THERE'S NO ROOM FOR OCCAM IN A CTer's COURTROOM OF SILLINESS
David Von Pein
www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/d4049764bd7acc2f
>>> "How do YOU explain the fact that everyone in the limo was moving forward [between Zapruder frames 312 and 313]? You can't see the obvious?" <<<
Yeah, right...it just so happens that President Kennedy's head is
exploding and moving rapidly forward at the exact INSTANT he was hit
in the head with the assassin's bullet....but some CTers want to think
that the BULLET striking Kennedy WASN'T the cause of the rapid forward
movement of Kennedy's head between Z312 and Z313.
Now THAT'S true-blue denial, kids. And a really bad case of it, too.
Can you just hear the defense attorney trying to get a jury to swallow
this nonsense? It'd be a scream. Let's listen in to a sample of
it......
"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury....we all know that President
Kennedy was shot in the head at Zapruder frame #313...and we can
easily see his head moving very rapidly FORWARD between frames 312 and
313 (i.e., the exact INSTANT that JFK is hit in the head with a
bullet)...we all know this...but we here on the defense side of the
courtroom want you 12 good men and women of the jury to believe that
something ELSE caused John Kennedy's head to snap forward very rapidly
at the EXACT SAME ONE-EIGHTEENTH OF A SECOND when he was ALSO being
hit in the head with a rifle bullet....and we think you jurors should
seriously consider this 'strawman' argument I'm going to introduce to
you now....
"And that strawman is this -- It wasn't the assassin's bullet
that caused the forward movement of John Kennedy's head. It was,
instead, the automobile's SLOWING DOWN from 11 or so MPH to about 8
MPH that caused JFK's head to pitch forward very quickly between Z312
and Z313! That's obvious, isn't it?!
"Forget about that bullet hitting him at that EXACT SAME 1/18th
of a second! That's unimportant here! The important thing to remember,
ladies and gentlemen, is this -- We MUST find ways (any way will do!)
to AVOID THE OBVIOUSNESS OF WHAT WE SEE IN THE ZAPRUDER FILM! And we
also must (at all costs!) avoid soiling the skirts of the defendant,
Lee H. Oswald!
"Because ANY evidence that leads toward the notion that the
defendant in this case could have possibly fired the shots that killed
John F. Kennedy MUST be automatically turned on its head, and such
evidence MUST always be considered faulty in some manner -- just like
this "head going forward" business.
"Sure, his head moves forward at the EXACT INSTANT he's being
killed with a rifle bullet! But that doesn't have to mean that the
BULLET caused that forward head snap AT THAT EXACT SAME INSTANT, does
it? Of course it doesn't!
"Rule 1A applies in this courtroom of silliness, ladies and
gentlemen....and that rule is this --- "THERE'S NO ROOM FOR OCCAM'S
RAZOR WHEN IT COMES TO THE INVESTIGATION OF THE ASSASSINATION OF
PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY"!
"Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. .... We'll now need a 5-minute
bathroom break, Your Honorable Judge Ito....because I can see that
jurors #3 and #10 are about to split a gut with laughter, and their
bladders are also notoriously weak ones." -- JOHNNIE COCHRAN, ESQ.
aeffects
no advertising troll......
lazu...@webtv.net
mating habits of pygmies...if there's no precedence for something like
9/11 & the Assassinations...the simplest solution is just a theory and
not always the right one...
robc...@netscape.com
Nor is the simplest explanation ALWAYS THE CORRECT ONE! In this case
it sure isn't.
David Von Pein
>>> "Occam's Razor has about as much to do with the JFK Assassination as the mating habits of pygmies." <<<
Bullshit.
The "Occam's" theory can apply to anything in life...even political
assassinations. The principle espoused by William of Occam is a sound
one, and is rooted in basic common sense (therefore, it's not going to
be to the liking of conspiracy-loving kooks like the ones who inhabit
this forum):
"Occam's razor: a scientific and philosophic rule that entities
should not be multiplied unnecessarily which is interpreted as
requiring that the simplest of competing theories be preferred to the
more complex or that explanations of unknown phenomena be sought first
in terms of known quantities." -- Merriam-Webster OnLine Dictionary
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/occam%27s%20razor
Let's take the above Occam's principle and apply it to just one part
of the JFK murder case -- the SBT:
Is it reasonable to think that ONE bullet sliced through both John
Kennedy and John Connally on Elm Street?
Or is it MORE reasonable to believe that THREE separate bullets
entered the two victims on Elm (as almost all conspiracy theorists do
believe, since those CTers want to believe that JFK's throat wound was
caused by a bullet entering his neck from the front)....with those
three bullets (just by chance) entering the two victims in just such a
way so that a SINGLE-bullet theory could be postulated by the U.S.
Government after the assassination? (Not to mention how all three of
those bullets vanished off the planet immediately after the shooting
as well.)
In other words....
Is it more reasonable to accept "the simplest of competing
theories" (i.e., the SBT)?
Or is it more reasonable to believe that three (disappearing!) bullets
really did the damage to JFK & JBC, instead of just the one bullet?
Food for Occam's thought.
Bud
> >>> "Occam's Razor has about as much to do with the JFK Assassination as the mating habits of pygmies." <<<
>
> Bullshit.
>
> The "Occam's" theory can apply to anything in life...even political
> assassinations.
I`ve always liked this Bob Novella quote, which seems tailor-written
for conspiracy conjecture...
"When a theory becomes increasingly complex to account for
troublesome data, a red flag should be raised, indicating it`s time
for Occam`s Razor to draw some blood."
plwi...@yahoo.com
> www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/d4049...
>
> >>> "How do YOU explain the fact that everyone in the limo was moving forward [between Zapruder frames 312 and 313]? You can't see the obvious?" <<<
>
> Yeah, right...it just so happens that President Kennedy's head is
> exploding and moving rapidly forward at the exact INSTANT he was hit
> in the head with the assassin's bullet....but some CTers want to think
> that the BULLET striking Kennedy WASN'T the cause of the rapid forward
> movement of Kennedy's head between Z312 and Z313.
>
Precisely the same reasoning can support the conclusion that a shot
from the front caused Kenedy's backward head snap.
David Von Pein
>>> "Precisely the same reasoning can support the conclusion that a shot from the front caused Kenedy's [sic] backward head snap." <<<
No it can't....because the President's head does not move BACKWARD at
the precise MOMENT OF IMPACT. It moves forward at the moment of
impact:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/32668ce6dd515ced
robc...@netscape.com
> www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/d4049...
What is DVP babbling about? The SIMPLEST explanation, based on the
EVIDENCE, shows a conspiracy OCCURED in the death of JFK. End of
story!
David Von Pein
>>> "What is DVP babbling about? The SIMPLEST explanation, based on the EVIDENCE, shows a conspiracy OCCURED [sic] in the death of JFK. End of story!" <<<
What about the "SBT" specifically, Rob-Kook?
Is it more REASONABLE to believe in your insane FOUR-BULLET scenario
(not counting the head shot to JFK) to explain the wounding of Kennedy
& Connally....with all four of these bullets disappearing (naturally)
and all four of these bullets performing some amazing "SBT"-like feats
(even though you insist the SBT is a manufactured fantasy)?*
Or is it more reasonable (and Occam-like) to think that just one
bullet sliced through both victims, like the WC said?
Which version is truly the "simplest"? -- 4 bullets? Or the SBT?
* = Incredibly, Robcap actually did say, in October 2007, that he
thinks there were FOUR total bullets that need to replace the SBT and
CE399....when Rob said this:
"JFK was hit 3 times...[and] Connally 2 times..." -- Rob C.;
Oct. 2007
Chuck Schuyler
What is simple about your vague conspiracy theory? You believe the WC
got everything wrong about the Kennedy assassination except the date
and names of the victims. (Oops...fellow CTer Healy believes John
FRANCIS Kennedy was in the limo that day!)
How many people would need to be involved in your clusterf*ck version
of the events on 11/22/63?
Thousands?
The thrust of Occam's Razor, explained briefly in Wikipedia, is as
follows:
"When multiple competing hypotheses are equal in other respects, the
principle [Occam's] recommends selecting the hypothesis that
introduces the fewest assumptions and postulates the fewest
entities."
If you can explain your who-killed-JFK theory (you can't or
won't...all you have is a bunch of suspicions) we'd have something
testable against what the WC produced, but you haven't produced
anything.
Now, if you want to live in your fantasyland JFK hobby bubble and
pretend that thousands of men and women over the years have
industriously continued to work to cover up the truth behind the
murder of JFK, you're entitled to your little hobby.
But you're not entitled to your own facts.
So...
We have Oswald's rifle. Pictures of him holding the rifle snapped by
his wife. Order forms showing where it came from and where it was
sent--a PO Box under the alias he used. Prints at the crime scene.
Prints on the weapon. Ballistic evidence. An autopsy report showing
strikes on the victim(s) consistent with shots fired from behind. Film
and photographic evidence showing Oswald would've been in position at
his place of work to fire the shots when the victims are seen reacting
to shots. Consciousness of guilt with Oswald leaving the TSBD, etc.
All of this is forged/altered/lies/mistaken?
Because if just a fraction of it is correct, Oswald killed JFK.
Occam's Razor looks pretty good next to your foolish, childish claims.