFK was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald,who acted alone.
► Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed. - Jay Utah
► Heisenberg's Law - The weirdness of the Universe is inversely proportional to the scale at which you observe it, or not.
smartcooky 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 26th February 2018, 06:11 PM   #314
applecorped
Rotten to the Core
 
applecorped's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 17,950
This is not time we'll spent
__________________
All You Need Is Love.
applecorped 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 26th February 2018, 07:43 PM   #315
Axxman300
Master Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 2,573
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
BTW the only reason I'm skeptical of the ventriloquist suppressor as a good explanation for the grassy knoll loud report phenomenon is because I have a hard time discounting all the statements about smoke on the knoll, some of them happening very early on on news reports and written statements/interview summaries.
Guns have used smokeless powder since the late 1880's, so unless there were Civil War reinactors on the knoll there was no smoke.

There is no smoke visible in any of the footage in the minutes after the shooting. The smoke in the trees is a wive's tale, nothing more.
__________________
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 26th February 2018, 07:49 PM   #316
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Perfection, NV
Posts: 28,655
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
... I have a hard time discounting all the statements about smoke on the knoll..
Of course, that's what CTists do. What you should have a hard time doing is reconciling all the statements.

You have to not discount all the statements. That's how CTists maintain a sham veneer of relevance and keep the discussion going.

Shame, really.
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 26th February 2018, 07:55 PM   #317
Axxman300
Master Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 2,573
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The ventriloquist suppressor is possible, but your assertion is that there is no direct evidence for it.
That's because no qualified shooter in 1963 would have used one.

Quote:
What about Connally's repeated statements?
What about them? The man was shot, he went into shock, so he's not a credible witness.

Quote:
A. Connally said the shot that struck him occurred very shortly after first loud report he heard.
How long? Seconds? One second? A half a second? Oswald's first shot missed, so yeah, he'd have heard it.

Quote:
B. Connally said that he did not hear the shot that struck him.
Nobody shot with a high powered rifle ever does, plus the screaming drowns out the report.

Quote:
C. Connally said that he heard two loud shots, the second one is apparently describing the z313 shot.
So?

Quote:
D. Connally said the single bullet theory could not be true unless the first loud shot missed.
He was hit by the second shot, so guess what? It's true, it happened.

Quote:
F. I have not found any evidence for any loud report before Z190-224. Maybe Connally's quick head turn at z160 is something, but that can be discounted if it doesn't match the rest of the evidence.
Doesn't matter. The physical evidence, the ballistic evidence, and the pathology all points to Oswald.

Quote:
I know about the phrase "you never hear the one that hits you", but show me any early statement by Connally describing what happened and try to fit it into a scenario without any loud shot before ~z190-224.
Easy:

Bullet strike's JFK, then Connally, followed by his wife screaming, Jackie screaming, the head-shot, more intense screaming, blood everywhere, brains everywhere, Connally in devastating from life-threatening GSW, then the acceleration of the limo.

Fits for me.
__________________
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 26th February 2018, 07:56 PM   #318
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,089
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
BTW the only reason I'm skeptical of the ventriloquist suppressor as a good explanation for the grassy knoll loud report phenomenon is because I have a hard time discounting all the statements about smoke on the knoll, some of them happening very early on on news reports and written statements/interview summaries.
You have actually brushed up against reality, but by accident.

Outside of use on machineguns or submachine guns, suppressors on bolt action or semi auto rifles will virtually eliminate muzzle smoke/flash unless the piece is fired to the point the can gets seriously hot - a can will heat up over ambient temperature by approximately seven degrees per round. A shooter that limits their firing to 1 round per minute can put between 15-20 rounds downrange before the effectiveness of the can and the ability to suppress sound and dissipate muzzle flash/smoke is compromised.

Use a can in full auto, it gets loud quick and they glow real pretty.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong 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 26th February 2018, 07:59 PM   #319
Axxman300
Master Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 2,573
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
No replies to this comment? Seriously. Reclaiming history, page 395.
Because it's OFF TOPIC.

You have to start a separate thread about Talbot's nincompoopery.


Quote:
Even Bugliosi didn't go so far as to claim the autopsy pathologists were simply wrong because of memory issues. Because that's stupid.
Uncle Vince said Oswald acted alone.
__________________
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 26th February 2018, 08:00 PM   #320
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,089
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The ventriloquist suppressor is possible, but your assertion is that there is no direct evidence for it.

What about Connally's repeated statements?
It's a hell of a lot more than assertion, and how many times will I need to make this note?

Earwitness accounts of gunshots are subjective and unreliable. If I can be fooled, anybody with less experience is even more likely to be fooled.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong 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 07:30 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
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.