This is a perfect example of your flaws observation and logic. Nowhere did I say or imply anything about the men who worked on JFK's head, or that they were lying or imagining things. The douchetard in the beard, he had issues. As I said.

But you imagined I said or implied it. You repeatedly make the same errors, so why should we take your premise seriously when it is entirely plausible that you have always made these same errors in your review of the JFK assassination?

That's because he lives in Imagination Land!

No kiddies I live in a world where people ask questions when things don't add up and not in one where the koolaid drinkers just follow what the prevailing government line has been.

I ask again, if you discount the sworn testimony of all the Dallas doctors as incorrect, then you must therefore say they are lying. Straight out.

Why do you insist that the gov told the whole unvarnished truth when there is so much evidence to the contrary from the mouths of those DIRECTLY involved.

NOT one of you was there or involved in any way so you have decided to accept one story that doesn't add up any way you try to tally it.

The list of conflicting evidence is staggering and from numerous sources.

It would have been nice to learn the actual truth but those involved are dying off. It was a brilliant scheme.

First of all, I thought you swore you were done here. Second of all, I ask again if you can make a single argument without engaging in endless logical fallacies? Clearly your critical thinking is so poor that you are incapable of it. Is the only option your mind can comprehend that because we don't accept your video as proof that we are therefore saying they are all lying? Must we once again slap you down with some facts and show how silly and meaningless that video is?

I also was not on the moon when the astronauts landed. And yes, I have also decided to "accept one story" that we indeed landed on the moon, because that is what the evidence suggests, and it *does* tally up, in spite of contrary claims from loony goons.

Now Ive lost all faith in you. How can you ignore that coke can in the corner of those moon photos. ;)

You may want to open the thesaurus and look for another big word, logical fallacy is wearing a bit thin. So now you claim the video interviews with the doctors are faked, or otherwise inaccurate?

Wow. Oh well, no hope for you. So sad.

Ah, the endless irony.

I'll make a deal. If you can write one single post without engaging in a logical fallacy, I'll explain in detail why I don't consider the video you posted to be evidence of a conspiracy or second shooter.

Well as you consider EVERYTHING a logical fallacy, just humor me with your interpretation of the video with the Dallas doctors and the mortuary tech who personally handled JFK's body is wrong. Are they lying? Were these not the real people?

There are numerous more studies clearly showing and PROVING alterations in the film released to the public using SOTA digital forensics, digital facial analysis, etc.

So please share your insights.

Oops, you just engaged in one. ROFLMAO

Nevertheless, I'll respond later.

I can hardly wait.

In the mean time you can watch evidence about something else. Here's a video showing the clear link ;-) between vaccines and autism, or in this case, Dystonia.

Also Known as: Black & White Thinking.
Description of False Dilemma

A False Dilemma is a fallacy in which a person uses the following pattern of "reasoning":

1. Either claim X is true or claim Y is true (when X and Y could both be false).
2. Claim Y is false.
3. Therefore claim X is true.

This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because if both claims could be false, then it cannot be inferred that one is true because the other is false. That this is the case is made clear by the following example:

1. Either 1+1=4 or 1+1=12.
2. It is not the case that 1+1=4.
3. Therefore 1+1=12.
[Link: nizkor.org]

"Supreme Overlord of the KnuckleDragging Wire Pullers"

I see how it all makes sense to you.

Here is a novel idea. Watch the video I posted the link for and post your specific response to that video and the salient points made in the video.

Try to deal with real world questions and leave the coffee table psycho analysis picture books by the side.

The guy in the beard looks familiar because he's been heavily involved in the kookspiracy industry. The video portends that the autopsy photos are faked by looking at 3... though 52 were taken.

Are the Autopsy Photos Faked?
In 1981, The Boston Globe had a panel of photographic experts closely examine the photos and x-rays from Kennedy’s autopsy to determine their authenticity. Bob Groden — yes, the fellow who showed up at the O.J. Simpson trial (the bearded guy in your video Giz) — was there making his case that they were faked. See how much success he had in convincing bona fide experts of fakery.

Of course, the House Select Committee had already thoroughly examined the "forgery" issue. It commissioned the nation’s top experts to examine the autopsy materials for fakery, and here is their report. If you actually believe that Harrison Livingstone is an expert on the photos and x-rays, you need to read this. Accompanying this file is a graphic showing the face measurements forensic anthropologists used to establish that the person in the autopsy photos was John F. Kennedy.

Of course, if the autopsy photos and x-rays are faked, just how many people would have to be implicated in doing — and lying about — the fakery? This essay by Joel Grant discusses the history of this issue.

The autopsy doctors, have always accepted the photos and x-rays as genuine. In early 1967 all three autopsists (Humes, Boswell, and Finck) examined these materials at the National Archives. Their report authenticates the photos and x-rays as genuine.


The issue of the rear of JFK's skull being an exit wound has been thoroughly debunked and not part of the video so it's not worth going there.

I think the salient point here is the fascination with conspiracy theories as an indicator of human phsychological conditions.

-The dismissal of repeated factual claims of logical fallacies points to detachment. The irony is that you use more logical fallacies to dismiss or repel these factual assertions.

-The admonishment to 'quit drinking the koolaid; look for the truth, it's out there if you care to see it; take your heads out of the sand' are all proof of a superiority complex.

Since I'm not a physchologist and don't have a physchology book on my coffee table, I'll refer to this excellent blog post:

The Narcissus in All of Us