CTKA's Review of Absolute Proof

http://www.ctka.net/2014_reviews/groden_book.html

A decidedly mixed bag of goods.

I probably erred on the side of being nice.

Great piece and you were very kind to him. I can't believe how quickly the two Mrs. Reids story unraveled.

Thanks, and I think I was.

There was other stuff I could have brought up also that I found questionable.

I like a lot of what Groden has done, but it's been somewhat downhill since he testified for OJ Simpson.

I like a lot of what Groden has done, but it's been somewhat downhill since he testified for OJ Simpson.

Well, I would not say that was some kind of marker.

Because he did do some good things after that on JFK.

But I just think he made some bad errors in analysis in this particular book.

You really have to watch yourself in this field.  Its full of land mines.

Therefore, one has to have trusted colleagues to bat ideas around with.

Why do authors publish 'true crime' books that have fallacies scattered about it when they KNOW they're fallacies ?  It doesn't help re-opening this case, does it?  What will re-open this case?

Groden's got a good heart, you can tell. However, seeing him in that video by the Baker woman for Jack's remembrance was quite telling where this has all gone.  Nobody knows.  Even the 'X' is gone.  Does anyone remember how this 'trying to find out' business really was BEFORE the internet?  Sorry for the ramble.  And don't give up, Jim.  It's only started.  Keep going.  Breath Deep.

And wouldn't it be great if electricity didn't work any more ?  Just sayin'.

Mark, wrt your comment about the internet ... I think this is symptomatic of research in general, not just JFK research.  As with every revolution in communication technology (see Eric Havelock's Preface to Plato), there is a dialectic of advantage and disadvantage at play; the very instantaneous and democratized nature of information afforded by the electronic medium can also be detrimental to scholarship, insofar as the latter requires time to mature, and insofar as the labors of the individual in isolation can sometimes be more fruitful than an uncontrolled discussion where a kaleidoscope of opinions or reactions of varying shallowness and depth impinge on the topic.

Nostalgia is a common mode for interpreting such changes.  There are instances where the writing down of oral narrative in the middle ages can be seen as an attempt to bridge the present with something which has been more or less lost (the writing down of Beowulf in the 10th-11th century has been interpreted this way, for example).

I can understand your sentiments, though.  I am currently about 2/3 of the way through John Kelin's marvelous book on the first-generation critics of the Warren Commission, Praise from a Future Generation; and while we realize today the main errors that were made by these men and women, it is hard not to see an element of true greatness in their contributions.  It is not an uncommon phenomenon, as I said, to view historical movements this way (i.e., as a decline from the origins, with the past dominated by giants), but that does not necessarily make it merely a historiographic trope, either.

A similar problem arising from the information explosion is the increased tempo of academic research.  Here is a telling statement by the British Nobel laureate theoretical physicist Peter Higgs, proponent of the by now famous and eponymous subatomic particle recently confirmed at CERN:

"It’s difficult to imagine how I would ever have enough peace and quiet in the present sort of climate to do what I did in 1964. [...] Today I wouldn’t get an academic job. It’s as simple as that -- I don’t think I would be regarded as productive enough."

You have spoken well.  Have learned something today.  Thanks.

This is the guy Doyle is relying on to refute PM.

Doyle relies on others' material all the time, because he hasn't got any ability to do this by himself.
Case closed Brian! Filthy liar!!

barto wrote:Doyle relies on others' material all the time, because he hasn't got any ability to do this by himself.
Case closed Brian! Filthy liar!!

He's a worthless parasite. Sometime last year over at Stinky's before he got banned there, he was using/referencing some of my customized Wiegman images to make whatever ridiculous point he was trying to make at the time. I promptly moved the thread that contained the images in house. He whined about it. If the bastard is so smart, he can make his damn images. But he can't do that. The only thing he can do is roll Sanibel Gold. And get himself banned.

Checkmate.