Valkyrie at Dealey Plaza

[Greg Burnham]

I don't think a clarification is necessary. My question posed above was clear and self explanatory.

Evidently.

[Albert Doyle]

If indeed Vallee's head injury and mental incapacitation were the signs of somebody who was intended to be a patsy after an act of assassination would that not represent the falsification of the Chicago ruse theory? And since falsification is desirable in order to give a theory credibility and separate it from philosophy, then isn't the expanding of the possible dimension of the Chicago plot something that would be sought in the pursuit of Deep Political thinking rather than discouraged?

[Greg Burnham]

If indeed Vallee's head injury and mental incapacitation were the signs of somebody who was intended to be a patsy after an act of assassination would that not represent the falsification of the Chicago ruse theory? And since falsification is desirable in order to give a theory credibility and separate it from philosophy, then isn't the expanding of the possible dimension of the Chicago plot something that would be sought in the pursuit of Deep Political thinking rather than discouraged?

Forgive my linguistic ineptitude, but I am having some difficulty deciphering your meaning. I am not attempting to be humorous nor insulting.
I simply find little of value in what you are writing in this instance. Again, that's not meant to disparage you or Vasilliops. It's probably just me.

[Charles Drago]

If indeed Vallee's head injury and mental incapacitation were the signs of somebody who was intended to be a patsy after an act of assassination would that not represent the falsification of the Chicago ruse theory? And since falsification is desirable in order to give a theory credibility and separate it from philosophy, then isn't the expanding of the possible dimension of the Chicago plot something that would be sought in the pursuit of Deep Political thinking rather than discouraged?

Forgive my linguistic ineptitude, but I am having some difficulty deciphering your meaning. I am not attempting to be humorous nor insulting.
I simply find little of value in what you are writing in this instance. Again, that's not meant to disparage you or Vasilliops. It's probably just me.

Now for the bad cop:

GIBBERISH!

[Greg Burnham]

If indeed Vallee's head injury and mental incapacitation were the signs of somebody who was intended to be a patsy after an act of assassination would that not represent the falsification of the Chicago ruse theory? And since falsification is desirable in order to give a theory credibility and separate it from philosophy, then isn't the expanding of the possible dimension of the Chicago plot something that would be sought in the pursuit of Deep Political thinking rather than discouraged?

Forgive my linguistic ineptitude, but I am having some difficulty deciphering your meaning. I am not attempting to be humorous nor insulting.
I simply find little of value in what you are writing in this instance. Again, that's not meant to disparage you or Vasilliops. It's probably just me.

Now for the bad cop:

GIBBERISH!

Albert,

Can I get you anything? Coffee? A cigarette?

[Albert Doyle]

To quote the bard Phil:

http://www.experiment-resources.com/falsifiability.html



Falsifiability, as defined by the philosopher, Karl Popper, defines the inherent testability of any scientific hypothesis.
by Martyn Shuttleworth (2008)

Science and philosophy have always worked together to try to uncover truths about the world and the universe around us. Both are a necessary element for the advancement of knowledge and the development of human society.

Scientists design experiments and try to obtain results verifying or disproving a hypothesis, but philosophers are the driving force in determining what factors determine the validity of scientific results.

Often, they even determine the nature of science itself and influence the direction of viable research. As one theory is falsified, another evolves to replace it and explain the new observations.

One of the tenets behind science is that any scientific hypothesis and resultant experimental design must be inherently falsifiable. Although falsifiability is not universally accepted, it is still the foundation of the majority of scientific experiments.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]3996[/ATTACH]

WHAT IS FALSIFIABILITY?

In its basic form, falsifiability is the belief that for any hypothesis to have credence, it must be inherently disprovable before it can become accepted as a scientific hypothesis or theory.

For example, if a scientist asks, "Does God exist?" then this can never be science because it is a theory that cannot be disproved.
The idea is that no theory is completely correct, but if not falsified, it can be accepted as truth.

For example, Newton's Theory of Gravity was accepted as truth for centuries, because objects do not randomly float away from the earth. It appeared to fit the figures obtained by experimentation and research, but was always subject to testing.

However, later research showed that, at quantum levels, Newton's laws break down and so the theory is no longer accepted as truth. This is not to say that his ideas are now useless, as the principles are still used by NASA to plot the courses of satellites and space probes.

Popper saw falsifiability as a black and white definition, that if a theory is falsifiable, it is scientific, and if not, then it is unscientific. Whilst most pure' sciences do adhere to this strict definition, pseudo-sciences may fall somewhere between the two extremes.

PSEUDO SCIENCE

According to Popper, many branches of applied science, especially social science, are not scientific because they have no potential for falsification.

Anthropology and sociology, for example, often use case studies to observe people in their natural environment without actually testing any specific hypotheses or theories.

Whilst such studies and ideas are not falsifiable, most would agree that they are scientific because they significantly advance human knowledge.

Even pure' or true' science must make compromises and assumptions on occasion. The testing of any theory must take into account the equipment and resources available.

Falsifiability is not a simple black and white matter because a theory, which is difficult to falsify at the time, may be falsified in the future.

The Raven Paradox shows the inherent danger of relying on falsifiability, because very few scientific experiments can measure all of the data, and rely upon generalization.

CONCLUSION

For many of the pure sciences, the idea of falsifiability is a useful tool for generating theories that are testable and realistic.

If a falsifiable theory is tested and the results are significant, then it can become accepted as a scientific truth.

The advantage of Popper's idea is that such truths can be falsified when more knowledge and resources are available. Even long accepted theories such as Gravity, Relativity and Evolution are increasingly challenged and adapted.

The major disadvantage of falsifiability is that it is very strict in its definitions and does not take into account that many sciences are observational and descriptive.

Pseudo sciences undertake research without an initial theory or hypothesis. On the other hand, theories such as 'Intelligent Design' would be classed as scientific, because they have a falsifiable hypothesis, however weak.

Read more: http://www.experiment-resources.com/falsifiability.html#ixzz27EOtJ0H2

[Charles Drago]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3YiPC91QUk

To explain my predicament in trying to communicate with Albert, I ask that you view the linked video -- a scene from Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

I would be the king, Albert would be the guard.

[Bill Kelly]

I've updated the Valkyrie at DP,
Thanks to all who have commended, criticized and corrected aspects of it, as it is still a work in progress. Of all the plots to kill Castro, I think this is the one used at Dealey Plaza, and further research into the planning and development of this plot will support my contention.
BK [URL="http://jfkcountercoup2.blogspot.com/"]
[/URL]
JFKcountercoup: Valkyrie At Dealey Plaza - Updated

JFKcountercoup: CIA Loses Detailed Study of Hitler Plot

[James Lateer]

The idea suggested is that Thomas Arthur Vallee could not have been a patsy because he was not a Communist.

Well, IMO opinion there had to be at least one backup patsy, whether it be in Chicago, Tampa or Dallas. What if Oswald had called in sick to the TSBD on 11-22-62? What if he had been in a car accident on the way to work? What if he had chickened out (a real possibility IMO)?

Oswald had apparently put in an appearance with the Assistant Dean of Students at (my alma mater) the U of Illinois in 1962 or 1963. Many think this was to connect him to the Chicago plot. And I actually believe that Joseph Milteer was the backup patsy or one of the backup patsies in Dallas on 11-22-63.

Oswald could have gone to Mexico City in September, 1963. But if he were not in the TSBD on 11-22-63, nobody would have ever known about it.

J Edgar Hoover put out a warning to FBI offices in October, 1963 saying that right-wing extremists were trying to kill Kennedy in Dallas. In the recently released JFK files, Hoover asked the FBI to locate the whereabouts of the American Nazi Party on 11-22-63 after the assassination took place. This could have been part of the potential blame of right-wing extremists if Oswald would have cut and ran.

The tie-in of Oswald to the Communist party was very thin. It was a pretense that nobody ever really believed. Another patsy could have been found with Communist literature in his pocket, or could have been fingered by Yuri Nosenko or somebody like that.

Or the assassination could have been blamed on a right-wing fringe group. Look at Oklahoma City and Timothy McVeigh. Nobody ever really asked who McVeigh had ties to. Some people say he was tied to terrorists in the Philippines. There was really no investigation about any of that. And look at the anthrax attacks. The door was just shut without further ado.

I believe that the Chicago plot was not a fake. I don't think the Tampa plot was a fake. And if the Dallas plot did not come off, there would just have been another a week or two later. The Kennedy's (in some respects) almost had a death-wish and were reckless and careless about security to a ridiculous degree. Both JFK and RFK made things very easy for their assassins.

James Lateer

[Anthony Thorne]

The idea suggested is that Thomas Arthur Vallee could not have been a patsy because he was not a Communist.

I have never seen this suggested anywhere.

Bill, thanks for your hard work on the Valkyrie plot. It's very useful stuff and (from the notes under your recent article in Lobster magazine) I'm looking forward to your upcoming book.

I'm sure that CIA study is still around somewhere. They're probably keeping a tight grip on it.