When critics use opinions to prove facts they may create Misinformation

A rebuttal of "Facts and Fiction in the Kennedy Assassination" by Massimo Polidoro and the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry 

A rebuttal of "Facts and Fiction in the Kennedy Assassination" by Massimo Polidoro and the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry 

"However, cases are often made more difficult to solve when facts get confused with imagined realities and unfounded conclusions.  Eyewitness testimonies and self-styled experts, even in good faith, can alter details and hid important clues that-if untouched-could lead to radically different conclusions." (Massimo Polidoro) 
After a reasonable introduction paragraph, what follows is a ham-handed swipe at all sources Polidoro deems unverified due to the implications many present. He offers no actual evidence or repeated documented instances of these allegations, but states it as if the reader should give it regard. Notice that he does not address the many official flaws and clear acts of deception in the case; he instead blames inconsistencies on all the non-officials involved.  

"Those of you who have seen the Oliver Stone movie JFK, where this story is told in great detail, will remember the many contradictions  coming out of the official investigation of the assassination. I have seen that movie as well, and like anyone else, I couldn't help but be convinced that Oswald could not be the only assassin."(Massimo Polidoro) 
No fictional movie is a useful source in research or verifiable analysis and while the film "JFK" certainly attracted the public's notice, it should have led to viewers to do actual research, not use the film as a reference point.

"Now, as we can see, facts contradict many details of Jean Hill's dramatic testimony.  Aside from excusable mistakes and errors made in good faith, we have here a story that, over the years, has changed and grown out of proportion...", "It is quite clear what happens to some people when they find themselves right in the middle of history and have absolutely no role in it. They imagine one. (Massimo Polidoro) 
Polidoro offers information to discredit Jean Hill, and then proclaims that many witnesses must have invented their testimony. He infers alleged contradictions from a single witness statement discredit over fifty recorded witnesses. This unverified and sweeping statement creates the very misinformation that he seemingly scorns.

"Another one is “imagined experts,” that is, self-styled experts with no real expertise in the chosen field except what they think is “common sense.” The Kennedy assassination presents dozens of such cases, but one of the most popular involves the so-called “magic bullet.” The Warren Commission that investigated the Kennedy assassination concluded that the reactions of Kennedy and Connally occurred too close together for two separate shots, even from the same gun, to have been responsible for their wounds." (Massimo Polidoro)
No serious expert would make unproven claims, among the practices to avoid is claiming to possess an insight into all experts based on unsubstantiated boasts. I would imagine such a person would have to possess a great deal of proof to support such broad statements and if no verified proof is offered one may be viewed as the very "imaginary expert" they brand others as. While the President's (Warren) Commission did find that a single gunman from the rear caused the wounds suffered by President Kennedy, they were lawyers and politicians and first responding medical experts at Parkland Hospital viewing primary medical evidence disagree.i The House Select Committee also determined more shots that the President's (Warren) Commission.ii

"What we should do instead is to try to do our best to dig up facts and let them speak for themselves. They may have things to say that often turn out to be quite surprising." (Massimo Polidoro)
In this statement, I agree with Polidoro and the facts shall ultimately reveal many quite surprising things. However, without research and reasoned scrutiny of all evidence without bias, a more complete truth shall elude those blind to it. The truth is not exclusive to either side of the conspiracy debate; it is a combination of all the verified facts and proven statements from both sides.
Sincerely,
C.A.A. Savastano
TPAAK Facebook

References:
i. Hearings of the President's Commission Volume VI, Dr. Paul Peters, Dr. Charles Carrico,  Dr. Robert McClelland, Dr. Malcolm Perry, Dr. Ronald Jones, Dr. Marion Jenkins, Dr. William Clark, Dr. Don Curtis, Dr. Gene Akin, Dr. Kenneth Salyer, Dr. Charles Baxter, Nurse Diana Bowron, Nurse Pat Hutton
ii.  Report of the House Select Committee on Assassinations, Summary of Findings and Recommendations, Section I, Part B, p. 65

Related Articles:
Reserve complete judgement and use all the Evidence
Common Bias, Theories, and one critic's Truth