Your Theories Won?t Do It

[John Iacoletti]

Well, gee, I couldn?t possibly be talking about the ones showing the weapon being found and taken out of the building, could I?

Do you always answer questions with other questions?

How does a photo of a weapon outside the building tell you what was found on the 6th floor?

How do the reconstructed police photos that were taken after the crime scene was disturbed tell you what was found in the undisturbed scene?

How does the low resolution Alyea film uniquely identify the rifle that Carl Day picks up and hands to Fritz as a Carcano?

How does any of this preclude that a Mauser was found and just not photographed?

Saying 7.65 Mauser doesn?t change anything. 7.65 was a common calibre of Mauser rifles and doesn?t mean anything. Grossing at straws.

Says you. 

M1898 German 7.92?57mm
M1902, M1912, M1924 & M1936 Mexican 7?57mm
M1903 Turkish 7.65x53mm
M1904 & M1912 Chilean 7?57mm
M1912 Colombian 7?57mm
M1904 Portuguese 6.5?58mm Vergueiro
M1906 Swedish 6.5?55mm
M1908 Brazilian 7x57mm
M1908 Uruguayan 7x57mm produced by the Deutsche Waffen und Munitionsfabriken
M1909 Argentine 7.65?53mm
M1910 Serbian 7?57mm
M1924 Chinese 7.92?57mm
M1935 Belgian 7.65x53mm
M1943 Spanish short 7.92?57mm

Interestingly, some of the Argentine 7.65 Mausers were stamped as such:


 

What are you talking about? People on the sixth floor: 3 shells. Photographs and films show 3 shells. Yet one document says 2 and all the sudden it?s ?disputed.?

Whoa, slow down there, Nelly.  I said "whether they were photographed as discovered is disputed".  The document showing 2 shells is just yet another example of dodgy evidence handling.

There?s no direct evidence linking it to any particular region. What it shows is that the broke bullet ? which was found in the limousine

You forgot the "allegedly".  That's the problem with the mishandling of evidence.  There's no way to verify that those mangled fragments came out of the limousine.

? struck human tissue.

Woah again.  There's no basis for "struck".

Now, you can hit out with your usual pitch of how we can?t be certain those who found it didn?t prick their finger BS, or you could refer to my statements about trying understand these events in terms of global models or balance of probability.

When you have a pre-vested interest in your model, you interpret the evidence accordingly.  Eg. "struck".

It relies mostly on physical evidence and documents.

I'll bite.  What "physical evidence" and "documents" tell you who pulled the trigger?  What "physical evidence" and "documents" even tell you what the murder weapon was?

Half the people on this forum.

Well then it should be easy for you to quote even one of them saying "evil conspiracy people planted CE 399 and never uttered a word".

No one said it did. Again, this ?baby?s intro to logical fallacies? stuff pulls you down.

If it's such a "baby's intro to logical fallacies" why do you keep committing them?

I didn?t say X is a possible explanation, therefore X is true.

That's your argument though.  How else do you get from "a lone shooter can account for the ballistic evidence" to the conclusion "a lone shooter committed the crime"

All I have told you repeatedly is that we can?t know anything for certain, but that doesn?t preclude us from having some level of understanding. I suggested a possible scenario to help explain a possible event (nobody really knows what stretcher the bullet was on)

Tomlinson didn't express any lack of knowledge despite Specter's best attempt to talk him out of it.

and you respond as though I?m making truth claims.

I apologize.  So we're in agreement that there no way to know if it is true that CE 399 was related to the assassination?

That he?s a psychopath. What does that suggest: many things, incl. that the psychophysiological symptoms of anxiety would not have impaired his shooting ability (given that they?d have been absent) and that?d he?d look calm when confronted with Baker et al, among many other interesting things.

Could there be other things that would account for looking calm when confronted by Baker other than he was a psychopath who just shot the president?  Like...I don't know...not having shot the president?  Particularly when it's just your layman opinion that he was a psychopath?

[Rob Caprio]

You?re like a broken record with that citations gibberish. I once cited a bibliography and you said I didn?t cite once source. You don?t even read posts and copy your entire shtick from CT books ? Presumed Guilty, was it?

If you?d read that post you?d understand I wasn?t citing evidence, I was listing conclusions, hence why that?s what?s there. You?d also have noticed my challenge at the bottom.

Of course LNers like you hate being asked for supporting citations because you don't have any! You have never provided a supporting cite for your claims. Never. All you present is your biased psycho-babble opinion.

This is classic LNer behavior. No person who appeals to science like you have over the years could be so inept at providing supporting citations as you have been. The evidence in this case does NOT support the claims in the WCR. Any honest person can see this. What evidence converted you to supposedly becoming a LNer (of course you were always one)?

You won't cite it as no supposed convert ever does.

[Dillon Rankine]

Of course LNers like you hate being asked for supporting citations because you don't have any! You have never provided a supporting cite for your claims. Never. All you present is your biased psycho-babble opinion.

This is classic LNer behavior. No person who appeals to science like you have over the years could be so inept at providing supporting citations as you have been. The evidence in this case does NOT support the claims in the WCR. Any honest person can see this. What evidence converted you to supposedly becoming a LNer (of course you were always one)?

You won't cite it as no supposed convert ever does.

😂😂😂😂 Just found an old gem: one of my old posts which had a bibliography of sources contains the phrase ?Rob Caprio will likely claim these citations don?t exist: guess who showed in the comments, totally oblivious to that part because he hasn?t even read the post?

BTW, here?s posts I?ve made since the forum got restarted which contain sources and a bibliography:

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1120.msg25836.html#msg25836

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1123.msg26169.html#msg26169

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1167.msg26905.html#msg26905

My posts usually focus on the science of the case. That?s where I make my citations. My comments are usually shorter and not meant to be in depth. Recently, I?ve done some ?philosophical?/abstract or reflective posts which I suppose you take to be ?psycho-babble opinions.?

My increasing knowledge of the actual evidence turned me from a die-hard CT to LNer. One example: Understanding ballistics and how knowing the velocity and other properties of the carcano bullets, with the range and supposed feat of 399, the equations and experiments show that a bullet could have looked like 399. 

[John Iacoletti]

My posts usually focus on the science of the case. That?s where I make my citations. My comments are usually shorter and not meant to be in depth. Recently, I?ve done some ?philosophical?/abstract or reflective posts which I suppose you take to be ?psycho-babble opinions.?

I think Rob means citations for evidence that converted you to being an ODIA-er.

[Tom Scully]

Inject points to ponder, rinse, repeat...

From Crossfire by Jim Marrs (details easily verified from other sources, consolidated for brevity)


1958:


(Mary Bledsoe's aunt, America Webb, was the widow of Joe Webb, of the same Webb family
of Tennessee and Ennis, TX, as Clarice Marie Webb Campbell, wife of O.V. Campbell.)

Isn't this the marriage of Mary Bledsoe's youngest uncle?


Isn't this 1930 census entry proof RD Matthews and his mother were living with her sister,
Adelaide Germany and her son with Mary Bledsoe's uncle, Jewell Ralston Germany?

[Rob Caprio]

😂😂😂😂 Just found an old gem: one of my old posts which had a bibliography of sources contains the phrase ?Rob Caprio will likely claim these citations don?t exist: guess who showed in the comments, totally oblivious to that part because he hasn?t even read the post?

BTW, here?s posts I?ve made since the forum got restarted which contain sources and a bibliography:

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1120.msg25836.html#msg25836

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1123.msg26169.html#msg26169

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1167.msg26905.html#msg26905

My posts usually focus on the science of the case. That?s where I make my citations. My comments are usually shorter and not meant to be in depth. Recently, I?ve done some ?philosophical?/abstract or reflective posts which I suppose you take to be ?psycho-babble opinions.?

My increasing knowledge of the actual evidence turned me from a die-hard CT to LNer. One example: Understanding ballistics and how knowing the velocity and other properties of the carcano bullets, with the range and supposed feat of 399, the equations and experiments show that a bullet could have looked like 399.

😂😃😃

This LNer, and he was always a LNer, claims the official evidence converted him! This is "comedy gold" to quote Richard Smith and David Von Pein. The study of the official evidence makes anyone who is honest realize a conspiracy took place, but Rankine says it made him realize that LHO acted alone. Sure.

He is so sure of it that he ignored my request for him to cite what evidence made him see the light. They always do this because none exists.

[Rob Caprio]

I think Rob means citations for evidence that converted you to being an ODIA-er.

That is what I meant John and I'm sure he knows it, but what could he cite?

[Paul May]

Please. You were always a LNer. Your avoidance of the actual evidence proves this.

You have NO clue about the actual evidence.  None. You gleam from conspiracy literature like the parrot you are you spew it out when called upon. Let?s you and I debate for the forum?s education. Any area of the event. You game or a coward?