10-03-2017, 07:12 AM
(This post was last modified: 10-03-2017, 08:03 AM by Albert Doyle.)
It's not the forum that's degenerating. It is the community. The community is now overtaken by a majority that has accepted a popular bogus theory and has branched tangential sub-theories off that theory into a hijacking of the the assassination research world towards that subject. Those who insist on good evidence and input sanity into this situation are shunned and have negative comments made towards their material. And those who continue to ignore evidence and make bogus inferior analyses are those who continue to receive support from people like Jim DiEugenio who never has his posts criticized even though he is backing a notorious research group and aiding in the spreading of bad theories.
The people who are rejecting this bad trend are not the people in violation and insisting on the recognition of good evidence is never an offense. Those who protest our effort are criticizing the symptoms but they aren't criticizing the cause. The cause is that people who call themselves the best and brightest in the research community have been fooled by a very good evidence spinner named Sean Murphy. It has led to an almost cult-like backing from researchers who should know better towards evidence they normally wouldn't tolerate in such an unquestioning way. I am familiar with the normal methods someone like Jim DiEugenio applies to evidence. If you look at certain pro-Murphy posters Jim D applies none of his usual technical abilities or scrutiny towards ROKC posters and their faulty claims. The things I am pointing out from other sites are wide open failures in evidence that Jim would never miss if he were applying his usual talents. They are rotten claims based on clearly faulty reasoning and directly contradicting facts that are not only going uncriticized but are starting to become an unquestionable norm that is being used to determine community acceptability based on the opinion of persons promoting provably bad evidence and using dirty methods to avoid accounting for it. This single issue is directly responsible for the community becoming dysfunctional and potentially destroying its credibility. For reasons I still do not understand Jim refuses to apply any scrutiny at all to the offerings of these notorious pro-Murphy posters even though their offerings are full of flaws anyone could detect.
The people who are responsible for this situation are not the small discriminated-against minority capable of seeing and articulating the correct evidence. It is the dominating majority who are so determined to prove Murphy that they will ignore good evidence and push knowing lies (ROKC). They'll allow good posters to be manhandled and banned by unfit moderators while clearly credulous analyzers are given preference while the others saying nothing. These people are responsible for the unnecessary prolonging of an already debunked theory. They are the people who should be called out on the swamp they've created. That's what I am doing.
Those of us who insist on the correct Prayer Man evidence being acknowledged are actually doing the returning to productive research you are calling for. We are establishing that Oswald was not Prayer Man and was not standing on the front entrance landing as seen in the Darnell Film. Once we can dismiss this bogus ROKC research group and its undue influence via bad theories, we can return to that true pursuit of the correct evidence and assume Oswald was in the lunchroom or first floor break room as the evidence is showing. And to stay on topic, the two men seen walking up the Elm St Extension are most definitely Shelley and Lovelady. Kamp quotes Campbell but then ignores that he said he saw Truly and Baker run in to the building. A good example that the Murphy-ites ignore evidence they don't want to hear and are dishonest in broad daylight.
Kamp is completely uncredible and he's being given excellence in research awards. His own article says Campbell saw Truly and an officer run in to the building. Kamp then replies "WHERE does it say Baker & Truly entered the building?" Kamp is not only being allowed to openly defy obvious proof but those who point it out are banned and Kamp's contemptuous denials are given credit. I do take credit however that when Kamp is forced into such pathetic denial by good argument that he mentions my name. I take pride that he mentions my name when his material is blowing up in his face.
You should be helping us not fighting us. The irony of this is those who are not fighting this insidious group will probably lose their community because they didn't fight them. They'll lose their community because they attacked the victims - the people who were right.
.
The people who are rejecting this bad trend are not the people in violation and insisting on the recognition of good evidence is never an offense. Those who protest our effort are criticizing the symptoms but they aren't criticizing the cause. The cause is that people who call themselves the best and brightest in the research community have been fooled by a very good evidence spinner named Sean Murphy. It has led to an almost cult-like backing from researchers who should know better towards evidence they normally wouldn't tolerate in such an unquestioning way. I am familiar with the normal methods someone like Jim DiEugenio applies to evidence. If you look at certain pro-Murphy posters Jim D applies none of his usual technical abilities or scrutiny towards ROKC posters and their faulty claims. The things I am pointing out from other sites are wide open failures in evidence that Jim would never miss if he were applying his usual talents. They are rotten claims based on clearly faulty reasoning and directly contradicting facts that are not only going uncriticized but are starting to become an unquestionable norm that is being used to determine community acceptability based on the opinion of persons promoting provably bad evidence and using dirty methods to avoid accounting for it. This single issue is directly responsible for the community becoming dysfunctional and potentially destroying its credibility. For reasons I still do not understand Jim refuses to apply any scrutiny at all to the offerings of these notorious pro-Murphy posters even though their offerings are full of flaws anyone could detect.
The people who are responsible for this situation are not the small discriminated-against minority capable of seeing and articulating the correct evidence. It is the dominating majority who are so determined to prove Murphy that they will ignore good evidence and push knowing lies (ROKC). They'll allow good posters to be manhandled and banned by unfit moderators while clearly credulous analyzers are given preference while the others saying nothing. These people are responsible for the unnecessary prolonging of an already debunked theory. They are the people who should be called out on the swamp they've created. That's what I am doing.
Those of us who insist on the correct Prayer Man evidence being acknowledged are actually doing the returning to productive research you are calling for. We are establishing that Oswald was not Prayer Man and was not standing on the front entrance landing as seen in the Darnell Film. Once we can dismiss this bogus ROKC research group and its undue influence via bad theories, we can return to that true pursuit of the correct evidence and assume Oswald was in the lunchroom or first floor break room as the evidence is showing. And to stay on topic, the two men seen walking up the Elm St Extension are most definitely Shelley and Lovelady. Kamp quotes Campbell but then ignores that he said he saw Truly and Baker run in to the building. A good example that the Murphy-ites ignore evidence they don't want to hear and are dishonest in broad daylight.
Kamp is completely uncredible and he's being given excellence in research awards. His own article says Campbell saw Truly and an officer run in to the building. Kamp then replies "WHERE does it say Baker & Truly entered the building?" Kamp is not only being allowed to openly defy obvious proof but those who point it out are banned and Kamp's contemptuous denials are given credit. I do take credit however that when Kamp is forced into such pathetic denial by good argument that he mentions my name. I take pride that he mentions my name when his material is blowing up in his face.
You should be helping us not fighting us. The irony of this is those who are not fighting this insidious group will probably lose their community because they didn't fight them. They'll lose their community because they attacked the victims - the people who were right.
.