[Ben Holmes]

Quote:As I'm sure you must know, it is all in how you weigh the evidence. There is no evidence of a conspiracy and all the evidence points to Oswald shot JFK and no credible evidence anyone else was involved.

Restating a lie doesn't make it true...

Quote:Remember my hypothetical take on the driver being involved? A case can be made he was involved, as long as you don't need evidence he was involved. Just because it can answer a few hard to answer questions, and it does, that is not evidence he was involved any.

This is a common failing among believers, they can't tell the difference between "evidence" and "proof".

Quote:The statements made at the Parkland Pres Conference where Dr. Perry referred to a frontal shot has to be weighed with other evidence and how it fits it. It doesn't show more than a mistake due to not having enough information yet. It doesn't outweigh the autopsy and all final medical reports and all expert conclusions. It just doesn't.

This is what happens when you let ignorant people try to use their ignorance as disinformation.

The prosectors NEVER SAW THE BULLET WOUND IN JFK'S THROAT - they had no idea that it even existed until the next day - after the body was gone...

So yes, Dr. Perry's observation DOES outweigh non-existent autopsy evidence.

Nor is the Parkland observations of JFK's throat wound a "mistake" - it looked exactly as they claimed it looked - and it looked like an entry wound. That's merely historical fact.

I've always asserted that believers are one of two things - either ignorant of the facts, or liars. This particular troll is clearly ignorant of basic facts in this case. (Which obviously explains why he so rarely addresses the evidence...)

Quote:You are really going to bring up the witnesses thing again this soon? You are not still tired of trying to make that into something? Let some time go by before reintroducing already debunked ideas. Especially one that went on for pages and was completely fleshed out.

I don't think this troll has thought things through... EVERYTHING is witness testimony. There's no such thing as something that does not rely on witness testimony. NOTHING!!

How can it be "debunked?"

Are there any believers who'd like to come to this troll's defense, and explain how eyewitness testimony has been "debunked?"

Quote:It doesn't matter who agrees or disagrees on a public forum. What matters is what the experts conclude after evaluating all credible evidence.

Then all you need to do is produce an "expert" who makes the claim that there's no evidence for conspiracy. But if you were able to, all you'd be doing is demonstrating that "experts" can lie too.

Eyewitness testimony is evidence. It's just that simple.