Why do some people believe in conspiracy theories?

[Bill Chapman]

In other words, no justification at all.

You can't even identify anybody who argues that "all evidence is either faked, planted, or altered".

You lot self-identify. Faked, planted, altered is the lingo commonly used by conspiracy-mongers pushing a coverup agenda

Feel free to point out where any CT has ever identifified even a single piece of evidence as valid.

[Walt Cakebread]

Feel free to quote any of them (or anybody else) saying that all evidence is either faked, planted, or altered.

Go ahead Crapman.... Quote me as saying at anytime, that I said, that all of the evidence is faked planted or altered....

I most certainly do NOT believe that....As a matter of fact if you didn't have your head somewhere other than squarely on your shoulders you'd know that I disagree vociferously with those who believe that all of the Back Yard photos are fakes that were created by the conspirators.   I believe that one and possible two of the BY photos are genuine photos that were created by Lee Oswald....  I believe that he created CE 133A  as part of the hoax plot to  make it appear that Lee Oswald had attempted to shoot General Walker. 

Now then... as you were saying Mr Crapman.....  Oh BTW...  It appears that you're getting your butt kicked....

[Jack Trojan]

IMO, a much more interesting question is why are LNers so gullible?  Are they shills, gamers, or do they just have a strained relationship with truth and logic?

[John Iacoletti]

You lot self-identify. Faked, planted, altered is the lingo commonly used by conspiracy-mongers pushing a coverup agenda

"you lot" is Chapman-speak for "no, I can't actually cite anybody saying that".

Feel free to point out where any CT has ever identifified even a single piece of evidence as valid.

Identifified?

Walt has already given you one answer.

I think lots of the "so-called" evidence is valid.  It just doesn't prove that Oswald shot Kennedy.

[Martin Weidmann]

"you lot" is Chapman-speak for "no, I can't actually cite anybody saying that".

Identifified?

Walt has already given you one answer.

I think lots of the "so-called" evidence is valid.  It just doesn't prove that Oswald shot Kennedy.

I think lots of the "so-called" evidence is valid.  It just doesn't prove that Oswald shot Kennedy.

Exactly right, but that's something the LNs will never be able to wrap their heads around or even discuss openly, for that matter.

Far easier for them to just paint everybody who doesn't agree with them with the same brush and qualify them as irrational, unreasonable, conspiracy mongers even when they don't even have a conspiracy theory to put forward and just want to examine the validity of the case against Oswald.

[Jerry Freeman]

You lot self-identify. Faked, planted, altered is the lingo commonly used by conspiracy-mongers pushing a coverup agenda
Feel free to point out where any CT has ever identifified even a single piece of evidence as valid.  Last Edit: Today at 12:31:18 AM by Bill Chapman

Ever notice that El Chapo edits/re-edits every post that he makes and they still don't make any sense. "identifified" [stutters poor guy]
Here is what I say.... The Oswald did it story was a cover-up plain and simple. That is not a theory. Why do you not grasp that?  you lot you all.. in Texas it's ya'll   
 

[Bill Chapman]

Go ahead Crapman.... Quote me as saying at anytime, that I said, that all of the evidence is faked planted or altered....

I most certainly do NOT believe that....As a matter of fact if you didn't have your head somewhere other than squarely on your shoulders you'd know that I disagree vociferously with those who believe that all of the Back Yard photos are fakes that were created by the conspirators.   I believe that one and possible two of the BY photos are genuine photos that were created by Lee Oswald....  I believe that he created CE 133A  as part of the hoax plot to  make it appear that Lee Oswald had attempted to shoot General Walker. 

Now then... as you were saying Mr Crapman.....  Oh BTW...  It appears that you're getting your butt kicked....

'believe that he created CE 133A  as part of the hoax plot to  make it appear that Lee Oswald had attempted to shoot General Walker.
>>> in other words, you believe that was faked

LOL

[Bill Chapman]

"you lot" is Chapman-speak for "no, I can't actually cite anybody saying that".

Identifified?

Walt has already given you one answer.

I think lots of the "so-called" evidence is valid.  It just doesn't prove that Oswald shot Kennedy.

No citation needed, since my statement is a take on the general CT attitude that a coverup exists; along with the lingo used to express that notion

"So called", huh..
By using quotes, you've already denied it as evidence