Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

distances between kills.odd

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
    No, it's because I know a bit about psychology and neurobiology, and I recognise pseudo-psychoanalytic bull$hit when I see it.
    LOL! too funny sam
    and true

    even its own founder abandoned it once he saw it wasn't making him enough money.
    "Is all that we see or seem
    but a dream within a dream?"

    -Edgar Allan Poe


    "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
    quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

    -Frederick G. Abberline

    Comment


    • Originally posted by albie View Post
      Oh, you've read his books then?
      Only one of them and quite a few years ago.

      Toilet paper with words written on it.
      Regards

      Herlock






      "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

      Comment


      • Originally posted by albie View Post
        Prove it.

        Sholmes tried. Well, he insulted my theory and hence me, then he tried earnestly to prove my theory was just coincidence. Failed and went back to his usual level of being a bully.

        He failed. As will you.
        Will you stop bleating about me being a Ďbully?í

        If you canít take criticism when you propose a theory that no one else believes you canít expect a round of applause.
        Regards

        Herlock






        "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

        Comment


        • Originally posted by albie View Post
          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 ďYou donít even have one.Ē Many people that know far more about the case than I do donít have a theory. In fact most people donít have a theory. You donít need a theory to have an opinion.

          Iím denying the existence of magic because thereís no reliable evidence for it and Iím not gullible.

          You accuse me of defaming Icke!

          That like saying that I donít show Ted Bundy enough respect.
          Regards

          Herlock






          "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

          Comment


          • Originally posted by albie View Post
            '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 ďweíll they would say that wouldnít they.Ē
            Regards

            Herlock






            "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

            Comment


            • Originally posted by albie View Post
              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 donít have to believe in magic to merit your theory by the way.
              Regards

              Herlock






              "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                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.
                Regards

                Herlock






                "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                  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.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                    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.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                      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.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                        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.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
                          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)

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
                            Will you stop bleating about me being a Ďbully?í

                            If you canít take criticism when you propose a theory that no one else believes you canít 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.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by albie View Post
                              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?
                              Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                              "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, GŲtzendšmmerung, 1888)

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
                                Can you hear yourself? So your a great mind?

                                And what relevance is ďYou donít even have one.Ē Many people that know far more about the case than I do donít have a theory. In fact most people donít have a theory. You donít need a theory to have an opinion.

                                Iím denying the existence of magic because thereís no reliable evidence for it and Iím not gullible.

                                You accuse me of defaming Icke!

                                That like saying that I donít 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 donít need a theory to have an opinion.

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

                                >>Iím denying the existence of magic because thereís no reliable evidence for it and Iím 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 donít 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.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X