Blurred

[DJA]

Algernon Allies in the Cleveland Street Scandal .

As you probably know his previous job and lodging was at The Marlborough Club.
Established in 1868 by William Waldorf Astor,King Edward VII,Sir Henry Irving and Ernest Shackleton so that King Edward VII had a quiet spot for dinner,cards,etc.

[Elamarna]

Hi.

Am out at the moment so will respond to the post by Pierre later.
Such a poor post . Still it requires a firm response.

Steve

[GUT]

Pierre,
So far as I know you have not provided the first credential, and I can assure you that your postings do not inspire trust.

curious

And he's been asked numerous times to demonstrate his qualifications as an "Academic Historian" as he describes himself, something he has failed repeatedly to do and yet when real historians read his words here they say "That's not a person who holds an MA in history, or if so the University that awarded it needs investigating".

[GUT]

Well the above makes about as much sense as most of what Pierre says anyway.

[curious]

What sort of a commentary is that? Now you are outside of reality. I am a historian. So I am not "anyone" but I specialize in source criticism.



Regards, Pierre [/B]

Pierre,
So far as I know you have not provided the first credential, and I can assure you that your postings do not inspire trust.

curious

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=curious;378753]

Thanks, Steve and GUT, for continuing the fight, especially if you fear newbies will be led astray. I suspect I give people more credit for intelligence than they perhaps deserve.

I have noted the unparalleled arrogance. However, for me, it has gone from hilarious to pathetic and I wonder what's wrong. I've read widely, of course, but not being in the medical field, I can't be sure.

I've been glad numerous times, as I've read through a thread and found something I felt I needed to respond to, when I read a little further, the two of you (and others) had fought the fight before me.

Thanks again.

curious

Yes, thank you for continuing the fight. Let the fighters strive vigorously and resolutely to gain power over the enemy, and save the proselytes from being led astray into the dark paths of smoke screens and personal opinions!

Yes, thank you for continuing the fight. May the fighters enlighten the proselytes and hand over the intelligent old traditions to them, with objectivity and neutrality, through their eternal knowledge about the unbiased and reliable sources!

Yes, thank you for continuing the fight! Let these brave men defend ripperology against the hilarious and pathetic unparalleled arrogance of the enemy!

Let us rejoice and be glad, and perhaps the battle will soon be over!

Regards, Pierre

[curious]

Hi Curious,

yes I don't mind anyone having any ideas, that’s what makes this so interesting, however that seems to be something that some object to, and have stated that they wish to destroy the world of "Ripperology".





Such an attitude shows:

1. A complete and fundamental misunderstanding of "Ripperology". Much of the research carried out here and at other sites is not directly related to the identity of the killer, or as some say killers. Naming the killer would not stop that.

2. The arrogance of such a statement, that naming a suspect, could prove beyond doubt the id, and that it would just be accepted, and that would lead to the end of "Ripperology", is unreal!




Hi GUT that’s the point that those who make comments about people dancing to the tune of one person, miss completely.

The various statements made without naming a suspect and posts which tell the community how they MUST think, and what is ACCEPTABLE to ask as a question must be challenged.

Regards

Steve

Thanks, Steve and GUT, for continuing the fight, especially if you fear newbies will be led astray. I suspect I give people more credit for intelligence than they perhaps deserve.

I have noted the unparalleled arrogance. However, for me, it has gone from hilarious to pathetic and I wonder what's wrong. I've read widely, of course, but not being in the medical field, I can't be sure.

I've been glad numerous times, as I've read through a thread and found something I felt I needed to respond to, when I read a little further, the two of you (and others) had fought the fight before me.

Thanks again.

curious

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Elamarna;378687][QUOTE]

Post 130 you said

"The newspaper articles have tendencies. It doesn´t matter in the papers if "Halse was there". The articles are not reliable."

The articles being discussed were the reports in the newspapers about the evidence given at the inquest about the GSG, those are referred to in press terms as Court Reports.

And in historical terms they are referred to as historical sources.

Yes Court Reports are different from other newspaper reports in that they reflect what was said, and do not give an opinion.

No. They are not different from other newspaper ARTICLES. They can contain bias just like any other source. Do not use the word "report". It is not a matter of "objective" and "neutral" reporting. It is a matter of written articles.

It is clear that there is no reliable academic research on the reliability of newspaper Court Reports in the 19th century, or at least none which are known.

So you have arrived at the same conclusion as I.

If one is asked for data to support an hypothesis one puts forward, and such data is not available, it is normal and polite to say there is none; not to tell someone to go look for it themselves!

There is DATA, Steve. In my pilot. How come you can not understand this? Do you understand the difference between data, analysis and interpretation? Do you understand what I have done?

However the post claims this hypothesis is based on a pilot study, therefore it would be normal to supply this in place of the data requested above.

But you see, the data is in the study. What you are asking for is other research, the same research that you just told me (after I did the same) was non existent.

If this is in the form of a post already on the boards, and it is highly debatable that any post on this thread contains enough to be termed a pilot study, then it would be polite to point one towards it, even if it is inadequate.

If you want to discard everything I write here I will not be able to answer your posts anymore, since they will be biased by you wish to discard everything I write. If you want to discuss with me, at least you should be honest in your comments.

Let us be clear, the post states the opinion that these reports are unreliable, they have a tendency, a bias.

Not "reports" but newspaper articles.

They are used here as a symbolic capital by ripperologists and therefore not subjected to the proper source criticism.

Instead there is an illusion among ripperologists that there are certain sources that are "neutral" and "objective".

They are not per definition a class of neutral and objective sources - they are, like any other sources, subjects for source criticism.

IF you do not perform source criticism you can NOT trust the sources, and then you can NOT generate knowledge about the past.

However Pierre, this opinion is based on your own pilot study.

It is not an "opinion" but a scientific fact well known in the world among historians and social scientists that sources have bias. That is just plain common knowledge and there is NOTHING radical about it.

Just because ripperologists love their newspaper article "reports" does not mean they are free from bias, error and problems.

Anyone can say, I have done a study and that study shows that......

What sort of a commentary is that? Now you are outside of reality. I am a historian. So I am not "anyone" but I specialize in source criticism.

That is JUST the opinion of one individual, it is not an established fact, nor has it, far more importantly, been academically tested by peer review.

An opinion. nothing more, nothing less!

regards

Steve

OK Steve, so you are behaving like a "postmodernist". "That is just an opinion". I could say the same to you: That is just your opinion. And then we have total relativism and circular arguments.

And all of this just because you do not want me to touch your precious "Reports" with a capital R and show you that they are biased.

Great!

And another thing. 128 years of knowledge of English did not lead to finding the ripper.

Regards, Pierre

[Elamarna]

Thank you, Steve. You said it far better than I would have, but those outrageous statements definitely needed to be addressed.

I log on only occasionally anymore, and I am stunned to find people continuing to dance to this particular fiddle. I can't understand the complete waste of time.

Again, thanks, Steve.

Hi Curious,

yes I don't mind anyone having any ideas, that’s what makes this so interesting, however that seems to be something that some object to, and have stated that they wish to destroy the world of "Ripperology".

That is my destiny, David, since everyone is afraid of what they might hear in the future.

So everything I say must be disputed from the beginning.

Otherwise the small field of ripperology may be destroyed.

Regards, Pierre

Such an attitude shows:

1. A complete and fundamental misunderstanding of "Ripperology". Much of the research carried out here and at other sites is not directly related to the identity of the killer, or as some say killers. Naming the killer would not stop that.

2. The arrogance of such a statement, that naming a suspect, could prove beyond doubt the id, and that it would just be accepted, and that would lead to the end of "Ripperology", is unreal!

Some, I think, are also concerned that, if left unchallenged, in future newbies will read his rubbish and think it's true.

Yet others I suspect simply enjoy the argument.

Hi GUT that’s the point that those who make comments about people dancing to the tune of one person, miss completely.

The various statements made without naming a suspect and posts which tell the community how they MUST think, and what is ACCEPTABLE to ask as a question must be challenged.

Regards

Steve

[DJA]

Sailorman George Hutchinson had an unexplained child living with him at one stage.

The child's parents resided in Primrose Street,an extension of Hanbury Street and Spital Square.

[jerryd]

Anyone heard of The Rose and Crown Coffee House at 38 Houndsditch!

Sure have. Was used by the police to sequester witnesses. i.e Algernon Allies in the Cleveland Street Scandal case. Held there by Abberline.

Also, A good possibility to a link with Thomas Conway junior that you asked about before.

By the way, Charles Hammond is a shoe in for A-man. Same dark moustache turned up at the ends, dark skin, flashy dress[just like the pimp he was], gold watch chain and a seal from Major Moet.[Thanks to Glenn Chandler for the seal info in his book, The Sins of Jack Saul] The horseshoe pin probably came from the Equerry to the Prince of Wales, Lord Somerset, to keep quiet about his [Somerset] affair with Allies.

[DJA]

Who is your suspect/theory?

Anyone heard of The Rose and Crown Coffee House at 38 Houndsditch!

[Azarna]

Therefore, it was with high probability not written in a good round hand but As Swanson said, in a normal hand.

Regards, Pierre

A "good round hand" was a "normal hand".

[Abby Normal]

Jack used to lecture and write on his green boards with his left hand in his trousers.

Have a few other instances that indicates he was born left handed.

Pretty sure he was ambidextrous.

He also used his sense of touch in regards to his patients ill health by actually feeling for the diseased organ.

Those patients included Nichols and Conway/Eddowes.

Anyone considered a link between Eddowes' son and her leaving her defacto at Houndsditch at 2pm on the last day of her life?

Who is your suspect/theory?

[Mayerling]

I will have to consider your response Pierre.

Jeff