21-09-2015, 01:05 AM
What's painfully obvious is that ROKC 'experts' rely on a large percentage of verbal rhetoric (bs) while speaking in a highly confident self-referencing tone. In case you haven't examined the content on ROKC it is an embarrassing troll pit that consists mostly of bankrupt so-called assassination researchers trolling persons on other more credible assassination sites.
Actually, no, my posts are not 'opinion'. If you looked at what they offered you could see Greg Parker adjusting his comments as he read them. He had to make excuses around the 12:30 time Carolyn Arnold had to have known about because she was a Book Depository employee for 4 months before she told FBI 12:25 (Greg is so desperate to make excuses he misses obvious things like this). No, my posts are based on facts Greg couldn't answer and you yourself ended up saying "The Carolyn Arnold story doesn't really matter". An entirely reckless statement for anyone who pretends to be an assassination researcher. Also, I think my post's content drove you to this rather vapid reply. You couldn't really answer what it said short of petty ridicule and unrelated personal remarks. What is kind of obvious is that while criticizing my methods you were unable to answer their content. In a typical Greg Parker backwards conclusion, ROKC considers their inability to answer as being the other side talking to themselves. ROKC members have existed so long in that intellectual black hole that they actually think the can troll the world and reality. Your response was very superficial. My suggestion is what I wrote is the reason why. A person who really believed my post was faulty would not recommend I write an article.
Greg Parker was justly excluded from this site because he offered the kind of escalating trolling and disingenuous entries that you do here. I really consider ROKC an infection of the valid Kennedy assassination internet that needs to be contained before it spreads. My post contained facts you could not refute right here in non-troll reality. Greg has fallen silent now.
Actually, no, my posts are not 'opinion'. If you looked at what they offered you could see Greg Parker adjusting his comments as he read them. He had to make excuses around the 12:30 time Carolyn Arnold had to have known about because she was a Book Depository employee for 4 months before she told FBI 12:25 (Greg is so desperate to make excuses he misses obvious things like this). No, my posts are based on facts Greg couldn't answer and you yourself ended up saying "The Carolyn Arnold story doesn't really matter". An entirely reckless statement for anyone who pretends to be an assassination researcher. Also, I think my post's content drove you to this rather vapid reply. You couldn't really answer what it said short of petty ridicule and unrelated personal remarks. What is kind of obvious is that while criticizing my methods you were unable to answer their content. In a typical Greg Parker backwards conclusion, ROKC considers their inability to answer as being the other side talking to themselves. ROKC members have existed so long in that intellectual black hole that they actually think the can troll the world and reality. Your response was very superficial. My suggestion is what I wrote is the reason why. A person who really believed my post was faulty would not recommend I write an article.
Greg Parker was justly excluded from this site because he offered the kind of escalating trolling and disingenuous entries that you do here. I really consider ROKC an infection of the valid Kennedy assassination internet that needs to be contained before it spreads. My post contained facts you could not refute right here in non-troll reality. Greg has fallen silent now.