[Ben Holmes]

I've long been looking for an honest believer... one who'd admit that the evidence is in conflict, and be able to correctly judge what is true, and what is false.

For example, Dr. Humes, years after the autopsy, tried to move the wound location away from where he'd written that it was located... he originally wrote:
 

Quote:1. There is 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. In this region there is an actual absence of scalp and bone producing a defect which measures approximately 13 cm. in greatest diameter.

Now, this is clearly in the back of the head. Indeed... most eyewitnesses were quite decisive in putting the wound EXACTLY WHERE THE AUTOPSY REPORT PUT IT:




Let's take a look at the bones of the human skull:





You'll notice that the Autopsy Report put the wound in the Parietal-Occipital area, and on the right side (because temporal bone was also involved). This is EXACTLY where the vast majority of witnesses put the wound.

But every believer I know is willing to accept this as the true location:




Why can't I find anyone who will admit that Dr. Humes is contradicting HIS OWN WRITTEN ACCOUNT of where the wound was located? Why can't any believer admit that Dr. Humes is contradicted by the vast overwhelming majority of eyewitnesses, who put it in the Parietal-Occipital area? Why do believers such as David Von Pein claim that I've put it in the occipital (rather than the Parietal-occipital). Why are so many believers willing to put the wound Parietal-Frontal - WHEN THERE'S NO MEDICAL EVIDENCE FOR SUCH A LOCATION?

Are there any honest believers willing to state publicly that Dr. Humes was contradicting his own Autopsy Report???

And if not... why not?