Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[Jeff Leahy]

Hello Chris. Thanks.

Well, not you. And I do not accuse you.

Let's drop this, eh?

Cheers.
LC

As suggested your fighting a battle you can't win?

[Chris]

Well, not you. And I do not accuse you.

Let's drop this, eh?

The point is, Lynn, that everyone here has been well aware of the problems with the provenance of the "shawl", from the very beginning. It's been the most obvious thing in the world. It's ridiculous to pretend that anyone here has said this solves the case, or is a "gullible science worshipper", or anything like that.

Drop it by all means.

[lynn cates]

drop it

Hello Chris. Thanks.

Well, not you. And I do not accuse you.

Let's drop this, eh?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

fantastic

Hello Trevor. Thanks.

True; however, I may differ as to what counts as fantastic.

Cheers.
LC

[Chris]

No offense, but if you read the posts (yes, 4000+), you'll find your dictum a tad naive.

OK. If you're accusing me of being naive, who exactly are you accusing of being a "gullible science worshiper"?

Let's have some names.

[Trevor Marriott]

Hello Chris. Thanks.

Not referring to those who have already rejected the nonsense. I meant only the gullible science worshipers.

Cheers.
LC

“When convention and science offer us no answers, can we not finally turn to the fantastic as plausibility?”

Fox Mulder-The X Files, Episode 1 1993

[lynn cates]

significance

Hello Jeff. Thanks.

Yes, the significance is that people STILL want a solution to the cases/s.

Guess it's up to us to find the REAL solution, eh?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

dictum

Hello Chris. Thanks.

No offense, but if you read the posts (yes, 4000+), you'll find your dictum a tad naive.

Cheers.
LC

[Jeff Leahy]

Hello Jeff. Thanks.

What fight? The shawl lads are in full retreat as the "science" dissolves before our eyes. In fact, one has been effectively gagged by his higher ups.

It's about time for serious researchers--like me--to get back to work. This rot has taken up too much of my valuable time anyway.

Cheers.
LC

I think we both understand the importance and wider perspective

Jx

[Chris]

Not referring to those who have already rejected the nonsense. I meant only the gullible science worshipers.

As people keep pointing out to you, there is no one of that description here.

[pinkmoon]

None of this is true because the shawl couldn't have been at any of the murder sites.

[lynn cates]

talking

Hello Amanda. Now you're talking.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

referrence

Hello Chris. Thanks.

Not referring to those who have already rejected the nonsense. I meant only the gullible science worshipers.

Cheers.
LC

[Amanda Sumner]

Pink, that's the third time at least that you've posted that message on this thread.

One of the most sensible posts on here. As the shawl was not at the murder scene it hardly matters what was or is on it now. Any DNA is irrelevant to the case.

Amanda ( S )

[lynn cates]

science

Hello Jeff. Thanks.

What fight? The shawl lads are in full retreat as the "science" dissolves before our eyes. In fact, one has been effectively gagged by his higher ups.

It's about time for serious researchers--like me--to get back to work. This rot has taken up too much of my valuable time anyway.

Cheers.
LC