Buell Wesley Frazier

[Dan O'meara]

Try this.  If the evidence places Oswald at the Tippit murder scene, do you agree that is conclusive of whether he had the time to get there?  And as a result, we don't need to prove his every movement with a stopwatch to accept that conclusion.  I'm not asking you for an endless pedantic subjective rant on whether the evidence places him there.  I realize that some CTers may not agree that it did because they apply an impossible standard of proof, but hypothetically IF the evidence places him at the scene don't you agree that moots all the discussion about timelines and routes that would have got him there at that moment?  I don't think that is a very complex concept to understand even for you.

If the evidence places Oswald at the Tippit murder scene, do you agree that is conclusive of whether he had the time to get there?

Yes

And as a result, we don't need to prove his every movement with a stopwatch to accept that conclusion.

Agreed

IF the evidence places him at the scene don't you agree that moots all the discussion about timelines and routes that would have got him there at that moment?

Agreed

[Martin Weidmann]

If the evidence places Oswald at the Tippit murder scene, do you agree that is conclusive of whether he had the time to get there?

Yes

And as a result, we don't need to prove his every movement with a stopwatch to accept that conclusion.

Agreed

IF the evidence places him at the scene don't you agree that moots all the discussion about timelines and routes that would have got him there at that moment?

Agreed

Wasn't the subject matter; Oswald being on the 6th floor and getting down the stairs within 75 seconds after the shots?

So, why is "Richard" now talking about Tippit?   

[Dan O'meara]

Wasn't the subject matter; Oswald being on the 6th floor and getting down the stairs within 75 seconds after the shots?

So, why is "Richard" now talking about Tippit?   

I think TD's Patented Logic - If it DID happen, that proves it DID happen - can be applied to all scenarios regarding the JFK case. 

[Tom Sorensen]

Wasn't the subject matter; Oswald being on the 6th floor and getting down the stairs within 75 seconds after the shots?

So, why is "Richard" now talking about Tippit?   

Likely because he held a similar lecture in the Tippit thread last year.

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4116.msg158279.html#msg158279

[Tom Sorensen]

Try this.  If the evidence places Oswald at the Tippit murder scene, do you agree that is conclusive of whether he had the time to get there?  And as a result, we don't need to prove his every movement with a stopwatch to accept that conclusion.  I'm not asking you for an endless pedantic subjective rant on whether the evidence places him there.  I realize that some CTers may not agree that it did because they apply an impossible standard of proof, but hypothetically IF the evidence places him at the scene don't you agree that moots all the discussion about timelines and routes that would have got him there at that moment?  I don't think that is a very complex concept to understand even for you.

The WC definitely didn't get it because they came up with a nutty bus ride going nowhere and Whaley the cab driver; neither were needed according to your principle. Is "an impossible standard of proof" explained in part two of your lecture?

[Martin Weidmann]

Likely because he held a similar lecture in the Tippit thread last year.

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4116.msg158279.html#msg158279

He tried to do the same in a conversation I had with him about Oswald being on the 6th floor when the shots were fired and coming down the stairs within 75 seconds after the last shot.

He couldn't prove that Oswald was on the 6th floor at 12:30 PM or that he came down the stairs, so he started to use circular logic.

1. Oswald was seen on the second floor door by Baker within 75 to 90 seconds after the shots, which somehow "proves" that he must have come down the stairs

2. Oswald came down the stairs which "proves" that he must have been on the 6th floor.

It's laughable, but what is worse is that he actually believes his reasoning is logical.

You'll get a better conversation out of a brick wall.