14
After a 3-hour debate about the moon landing at a bar in Roswell, I realized you need to ask for the primary source document, not just the debunker's summary.
A guy kept citing a popular debunking website, but when I pressed him, he hadn't read the actual NASA technical reports from 1969, which completely changed the argument. What's the most convincing piece of original evidence you've found that settled a conspiracy debate for you?
3 comments
Log in to join the discussion
Log In3 Comments
fiona50212d ago
You know what got me on the JFK thing? I used to buy into the whole magic bullet theory. Then I actually watched the full, raw Zapruder film, not just the clips they show on TV. Seeing the whole thing, the timing of it all, frame by frame, it just made the single shooter thing seem way more possible. The way his head moves back and to the left, it clicked for me in a way no summary ever did. You really have to go to the source.
4
joelsanchez8d ago
The Zapruder film is 26 seconds long. I've seen it too, and the head movement looks like a reaction to a shot from the front to me, not the back. It's the same detail west.alice pointed out. The official story asks you to believe one bullet did all that damage, which seems like a real stretch. Watching the source just made me more sure it wasn't that simple.
8
west.alice12d ago
Honestly fiona502, I've watched that film a dozen times and it convinces me the opposite way. The movement you describe is exactly why a shot from the front makes more sense to me.
5