In the last few years, I have presented talks at three JFK conferences and applied to three additional ones. Here are the abstracts that I submitted for each, along with brief remarks where appropriate.
Third Decade Research Conference, Providence, RI,
June 1993 ("Conspiracy not a fact")
This was my first presentation at a JFK conference. It received mixed reviews, with conspiracists disapproving and nitpicking and nonconspiracists approving. Virtually all the critics and conspiracists misunderstood the title, thinking it to mean that conspiracy had been disproven rather than not proven.
COPA, Washington, D.C., October 1996 (NAA of
This talk was my best experience at any JFK conference. I had 30 minutes, and the audience was generally respectful. Immediately after the talk, Gary Aguilar proceeded to point out to the audience several observations as though there were in conflict with what I had just said. The interesting thing was that I had just made these same points myself.
Fourth Decade Research Conference, Fredonia, NY, July 1996
I gave a talk on NAA and the bullet fragments that was not a formal part of the program. The comment I remember best was from George Michael Evica, to the effect that he was strongly opposed to using the scientific method in JFK research because then "you could never prove anything."
COPA, Washington, D.C., June 1997 (Jet
This talk was declined by the organizers because I didn't tell them in advance exactly what I was going to say. (Censorship, anyone?) Later, each member of the program committee denied that he was the one responsible for the declination. (Lying, anyone?) So much for free and open discussion at JFK" research" conferences. Evidently, acceptable research must fall within the framework of conspiracy.
JFK Lancer, Dallas, November 1998 (Jet
effect: fact or fiction?)
This paper was not presented because the program committee (read George Michael Evica) refused to answer my repeated requests for a decision. It was in effect a pocket-veto. The strangest part was that I was going to tell them that the jet effect, which they institutionally reject, was real but so small that it could virtually be neglected. Evidently the message must correspond perfectly to their beliefs or it will be rejected.
JFK Lancer November in Dallas, 2001 (NAA
and the JFK assassination)
The abstract was submitted in August 2001 and is now awaiting a decision. We will see if Lancer has the courage to have an honest discussion on the enormously important NAA.