Jump to content
The Education Forum

Darrell Curtis

Members
  • Content Count

    51
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Darrell Curtis

  • Rank
    Experienced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Arlington, Tx
  • Interests
    Dogs, history, biking, working out, hiking.

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Yet nothing he finds and throws, sticks. He gets cornered every time, shown up and made to look foolish. I've been lurking here regularly since 2004 or 2005, and hadn't noticed his presence before. Wonder how I missed that? It would be good if he were cornered on the matter of evidence. But it seems that if he was held accountable for that, then the lone nut people here would, in fairness, need to be held accountable for their pot stirring, avoiding answering questions regarding evidence, etc.
  2. It seems his theories are beginning to contradict each other.
  3. Certainly a likelihood, although it may be addressed by other means in the changes made to the area over the years. As I don't think there was any nefarious intent in filling it in, it's probably not too terribly important. The only reason for mentioning it was that it seemed it might be a helpful tidbit to those who don't live in the area, or don't visit with any frequency.
  4. It has been filled in with concrete. I didn't notice it being locked when I was there recently, it may have been. All that I did notice was that it was sealed, there wasn't any sewer access there any longer.
  5. It's hard not to come to any other conclusion than that you've not been to Dealey Plaza. If you'd ever stood inside the pergola, you'd realize that it would require something to elevate a person in order to use those openings, even just to look through them. I'm six feet, and even the opening second from the top is out of reach even when extending myself fully. Debating these things is such a distraction/diversion. Where the shots came from (within certain limits) and who fired them has kept concerned citizens chasing their tails for decades. Why fire from the pergola when that was sufficiently covered from other areas? As to that flash, it could have been anything, including some sort of artifact of filming. That would be where we should defer to those with expertise in that area. I'm sure you're an excellent lawyer Mr. Santos, but who would hire a plumber to work on their car? The cleverest and most effective trick perpetrated in the entire morass that is the JFK assassination has been to keep people debating over details that can't be proven beyond doubt, and have questionable value with regards to proving the case for conspiracy, at least in the minds of the general public. The JFK assassination could use an Occam's Razor the size of a Buick. FYI, I am not a "lone nutter" and do not believe Lee Oswald committed the crime, lest my comments are used to portray me as such, in order to dismiss them. I'll return to lurking now. Thank you.
  6. Chris, that's exactly right. Very well stated. Where did you find that?
  7. Thanks John. We'll see. I expect it may be pushed back again. I wonder those of us waiting for traditional paper copies may have a slightly longer wait?
  8. The term conspiracy theorist raises a question that never seems to be asked. What is the term for a conspiracy that is verifiable, and those who speak of and believe in these conspiracies? Would this be a conspiracy factist? Along with the derisive, derogatory term "conspiracy theorist" often comes the idea that *all* conspiracies are false and believing in them is delusional. But that obviously isn't the case when we consider the Gulf of Tonkin, the Tuskegee syphilis experiments, MK-Ultra, Operation Mockingbird, and my personal favorite "Et tu, Brute?" Apparently that was just something Shakespeare invented for entertainment purposes. It's frustrating and tiresome that so often the words "science" and "scientific" (among others, alone and in combinations) are bandied about as if they automatically give credibility or legitimacy where it isn't necessarily the case.
  9. What is the expected release date of this book? I've been waiting on it a while, as have others, only to see it pushed back. It's a real lesson in patience.
  10. Right. If only that standard could be applied more consistently to the subject. I'm guilty of that failing myself, but it is something to strive for. There's such a strong tendency to jump to conclusions, see connections and patterns where there's really only mere causality at work, pariedola, with regards to the JFK assassination. If the information I've heard is correct, apparently McAdams doesn't do so well in a public debate forum when confronted with verifiable facts presented with solid logic. Yes, I'd say the list ought to begin at least shortly before the first shot. Maybe beginning with the seizure experienced by James Belknap, shortly before JFK's arrival in the plaza (assuming there is anything to truly suspicious or sinister there). I'd love to see such a list. I don't feel even remotely qualified to assemble one myself, due lack of in depth knowledge, at least. The benefit of such a list would seem to be potentially almost incalculable.
  11. That makes sense. As well, Stemmons/635 hadn't been built yet, so coming off of Stemmons onto any of those three roads wouldn't have been a consideration either. Should have thought that through a little more before posing the question.
  12. Following the item you posted was another article which contained the following. It appears to do an excellent job of pulling the rug out from under McAdams. But the the thought occurs that if this kind of logical analysis was the standard for JFKA research and investigation, it would be harder for the lone nut people to continue their charade, in the form of attacks on the effort to bring the truth to light. Begin excerpt: Although Professor John McAdams wrote The JFK Assassination Logic (Potomac Books, 2011), the book is far away from its declared purpose of "how to think about claims of conspiracy." The underlying intention is to reject all claims of conspiracy and to confirm the Warren Commission (WC) Report on a lone gunman who shot a magic bullet. Thus, Professor McAdams devised his logic on the basis of the classic Only Game in Town (OGT) fallacy. Even if it weren't available, a better account than the WC report, nobody is obliged to accept it in default, because there is always an alternative to the OGT fallacy: to find a more plausible explanation. All the JFK assassination researchers face the same logical problem of finding evidence that strongly discriminates between the two competing hypotheses: H 1 : The deed of a lone gunman H 2 : The result of a conspiracy All of them are forced to infer to the best explanation through good arguments, id est: those containing true premises related in the right way to the conclusion. For this kind of reasoning, the American philosopher Charles Sanders Pierce coined the term " abduction ," but it rather suggests kidnapping nowadays. We can use instead "inference to the best explanation" for what Pierce meant, and he actually meant that an observation O strongly favors one hypothesis (let's say H 2 ) over another ( H 1 ) if the following conditions are satisfied at once: If H 2 were true, O is to be expected (unsurprising) If H 1 were true, O would have been unexpected (surprising) The No Surprise / Surprise Principle rules the inference to the best explanation and it applies not only to the whole set of facts regarding the JFK assassination, but also for every single fact in dispute.
  13. https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1174&context=fac_pm "In 1963 Secret Service practices required that buildings along a presidential motorcade route be inspected in advance if either the motorcade route was a standard one that had been used in the past or there was a specific reason to suspect the occupants or activities in a certain building. President Kennedy’s Dallas motorcade route had been the standard route for motorcades for years; President Franklin D. Roosevelt, for example, had visited Dallas in 1936 and traversed the same route in a motorcade (although in the opposite direction). For this reason alone, the buildings along the motorcade should have been subjected to inspection before the motorcade traveled past them." President Franklin Roosevelt’s motorcade, took the same route according to the article linked in the OP. According to the link I've included, FDR did not take the same route, but went straight on Main, although from west to east, in reverse of JFK's route. Can anyone clear up the apparent discrepancy?
  14. I caught that. He was such a nice boy, he used to cut the grass.
×
×
  • Create New...