Comments to the LA Times article on an upcoming PBS Special on JFK
Updated March 9, 2014
JFK Blog Posts
JFK Calc Spreadsheet Database
From the article:
“Sorry, conspiracy theorists, modern forensic science shows that John F. Kennedy was likely killed by “one guy with a grudge and a gun,” said professor John McAdams during a panel for Nova’s new “Cold Case: JFK” on Wednesday at the Television Critics Assn. press tour in Beverly Hills”. http://discussions.latimes.com/20/lanews/la-et-st-pbs-cold-case-jfk-conspiracy-theorists-20130807/10
“Killed by one guy with a grudge and a gun”?
That’s a lie, pure and simple. No, Professor, Americans are not so gullible as to believe this pathetic nonsense. Do you dare tell your students that it was a communist malcontent with a grudge? They probably would laugh you out of the classroom. Modern forensic evidence (videos, photographs, acoustic, medical, ballistic, geometric) and overwhelming eyewitness testimony proved a conspiracy a long time ago. Not to mention the mathematical impossibility that at least 100 of an estimated 1400 material witnesses would die mysteriously in the 14 years following the assassination.
Officially 77 deaths were ruled unnatural: 34 homicides, 24 accidents, 16 suicides and 3 unknown cause. But statistical expectation based on mortality rates indicates there should have been just 12 accidents and 3 suicides. Approximately 25 of the 40 deaths officially ruled accidents and suicides were actually homicides. Therefore, approximately 59 of the 77 deaths ruled unnatural were homicides. But that’s not all. The 43 deaths officially ruled as “natural”, including heart attacks and sudden cancers, was also overstated based on statistical expectation. As many as 25 were actually homicides, therefore approximately 80-90 of the 1400 material witnesses deaths were homicides.
Here are the graphs and probability calculations which prove a conspiracy: http://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2013/10/14/jfk-witness-deaths-graphical-proof-of-a-conspiracy/
This is a sensitivity analysis of unnatural witness deaths.
Since you cannot refute the mathematics, you are left with the lame response that the data, logic and calculations were not peer-reviewed. You are not interested in the scientific method and are apparently mathematically challenged; that’s why you cannot peer-review it yourself. http://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2013/07/08/debunking-john-mcadams-debunking-of-jim-marrs-witness-list/
To you, all honest JFK researchers, authors, Parkland doctors and Dealey Plaza eyewitnesses are “mistaken” and/or trying to sell books – just like you did. But unlike these truth seekers, you and the corporate media gatekeepers are classic examples of how factual omission, misinformation, disinformation and logical fallacies are used to cover up the truth about the JFK assassination.
Now these comments to the article are for readers (and students) who can think for themselves.
Clare Kuehn at 4:40 PM August 10, 2013
Not only is a wide and deep conspiracy far more horrible — the horrible way we can be fooled and that people would want to — than “odd events which just might happen” (though those can be horrible, too) …
There HAS to be a magic bullet simply within the back-near-spine to front-of-neck trajectory: An empty object (one without a spine/neckbones) could have such a trajectory, but centre front from (or to) near centre back REQUIRES A STOPPED OR DEFLECTED BULLET.
McAdams/PBS advisors’ “science” dies on this single point.
James Fetzer at 2:30 PM August 10, 2013
Does anyone really believe that the belief that our lives is dominated by powerful special interests who can even remove the President of the United States in broad daylight in a major American city is psychologically “more comforting” than the belief that it was done by “a lone, demented gunman”?
Psychologists observe that most of us suppress information that conflicts with our most deeply held beliefs, such as the belief that our government is nurturing and protecting us. The phenomenon, which is known as “cognitive dissonance”, can be illustrated by a woman who discovers evidence that her husband has been molesting their daughter, but cannot bring herself to accept it. Years later, when the truth emerges, she is at a loss to explain why she had not done something about it. The “magic bullet” theory is not even anatomically possible, as David W. Mantik, M.D., Ph.D., has proven, because cervical vertebrae intervene, which shows their knowledge of human psychology is no greater than their knowledge of human anatomy. The situation is the same with regard to 9/11, where Rachel Maddow touts it as “more comforting” to believe that the government murdered 3,000 of our fellow citizens to promote a political agenda than it is to believe that 19 Islamic terrorists committed the crime. They are bringing us a song and dance in lieu of rational analysis based on logic and evidence.
Harald’s Piget at 9:46 AM August 10, 2013
Why does George H.W. Bush choke on the words “deranged madman”?
He’s stifling a laugh cause he can’t even say it with a straight face. At Ford’s funeral H.W. brings up the Kennedy case. And yes, Ford was on the Commission and did the lynch pin altering of the data to make the “Magic Bullet” slightly more plausible.. Enough for government work..
Why do they call it “Magic Bullet”?
Because the alleged behavior of the bullet does not match the habits of nature as described by Newton! Get it, folks…It didn’t happen. The whole thing is a dirty American secret hiding in plain sight…
Harald’s Piget at 9:30 AM August 10, 2013
The “Commission” which allegedly cleared the air was not even independent – it was picked by LBJ. And didn’t even investigate, regardless of the 16 volume record that is now definitely not in your local library. Just read a few pages to discover it was most definitely not an investigation; if you know anything about what an actual investigation looks like.
There must be an emotional reason every single literate citizen who has access to the Internet could not figure this out and draw the appropriate conclusion. The “Magic Bullet” notion is just for people who believe the Bible was found under a tree and God put it there.
Harald’s Piget at 9:28 AM August 10, 2013
All the details those people who’ve studied the forensics and issues for 10K hours, at least, understand and think makes it all obvious, just make folks eyes glaze over… ’cause that’s how it’s been framed.
And the experts are so close to the material it inhibits the communication of the reality to folks who have no frame of reference for the details… So a McAdam’s can get away with reassuring people “there’s nothing to look at here. Move along”.
It also helps the public are not trained in logic, rhetoric and grammar.
The hit to the back of the head with the brains on the back of the limo? The alleged rifle that couldn’t load fast enough; a rifle so old it was difficult if not impossible to get bullets. The fact the evidence shows Kennedy was hit to the head with a high powered rifle.. The fact the alleged killer was not a marksmen and the image of him with a rifle – promoted by Time- Life was special effected.. The blocking tree the obscured the shot..
Not even touching on the patsy’s murder while in the custody of the Dallas police within a few days by a mob connected murderer. That alone was enough to make most Europeans know it was a State hit.
Harald’s Piget at 9:27 AM August 10, 2013
If it’s on TV. you know it’s a lie…Tom Hanks is as trustable as Earl Warren.. Remember, the first movie Hanks starred in was how video games made a kid (played by Tom Hanks) want to jump off the Trade Towers, since the games made Hank’s role think he could fly.
Why is McAdams so interested in propping up the falsified one-thousand-and-one ways to Sunday… ludicrous myth? It’s gonna take some big gonads to come out on the 50th with this horrendous lie. Ra Ra. lol
The perpetrators and cover – up artists never lacked chutzpah. Even to the point of making Oliver Stone a pariah in the movie business for 10 years after , his actually lukewarm “JFK”. For years, Stone’s name mentioned in the Mass Media organs never went by once without the accompaniment of a blaring laugh – track around the alleged slur “Conspiracy theorist.”
How’s that for fallacious persuasion and Mass Media control of information and perception? All this gigantically funded Propaganda push, marking the 50th year, is going to prove is the indisputable collusion of the Mass Media organs of information.
Richard Charnin at 8:32 AM August 10, 2013
“I no longer believe that we were able to conduct an appropriate investigation of the [Central Intelligence] Agency and its relationship to Oswald…. I do not believe any denial offered by the Agency on any point. The law has long followed the rule that if a person lies to you on one point, you may reject all of his testimony…. We now know that the Agency withheld from the Warren Commission the CIA-Mafia plots to kill Castro. Had the commission known of the plots, it would have followed a different path in its investigation…. We also now know that the Agency set up a process that could only have been designed to frustrate the ability of the committee in 1976-79 to obtain any information that might adversely affect the Agency. Many have told me that the culture of the Agency is one of prevarication and dissimulation and that you cannot trust it or its people. Period. End of story. I am now in that camp.” –Robert Blakey, staff director and chief counsel for the U.S. House Select Committee on Assassinations, statement from 2003
Richard Charnin at 8:32 AM August 10, 2013
“After the assassination the public was burdened with no quandary. Wherever the guilt really lay, the man identified as killing President Kennedy was stamped as a disciple of the extreme left. Rightly or wrongly, the political left was implicitly convicted along with Oswald. Was that verdict just, or were Oswald and his apparent heroes victims of a vicious double-cross by forces of the extreme right?” –Anthony Summers, Not in Your Lifetime
“I have felt, I always felt, a sympathy for Oswald, and I just don’t feel it’s right that he would be, or his children should be, stuck with that stigma, that’s all.” –Chauncey Holt, CIA contract agent and Mafia associate (also identified as one of the “three tramps” photographed in Dealey Plaza), video interview, 20 June 1997
“Lee Oswald was totally, unequivocally, completely innocent of the assassination. And the fact that history — or in the rewriting of history — has made a villain of this young man, who wanted nothing more than to be a fine Marine, is in some ways the greatest injustice of all.” –Jim Garrison, District Attorney of New Orleans, interviewed in the documentary, The Men Who Killed Kennedy: Part 4: The Patsy
Richard Charnin at 8:31 AM August 10, 2013
“It was common knowledge in the Tokyo CIA station that Oswald worked for the agency…. Right after the President was killed, people in the Tokyo station were talking openly about Oswald having gone to Russia for the CIA. Everyone was wondering how the agency was going to be able to keep the lid on Oswald. But I guess they did.” –interview of Jim and Elsie Wilcott, former husband and wife employees of the Tokyo CIA Station, San Francisco Chronicle, “Couple Talks about Oswald and the CIA,” 12 September 1978
“[Former CIA Director Richard] Helms told reporters during a break that no one would ever know who or what Lee Harvey Oswald … represented. Asked whether the CIA knew of any ties Oswald had with either the KGB or the CIA, Helms paused and with a laugh said, ‘I don’t remember.'” –Richard Helms, chatting with the Washington Post’s George Lardner and other reporters in 1978, during a recess of the U.S. House Select Committee on Assassinations, cited by Gaeton Fonzi, The Last Investigation
Richard Charnin at 8:30 AM August 10, 2013
“There’s no question in my mind that the twenty-six volume set [of the Warren Report] should be taken from the shelves of all the libraries where they now rest in the United States, in non-fiction, and placed in the fiction shelves, along with Tom Sawyer, Huckleberry Finn, and Gulliver’s Travels.” –Dr. Cyril Wecht, interviewed in the documentary, The Men Who Killed Kennedy: Part 1: The Coup D’etat
“If he had it to do over again, he would begin his investigation of the Kennedy assassination by probing ‘Oswald’s ties to the Central Intelligence Agency.'” --Richard Sprague, first staff director and chief counsel to the U.S. House Select Committee on Assassinations, statement to Sam Anson of New Times magazine, cited by Gaeton Fonzi, The Last Investigation
“[Lee Oswald's mother] Mrs. Marguerite Oswald frequently expressed the opinion that her son was recruited by an agency of the U.S. Government and sent to Russia in 1959, but she stated before the Commission that ‘I cannot prove Lee is an agent.'” –Warren Commission Report, Appendix XII: Speculations and Rumors, Oswald and U.S. Government Agencies, p. 660
Richard Charnin at 8:30 AM August 10, 2013
“We do know Oswald had intelligence connections. Everywhere you look with him, there’re fingerprints of intelligence.” –Republican Senator Richard Schweiker, member of the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, The Village Voice, 15 December 1975
“The question of whether Oswald had any relationship with the FBI or the CIA is not frivolous. The agencies, of course, are silent. Although the Warren Commission had full power to conduct its own independent investigation, it permitted the FBI and the CIA to investigate themselves — and so cast a permanent shadow on the answers.” --Walter Cronkite, CBS News anchor, 28 June 1967
“I think the [Warren] report, to those who have studied it closely, has collapsed like a house of cards … the fatal mistake the Warren Commission made was to not use its own investigators, but instead to rely on the CIA and FBI personnel, which played directly into the hands of senior intelligence officials who directed the cover-up.” –Republican Senator Richard Schweiker, member of the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, speaking on the CBS News program Face the Nation, 27 June 1976
Richard Charnin at 7:37 AM August 10, 2013
Apparently, McAdams had a limited math background, otherwise he would have done the analysis. His total ignorance of probability theory is shown by his feeble, pathetic attempt to refute the testimony of eyewitnesses and medical doctors at Parkland Hospital. The man has no shame. And this is a university professor? http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/logic2.htm
As a quantitative analyst/software developer working in defense/aerospace and Wall Street investment banking, I had the pleasure of programming mathematical models that were more complex than calculating probabilities of JFK witness unnatural deaths. Facts, logic and mathematical proof are the bane of the disinformationist. Knowing the unnatural mortality rate (R) for (n) witness unnatural deaths in a group of (N) individuals over a given time period (T) is all that is required in order to calculate the probability of (n) deaths.
Richard Charnin at 7:34 AM August 10, 2013
The following logical analysis represents a profound PARADIGM SHIFT in analyzing the significance of the “convenient” witness deaths. To prove a conspiracy, it does not matter one iota if individual witnesses were related or material to the assassination (even though they obviously were). Witness relevance and connection to JFK becomes obvious after the fact.
This straightforward probability analysis closes the book on McAdams’ decades-old barrage of disinformation and utter disregard for the truth. As a professor of political science, one would expect McAdams to seek the truth with an honest scientific evaluation of the facts. His avoidance – or inability – of engaging in an honest analysis cannot be attributed totally to pure ignorance. His agenda is obvious to anyone paying attention. He has been exposed time and again as an illogical coincidence theorist (CT). The “tell” is his inability to refute the basic mathematical analysis which proves that there was a conspiracy to assassinate JFK.
Knowing the unnatural mortality rate (R) for (n) witness unnatural deaths in a group of (N) individuals over a given time period (T) is all that is required in order to calculate the probability of (n) deaths.
Richard Charnin at 7:23 AM August 10, 2013
John McAdams is the foremost Warren Commission apologist and Lone Nutter. To McAdams, JFK researchers seeking the truth are “conspiracy buffs” who are wrong to believe scores of eyewitnesses, Parkland doctors, photographic and acoustic evidence.
McAdams astounding propensity to obfuscate is best illustrated in his attempt to debunk Jim Marrs’ list in “Strange” and “Convenient” Deaths Surrounding the Assassination: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/deaths.htm. But this is just one example of McAdams’ disinformation and obfuscations.
After reading this post, check out Michael T. Griffith’s extremely thorough debunking of McAdams’ Kennedy Assassination home page. The devastating article was written in 2001, yet McAdams is still “lone-nutting” for the Warren Commission. http://www.mtgriffith.com/web_documents/vsmcadams.htm
We will quickly prove that McAdams’ valiant effort to refute the relevance of the witnesses is an exercise in futility. He is apparently unaware that at least 56 of the approximate 800 witnesses called to testify by the Warren Commission, Garrison/Shaw Trial, Senate Select Committee and the HSCA met “convenient” deaths in 1964-77. The probability is ZERO.
Richard Charnin at 6:04 AM August 10, 2013
Oswald said: “I am just a patsy”. Here is proof that he was. Aside from the impossible Magic Bullet trajectory, and the planted pristine bullet found on Connally’s stretcher at Parkland Hospital, we have Absolute proof of a conspiracy: The bullet in Connally’s thigh. Will this be shown in the upcoming Tom Hanks cover-up propaganda film “Parkland”? Not Likely. http://rechtiskrom.wordpress.com/2013/01/27/lee-harvey-oswald-i-am-just-a-patsy/
WinstonCourt at 10:53 PM August 9, 2013
There is no theory that a lot, if not most, of information on this was locked up for 75 years, and kept from the public. There is no theory about our government having been caught in the past killing people. There is no theory about the fact that our government frequently lies. There is no theory about the fact that government hides their evil actions under the title of “national security.” There is no theory that a bunch of perverts have been caught in our public servant offices. Etc., etc., etc.
So, it really becomes a focus on “conspiracy.” And, am I the only one who is a constant state of conspiracy in my actions? I mean, a LOT of what I do is a conspiracy. I hide facts, I lie, I manipulate, I choose words to lead people into believing scenerios which are less that true, etc., etc., etc.
So then, is government, our public servants, etc. like God, and are perfect people? I THINK NOT!
Clare Kuehn at 3:56 PM August 9, 2013
Psychologizing about which is more comforting — odd events, or corruption at high and low levels — is moot. The question is which science work is done properly.
Since a back wound just to the right of the spine would have to pass through bony process from the neck, no matter HOW the body was positioned, in order to reach the center front neck, there had to be at least a back and front shooter to be forensically anatomically possible.
As Arlen Specter’s own questions to the doctors in the Warren Commission admit, the shots require NO NECK BONE, as do McAdams’ and the hypothetical “science” of PBS advisors.
Kennedy could raise his head; he had a neck bone.This aspect (1 front shot, 1 back shot) does not exonerate Oswald as a shooter, but it is a start. And already posits the requirement of 2 or more persons: a conspiracy; and answers it with roughly where they were (a theory, i.e., explanation — of the forensics).
Now get real.
James Fetzer at 2:51 PM August 9, 2013
Citing John McAdams’ book, JFK ASSASSINATION LOGIC (2011), creates a grossly misleading impression. As David W. Mantik, M.D., Ph.D., has shown in his devastating review on the CTKA web site, McAdams commits so many fallacies that I, who offered courses in logic, critical thinking and scientific reasoning for 35 years, could teach a week’s worth of dissection in critical thinking. It is a compendium of irresponsible reasoning.
He grossly violates a basic condition of scientific reasoning, namely, that it must be based upon ALL the available evidence. In relation to the Zapruder film, for example, he does not explain that 60 witnesses reported observing the limousine slow dramatically or come to a complete stop, where it slowed dramatically AS it came to a complete stop. Nor that a half-dozen have viewed another film that includes it. Nor does he cite John P. Costella’s on-line Zapruder tutorial.
This had to be suppressed lest the public realize that the film has been massively altered, since the driver’s pulling it to the left and to a halt was such a stunning indication of Secret Service complicity. While the blow-out at the back of his head was painted over in black, it can still be seen in frame 374. For more, see “Who’s telling the truth: Clint Hill or the Zapruder film?”, “Did Zapruder film ‘the Zapruder film’? and “Thinking about ‘Conspiracy Theories': 9/11 and JFK”.
James Fetzer at 9:23 AM August 9, 2013
As Michael Baden, M.D., who chaired the medical panel for the HSCA, has observed, if the “magic bullet” theory is false, then there had to have been at least 6 shots from 3 directions, insofar as the wound to JFK’s throat could no longer be counted as an exit wound and the wounds to John Connally would also require extra shots and additional shooters.
Since the “magic bullet” theory is provably false, there must have been at least 6 shots and additional shooters, which establishes the existence of the conspiracy that others, like John McAdams, are so eager to cover-up. (See “Reasoning about Assassinations”.)
The shirt and jacket JFK was wearing have holes about 5.5″ below the collar. The autopsy diagram shows a wound at that location. Admiral Burkley places the wound at the level of the 3rd thoracic vertebrae. An FBI sketch shows the back wound lower than the wound to the throat. Re-enactment photos show a large patch there, with a smaller patch at the back of the head. The mortician’s description places it 5-6″ below the collar.
Gerald Ford had the wound re-described from “his uppermost back” to “the base of the back of the neck”. But the hypothesis is not even anatomically possible, because cervical vertebrae intervene. What science shows is that JFK was killed by at least 6 shots from 3 directions. The question is easy to resolve by simply looking at the evidence.
James Fetzer at 12:33 AM August 9, 2013
Having pioneered the application of scientific reasoning to the assassination of JFK in ASSASSINATION SCIENCE 1998, MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA 2000 and THE GREAT ZAPRUDER FILM HOAX 2003–which Vincent Bugliosi has acknowledged as the only exclusively scientific books published on the death of our 35th president–John McAdams’ stance is absurd.
I organized a research group of the most highly qualified experts to ever study the case in late 1992, including three M.D.s and three Ph.D.s. We discovered almost immediately that the autopsy X-rays had been altered, that another brain had been substituted for that of JFK and that the Zapruder film had been massively revised.
There are more than 15 indications of Secret Service complicity in setting him up for the hit; the CIA/military/Mafia/anti-Castro Cubans and local law-enforcement took him out, the FBI was used to cover it up and Lyndon and J. Edgar were principals with financing from Texas oil men. See “What happened to JFK–and why it matters today”.
“Reasoning about Assassinations”, which I presented at Cambridge and published in an international, peer-reviewed journal, provides the simplest proof of conspiracy, simply by establishing where JFK was hit in the back. We are in the midst of the most massive propaganda campaign in US history, where McAdams is far from alone in spreading false information about the assassination.
Richard Charnin at 10:38 PM August 8, 2013
In 1964-1977, at least 81 of 1400 material witnesses died unnaturally (46 homicides, 8 suicides, 23 accidental, 4 unknown). Applying the national unnatural mortality rate (0.000542) the probability is 5.62E-43. That is less than (1/trillion)^3. Using the actual observed weighted unnatural rate (0.000148), the probability of 81 unnatural deaths is less than (1/trillion)^6.
Warren Commission apologists have suggested that there were many more than 1400 material witnesses and therefore the probabilities are not valid – without providing a list.
Even assuming an impossible 25,000 material witnesses, then given the 0.000062 homicide rate, there was a 1 in 500,000 probability of 46 witness homicides in the 14 years following the assassination.
But this is a conservative estimate based on 46 of 81 unnatural deaths. If 24 of the 35 “accidents” and “suicides” were actually homicides, the probability of 70 homicides is 7.77E-16 (1 in 1000 TRILLION). So much for the bogus 25,000 witnesses argument. http://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2013/04/24/jfk-assassination-a-probability-analysis-of-warren-commission-witness-unnatural-deaths/
Richard Charnin at 10:26 PM August 8, 2013
Exposing the Media and Coincidence Theorists (CTs) in the JFK Cover-up: Facts, Logic, Mathematics
Suppose that on Nov. 22, 1963, 1400 individuals were selected from the U.S. population and that within one year, at least 15 would die unnaturally (homicide, accident, suicides. Based on unnatural mortality rates, only one such death would be expected.
There are two possibilities. The 15 unnatural deaths were…
1) unrelated. It was just a 1 in 167 trillion coincidence.
2) related. There was a common factor -a connection- between them.
We can confidently rule out 1). But if the 15 unnatural deaths were related, what was the connection?
Once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, is the truth.
– Arthur Conan Doyle
In 1977, an HSCA statistician said it was impossible to determine a defined universe of JFK-related witnesses. Therefore the London Sunday Times actuary’s 100,000 TRILLION to 1 odds of 18 material witness deaths in three years was invalid.But the Warren Commission had 552 total witnesses. At least 18 died unnaturally in 14 years; the probability is 1 in 140 BILLION.
Richard Charnin at 10:07 PM August 8, 2013
JFK Mysterious Witness Deaths and the HSCA
In 1964, the Warren Commission ignored the testimony of 51 eyewitnesses who claimed that the shots came from the Grassy Knoll area. Just 32 said they came from the Texas School Book Depository. In 1978 the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) was forced to conclude that there was a “probable” conspiracy based on acoustic evidence – a 96% probability of at least four shots (including at least one from the Grassy Knoll). The physical evidence indicates more than four shots. Some shooters probably used silencers.
Despite all of the evidence to the contrary, the HSCA was not about to refute the Warren Commission’s outrageous Single Bullet Theory. It still maintained that Oswald fired from the TSBD – and the other shooter(s) must have missed. I
So it is not surprising that prior to the presentation of the acoustic evidence, the HSCA would use obfuscation and factual omission in an attempt to refute an actuary’s calculation of 100,000 trillion to 1 odds of 18 material witness deaths in the three years following the assassination. If the odds were essentially correct, it would force the HSCA to conclude a conspiracy.
Richard Charnin at 9:59 PM August 8, 2013
JFK Assassination Paradigm Shift: Deaths of Witnesses Called to Testify
This post will describe the methodology used to calculate mortality rates and associated probabilities of the deaths of witnesses who testified or were sought in four JFK-related investigations. The method represents a paradigm shift in analyzing witness deaths and is mathematical proof of a conspiracy beyond any doubt.
The only relevant variables needed for calculating probabilities are the number (N) called to testify, the number (n) who died unnaturally, the time period (T), and the unnatural mortality rate (R).
Warren Commission (WC) apologists and “coincidence” theorists (CTs) have offered tortured explanations to refute the relevance of witness deaths by challenging the witness connection to the assassination and/or cause of death. But their explanations are an exercise in futility; they miss the forest for the trees. Focusing on any particular death is an irrelevant distraction.
First, they are debunked by the known number of witnesses who testified or were sought to testify in the four investigations. Second, the fact they were sought is obvious proof that they were relevant.
David Winter1 at 1:49 PM August 8, 2013
“And on its face, their science does sound good. “
But that’s the problem, their science IS NOT very good. The evidence that there was more than one shooter, AND that there was a cover up is overwhelming. Even the United States government finally admitted in 1976 that there was a conspiracy and cover up.
Oswald was photographed on the ground floor by the front door. He was then seen, by a police man, drinking a Coke within second of the shots being fired. It is physically not possible for him to have been by the window at the time.
And let’s forget the fact that the Zapruder film clearly shows that the last shot (or at least fatal shot) came from the front. I spent many years in the Navy. I fired a lot of weapons. Heads do not move backwards towards the round and the skull explode out the back when a round enters the rear of the head. It just doesn’t happen and if this supposed firearms expert is claiming this then he’s no expert at all.
The ‘lone nut’ theory is more easily debunked than the creationist theory. PBS is reaching for straws if they think they can actually win this argument.
Tim Fleming1 at 12:24 PM August 8, 2013
Lone nutters like DeNooyer and McAdams have been peddling lies for decades. They do history a disservice and they protect those monsters (some of whom are still alive) who pulled it off. To believe these coincidence theorists, one must overlook a mountain of evidence which indicates a conspiracy took JFK’s life. Shame on PBS.
author, The President’s Mortician
Bill Kelly3 at 9:49 PM August 7, 2013
How can science determine that the motive for the assassination was a “grudge”?
Why can’t an alleged scientific investigation into the assassination tell us more than we knew before rather than just reaffirm a lone shooter, which does preclude a conspiracy?
And how does believing in a conspiracy make one feel safer or more secure?
And how come these scientific documentaries on the assassination fail to explore the DNA testing of the bullet fragments by the ARRB in 1998, which would really be interesting but nobody wants to explore it?
And what about a scientific review of the acoustical testing by the HSCA?
And why not a proper forensic autopsy of the victims today, when better scientific x-rays, MRIs, DNA and other tests are available?
Science doesn’t oppose conspiracy theories, producers who don’t want to explore the best lines of inquiry and only interview professors with a grudge like McAdams are the ones who oppose conspiracy theories.
Science promotes the truth. Dig up the body and give it to science for a few hours and many of the outstanding questions will be answered. And releasing the remaining government records withheld for reasons of national security will answer the rest.
Richard Charnin at 9:31 PM August 7, 2013
McAdams and the Lone Nutters who still push the insane Magic Bullet Theory have been debunked a long time ago.