Letters to Police

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve,

and then of course we have the "real experts", in this particular case, the ripperologists.

But ripperology is not a university discipline.

Cheers, Pierre

No but their knowledge of the events is useful and should be used, the same does not apply to the intreptation of those events of course.

I was more thinking of medical experts and historians as the post appeared to be an attack on historians in general and suggesting journalists are somehow superior.


Steve

[Pierre]

If Pierre is what he claims is actually secondary to the message contained in the above post and others recently posted.
It portrays the tendency to disregard the opinions of experts be they historians or medics in favour of the opinions of non experts.
It fosters a belief that facts are unimportant, and personal belief is all that matters.

To ignore knowledge in favour of guesswork is utterly amazing.

Steve

Hi Steve,

and then of course we have the "real experts", in this particular case, the ripperologists.

But ripperology is not a university discipline.

Cheers, Pierre

[GUT]

If Pierre is what he claims is actually secondary to the message contained in the above post and others recently posted.
It portrays the tendency to disregard the opinions of experts be they historians or medics in favour of the opinions of non experts.
It fosters a belief that facts are unimportant, and personal belief is all that matters.

To ignore knowledge in favour of guesswork is utterly amazing.


Steve

An incredible attitude isn't it.

But then it's the same with evidence, what does it matter when one has a theory to push.

[Elamarna]

And can you also explain to me what the different is between a book written in the past, and an article of a journalist from the past ?!

Do you give more value to the old books ?! don't they also try to send to me the informations their authors wanted ?!

Or the notes of policemen from the past saying they knew who Jack the ripper was , how should I deal with it ?! what makes them better than an article in an old newspaper ?!

I have happily made my case and knew who Jack the ripper was, I believe what is written , and I will continue using it, I will not waste my time with historians if they are as you suggest

The historians you are describing Pierre do nothing, they enjoy wasting time, istn't that the core of their work .. the passing of time ..

If Pierre is what he claims is actually secondary to the message contained in the above post and others recently posted.
It portrays the tendency to disregard the opinions of experts be they historians or medics in favour of the opinions of non experts.
It fosters a belief that facts are unimportant, and personal belief is all that matters.

To ignore knowledge in favour of guesswork is utterly amazing.


Steve

[Rainbow]

And can you also explain to me what the different is between a book written in the past, and an article of a journalist from the past ?!

Do you give more value to the old books ?! don't they also try to send to me the informations their authors wanted ?!

Or the notes of policemen from the past saying they knew who Jack the ripper was , how should I deal with it ?! what makes them better than an article in an old newspaper ?!

I have happily made my case and knew who Jack the ripper was, I believe what is written , and I will continue using it, I will not waste my time with historians if they are as you suggest

The historians you are describing Pierre do nothing, they enjoy wasting time, istn't that the core of their work .. the passing of time ..

[Henry Flower]

Historians try to find out what really happened in the past when the past can not speak for itself.

Cheers, Pierre

Absolute nonsense, and clinching proof that you are not what you claim to be.

[Rainbow]

Historians CANNOT find out what happened in the past.

They need to build there judgments on what appears to them as real but no garantie here..

Press, journalists, try to close the holes and historians dig for more, and the past will remain a mystery.

It is also a guesswork, did they know for example when the diary had been written ?

or maybe we should wait for more time, a century maybe, till it belongs more and more to the past and they start to give their answers ?! but again, after another century, will come a new generation of historians , and will dig new holes..

[Pierre]

I tried all of these questions, and I couldn't answer any single question of them, and I find myself in front of two things:

either to wait for a miracle that will give me the true answers for them, for example, the one who wrote this letter will come back to life and explain everything to me, and even then, I will not be sure if he has any tendencies behinde it that I will not ever know.., and since I live in this time, how can I even believe anything he will say .. so , even miracles will not work here, and this source from the past will never tell me anything from the past..

Or to throw this letter in the garbage, because anything I will try, is just a guesswork... and wasting of time.

Isn't that the best thing to do, after trying to examine sources from the past ?!

At least Press, Journalists, try to make sense, try to give an information, but what are the historians doing at all ?

Historians try to find out what really happened in the past when the past can not speak for itself.

Cheers, Pierre

[Rainbow]

I tried all of these questions, and I couldn't answer any single question of them, and I find myself in front of two things:

either to wait for a miracle that will give me the true answers for them, for example, the one who wrote this letter will come back to life and explain everything to me, and even then, I will not be sure if he has any tendencies behinde it that I will not ever know.., and since I live in this time, how can I even believe anything he will say .. so , even miracles will not work here, and this source from the past will never tell me anything from the past..

Or to throw this letter in the garbage, because anything I will try, is just a guesswork... and wasting of time.

Isn't that the best thing to do, after trying to examine sources from the past ?!

At least Press, Journalists, try to make sense, try to give an information, but what are the historians doing at all ?

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Rainbow;419299]

Yes Pierre, I would like to listen to your opinion as a historian, not to tell me that the people were talking a lot about it..

Do you consider it a source of the past ?!

It is a source from the past.

Did it happen in the past, that half the Kidney of Eddows had been sent to Mr. Lusk ?!

There is no evidence for the kidney having come from Eddowes that I know of.

Where can I know exactly the limists here between what the journalists wanted me to believe and what realy Jack the ripper did in the past ?!

The limits are very often not clear from the start. One has to analyze the sources from an external (1) as well as an internal (2) source critical perspective.

1. Questions to the sources from the external perspective:

What type of sources are they?
What were the function(s) of the sources when they were created?
What was their provenience?
What was their purpose?
How can you use them?


2. Questions to the sources from the internal perspective:

What do the sources say?
What do they not say?
What is the meaning in the sources?
Is the source credible?
Did the person(s) producing the source have the ability to tell the "truth"?
Is the person speaking in the source an eyewitness?
Are there internal contradictions in the source / in the narrative(s)?
Is the person producing the source or the person(s) giving statements in the source objective?
Are there any tendencies in the sources?
Did the person producing the source or the one(s) giving statements have a motive to say anything else than the "truth"?

Can I use this letter to try to understand the motive of the killings, if not why ?!

To be able to use this letter to understand the motive of the killings (=s!) you have to establish by using source criticism (above) that it was written by the postulated serial killer in 1888-1889 (if you think that is the time period).

Does this letter even belong to the past ?!

It does belong to the past but you will have to examine it. Try the questions above, letīs see what your answers will be!

Thank you.

No problem.

Best wishes, Pierre

[Henry Flower]

What do you want, Henry?

Pierre

I find it interesting that in the process of relentlessly stalking and hounding any proponent of the Lechmere theory you resurrect three-and-a-half-years-dead threads to demand they account for their ideas, and then when asked to present your own you basically say, "Erm, to do history proper you has to research. I dunno, this is controversial, the kidney letter. For more info here's a link to an essay on casebook wot I read!"

Fine work, just superb. Take a look in the mirror, buddy.

[Rainbow]

What do you want, Henry?

Pierre

Yes Pierre, I would like to listen to your opinion as a historian, not to tell me that the people were talking a lot about it..

Do you consider it a source of the past ?!

Did it happen in the past, that half the Kidney of Eddows had been sent to Mr. Lusk ?!

Where can I know exactly the limists here between what the journalists wanted me to believe and what realy Jack the ripper did in the past ?!

Can I use this letter to try to understand the motive of the killings, if not why ?!

Does this letter even belong to the past ?!

Thank you.

[Pierre]

Stating the bleeding obvious: 1 point

Only a professional historian could possibly take words this windy and generic and hope people think he's actually saying something worthwhile. Anyway, as the Historian who has Nearly Solved the Ripper Case I expect you've researched the matter for yourself in great depth. I expect you'll fill us in on your findings in the next couple of paragraphs. I mean, we already KNOW that researching things in a rounded way is the best way to generate knowledge, so a man who buries himself in The Archives night and day MUST have more to offer than that trite observation, right? Excited to read your insights and findings.

..... oh..... oh gee..... What a shame. Still, even here the Pro-Historian shines through and we see your acute powers of observation: people have indeed been discussing its validity a lot. Well spotted, Pierre.


Oh - cool - here comes a link to some fascinating archive, or a high-level academic research paper Pierre has submitted on the subject to a respected historical journal! Can't wait to read it!


Oh.... oh, but that's..... oh boy. That's just a link to another page on Casebook. Ermm......... gee, "thanks" for that.


Yeah, cheers, Pierre. Fantastic work ;p

What do you want, Henry?

Pierre

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

The Lusk package is as phony as a ten-dollar Rolex.

As are the contents of the package George Lusk reportedly received on 10th November 1888.

Regards,

Simon

[Henry Flower]

The letter with the kidney is problematical

Stating the bleeding obvious: 1 point

it is important to research it from all perspectives if one really wants to generate the best knowledge about it.

Only a professional historian could possibly take words this windy and generic and hope people think he's actually saying something worthwhile. Anyway, as the Historian who has Nearly Solved the Ripper Case I expect you've researched the matter for yourself in great depth. I expect you'll fill us in on your findings in the next couple of paragraphs. I mean, we already KNOW that researching things in a rounded way is the best way to generate knowledge, so a man who buries himself in The Archives night and day MUST have more to offer than that trite observation, right? Excited to read your insights and findings.

I have no idea if the letter has any validity at all but people have been discussing that a lot.

..... oh..... oh gee..... What a shame. Still, even here the Pro-Historian shines through and we see your acute powers of observation: people have indeed been discussing its validity a lot. Well spotted, Pierre.

Some of the main problems with it I think is to be found here:

Oh - cool - here comes a link to some fascinating archive, or a high-level academic research paper Pierre has submitted on the subject to a respected historical journal! Can't wait to read it!

http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/dst-cmdlusk.html

Oh.... oh, but that's..... oh boy. That's just a link to another page on Casebook. Ermm......... gee, "thanks" for that.

Cheers, Pierre

Yeah, cheers, Pierre. Fantastic work ;p