Non problematic evidence?

[Martin Weidmann]

I have examined the evidence from several points of view. First several CT viewpoints , then the official report, several LN viewpoints,  my own research, viewpoints of forum discussion, etc

Your theory has no evidence to support it.

Your theory has no evidence to support it.

That's rich, since you have no clue if John even has a theory and what it is. 

It's also ignorant and arrogant at the same time. The only theory that actually presents conclusions not supported by the evidence is the WCR.

[Charles Collins]

Your theory has no evidence to support it.

That's rich, since you have no clue if John even has a theory and what it is. 

It's also ignorant and arrogant at the same time. The only theory that actually presents conclusions not supported by the evidence is the WCR.

If you would stop jumping to conclusions and actually read his post, you might be able to see that I was referring to his stated theory regarding me.

[Martin Weidmann]

If you would stop jumping to conclusions and actually read his post, you might be able to see that I was referring to his stated theory regarding me.

As I said before; you need to improve your communication skills, so that people know what you mean and do not have to be mind readers that jump to conclusions.

As far as "his stated theory" goes, all John presented was "another theory"... He never said it was his, but he might just as well as there is plenty of evidence for it.

[Bill Chapman]

Let's agree to disagree? you keep playing games and I'll keep on jumping to obvious conclusions that you don't like....

Show us an obvious conclusion

[Jerry Freeman]

Let's agree to disagree?

You can't even get people here to agree with that

[Martin Weidmann]

Show us an obvious conclusion

From the total sum of all your postings, the obvious conclusion is that you are a complete waste of time

[John Iacoletti]

I have examined the evidence from several points of view. First several CT viewpoints , then the official report, several LN viewpoints,  my own research, viewpoints of forum discussion, etc

None of that is reflected in anything you have written here. All you?ve done is said that you?re convinced, you?re not interested in discussing the evidence, and that you?ve ?already considered? all the objections to the evidence and you don?t care because your mind is made up.

That?s great for you, but not a particularly compelling defense of the official narrative.

It basically amounts to ?The WC said it, I believe it, and that settles it?. Ok, but lots of us don?t.

[Charles Collins]

None of that is reflected in anything you have written here. All you?ve done is said that you?re convinced, you?re not interested in discussing the evidence, and that you?ve ?already considered? all the objections to the evidence and you don?t care because your mind is made up.

That?s great for you, but not a particularly compelling defense of the official narrative.

It basically amounts to ?The WC said it, I believe it, and that settles it?. Ok, but lots of us don?t.

Do you think that I need to hear your personal viewpoint before I say that the evidence is overwhelming convincing? Is your viewpoint THAT important?

I didn?t say the things you wrote. Those are your words. I am not trying to tell you that you have to defend your conclusions to me. I am only suggesting that it is wise to have an open mind.