Re: Hard Scientific Evidence...

On Friday, December 22, 2023 at 1:01:53 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> HARD SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE... 
> 
> The "hard evidence" of the 6.5mm virtually round object in the AP 
> X-ray... 
> 
> The "hard evidence" of the medically observed appearance of the bullet 
> wound in the throat... 
> 
> The "hard evidence" of clothing, which was irrationally refused to the 
> prosectors for examination. 
> 
> The "hard evidence" of autopsy photos & X-rays that have disappeared. 
> 
> The "hard evidence" of photos showing a bullet being recovered in the 
> grass. 
> 
> The "hard evidence" of Frazier - and how the Warren Commission went 
> 'expert shopping' to find Nicol... 
> 
> The "hard evidence" of a fingerprint in the 'sniper's nest' that was 
> never identified. 
> 
> The "hard evidence" of NAA testing that was concealed by the Warren 
> Commission. (and lied about to this very day) 
> 
> The "hard evidence" of rifle testing, where the Warren Commission used 
> real experts, firing from half the height, at oversized stationary 
> targets with all the time they wanted for the first shot. 
> 
> The "hard evidence" of the lack of 'First Frame Flash' in the extant 
> Zapruder film - the very same error that proved the 'alien autopsy' 
> film a fake. 
> 
> The "hard evidence" of the curb near Tague being patched. Tell us 
> about the ballistic path of that bullet. 
> 
> Believers can run, but they can't address the hard evidence in this 
> case... to say nothing about the eyewitness testimony...

  Conspiracy hobbyists love looking at the wrong things incorrectly.