A Strange Astronomical Pattern

[Aldebaran]

For this to have any true validity one would have to show the significance (to the killer) of the choice of days for the crimes, and the positions of stars in the heaven on those occasions, which takes us closer to the field of astrology rather than astronomy. Slight possibility but it is not really a strong one (or a provable one).

Can't help repeating this: "The fault dear Brutus is in ourselves, and not in the stars!"

Why would you think the positions of the constellations would change from day to day? They are stable for quite a long time, as the earth doesn't rotate that fast. The killer could make a murder map and take his time. It's really child's play if you can read the heavens. I'll show you how easy it is in a minute.

[Aldebaran]

Okay, this is tonight's sky [really] over the United Kingdom, looking from the south.



Here is a very rudimentary street map. I placed the most important planets and stars on the map with crude red dots. If I took my time, I could do a much better job with the distances and even the dots. The longest time it took was to upload these two images on the photo hosting site. Now I can go out and kill six victims for the next few weeks. I'll probably become the Hammersmith-Fulham Ripper, but the police will likely be clueless as to where I'll strike next. You won't be, so be sure and tip them off.



If it's that simple, why is it so impossible?

[Mayerling]

Why would you think the positions of the constellations would change from day to day? They are stable for quite a long time, as the earth doesn't rotate that fast. The killer could make a murder map and take his time. It's really child's play if you can read the heavens. I'll show you how easy it is in a minute.

I will admit that large heavenly bodies do move slowly - you could demonstrate this, but I have seen photos of planets or stars moving one day after another. I will say though that you still would have to show the significance of the dates chosen for such astrological/astronomical planning - also why the victims were chosen (by chance of whom was available at those places, or because of whom was the actual target with the others picked by sheer serendipity (they were at the other designated spots).

Jeff

[curious]

Yes, there was something special about them because they were among the brightest stars anyone could see in the heavens in that fall season. Anyone with a knowledge of astronomy or navigation could easily use them to create a murder map by using any street map.

a sailor, perhaps?

[DJA]

But I seem to recall others that were if the same tenor, shapes out of the sites, one bloke even got an arrow.

Then there's Van Gogh.

And Lewis Carrol, who seems to gave almost reappeared in Pierre's latest drivel about anagrams (that aren't).

So on the whole not even in the top ten.

About 4/1 for 65th worst.

[Aldebaran]

I will admit that large heavenly bodies do move slowly - you could demonstrate this, but I have seen photos of planets or stars moving one day after another. I will say though that you still would have to show the significance of the dates chosen for such astrological/astronomical planning - also why the victims were chosen (by chance of whom was available at those places, or because of whom was the actual target with the others picked by sheer serendipity (they were at the other designated spots).

Jeff

The movements aren't really noticeable for quite some time. There are no significant dates involved. If one wanted to establish such a diabolical modus operandi, you look at the sky on one evening, preferably with magnification. and make a map like I did. If the Ripper did it, he chose a densely populated area. He didn't choose his victims by anything except the type of women they were under any MO. But he was pretty much guaranteed to come across some likely victim any time he set out. All he had to do was go to his dot on the map and wait there like the clever fellow he thought he was. Or perhaps he was so crazy as to believe it was all part of a divine plan. I believe that some of the Ripper letters are genuine and they are quite taunting. Obviously, the Ripper thought himself to be thumbing his nose at the police. Since his murders give him the same kind of thrill whether there is any plan to them or not, having a set pattern won't much matter except that he can add the element of playing a game with the police.

Regardless, he wouldn't be able to commit the murders in the same area for too long, plan or no plan. He'd have to move on to a different location--and for all we know he did.

[John Wheat]

It may seem ridiculous to you because you can't imagine any killer thinking along those lines. The fault may lie with your lack of imagination. Or can't you even imagine that possibility? It is very easy to be a naysayer, to use the words "That's ridiculous" but do you have so much as a single argument as to why it couldn't possibly be so? Of course not. Naysayers seldom have. Naysaying is a mechanism for making one seem superior. Nice try.

You want my opinion as to what are the most ridiculous threads on this board? That's easy. The ones in which certain parties here engage in tiresome bickering--like kids in a schoolyard. No one can seem to concentrate on any one thread for very long, seem to start new ones for no real reason instead of continuing older ones so that there could be some semblance of collective linear thinking or debate for anyone new coming here to learn from. Few people here seem to want to put their heads together for very long--are all over the place continuously every day. I don't think the Jack the Ripper murders will ever be solved but, if there was some chance they could be, it would likely never happen here. Too many people like you and not enough like me.

Surprisingly I happen to agree largely with you about your points about what are the most ridiculous threads. However I think you'll find I'm not the problem. People who come up with crackpot theories are though.

Cheers John

[GUT]

Surprisingly I happen to agree largely with you about your points about what are the most ridiculous threads. However I think you'll find I'm not the problem. People who come up with crackpot theories are though.

Cheers John

And boy there are plenty of those.

[MysterySinger]

Interesting take on the subject. Not sure it has any legs but well done for posting. Jupiter can't be involved though as it is the bringer of jollity. But if folks don't care for this thread, they could try posting something "more interesting" or "more credible" don't you think?

Boo hop you didn't answer my question.

[Harry D]

Look at the murder spots of other serial killers who worked in a localized area and I'm sure you could line the dots up into some pattern. Also, how fortunate that the killer was able to find victims at those specific locations, instead of just randomly trolling the neighbourhood.

[Aldebaran]

Surprisingly I happen to agree largely with you about your points about what are the most ridiculous threads. However I think you'll find I'm not the problem. People who come up with crackpot theories are though.

Cheers John

On the contrary, people who never come up with anything but use this forum to exercise their frustration or belligerence issues would be the problem. Unless you can explain what your continuous insults are in aid of or how they further the understanding of any aspect of the case in question. More significantly, you either don't seem to know an observation from a theory or are unwilling to make the distinction.

When I formulate a theory, and I certainly have done in a different field, I certainly don't start off by saying that it might be a sheer coincidence. And I also don't continue by asserting that any proof is impossible. In fact, I wouldn't even try to write a brief dissertation on this because 1 know nothing about the murderer, his profession, his knowledge, his education, or even his hobbies. There's nothing to go on. All I've done here is observe that there is a pattern, in my opinion, [to which others evidently don't believe I have a right without being insulted] and demonstrated how easily such a pattern could be made.

Some of you, who have been on this forum a lot longer than I have, evidently are behaving in the knowledge that the behavior rules here aren't enforced. I don't know but, if that is the case, then so be it. I can assure you that, if getting into a peeing contest of words with me is the objective--you'll lose. That's my theory, one I can certainly prove.

[John Wheat]

On the contrary, people who never come up with anything but use this forum to exercise their frustration or belligerence issues would be the problem. Unless you can explain what your continuous insults are in aid of or how they further the understanding of any aspect of the case in question. More significantly, you either don't seem to know an observation from a theory or are unwilling to make the distinction.

When I formulate a theory, and I certainly have done in a different field, I certainly don't start off by saying that it might be a sheer coincidence. And I also don't continue by asserting that any proof is impossible. In fact, I wouldn't even try to write a brief dissertation on this because 1 know nothing about the murderer, his profession, his knowledge, his education, or even his hobbies. There's nothing to go on. All I've done here is observe that there is a pattern, in my opinion, [to which others evidently don't believe I have a right without being insulted] and demonstrated how easily such a pattern could be made.

Some of you, who have been on this forum a lot longer than I have, evidently are behaving in the knowledge that the behavior rules here aren't enforced. I don't know but, if that is the case, then so be it. I can assure you that, if getting into a peeing contest of words with me is the objective--you'll lose. That's my theory, one I can certainly prove.

When have I specifically insulted you? I have suggested your theory is a crackpot theory which it is. And I have suggested that this is one of the most ridiculous threads on the site again which it is. I haven't broken any site rules. I think you'll find personal insults are against the site rules. But I have never personally insulted you nor am I planning to. I suggest you re-read the site rules. And I certainly don't use this site to exercise any frustrations however I know when a theory has merit and when one has no merit whatsoever.

[Aldebaran]

Look at the murder spots of other serial killers who worked in a localized area and I'm sure you could line the dots up into some pattern. Also, how fortunate that the killer was able to find victims at those specific locations, instead of just randomly trolling the neighbourhood.

I can't agree that there would necessarily be a pattern that resembled anything. You could draw a line from one site to another and get nothing but a bunch of intersecting lines for your pains. And I'll repeat--in the Whitechapel district, the killer worked in a densely populated area and I also wrote before that he didn't just have to stand in one spot. He could still remain within a small area by moving to neighboring streets. In my opinion, hanging about near a pub, of which there were very many, would have probably served his purpose. Look, all of that applies even without any fixed pattern. Serial killers don't simply act on a whim when it comes right down to it. Most of them had some sort of plan or MO, a pattern of action that they had discovered facilitated their ability to find victims.

But, when it comes to patterns, had that night sky not been the one visible at the time of the murders I would not even have mentioned it. That is the only factor that could connect such a pattern to the killings and I said so right from the beginning.

[Aldebaran]

When have I specifically insulted you? I have suggested your theory is a crackpot theory which it is. And I have suggested that this is one of the most ridiculous threads on the site again which it is. I haven't broken any site rules. I think you'll find personal insults are against the site rules. But I have never personally insulted you nor am I planning to. I suggest you re-read the site rules. And I certainly don't use this site to exercise any frustrations however I know when a theory has merit and when one has no merit whatsoever.

Since I have already explained to you that I hold no theory, continuing to assert that I have "a crackpot theory" is not an insult? In what sort of world do you exist that you believe you are innocent of

1. Being rude

2. Being dense

??

It even looks like you have an inability to comprehend the site rules to which you direct me. Why are you still in this thread? Just to keep repeating the words "crackpot theory'? Or do you have a quota of bandwidth that you feel you have to waste on a daily basis? I have news. Well-bred, well-spoken people find it sufficient to say, "I do not believe your theory can be correct" and then supply some points to the contra. Rude egotists think the fact that they have vented their two word opinion is sufficient and don't feel the need to elaborate, of course. [Not that they could]. Now, once again, I do not have a theory about the JTR case. If you continue to state that I do, cracked, potted, painted, or placed on your window sill, people will be justified in suspecting dyslexia.

[Aldebaran]

This might be of interest. Under which serial killer category did Jack fall--organized or disorganized?

http://www.actforlibraries.org/organ...erial-killers/

Gacy dug the graves in advance? Is that really true? If so, that takes the cake for cold-blooded--but organized.