04-02-2017, 08:54 PM
I just wanted to mention David Josephs is over on the Education Forum backing Sandy Larsen's anti-lunchroom encounter material.
In my opinion his material does not disprove the lunchroom encounter. No matter how many times I post that Roger Craig's second Oswald in the Depository probably accounts for the discrepancies the anti-lunchroom encounter people are calling conclusive evidence it gets ignored and the same old ROKC/Murphy material is re-posted as fact. Like Prayer Man, the anti-lunchroom encounter theory is just CTers trying to spin evidence to give themselves something to fill their conspiracy evidence concessions with rather than a determination of truth. These people are guilty of tabloidizing the assassination research world and mis-leading the public on the truth behind the assassination.
Oswald was right where Carolyn Arnold saw him minutes earlier. Unless of course you want to honor Greg Parker's telling original witnesses where they were wrong and what they actually witnessed.
In my opinion his material does not disprove the lunchroom encounter. No matter how many times I post that Roger Craig's second Oswald in the Depository probably accounts for the discrepancies the anti-lunchroom encounter people are calling conclusive evidence it gets ignored and the same old ROKC/Murphy material is re-posted as fact. Like Prayer Man, the anti-lunchroom encounter theory is just CTers trying to spin evidence to give themselves something to fill their conspiracy evidence concessions with rather than a determination of truth. These people are guilty of tabloidizing the assassination research world and mis-leading the public on the truth behind the assassination.
Oswald was right where Carolyn Arnold saw him minutes earlier. Unless of course you want to honor Greg Parker's telling original witnesses where they were wrong and what they actually witnessed.