distances between kills.odd

[albie]

The mindset that requires valid evidence.

We understand that you don’t have to believe in magic to merit your theory by the way.

I don't think you do understand that. If you did you would accept my theory.

Valid evidence isn't also in the positive, it is in the negative.

You have provided none for the latter.

[albie]

Nope you resort to the conspiracy theory mantra of “we’ll they would say that wouldn’t they.”

I haven't said that at all.

[albie]

Hysterical nonsense.

Dianetics is utter drivel created by a charlatan which is now used by one of the most sinister, damaging organisations on earth.

If your theory was valid people on here would respond accordingly but just like a typical bad loser you can only accuse everyone of being closed minded or too dumb to see it. Have you e er considered that there are people on here who have been studying the case for years and that they might know a bit more about it than you do?

Nope you resort to the conspiracy theory mantra of “we’ll they would say that wouldn’t they.”

>>Dianetics is utter drivel blah blah

There you again saying stuff but backing it up with no evidence. No wonder you are a ripperologist.

>>If your theory was valid people on here would respond accordingly but just like a typical bad loser you can only accuse everyone of being closed minded or too dumb to see it.

You have yet to prove my theory is invalid. I've been asking you for weeks now. No answer.

>>Have you e er considered that there are people on here who have been studying the case for years and that they might know a bit more about it than you do?

What of it? I know as much as I need to know. If my theory is not sound then demonstrate it. I'm all eyes. You call me a bad loser? HAHAHHA. Kettle calling pot I think is the term. And I bet the spout has melted.

You have continually failed to debunk my theory. You have lost and are not doing it well. I feel great about my theory now. The more you insult me and my theory the better I feel about it.

I'm right.

[albie]

Can you hear yourself? So your a great mind?

And what relevance is “You don’t even have one.” Many people that know far more about the case than I do don’t have a theory. In fact most people don’t have a theory. You don’t need a theory to have an opinion.

I’m denying the existence of magic because there’s no reliable evidence for it and I’m not gullible.

You accuse me of defaming Icke!

That like saying that I don’t show Ted Bundy enough respect.

I think most people have a great mind. It's just a shame you aren't using it in this thread.

>>You don’t need a theory to have an opinion.

A clown has an opinion and no means of backing it up.

>>I’m denying the existence of magic because there’s no reliable evidence for it and I’m not gullible.

There you go, you proved me right. The only reason you do not like my theory is because you think I'm saying magic is real.

>>That like saying that I don’t show Ted Bundy enough respect.[/

Oh. So a man trying to save the world is comparable, to you, to a pervert that raped and murdered maybe a hundred women.

Right.

[Sam Flynn]

I'm not saying Dianetics is valid or not. I am talking about the mindset that denies it as a knee jerk reaction.

When it comes to theories of the mind or the Universe, even experienced scientists have to work really hard to produce verifiable models, so how should we give any credence to the whims of L Ron Hubbard or David Icke?

[albie]

Will you stop bleating about me being a ‘bully?’

If you can’t take criticism when you propose a theory that no one else believes you can’t expect a round of applause.

If you are acting with me as you would with other people then you truly are a bully. If you are just acting that way with me then you truly are a frightened bully. That's the worst kind.

[albie]

Only one of them and quite a few years ago.

Toilet paper with words written on it.

Oh then you'll be able answer questions about the book. Which was it?(there's your first question)

[albie]

No, it's because I know a bit about psychology and neurobiology, and I recognise pseudo-psychoanalytic bull$hit when I see it.

Still not proving it is bunkum. I thought you guys would understand the logical process of debating points of evidence.

[albie]

Because scientists are constantly trying to debunk theirs and other scientists theories-and if new evidence or observations come in then the theories are discarded or revised to match reality-its called the scientific method.

I don't have a problem with a theory about the ripper that he believed in magic or had something to do with magic-if there is a shred of evidence that there is. But there isn't.

anyone can make any random connection and say it points to something. Ill show you and example:
the ripper was mutilating his victims and removing internal organs just like the mayans did.

In one case he even took away the heart.


therefore he thought he was a Mayan Priest and was reinacting their human sacrifice ritual.


prove me wrong.


you cant. because its not scientific.


unless you show actual facts and evidence, it is just a crackpot theory-no different than the royal conspiracy, or the masonic theory.


and we know from the history of serial killers that the belief in magic rarely, if ever, plays a part. at least at the core of there motivation. so theres that too.

Yes. Science has strict rules on what it accepts as truth. But if something has not been tested, like dianetics, then why on earth would you rule it out? That's as stupid as ruling it in before scientific testing.

Mayan? And all you have as your evidence is a heart? I have a dozen points of evidence. Find another eleven correlations to Mayan sacrifices and maybe you will have made a point.

You guys just aren't what I expected. I thought you'd see beyond the ridiculousness of my theory and appraise it based on points of evidence. I guess The Internet is all over the web.

[albie]

L Ron Hubbard wasn't even a good science fiction writer, let alone a philosopher or founder of a religion. he was a con man.

I'm not saying Dianetics is valid or not. I am talking about the mindset that denies it as a knee jerk reaction.

[albie]

yes-minds like Einstein, newton and Maxwell.


not albie on casebook trying to connect an unsolved serial murder case to myths about a Greco-Roman God.


big difference .LOL

I see you did not add your own name there. Bit mystified by numbers are you?

You have no argument against my theory. Evidence can come in any form. There is no one in the world other than you guys who think otherwise.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Because scientists are constantly trying to debunk theirs and other scientists theories-and if new evidence or observations come in then the theories are discarded or revised to match reality-its called the scientific method.

I don't have a problem with a theory about the ripper that he believed in magic or had something to do with magic-if there is a shred of evidence that there is. But there isn't.

anyone can make any random connection and say it points to something. Ill show you and example:
the ripper was mutilating his victims and removing internal organs just like the mayans did.

In one case he even took away the heart.


therefore he thought he was a Mayan Priest and was reinacting their human sacrifice ritual.


prove me wrong.


you cant. because its not scientific.


unless you show actual facts and evidence, it is just a crackpot theory-no different than the royal conspiracy, or the masonic theory.


and we know from the history of serial killers that the belief in magic rarely, if ever, plays a part. at least at the core of there motivation. so theres that too.

[Herlock Sholmes]

And let me tell you. I bet you laughed at the concept of dianetics before you ever learned a single thing about it. Because you have a certain mindset. If it doesn't come from a scientist in a white coat it isn't real.

This is a cowardly mindset.

And you hear the word 'venus' regarding my theory and the mindset kicks in. And you become blind to the notion that you don't have to believe in magic to merit my theory.

You have an innate inability to see this.

The mindset that requires valid evidence.

We understand that you don’t have to believe in magic to merit your theory by the way.

[Herlock Sholmes]

'OF COURSE IT IS' what an argument! OF COURSE IT IS. Oh, how could I have been so stupid. If only I had had these words in my mind to use.

I neither believe or don't believe in dianetics. I'm just trying to establish what counts as debunking to you.

And you have....drum roll...Wikipedia.

Where is your empirical evidence that dianetics has been debunked? I will consider a hundred peer reviewed papers based on actual controlled scientific studies. That's a fair amount.

This has never been done. Until it has then we have no right to believe or disbelieve in the theory, as with mine.

Why am I having to explain the basics of logic to grown men?

I think you guys are desperate. I've contributed a new theory with new evidence that works better than any other. And you HAVEN'T. GET HIM!!!!!!!!

Hysterical nonsense.

Dianetics is utter drivel created by a charlatan which is now used by one of the most sinister, damaging organisations on earth.

If your theory was valid people on here would respond accordingly but just like a typical bad loser you can only accuse everyone of being closed minded or too dumb to see it. Have you e er considered that there are people on here who have been studying the case for years and that they might know a bit more about it than you do?

Nope you resort to the conspiracy theory mantra of “we’ll they would say that wouldn’t they.”

[Herlock Sholmes]

All numbers are random to a fool. A telephone number is just squiggles to a Neanderthal.

To a great mind numbers and correlations are the signifier of universal laws.

And who is saying the queen is a lizard? You keep using reductio ad absurdum/ straw man arguments. You don't need to believe in magic to know that some people DO.

You have no argument at all.

You accept that some people do believe in magic because you are here defaming such people(Icke). What is your problem with my theory? You don't even have one. Like I said, you are subconsciously thinking you are denying the existence of magic by denying my theory.

Your mind is truly bizarre. No self awareness at all.

Can you hear yourself? So your a great mind?

And what relevance is “You don’t even have one.” Many people that know far more about the case than I do don’t have a theory. In fact most people don’t have a theory. You don’t need a theory to have an opinion.

I’m denying the existence of magic because there’s no reliable evidence for it and I’m not gullible.

You accuse me of defaming Icke!

That like saying that I don’t show Ted Bundy enough respect.