Off Topic > Other Conspiracy Theories
JFK - 3 shooters 6 shots
Echnaton:
--- Quote from: profmunkin on June 09, 2012, 11:50:27 AM ---I do not know....
--- End quote ---
That is the whole problem, isn't it. From your admitted ignorance of investigative procedures and lack of interpretive skills, you want to cast doubt on the WC report. Your entire approach is nothing more than FUD mongering.
Jason Thompson:
--- Quote from: profmunkin on June 09, 2012, 11:50:27 AM ---I do not know what evidence they could have attained from the mark on the curb, do you?
--- End quote ---
No, but I'm not the one insisting that there should have been some kind of analysis.
--- Quote ---BUT
Tague stated that he was able to discern the mark was directed toward the picket fence.
Tague testified that it was his impression that D.S. Walthers was able to discern the mark was directed toward the picket fence.
--- End quote ---
Where exactly did he say that?
--- Quote ---Fact is, the WC did not even ask Tague what it was about the mark that caused him to believe shot came from the picket fence, or Walters or policeman, so we don't have anything worthy of consideration.
--- End quote ---
No, what we have is his impression that the shots came from the picket fence and his suggestion that the book depository was a possible location he thought of at the time as a place the shots may have come from.
--- Quote ---That's how we get conspiricied loonies attempting to introduce concepts like co-linear, when they have no f-----g concept of the nature of the mark.
--- End quote ---
The nature of the mark makes no differnce to the 'concept of colinear'. The only things we have described as roughly colinear are Oswald's location, the limo, the mark on the curb and Tague. They are all far more colinear than Tague, the limo, the mark and the knoll.
But no, true physics means nothing to you, does it?
--- Quote ---The goal the WC was after was for Tague to put on record the opinion it was plausible that the shots could have come from the TSBD, "case closed".
--- End quote ---
Tague VOLUNTEERED that opinion early on in his testimony. he was NOT led to it, he was NOT co-erced to it, he was NOT misrepresented.
--- Quote ---It is not always just what they said, it is also just as important to understand what they didn't say.
--- End quote ---
But it's a pretty good idea to start out by understanding what they did say, and so far you haven't actually demonstrated any ability to do that. In fact you have intentionally left bits of what was said out of your arguments. Why?
gillianren:
You know, it wouldn't surprise me if the bits are getting left out because they simply don't appear in the source Profmunkin is using. Because I don't really believe he's using the actual Warren Report. I think he's using the pre-digested version which comes on some conspiracist site or another. He seems awfully surprised every time information is given which shows that he's missing an important fact, and he digs in against it. I take this to mean that someone he trusts is spoonfeeding him errors, and to question them would mean to question the person he trusts. And since he has come to believe that you're either right about everything or a dirty, dirty liar, he cannot let himself disbelieve people he likes.
profmunkin:
--- Quote from: gillianren on June 09, 2012, 02:22:38 PM ---You know, it wouldn't surprise me if the bits are getting left out because they simply don't appear in the source Profmunkin is using. Because I don't really believe he's using the actual Warren Report.
--- End quote ---
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/wit.htm
Good question, I have been using the above site to draw quotes from.
Maybe the mcadams site should not be used to draw evidence from.
Echnaton:
--- Quote from: profmunkin on June 09, 2012, 02:59:34 PM ---
--- Quote from: gillianren on June 09, 2012, 02:22:38 PM ---You know, it wouldn't surprise me if the bits are getting left out because they simply don't appear in the source Profmunkin is using. Because I don't really believe he's using the actual Warren Report.
--- End quote ---
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/wit.htm
Good question, I have been using the above site to draw quotes from.
Maybe the mcadams site should not be used to draw evidence from.
--- End quote ---
It is not evidence, it is testimony. There is a difference.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version