Gerald Posner from Case Closed:



In an October 30, 1966, interview with Life magazine, the Governor said, "There is my absolute knowledge, and Nellie's too, that one bullet caused the President's wound, and that an entirely separate shot struck me....I'll never change my mind." The
author [Posner is writing third person--my addition] presented some of the new evidence to Governor Connally during a telephone conversation in May 1992. He was open-minded that new technologies might provide an understanding of the few seconds of Dealey
Plaza not available in earlier years. "It may well be that Mrs. Connally was mistaken about seeing the President raise his arms after the first shot," he says. "That might have been after the second shot. And if that is true, it would make it all very,
very consistent. The first bullet could have missed both of us. The third bullet definitely only hit him. Based upon the angles, the second bullet, which went through his neck, could have gone through my back. The second bullet could have hit both of us."

<OFF>

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 11:30:24 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:

Gerald Posner from Case Closed:

In an October 30, 1966, interview with Life magazine, the Governor said, "There is my absolute knowledge, and Nellie's too, that one bullet caused the President's wound, and that an entirely separate shot struck me....I'll never change my mind." The

author [Posner is writing third person--my addition] presented some of the new evidence to Governor Connally during a telephone conversation in May 1992. He was open-minded that new technologies might provide an understanding of the few seconds of Dealey
Plaza not available in earlier years. "It may well be that Mrs. Connally was mistaken about seeing the President raise his arms after the first shot," he says. "That might have been after the second shot. And if that is true, it would make it all very,
very consistent. The first bullet could have missed both of us. The third bullet definitely only hit him. Based upon the angles, the second bullet, which went through his neck, could have gone through my back. The second bullet could have hit both of us."

<OFF>

If you wait long enough, you might get the story you want. Try a seance and you might get Connally to endorse every one of your wacky preferences.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 11:30:24 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:

Gerald Posner from Case Closed:

< Posner bullshit deleted >

And in 1988 he said this:
https://youtu.be/3WWPWO44p_s

Corroborated by frame 230 of the the Zapruder film: https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Z230.mp4

Corroborated by a bystander
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNZ2xCrzulI

Corroborated by the FBI https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/page-1.png

Even three Warren Commission members didn't buy the Single Bullshit Theory: https://youtu.be/7pW7CNXPCWs

All of this corroborating evidence was enough to convince intelligent people that the theory was bullshit.
But idiots like Gerald Posner and you believe it.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 11:30:24 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:

Gerald Posner from Case Closed:

In an October 30, 1966, interview with Life magazine, the Governor said, "There is my absolute knowledge, and Nellie's too, that one bullet caused the President's wound, and that an entirely separate shot struck me....I'll never change my mind." The

author [Posner is writing third person--my addition] presented some of the new evidence to Governor Connally during a telephone conversation in May 1992. He was open-minded that new technologies might provide an understanding of the few seconds of Dealey
Plaza not available in earlier years. "It may well be that Mrs. Connally was mistaken about seeing the President raise his arms after the first shot," he says. "That might have been after the second shot. And if that is true, it would make it all very,
very consistent. The first bullet could have missed both of us. The third bullet definitely only hit him. Based upon the angles, the second bullet, which went through his neck, could have gone through my back. The second bullet could have hit both of us."

<OFF>

I thought I had remembered reading somewhere that in his later years Connally did concede
the SBT was possible if it had been the second shot. He was adamant, and rightfully so, that he
had not been hit by the first shot. He seemed to labor for the longest time that JFK had been
hit by the first shot and the WC had concluded that which is false. They never concluded
whether the single bullet was the first or second shot. We figured out much later that it was
the second shot. We now know almost exactly when the single bullet struck, within a window
of a few frames.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:48:39 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 5:36:17 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 11:30:24 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:

Gerald Posner from Case Closed:

< Posner bullshit deleted >

And in 1988 he said this:
https://youtu.be/3WWPWO44p_s

Which predates his conversation with Posner and therefore is not a refutation of what he told
Posner.

Corroborated by frame 230 of the the Zapruder film: https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Z230.mp4

Your silly interpretations of what you see in a single frame don't corroborate anything, especially
when you ignore clear evidence of Connally's reaction in previous frames.

Corroborated by a bystander
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNZ2xCrzulI

Gil turns to a bystander a long way away who had a Secret Service agent between himself and
the two shooting victims. A fine example of what Bud says when he observes that conspiracy
hobbyists look at all the wrong things and do so incorrectly.

Corroborated by the FBI https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/page-1.png

Why do you keep citing an FBI report that doesn't say JFK and JBC were hit by separate shots.
The highlighted passage does not conflict with the SBT. More looking at things incorrectly.

Even three Warren Commission members didn't buy the Single Bullshit Theory:
https://youtu.be/7pW7CNXPCWs

Which means four of them got it right.

All of this corroborating evidence was enough to convince intelligent people that the theory was bullshit.

How would you know what the intelligent people think? You don't even know who the intelligent
people are.

But idiots like Gerald Posner and you believe it.

I'm less impressed by Posner's work than I am by Bugliosi's, but for the most part, he got things
right and made some worthwhile contributions.

Of course Stupid is more impressed with Bugliosi; he wrote a bigger book.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:48:39 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
< stupid comments without evidence automatically deleted >

Still waiting for you to provide evidence to refute my evidence.
Your comments are not proof of anything.
Let's see some evidence.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 7:00:42 AM UTC-4, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:

Of course Stupid is more impressed with Bugliosi; he wrote a bigger book.

You mean the same Bugliosi who stalked his milkman because he thought the milkman impregnated his wife ?
The same Bugliosi whose only "evidence" was that the milkman just happened to leave his job at the same time his wife became pregnant ?

https://youtu.be/2wPIng0hGxQ

That Bugliosi ?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 5:36:17 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 11:30:24 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:

Gerald Posner from Case Closed:

< Posner bullshit deleted >

And in 1988 he said this:
https://youtu.be/3WWPWO44p_s

Which predates his conversation with Posner and therefore is not a refutation of what he told
Posner.

Corroborated by frame 230 of the the Zapruder film: https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Z230.mp4

Your silly interpretations of what you see in a single frame don't corroborate anything, especially
when you ignore clear evidence of Connally's reaction in previous frames.

Corroborated by a bystander
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNZ2xCrzulI

Gil turns to a bystander a long way away who had a Secret Service agent between himself and
the two shooting victims. A fine example of what Bud says when he observes that conspiracy
hobbyists look at all the wrong things and do so incorrectly.

Corroborated by the FBI https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/page-1.png

Why do you keep citing an FBI report that doesn't say JFK and JBC were hit by separate shots.
The highlighted passage does not conflict with the SBT. More looking at things incorrectly.

Even three Warren Commission members didn't buy the Single Bullshit Theory: https://youtu.be/7pW7CNXPCWs

Which means four of them got it right.

All of this corroborating evidence was enough to convince intelligent people that the theory was bullshit.

How would you know what the intelligent people think? You don't even know who the intelligent
people are.

But idiots like Gerald Posner and you believe it.

I'm less impressed by Posner's work than I am by Bugliosi's, but for the most part, he got things
right and made some worthwhile contributions.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 4:36:17 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 11:30:24 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:

Gerald Posner from Case Closed:

< Posner bullshit deleted >

And in 1988 he said this:
https://youtu.be/3WWPWO44p_s

And he said this after learning from Posner of all the additional work done by Failure Analysis Associates with the Z film, possible bullet trajectories, etc. by recreating the event though accurate computer modeling.

Connally to Posner:

"Based upon the angles, the second bullet, which went through his [JFK's] neck, could have gone through my back. The second bullet could have hit both of us."

Corroborated by frame 230 of the the Zapruder film: https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Z230.mp4

Corroborated by a bystander
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNZ2xCrzulI

Corroborated by the FBI https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/page-1.png

Even three Warren Commission members didn't buy the Single Bullshit Theory: https://youtu.be/7pW7CNXPCWs

All of this corroborating evidence was enough to convince intelligent people that the theory was bullshit.

But idiots like Gerald Posner and you believe it.

What are you comparing the SBT to, Johnny Cochrane? Your fellow conspiracy afficionado The Toilet thinks your hero Oswald shot JFK from the grassy knoll and proceeded to hustle back inside the TSBD.

You are both NUTS.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:07:32 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:48:39 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
< stupid comments without evidence automatically deleted >

Still waiting for you to provide evidence to refute my evidence.

What would you accept since you are judge and jury for your own beliefs?

Your comments are not proof of anything.

Let's see some evidence.

Evidence that would satisfy you? Impossible.

But you know what would be a lot of fun? Your theory about what happened that day. This isn't about Oswald alone or a conspiracy killing JFK, it's about Oswald alone or a SPECIFIC conspiracy killing JFK. One side has presented their conclusions, and the
conspiracy side?

Nothing.

What happened in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63? Care to tell us?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 7:13:40 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 7:00:42 AM UTC-4, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:

Of course Stupid is more impressed with Bugliosi; he wrote a bigger book.

You mean the same Bugliosi who stalked his milkman because he thought the milkman impregnated his wife ?
The same Bugliosi whose only "evidence" was that the milkman just happened to leave his job at the same time his wife became pregnant ?

https://youtu.be/2wPIng0hGxQ

That Bugliosi ?

Never trust the milkman.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:13:40 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 7:00:42 AM UTC-4, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:

Of course Stupid is more impressed with Bugliosi; he wrote a bigger book.

You mean the same Bugliosi who stalked his milkman because he thought the milkman impregnated his wife ?
The same Bugliosi whose only "evidence" was that the milkman just happened to leave his job at the same time his wife became pregnant ?

https://youtu.be/2wPIng0hGxQ

That Bugliosi ?

That's the one. Great work on the JFK assassination, but apparently a bit of a scumbag in his personal life. Trump did a good job as President but has fucked around on all his wives, paying out six-figures to a porn starlet for her silence. Democrats
think Obama was a god but he's used drugs and whored around with both women and men. Yep, Obama is a closet homo. Democrats think good 'ol Joe Biden "saved" the country from a Trump dictatorship or some garbage but it's fairly obvious to all that Biden
is guilty of treason by accepting bribes from some of the worst countries on the planet--including China--for political favors that has enriched the Biden family to the tune of tens of millions of dollars.

Deal with Bugliosi's JFK arguments and not his personal character.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 05:03:00 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler <chuckschuyler123@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:07:32?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:48:39?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
< stupid comments without evidence automatically deleted >

Still waiting for you to provide evidence to refute my evidence.

What would you accept since you are judge and jury for your own beliefs?

Evidence.

Your comments are not proof of anything.

Let's see some evidence.

Evidence that would satisfy you? Impossible.

Can you name this logical fallacy?

But you know what would be a lot of fun? Your theory about what happened that day.
What happened in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63? Care to tell us?

Sure... after you. I'll post a scenario just as long and just as
detailed, with just as many citations as you can post. (And no,
stupid, citing the WCR isn't a valid answer)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 03:48:38 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowright1963@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 5:36:17?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 11:30:24?PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:

Gerald Posner from Case Closed:

< Posner bullshit deleted >

And in 1988 he said this:
https://youtu.be/3WWPWO44p_s

Which predates his conversation with Posner and therefore is not a refutation of what he told
Posner.

What Posner claims isn't corroborated by Connally.

Corroborated by frame 230 of the the Zapruder film:
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Z230.mp4

Your silly interpretations of what you see in a single frame don't corroborate anything, especially
when you ignore clear evidence of Connally's reaction in previous frames.

It's cute that you're calling the WC a liar without calling the WC a
liar.

Corroborated by a bystander
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNZ2xCrzulI

Gil turns to a bystander a long way away who had a Secret Service agent between himself and
the two shooting victims.

Shades of Mrs. Tice!!!

Corroborated by the FBI
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/page-1.png

Why do you keep citing an FBI report that doesn't say JFK and JBC were hit by separate shots.

Why do you keep lying?

The highlighted passage does not conflict with the SBT.

Yes it does. The FBI was quite specific that the bullet DID NOT
TRANSIT. So unless you're stupid enough to think that the head shot
also struck JFK, then you've lost.

You've lied.

REPEATEDLY.

No wonder you're afraid of my posts...

Even three Warren Commission members didn't buy the Single Bullshit Theory: >> https://youtu.be/7pW7CNXPCWs

Which means four of them got it right.

Can you name this logical fallacy?

All of this corroborating evidence was enough to convince intelligent people that the theory was bullshit.

Logical fallacy deleted.

But idiots like Gerald Posner and you believe it.

I'm less impressed by Posner's work than I am by Bugliosi's, but for the most part, he got things
right and made some worthwhile contributions.

I've demolished Bugliosi - and it was at that moment you decided to
stop responding to my posts. Perhaps I should do a series on Posner
too...

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 8:15:32 AM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:13:40 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 7:00:42 AM UTC-4, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:

Of course Stupid is more impressed with Bugliosi; he wrote a bigger book.

You mean the same Bugliosi who stalked his milkman because he thought the milkman impregnated his wife ?
The same Bugliosi whose only "evidence" was that the milkman just happened to leave his job at the same time his wife became pregnant ?

https://youtu.be/2wPIng0hGxQ

That Bugliosi ?

That's the one. Great work on the JFK assassination, but apparently a bit of a scumbag in his personal life. Trump did a good job as President but has fucked around on all his wives, paying out six-figures to a porn starlet for her silence. Democrats

think Obama was a god but he's used drugs and whored around with both women and men. Yep, Obama is a closet homo. Democrats think good 'ol Joe Biden "saved" the country from a Trump dictatorship or some garbage but it's fairly obvious to all that Biden
is guilty of treason by accepting bribes from some of the worst countries on the planet--including China--for political favors that has enriched the Biden family to the tune of tens of millions of dollars.

It's appearing likely that all the Democrats accomplished by running Biden in 2020 was to delay
a second Trump administration, not thwart it. It's still 13 months until the election which is an
eternity in politics, but the Democrats have a real dilemma. They ran Joe in 2020 because they
thought he was the only Democrat who could beat Trump. Now astute liberals like Bill Maher
and James Carvelle are saying he might be the only Democrat who could lose to Trump,
apparently forgetting about Kamala.

The problem for the Democrats is that it's almost impossible to dump an incumbent president
who doesn't want to leave. The last incumbent to be denied renomination was Andrew Johnson
who wasn't even a Republican. Lincoln chose him to run for reelection under a reunification party.
The GOP wanted no part of him. Tyler was also a convert from the opposing party when he was
denied renomination. Other than that, incumbents who wanted to run have always been given
the nod. It's getting increasingly problematic as time passes and filing deadlines for the
primaries come and go. It's not like it was in 1968 when Humphrey got the nomination without
winning or even running in any primary. Now, all at large delegates are chosen through either
primaries or caucuses. There's no way any candidate other than Joe could win a majority of
delegates unless they announce their candidacy soon. Could RFK Jr. do to Biden what McCarthy
did to LBJ in 1968 by showing his weakness in the early primaries. That might persuade Joe to
step down the way LBJ did. This could make for some great political theater. We might see the
first brokered convention since I was an infant (1952).

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 7:13:40 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 7:00:42 AM UTC-4, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:

Of course Stupid is more impressed with Bugliosi; he wrote a bigger book.

You mean the same Bugliosi who stalked his milkman because he thought the milkman impregnated his wife ?
The same Bugliosi whose only "evidence" was that the milkman just happened to leave his job at the same time his wife became pregnant ?

https://youtu.be/2wPIng0hGxQ

That Bugliosi ?

Ad hominem and poisoning the well.

What impact does any of that have to do with his ideas concerning the assassination?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 7:07:32 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:48:39 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
< stupid comments without evidence automatically deleted >

Still waiting for you to provide evidence to refute my evidence.

He was applying reasoning to the information. Since you are incapable of doing this you don`t think anyone should.

Your comments are not proof of anything.

"refute" "proof" Always a high bar, as if your ideas about the evidence are the default that must be dislodged.

Let's see some evidence.

Shown repeatedly to you. Are you smarter now than before?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 7:07:32 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:48:39 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
< stupid comments without evidence automatically deleted >

Still waiting for you to provide evidence to refute my evidence.

You need to show YOUR evidence is proof of the things you claim. So far, you have failed.

Your comments are not proof of anything.

Nor are your interpretations of the evidence.

Let's see some evidence.

We are looking at the same evidence. One of us is looking at it correctly and the other is named
Gil Jesus. Your interpretation of frame Z230 is about as significant as what you see in a
Rorschach test. You see what you want to see. On the other hand, no such interpretation is
required to see Connally's arm flip which began at Z226. That is undeniable. Even you have
tacitly acknowledged it, suggesting that he was swatting at a bug. Connally's arm flip at Z226,
COUPLED with JFK's simultaneous arm flip in the same frame, the bulging of Connally's jacket
just two frames earlier, the medical evidence that a bullet entered JFK's back and exited from
his throat, and the SS recreations that showed at that instant, both men were perfectly lined up
for a shot from the sniper's nest is more than enough to convince any reasonable person that
a single bullet passed through both JFK and JBC. Conspiracy hobbyists on the other hand
will find any excuse imaginable to dismiss all of these facts.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 12:06:29 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 7:07:32 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:48:39 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
< stupid comments without evidence automatically deleted >

Still waiting for you to provide evidence to refute my evidence.

You need to show YOUR evidence is proof of the things you claim. So far, you have failed.

Your comments are not proof of anything.

Nor are your interpretations of the evidence.

Let's see some evidence.

We are looking at the same evidence. One of us is looking at it correctly and the other is named
Gil Jesus. Your interpretation of frame Z230 is about as significant as what you see in a
Rorschach test. You see what you want to see. On the other hand, no such interpretation is
required to see Connally's arm flip which began at Z226. That is undeniable. Even you have
tacitly acknowledged it, suggesting that he was swatting at a bug. Connally's arm flip at Z226,
COUPLED with JFK's simultaneous arm flip in the same frame, the bulging of Connally's jacket
just two frames earlier, the medical evidence that a bullet entered JFK's back and exited from
his throat, and the SS recreations that showed at that instant, both men were perfectly lined up
for a shot from the sniper's nest is more than enough to convince any reasonable person that
a single bullet passed through both JFK and JBC. Conspiracy hobbyists on the other hand
will find any excuse imaginable to dismiss all of these facts.

In none of the Connally accounts that I've seen - WC, HSCA, interviews - does he mention anything about "swatting a bug" or reacting to some event before being struck in the back. In every account he was consistent about what he did: after hearing a shot
from behind his right shoulder, he turned to his right to see JFK and, failing that, then proceeded to turn back to his left to try and see JFK again. When he was just about situated even, looking straight, he was hit by a bullet, by what he said felt
like a "doubled-up fist". At no time during this right to left movement did he say he stopped to react to anything, a bug, a bird, a noise, an event. It was a right to left movement. Nothing in between.
This is where, as you said, Connally has to be thrown under the conspiracy bus.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 1:56:17 PM UTC-4, Steven Galbraith wrote:

On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 12:06:29 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 7:07:32 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:48:39 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
< stupid comments without evidence automatically deleted >

Still waiting for you to provide evidence to refute my evidence.

You need to show YOUR evidence is proof of the things you claim. So far, you have failed.

Your comments are not proof of anything.

Nor are your interpretations of the evidence.

Let's see some evidence.

We are looking at the same evidence. One of us is looking at it correctly and the other is named
Gil Jesus. Your interpretation of frame Z230 is about as significant as what you see in a
Rorschach test. You see what you want to see. On the other hand, no such interpretation is
required to see Connally's arm flip which began at Z226. That is undeniable. Even you have
tacitly acknowledged it, suggesting that he was swatting at a bug. Connally's arm flip at Z226,
COUPLED with JFK's simultaneous arm flip in the same frame, the bulging of Connally's jacket
just two frames earlier, the medical evidence that a bullet entered JFK's back and exited from
his throat, and the SS recreations that showed at that instant, both men were perfectly lined up
for a shot from the sniper's nest is more than enough to convince any reasonable person that
a single bullet passed through both JFK and JBC. Conspiracy hobbyists on the other hand
will find any excuse imaginable to dismiss all of these facts.

In none of the Connally accounts that I've seen - WC, HSCA, interviews - does he mention anything about "swatting a bug" or reacting to some event before being struck in the back. In every account he was consistent about what he did: after hearing a

shot from behind his right shoulder, he turned to his right to see JFK and, failing that, then proceeded to turn back to his left to try and see JFK again. When he was just about situated even, looking straight, he was hit by a bullet, by what he said
felt like a "doubled-up fist". At no time during this right to left movement did he say he stopped to react to anything, a bug, a bird, a noise, an event. It was a right to left movement. Nothing in between.

This is where, as you said, Connally has to be thrown under the conspiracy bus.

Connally's next day interview with Martin Agronsky from his hospital bed is the only one that
varies from every account he gave afterward. In that interview, Connally made two mistakes.
He said upon hearing the shot he turned to his LEFT. Obviously that was wrong. He also said
that when he turned, he saw the President "slumped". We know that is wrong because prior
to being hit, he never turned far enough around to see JFK. He probably conflated that vision
with his turn after he was shot. He twisted so violently to his right that at one point he was
facing directly back at JFK. I think after Connally reviewed the Z-film, he realized his early
account was wrong and made some revisions he stuck to in every telling since.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=john+connally+martin+agronky+interview&docid=603546005818588333&mid=BDC9F1C4FBF2E041E5BABDC9F1C4FBF2E041E5BA&view=detail&FORM=VIRE

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 2:54:06 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:

On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 1:56:17 PM UTC-4, Steven Galbraith wrote:

On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 12:06:29 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 7:07:32 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:48:39 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote: < stupid comments without evidence automatically deleted >

Still waiting for you to provide evidence to refute my evidence.

You need to show YOUR evidence is proof of the things you claim. So far, you have failed.

Your comments are not proof of anything.

Nor are your interpretations of the evidence.

Let's see some evidence.

We are looking at the same evidence. One of us is looking at it correctly and the other is named
Gil Jesus. Your interpretation of frame Z230 is about as significant as what you see in a
Rorschach test. You see what you want to see. On the other hand, no such interpretation is
required to see Connally's arm flip which began at Z226. That is undeniable. Even you have
tacitly acknowledged it, suggesting that he was swatting at a bug. Connally's arm flip at Z226,
COUPLED with JFK's simultaneous arm flip in the same frame, the bulging of Connally's jacket
just two frames earlier, the medical evidence that a bullet entered JFK's back and exited from
his throat, and the SS recreations that showed at that instant, both men were perfectly lined up
for a shot from the sniper's nest is more than enough to convince any reasonable person that
a single bullet passed through both JFK and JBC. Conspiracy hobbyists on the other hand
will find any excuse imaginable to dismiss all of these facts.

In none of the Connally accounts that I've seen - WC, HSCA, interviews - does he mention anything about "swatting a bug" or reacting to some event before being struck in the back. In every account he was consistent about what he did: after hearing a

shot from behind his right shoulder, he turned to his right to see JFK and, failing that, then proceeded to turn back to his left to try and see JFK again. When he was just about situated even, looking straight, he was hit by a bullet, by what he said
felt like a "doubled-up fist". At no time during this right to left movement did he say he stopped to react to anything, a bug, a bird, a noise, an event. It was a right to left movement. Nothing in between.

This is where, as you said, Connally has to be thrown under the conspiracy bus.

Connally's next day interview with Martin Agronsky from his hospital bed is the only one that
varies from every account he gave afterward. In that interview, Connally made two mistakes.
He said upon hearing the shot he turned to his LEFT. Obviously that was wrong. He also said
that when he turned, he saw the President "slumped". We know that is wrong because prior
to being hit, he never turned far enough around to see JFK. He probably conflated that vision
with his turn after he was shot. He twisted so violently to his right that at one point he was
facing directly back at JFK. I think after Connally reviewed the Z-film, he realized his early
account was wrong and made some revisions he stuck to in every telling since.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=john+connally+martin+agronky+interview&docid=603546005818588333&mid=BDC9F1C4FBF2E041E5BABDC9F1C4FBF2E041E5BA&view=detail&FORM=VIRE

Thanks for the correction. I had forgotten about the Agronsky interview; I recall Marsh using this to say Connally saw JFK. I think he hit you over the head with it?
He later told the HSCA that he never saw either JFK or Jackie Kennedy.
Mr. CONNALLY. That is correct. I never saw him [JFK]. I never saw Mrs. Kennedy after the shots were fired. I never saw either one of them, and I don't know when he was hit. They shouldn't have interviewed his wife with him. That clearly affected their
accounts.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 3:02:38 PM UTC-4, Steven Galbraith wrote:

On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 2:54:06 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:

On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 1:56:17 PM UTC-4, Steven Galbraith wrote:

On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 12:06:29 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 7:07:32 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:48:39 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
< stupid comments without evidence automatically deleted >

Still waiting for you to provide evidence to refute my evidence.

You need to show YOUR evidence is proof of the things you claim. So far, you have failed.

Your comments are not proof of anything.

Nor are your interpretations of the evidence.

Let's see some evidence.

We are looking at the same evidence. One of us is looking at it correctly and the other is named
Gil Jesus. Your interpretation of frame Z230 is about as significant as what you see in a
Rorschach test. You see what you want to see. On the other hand, no such interpretation is
required to see Connally's arm flip which began at Z226. That is undeniable. Even you have
tacitly acknowledged it, suggesting that he was swatting at a bug. Connally's arm flip at Z226,
COUPLED with JFK's simultaneous arm flip in the same frame, the bulging of Connally's jacket
just two frames earlier, the medical evidence that a bullet entered JFK's back and exited from
his throat, and the SS recreations that showed at that instant, both men were perfectly lined up
for a shot from the sniper's nest is more than enough to convince any reasonable person that
a single bullet passed through both JFK and JBC. Conspiracy hobbyists on the other hand
will find any excuse imaginable to dismiss all of these facts.

In none of the Connally accounts that I've seen - WC, HSCA, interviews - does he mention anything about "swatting a bug" or reacting to some event before being struck in the back. In every account he was consistent about what he did: after hearing

a shot from behind his right shoulder, he turned to his right to see JFK and, failing that, then proceeded to turn back to his left to try and see JFK again. When he was just about situated even, looking straight, he was hit by a bullet, by what he said
felt like a "doubled-up fist". At no time during this right to left movement did he say he stopped to react to anything, a bug, a bird, a noise, an event. It was a right to left movement. Nothing in between.

This is where, as you said, Connally has to be thrown under the conspiracy bus.

Connally's next day interview with Martin Agronsky from his hospital bed is the only one that
varies from every account he gave afterward. In that interview, Connally made two mistakes.
He said upon hearing the shot he turned to his LEFT. Obviously that was wrong. He also said
that when he turned, he saw the President "slumped". We know that is wrong because prior
to being hit, he never turned far enough around to see JFK. He probably conflated that vision
with his turn after he was shot. He twisted so violently to his right that at one point he was
facing directly back at JFK. I think after Connally reviewed the Z-film, he realized his early
account was wrong and made some revisions he stuck to in every telling since.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=john+connally+martin+agronky+interview&docid=603546005818588333&mid=BDC9F1C4FBF2E041E5BABDC9F1C4FBF2E041E5BA&view=detail&FORM=VIRE

Thanks for the correction. I had forgotten about the Agronsky interview; I recall Marsh using this to say Connally saw JFK. I think he hit you over the head with it?

He ended up hitting himself in the head with it. I mentioned this recently in another thread.
I asked him to point out at what point in the Z-film Connally was turned far enough to his right
that he could have seen JFK and he resorted to the ridiculous claim that Connally made that
turn in the roughly one second he was hidden behind the sign. That is not remotely feasible
Connally could have done that but Marsh kept insisting that is what happened, making a complete
fool of himself in the process.

He later told the HSCA that he never saw either JFK or Jackie Kennedy.
Mr. CONNALLY. That is correct. I never saw him [JFK]. I never saw Mrs. Kennedy after the shots were fired. I never saw either one of them, and I don't know when he was hit. They shouldn't have interviewed his wife with him. That clearly affected their

accounts.

I think Connally's later accounts were influenced by his review of the Z-film and he saw it
couldn't have happened the way he remembered it. He figure out what things he must have
gotten wrong and developed an account more compatible with the film. Connally remembers
doubling over and reviewing the film he saw that action began in the mid Z230s, so he
believed that is about when he was hit and that was clearly after JFK had been hit so that
might be why he was so adamant that he was hit by a different bullet. What he doesn't
remember was his reflexive arm flip which began at the precise moment JFK's arm's started
moving up. Had he been aware of that, I think he would have been more receptive to the SBT.
We'll never know how he might have responded had he been made aware of that fact. I don't
know who first discovered the simultaneous arm movements by the two men and when that
was discovered. I first became aware of it through DVP's webpage containing the enhanced
frames and that was within the last ten years. Maybe DVP can shed some light on who
discovered that. Maybe it was DVP.

I do think Connally did see JFK was slumped but it was after he had been hit and did almost
a complete 180 in his seat to the point he was facing JFK. Without bothering to look it up, I
think that occurred at about Z270. He remembers seeing that but didn't correctly remember
the sequence of events. That is how our minds sometimes work. We remember details but
we don't always piece them together in the correct order.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:38:56 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:

I thought I had remembered reading somewhere that in his later years Connally did concede the SBT was possible if it had been the second shot.

John Connally did, indeed, concede that the SBT is "possible". He did so, on camera, on CBS-TV in 1967....

"The only way that I could ever reconcile my memory of what happened and what occurred, with respect to the One-Bullet Theory is .... it HAD to be the SECOND bullet that might have hit us both." -- John B. Connally; Circa June 1967

Here's the video of Connally saying it (59 seconds into the video):

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0KFei3W7bGOWi1leGJ3WkFKX3c/view

And a related link:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2017/08/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1257.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 9:21:31 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:38:56 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:

I thought I had remembered reading somewhere that in his later years Connally did concede the SBT was possible if it had been the second shot.

John Connally did, indeed, concede that the SBT is "possible". He did so, on camera, on CBS-TV in 1967....

"The only way that I could ever reconcile my memory of what happened and what occurred, with respect to the One-Bullet Theory is .... it HAD to be the SECOND bullet that might have hit us both." -- John B. Connally; Circa June 1967

Here's the video of Connally saying it (59 seconds into the video):

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0KFei3W7bGOWi1leGJ3WkFKX3c/view

And a related link:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2017/08/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1257.html

To the Nutters, what a witness says years later is more reliable when it fits their wacky theories.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 12:39:54 AM UTC-4, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:

On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 9:21:31 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:38:56 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:

I thought I had remembered reading somewhere that in his later years Connally did concede the SBT was possible if it had been the second shot.

John Connally did, indeed, concede that the SBT is "possible". He did so, on camera, on CBS-TV in 1967....

"The only way that I could ever reconcile my memory of what happened and what occurred, with respect to the One-Bullet Theory is .... it HAD to be the SECOND bullet that might have hit us both." -- John B. Connally; Circa June 1967

Here's the video of Connally saying it (59 seconds into the video):

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0KFei3W7bGOWi1leGJ3WkFKX3c/view

And a related link:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2017/08/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1257.html

To the Nutters, what a witness says years later is more reliable when it fits their wacky theories.

There can be no doubt that Connally was hit by a separate bullet. The original witness statements say this. The Zapruder film shows this. The ridiculousness of the Magic Bullet Theory confirms this. Only liars and idiots can believe in the SBT.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 9:21:31 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:38:56 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:

I thought I had remembered reading somewhere that in his later years Connally did concede the SBT was possible if it had been the second shot.

John Connally did, indeed, concede that the SBT is "possible". He did so, on camera, on CBS-TV in 1967....

"The only way that I could ever reconcile my memory of what happened and what occurred, with respect to the One-Bullet Theory is .... it HAD to be the SECOND bullet that might have hit us both." -- John B. Connally; Circa June 1967

Here's the video of Connally saying it (59 seconds into the video):

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0KFei3W7bGOWi1leGJ3WkFKX3c/view

And a related link:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2017/08/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1257.html

We can always count on you to come up with the pertinent source from your vast archives. I
knew Connally had conceded the possibility of a second shot single bullet many years later
but I never knew he had done so as early as 1967. I wonder why Connally seemed to firmly
believe that JFK had been hit by the first shot. Obviously, he knew he had been hit by the second
shot and he was correct about that. For the longest time the myth persisted that the WC
concluded the single bullet was the first shot and the second shot was the miss. While they
allowed for that possibility, it was never their conclusion. Even Posner believed this was a WC
conclusion when he was promoting Case Closed. He thought he was correcting the record when
he wrote that the second shot was the single bullet but the record didn't need correcting. The
WC allowed for that possibility from the start. They came to no conclusion as to which shot
missed.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 7:06:19 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:

The WC came to no conclusion as to which shot missed.

Yes. That's correct. And whenever the proverbial "5.6 Seconds" argument comes up on JFK forums, I always like to pull out my archived copy of Page 117 of the Warren Report. It's always fun to rub the CTers' noses in it from time to time:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/five-point-six-seconds-myth.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 8:39:35 AM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:

On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 7:06:19 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:

The WC came to no conclusion as to which shot missed.

Yes. That's correct. And whenever the proverbial "5.6 Seconds" argument comes up on JFK forums, I always like to pull out my archived copy of Page 117 of the Warren Report. It's always fun to rub the CTers' noses in it from time to time:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/five-point-six-seconds-myth.html

It's surprising how many LNs still believe the 5.6 second scenario was an official finding of the
WC. I don't know how that came to be the default scenario but it clearly did. That's why the
CBS tests with sharpshooters recreating the shots required them to fire all 3 in 5.6 seconds to
see if it could be done. Oswald was under no such time constraint. He could fire at will and the
only time constraint was the one imposed by the time the limo would be within range of his
rifle. That was much longer than 5.6 seconds.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 9:55:58 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:

On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 20:30:23 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:

Gerald Posner from Case Closed:

<ON>
In an October 30, 1966, interview with Life magazine, the Governor said, "There is my absolute knowledge, and Nellie's too, that one bullet caused the President's wound, and that an entirely separate shot struck me....I'll never change my mind." The

author [Posner is writing third person--my addition] presented some of the new evidence to Governor Connally during a telephone conversation in May 1992. He was open-minded that new technologies might provide an understanding of the few seconds of Dealey
Plaza not available in earlier years. "It may well be that Mrs. Connally was mistaken about seeing the President raise his arms after the first shot," he says. "That might have been after the second shot. And if that is true, it would make it all very,
very consistent. The first bullet could have missed both of us. The third bullet definitely only hit him. Based upon the angles, the second bullet, which went through his neck, could have gone through my back. The second bullet could have

hit both of us."

<OFF>

Quotinig Posner is a far cry from quoting Governor Connally.

I scrolled through the comments and DVP linked to JBCs words via a taped interview with CBS from 1967 where the Governor muses about the possibility of the SBT being correct.

Not good enough?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 9:55:58 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:

On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 04:58:16 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 4:36:17?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 11:30:24?PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote: >> > Gerald Posner from Case Closed:
< Posner bullshit deleted >

And in 1988 he said this:
https://youtu.be/3WWPWO44p_s

And he said this after learning from Posner of all the additional work done by Failure Analysis Associates with the Z film, possible bullet trajectories, etc. by recreating the event though accurate computer modeling.

Connally to Posner:

"Based upon the angles, the second bullet, which went through his [JFK's] neck, could have gone through my back. The second bullet could have hit both of us."

Can you quote CONNALLY on that issue?

Posner already did.

Corroborated by frame 230 of the the Zapruder film:
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Z230.mp4

Corroborated by a bystander
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNZ2xCrzulI

Corroborated by the FBI
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/page-1.png

Even three Warren Commission members didn't buy the Single Bullshit Theory:
https://youtu.be/7pW7CNXPCWs

All of this corroborating evidence was enough to convince intelligent people that the theory was bullshit.

But idiots like Gerald Posner and you believe it.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sat, 7 Oct 2023 07:59:50 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirslick@fast.net>
wrote:


So, according to Bugliosi, it was this "oval" shape that was
"virtually conclusive evidence" of an SBT?

Chickenshit is TERRIFIED of this simple honest question. He knows
that Bugliosi was a moron if he truly thought this... yet you can't
get Chickenshit to publicly acknowledge that Bugliosi said this.

It's a simple "Yes" or "No" question, and Chickenshit cannot cite
where he has EVER answered it. (Without immediately denying it.)

So it's going to keep getting asked until Chickenshit answers it.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sat, 7 Oct 2023 10:56:16 -0700 (PDT), Steven Galbraith <stevemgalbraith@yahoo.com> wrote:

In none of the Connally accounts that I've seen...

You don't believe Connally...

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sat, 7 Oct 2023 11:54:04 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowright1963@gmail.com> wrote:

Connally's next day interview...

You don't believe what Connally said.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sat, 7 Oct 2023 18:21:29 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davevonpein@aol.com> wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 6:38:56?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:

I thought I had remembered reading somewhere that in his later years Connally did concede the SBT was possible if it had been the second shot.

John Connally did, indeed, concede that the SBT is "possible". He did so, on camera, on CBS-TV in 1967....

If you don't believe his contemporary statements, why would you accept statements made years later?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sun, 8 Oct 2023 05:39:33 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein <dvp.miscellaneous.38@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 7:06:19?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:

The WC came to no conclusion as to which shot missed.

Yes. That's correct. And whenever the proverbial "5.6 Seconds" argument comes up on JFK forums, I always like to pull out my archived copy of Page 117 of the Warren Report. It's always fun to rub the CTers' noses in it from time to time:

http://jfk-archives.blogsp

You know the rules, Von Penis.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sun, 8 Oct 2023 20:08:02 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler <chuckschuyler123@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 9:55:58?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:

On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 04:58:16 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 4:36:17?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 11:30:24?PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote: >>>>> Gerald Posner from Case Closed:
< Posner bullshit deleted >

And in 1988 he said this:
https://youtu.be/3WWPWO44p_s

And he said this after learning from Posner of all the additional work done by Failure Analysis Associates with the Z film, possible bullet trajectories, etc. by recreating the event though accurate computer modeling.

Connally to Posner:

"Based upon the angles, the second bullet, which went through his [JFK's] neck, could have gone through my back. The second bullet could have hit both of us."

Can you quote CONNALLY on that issue?

Posner already did.

Hearsay....

So your answer is "no."

Corroborated by frame 230 of the the Zapruder film:
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Z230.mp4

Corroborated by a bystander
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNZ2xCrzulI

Corroborated by the FBI
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/page-1.png

Even three Warren Commission members didn't buy the Single Bullshit Theory:
https://youtu.be/7pW7CNXPCWs

All of this corroborating evidence was enough to convince intelligent people that the theory was bullshit.

But idiots like Gerald Posner and you believe it.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)