JFK Assassination Autopsy Details Revealed After 55 Years

The assassination of Kennedy is one of the more significant events of the 21st century and one of the most studied. The historical consensus by historians, researchers, scholars and experts, with decades of research on the subject, is that LHO shot JFK, and acted alone in the assassination itself. It's not like historians are divided down the center on this, quite the opposite, it's overwhelming. To date there aren't many (if any) serious historians on the subject who maintain otherwise.

You, as a layperson, apparently seem to think otherwise. Okay, but incredibly you have no credible alternative at all. So you are taking a denier's stance, the "this didn't happen but I don't know what did" approach, and as explained already, all this will turn into is an exercise whereby you get other posters to "prove" it to you while you can subjectively reject/nitpick anything and everything they say. Like I predicted, that's already started to happen. This is identical to the approach used by many conspiracy theorists, they "conjure" vague undetailed conspiracies via their incredulity and denial of the event. It's very easy to do, and since it's a nonsense approach, it will usually get the culprit kicked or warned on history forums (even if they try to mask it as "I'm just asking questions" and all that)

Sorry if I am being the party-pooper for pointing out the obvious. If anyone wants to entertain it they can.

Yup. I don't know if you have an interest in history, or frequent history forums, but the question pops up a fair bit. The consensus is pretty clear, also the conspiracies themselves are a footnote in any historical references.

Quick overview and history of the swings and doubts surrounding the case

https://www.history.com/news/why-the-public-stopped-believing-the-government-about-jfks-murder

As for "serious", it doesn't have to be a historian, it could be a researcher, a writer, investigator, etc. Their work has to be critically considered by other experts on the field. So for those focusing on every detail of the assassination itself, or Oswald, or Ruby - the picture is fairly consistent. The conspiracies in contrast are highly inconsistent and all over the place.

To highlight the below from my link

"The legislation led to the most ambitious declassification effort in American history—more than five million documents in total. Over the next 25 years, the government fully released 88 percent of materials related to the assassination, and another 11 percent of partially redacted documents. As of October 2017, only one percent of documents remained classified."

"There have been no shocking revelations in these documents; nothing to challenge the conclusions of the Warren Commission that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. Moreover, there have been no convincing alternative explanations of what took place in Dallas on November 22, 1963. At the same time, authors such as Gerald Posner (Case Closed) and Vincent Bugliosi (Reclaiming History) effectively refuted all the major conspiracy theories. Technology has also conspired against conspiracy. Digital recreations of the Zapruder film prove conclusively that all three shots fired at the Kennedy motorcade came from the sixth floor of the Book Depository Building. There were no second shooters or conspiracies; just Oswald and a high-powered rifle"

This is the modern consensus. As mentioned, asking the Q on history forums produces the same response.

Been interested since Costner's movie. Visited the location in Dallas numerous times also, lived in Texas for a few years and was one of the places had to go to when had visitors from home.

Personal thoughts

While over there tried an identical rifle to what was allegedly used, as firearms go pretty poor. Totally agree with the numerous assessments that very few if anyone could have pulled off Oswald's alleged shots in that time with that rig.

Then came the warren commission single bullet theory. Absolutely ridicules, love to know whatever those "experts" were smoking. Solid/FMJ bullets like that just don't deviate trajectory like that, five trajectory deviations, first two almost 90 degrees to end up in Connolly's leg. But assuming by some magic it could happen, to have done so and the bullet to end up in Connolly's leg in almost pristine condition, just does not happen.

Still nothing to support your claim that an overwhelming majority of historians, experts and researchers dismiss the idea of a conspiracy.

You haven’t provided any evidence that an overwhelming majority of historians, experts and researchers believe that Oswald acted alone. Apart from reiterating the fact that you frequent history forums.

Unfortunately you do not apply the same standards to yourself in debate as you demand of others. Three times I have asked you for evidence that an overwhelming majority of historians, experts and researchers accept that Oswald acted alone and your replies have been a) you frequently visit history forums so it must be true or b) demanding an alternative theory from me.

Thanks for the evidence.

Oh wait it was just a rant. The type of thing you constantly lambast others for.

Most of the historians who have written books on the Kennedy assassination conclude there was a conspiracy.

Including 80% of the tenured academic historians who wrote books on the assassination in the decade from 2000.

Okay, but not one of them is strong enough to present in this thread.

Strong enough? A few posts ago you were implying no serious historians believed in a conspiracy being involved in the assassination of JFK.

Now 80% tenured academic historians in a decade isn’t “strong” enough, while still avoiding backing up your own statement.

Just because you say it doesn’t mean it’s true.

Where is the source for an “overwhelming” majority of historians etc believing there was no conspiracy surrounding the JFK assassination?

The none/hardly any serious historian believing in a conspiracy is simply not true.

There is no “evidence” in your above post.

There are mentions of authors such as Gerald Posner who had the arrogance to write a book titled Case Closed before the most confidential documents relating to the case have been released.

Yeah, moving on.

You are suggesting 80% of historians believe something else occurred, okay, let's analyse what that is.

A variety of conspiracies or just one? if variety, which is the key one? If just one, which is it?

this is what johndoe said:

he then provided a link to the history channel website. first it is the history channel website singular. One website does not comprise a consensus. Second it is the history channel website. it is not an authority on ANYTHING. So, no, their link does not show a consensus.

I never claimed there was such support. I am not the one making a claim. I am the one asking that person to support their claim with a source. It is not on me to prove their claim is incorrect. that is how it should be and it should apply to both sides equally King Mob. Both sides should be held to the same standard or else it comes across as hypocrisy.