+- Forums (http://conspiracyjfkforum.com)
+-- Forum: Main JFK Forums (http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Forum-Main-JFK-Forums)
+--- Forum: JFK Conspiracy Main Forum (http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Forum-JFK-Conspiracy-Main-Forum)
+--- Thread: How To Lie About The Evidence... Part 3 (/Thread-How-To-Lie-About-The-Evidence-Part-3)
How To Lie About The Evidence... Part 3 - Ben Holmes - 09-21-2016
Ben Holmes Wrote:David Von Pein Wrote:Only a rabid conspiracy believer could possibly manage to transform this description of President Kennedy's head (exit) wound.... "...a large irregular defect of the scalp and skull on the right involving chiefly the parietal bone but extending somewhat into the temporal and occipital regions..." [Warren Report, Page 540] ....into a wound that is ENTIRELY in the occipital region of JFK's head.
What part of "Occipital-Parietal" is ENTIRELY in the occipital?
These are simple questions David...
No wonder you keep blatantly lying about what I've stated... and refuse to answer them...
Now, does the Autopsy Report place the wound EVEN PARTIALLY in the back of the head?
(You can run, David - but you can't hide...)
This is a very common tactic that believers utilize... they simply lie about what critics have said. They cannot deny that the Autopsy Report put the wound in the Cccipital-Parietal area, yet they're constantly complaining that there was no large wound in the back of the head.
Patrick was recently caught lying about this very issue - claiming that Dr. Baden was correct when he stated that the wound was not in the Parietal-Occipital.
Why the constant lying?
Why isn't the truth good enough to support the position you hold?