[Mark Ulrik]

(08-25-2016, 02:04 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote:  

(08-25-2016, 08:52 AM)Mark Ulrik Wrote:  

(08-24-2016, 03:21 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote:  

(08-24-2016, 02:21 PM)Mark Ulrik Wrote:  That's just your weasel way of admitting that his numbers are wrong.

I've already stated that. As I've previously stated:

Ben Holmes Wrote:His numbers were wrong, as we see them today. But we aren't looking at the same data. The point he was making IS STILL TRUE TODAY - NO-MATTER HOW YOU COUNT THE WITNESSES!!!

So how can it be a "weasel way" of stating what I've plainly said several times now?

Because you're not being honest. It is the same data. Those 5 TSBD witnesses were located in the sources cited by Lane himself, using his selection critea. Why did your hero not find them? Was he being intentionally deceptive or just plain sloppy? Why didn't he list his 25 witnesses? Why do you refuse to post the tabulation you (*cough*) claim to have done?

Then you're a liar.

I've stated several times before, and quoted one of the instances right above - that Mark Lane was wrong in the number count. The "weasel" is clearly you... as you continue to refuse to state what Mark Lane was actually saying.

Mark Lane said "22 of 25" were GK witnesses. Using his sources and his selection criteria, I had no problem giving you 5 obvious TSBD witnesses. According to you that's because he "counted different people" than I did. That makes you the "weasel" in my book.

BY YOUR OWN COUNT, 20 out of 25 witnesses pointed to the Grassy Knoll.

Nice. Two lies in one sentence. I've never said there couldn't be (a lot) more than 5 non-GK witnesses. I simply gave you 5 of the most obvious ones. I've also never said that I accepted Lane's count of 25. On the contrary, I've demonstrated that his numbers are unreliable.

That count is wrong... there are more than 25 witnesses, THERE ARE MORE THAN 20 THAT POINTED TO THE GRASSY KNOLL.

But you refuse to list them. Mark Lane has taught you well.

Now, you claim that when I say "His numbers were wrong" - that this is a "weasel way" of admitting that his numbers were wrong.

Once again: Now, you claim that when I say "His numbers were wrong" - that this is a "weasel way" of admitting that his numbers were wrong.

You're a liar.

I was, quite obviously, commenting on your (repeated) claim that Lane "counted different people" than I did.

How can their be any "weaseling" going on when I stated the same thing you stated?

Who's the true weasel around here?

Most likely the one who keeps changing his mind about whether Lane was actually wrong, or he simply "counted different people" than I did.

You STILL refuse to acknowledge that your own numbers PROVE THAT MARK LANE WAS CORRECT TO ATTRIBUTE THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF 11/22 & 11/23 WITNESSES AS GRASSY KNOLL WITNESSES.

Of those witnesses, I listed 5 who explicitly pointed to the TSBD. That's one number, but enough to prove that Lane's "22 of 25" claim is bogus. Your "overwhelming majority" claim is also unsupported.

Since your own numbers make the same point that Mark Lane made, there's no need for me to list the witnesses, is there?

Like you were ever going to. Sorry, Ben, but no one here is falling for your bluff.
 

(08-25-2016, 08:52 AM)Mark Ulrik Wrote:  

(08-24-2016, 03:21 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote:  But the POINT he was making ... provably was not wrong.

The point was not the precise numbers... the point was that the overwhelming majority of witnesses documented on 11/22 & 11/23 pointed to the Grassy Knoll. An ABSOLUTE FACT according to you, since you can't produce more than five witnesses who point to the TSBD.

Again, you're not being honest. All that's needed to prove Lane wrong is 4 witnesses pointing away from the GK, but (out of the kindness of my heart) I gave you 5 who explicitly pointed to the TSBD. I don't know how many pointed to, and how many away from, the GK. I didn't attempt to do Lane's work for him. You claim to have, but you refuse to post your "tabulation" - which tells me that it probably doesn't support your "overwhelming majority" claim.

And you're a liar.

Mark Lane's point that the overwhelming majority of witnesses documented on 11/22 & 11/23 were Grassy Knoll witnesses is STILL UNREFUTED BY YOU.

Correction: Your claim, unsupported by you.

You even admit that you've not examined all those witnesses to make any determination. That makes you a coward as well... since I'm quite sure that you KNOW what you'd find.

Did you read the AP piece I posted earlier? The authors (GK:9; TSBD:12; Could be either:2) came to a vastly different conclusion than your hero (GK:22; Other:3). By not posting your fabled tabulation, aren't you tacitly admitting that their "point" is correct?

Tell us Mark - I've made it quite explicit that both cowardice and lying is allowed to be pointed out in this forum - how did you expect to get away with these lies and cowardice? Do you enjoy having your character flaws pointed out?

Irony, sweet irony.
 

Mark Ulrik Wrote:

Ben Holmes Wrote:

Mark Ulrik Wrote:

Ben Holmes Wrote:and that in the first two days the overwhelming majority of witnesses pointed to the Grassy Knoll...

Lane's claim of "22 of 25" is demonstably wrong. Your vaguer claim of "an overwhelming majority" is unsupported. You refuse to post the tabulation you (*cough*) claim to have done. I think we all understand why.

Yep... his precise numbers were wrong. But even YOU cannot produce any numbers that refute his point, which I'll just keep repeating, that the overwhelming numbers of eyewitnesses documented on 11/22 or 11/23 pointed to the Grassy Knoll.

This is the point that Mark Lane made...

Then why did he have to lie and claim it was 22 of 25?

And no matter how many times you run from that fact, and refuse to admit it - it's still true today.

Embarrassing, isn't it?

It must eat you up inside that you can't prove it.

It was MORE than 22 witnesses... and the total was MORE than 25.

But you refuse to list them. Mark Lane has taught you well.

Let's hear you acknowledge that fact, Mark. Surely you don't want to label you a coward yet again... so acknowledge in your response that there were MORE THAN 25 WITNESSES DOCUMENTED ON 11/22 & 11/23.

Sign. I've already told you that I don't know. If we were to include unpublished documents, however, then the answer would certainly be yes, but Lane is supposed to have been found his 25 witnesses in the WC volumes.

The truth can never be embarrassing to me - you're the one running from the facts. YOUR OWN NUMBERS PROVE THAT MARK LANE'S POINT WAS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT!

A bold-faced lie!

And that fact must eat you up inside!

My comments in green above.