JFK assassination may show how the universe works!

The thing I love about the JFK assassination is that it proves you can take any seven or ten seconds of time, dissect it for 50 years, and come up with so many multiple but credible theories about what occurred - theories that you can back up with provable and likely indictable evidence - that one of the only plausible explanations is that the universe reacted to these theories by allowing the accumulated facts to shape themselves to fit many theories. Oswald, the Chicago mafia, the cia, the texas moneymen, secret service agents, LBJ, Howard Hunt, the switched coffins and tampered with corpse, the tramps, the guy behind the bush on the knoll, Bush himself, the New Orleans crowd, Joe DiMaggio, the Miami mafia, Fidel Castro, a guy hiding in a storm drain, on and on, every one of them except for the DiMaggio theory (which, of course, is the correct one) now contains physical evidence, eyewitness testimony, and proof that you can take to court. It's a wonderful look at how the universe works, both in the physical realm and in the theory that we all produce our personal reality and the universe will shape itself around our considerations.

reply to post by Aleister


"We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are" - Anais Nin

One of my favourite quotes, from a fascinating woman. She ( and I) would agree with you, I think!

beansidhe
reply to post by Aleister

 

"We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are" - Anais Nin

One of my favourite quotes, from a fascinating woman. She ( and I) would agree with you, I think!

I loved Anais Nin. Wouldn't be surprised if JFK did too, literally (and I like her connection with Marjorie Cameron, they made a movie together: en.wikipedia.org... "Inauguration of the Pleasure Dome".).

I recall a recent science article in which one sweeping theory of quantum mechanics states that what we expect to see, the universe then provides for us. If someone has a link post it, thanks (if not I'll research it later).

reply to post by Aleister

Oswald, the Chicago mafia, the cia, the texas moneymen, secret service agents, LBJ, Howard Hunt, the switched coffins and tampered with corpse, the tramps, the guy behind the bush on the knoll, Bush himself, the New Orleans crowd, Joe DiMaggio,...

Joe DiMaggio?!?



Say it ain't so....

Seriously, I think I'm pretty well versed on many of the theories surrounding the JFK assassination but never heard of that one. Amazing...

Can you elaborate a little?

reply to post by Riffrafter


Joe DiMaggio was more or less a joke, but who knows. He loved Marilyn Monroe with all his heart and soul, and the theory that the Kennedy's may have had Marilyn offed could have gotten under his skin and....the rest....is history (if they could make a best selling book and movie about Abe Lincoln being a vampire killer, can the portrayal of this theory be far off???).

Lol timelines my friend.
BTW nice thread

interesting analogy. I've come to a similar conclusion in life and that's why I've stopped arguing with people (to some degree)

Everyone is correct and everyone is wrong, simultaneously. The only thing that is ever correct is the consensus reality we live in. Other than that, it's either intrinsic or extrinsic activity that shapes our perception.

reply to post by Aleister


He may well have!
I remember reading a Doreen Valiente book a while ago where she recounted the story of a woman who believed that the weather is becoming more changeable because we all expect it to - a sort of preconceived consensus reality as the above poster has just spoken of. When weather reports were first broadcast, everyone believed them without question. As we became accustomed to them, and saw their inaccuracies, we doubted them collectively. Thus the weather responded to our expectation of it.

Obviously I have no way of proving this as true or false (if such a thing exists?) but your post and the post by Flysolo has got me thinking. Thanks for this!

FlySolo
interesting analogy. I've come to a similar conclusion in life and that's why I've stopped arguing with people (to some degree)

Everyone is correct and everyone is wrong, simultaneously. The only thing that is ever correct is the consensus reality we live in. Other than that, it's either intrinsic or extrinsic activity that shapes our perception.

Very well said! I've never memorized the exact numbers, but we each only see and make a picture of a very tiny percentage of the signals coming into our senses at any moment. And by moment I mean a tiny span of time ("Tiny-time" may be an adequate name for a concept). So ten people in a room are seeing, experiencing, and acting in response to ten different rooms (all of that is augmented by what each person excepts to happen happening for them within the context of everyone elses's expectations).

Ol Lee Harvey Oswald may have been eating lunch in the cafeteria (well, not, he would have known Kennedy was going to pass by on the street and would have been watching that, so that's a fact going against Lee Harvey's innocence imnho) or he may have been taking the ride he'd planned to take by shooting Kennedy, but even he had to have felt and seen an entirely different set of events than anyone has ever come close to imagining or describing.

reply to post by beansidhe


This is the kind of co-creators of our reality thinking that folks like Jane Roberts and Robert Anton Wilson talked about. There is a good thread on Jane Roberts going right now in fact, with Bashar and Cayce thrown into the mix, here www.abovetopsecret.com...

I wonder if anyone has investigated Joe DiMaggio for the crime. He did have motive. And if enough of us talk about his possible role in the JFK murder well, if these theories of the universe is right, then evidence should begin appearing.

He likely would have hired his own investigators to investigate Marilyn Monroe's death, almost no way he wouldn't have. Maybe someone has the results of those investigations. Or maybe he destroyed them, and acted. Joltin' Joe DiMaggio, the man who killed the president for revenge. It'd be a good movie anyway. Just as long as Tom Hanks doesn't play DiMaggio, Goddess forbid.

reply to post by Aleister


Tom Hanks will play that role now, because we're all expecting it! Seriously, that is a good experiment to try out this hypothesis. I am going to mention to 10 people in the next 7 days that Joe di Maggio may have killed JFK, and see what happens. You never know... could

ETA: 'tiny time' could explain differences in witness statements, and probably does. We see through our own 'goggles' after all. But I do like the thought of 'tiny time' used in a court of law, as a defence. It's a great phrase!

reply to post by beansidhe


Maybe Hanks can play an old DiMaggio, as he contemplates his crime. Maybe his sister helped, Marilyn was her sister-in-law so she had motive (they were a sneaky pair, as his sister would sign his name to autograph requests coming to his home address).

Thanks. And if I were a lawyer I'd use the scientific, biological, and neurological fact that each witness only lives within a small portion of the signals which entered their brain during the incident that they are describing, so they color their experience with that collection of signals at the exclusion of all others, and then must go through the next filter: their own expectations and acceptance level, which further erode the percentage of signals that they can adequately speak about.

Didn't JFK die after giving a speech on how secrecy is repugnant in a free and democratic society?

Didn't he want to end the federal reserve?

Didn't he want to introduce a silver standard and move power away from the federal reserve?

Only one course of events happened resulting in JFK's assassination.

This is like the universe, a constant. Regardless of whether or not that constant appears differently relative to your position to it, nothing changes, regardless of which theory is ascribed to any event.

MichaelPMaccabee
Only one course of events happened resulting in JFK's assassination.

This is like the universe, a constant. Regardless of whether or not that constant appears differently relative to your position to it, nothing changes, regardless of which theory is ascribed to any event.

Correct, but the apparent multi-possible theories of the shooting almost all have evidence to back them up, even indictable evidence, because the stuff in the universe is such that we can pull solid facts from the situation to dress up almost any theory. For every Oswald we have, as a current thread surmises, an accidental shooting by a secret service agent hurrying to defend his president. John Wilkes Booth, well, of course there is evidence that he not only lived to a ripe old age, but that two or three people can be pointed to with certainty (with facts to back them up) as the "old Booth".

reply to post by Aleister


It's quantum physics at its finest. Good thread. All those theories always made my head swim. I wonder when the science community is going to accept that quantum physics applies to society as much as it does to subatomic particles? You have a message in your inbox by the way.