[Ben Holmes]

It's interesting to see other areas where the shady debate tactics frequently seen in the JFK case are also used.

Really, I suppose any highly controversial area is going to have this problem - but in the Evolution vs Intelligent Design arguments, you can see the same misrepresentations, cherry-picking, cowardice, and outright lying that is so prevalent in the JFK case.

Rather interesting, that.

Since it demonstrates the same sort of faith-based debate that we find in this forum... much of the defense of Evolution isn't based on evidence, but based on misrepresentation and ad hominem attacks.

Interestingly, one of the early posters on the JFK case... Michael Griffith, has also written against Evolution.

There are similarities beyond debate tactics... faith in the Warren Commission is mirrored by faith in Darwinian Evolution, both are subjects that are beyond dispute, in the eyes of supporters.

In both topics, believers in the Warren Commission, and believers in Evolution: proclaim critics of their faith to be ignorant or stupid... 

Come to think of it, Climate Change is another controversial topic where the faithful misrepresent and lie to defend their faith...

The point is really a simple one... when you don't have the facts & truth on your side, you will literally do anything, no matter how despicable, to maintain your faith.

And if you find yourself lying to support your "side"... perhaps you're on the wrong side...