Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Maybrick--a Problem in Logic

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

  • Originally posted by Observer View Post

    Put that horse in the Grande National. I've stuck an e on the end of Grand by the way it's de rigueur around these parts at the moment it seems. The thing is it's an easy shot for the National, lets make it more interesting. How about we make it run backwards blindfolded wearing oversize wellington boots with a 15 stone penalty. I'd still put my shirt on it.
    I'd be willing to consider investing a proportion of Ms Iconoclast's inheritance on the self-same nag were it to be ridden by anyone other than Bongo Barrett.
    Iconoclast
    Soldier of Fortune, Man of Peace, Destroyer of Images, Nice Guy, Genius

    Comment


    • To those posters who are totally convinced that the Diary was a merry money-making jape conceived and executed by Mike "Fitzgerald" Barrett and no other - why do you still post here if your minds really are made up? What are you trying to acheive, if anything? Why don't you leave the debate between those silly people who believe that Jim really did write it and that he really was the Ripper, and those even sillier persons who think that it might just be an old creation that just may have been passed down through the Graham family? Trying to convert us, or what? I mean, it's not as if you're prepared to actually debate the issue - you just make statements and not much else. Or is it that most of you are not quite as convinced about Barrett as you'd have us believe?

      Graham
      We are suffering from a plethora of surmise, conjecture and hypothesis. - Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure Of Silver Blaze

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Graham View Post
        To those posters who are totally convinced that the Diary was a merry money-making jape conceived and executed by Mike "Fitzgerald" Barrett and no other - why do you still post here if your minds really are made up? What are you trying to acheive, if anything? Why don't you leave the debate between those silly people who believe that Jim really did write it and that he really was the Ripper, and those even sillier persons who think that it might just be an old creation that just may have been passed down through the Graham family? Trying to convert us, or what? I mean, it's not as if you're prepared to actually debate the issue - you just make statements and not much else. Or is it that most of you are not quite as convinced about Barrett as you'd have us believe?

        Graham
        "Wellllll, what else COULD it be?????"

        Tee hee ...
        Iconoclast
        Soldier of Fortune, Man of Peace, Destroyer of Images, Nice Guy, Genius

        Comment


        • Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post
          Hello Ike.
          Now, I could sit back and say, “You see! The Piltdown debunkers can’t even agree on who dunnit! Some say Teilhard de Chardin, some say Dawson, and, lordy, some dumb-arse even says Conan Doyle! And if they can’t agree, well my dear fellow, then why not face the reality—or at least the POSSIBILITY-- that Piltdown Man IS REAL!”
          Entertaining post, rj. Always well thought out, even though we rarely agree on anything.

          Can I just remind those who cite hoaxes in order - bizarrely - to prove that there are hoaxes (Mike J.G. and the others who gloat with this empty logic), this one has already been shown to be a hoax, categorically, so it ain't the same as the scrapbook which has not been. I don't have to be a member of the same Club as those who believed P Man to be genuine simply because I believe in something else which ain't yet proven. I might be wrong in my belief, but someone else previously being suckered-in by some other belief and then being shown to be wrong ain't proof that I've been. Amen to that!

          Why am I saying 'ain't' all of a sudden? "Martha!!!"
          Iconoclast
          Soldier of Fortune, Man of Peace, Destroyer of Images, Nice Guy, Genius

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Graham View Post
            To those posters who are totally convinced that the Diary was a merry money-making jape conceived and executed by Mike "Fitzgerald" Barrett and no other - why do you still post here if your minds really are made up? What are you trying to acheive, if anything? Why don't you leave the debate between those silly people who believe that Jim really did write it and that he really was the Ripper, and those even sillier persons who think that it might just be an old creation that just may have been passed down through the Graham family? Trying to convert us, or what? I mean, it's not as if you're prepared to actually debate the issue - you just make statements and not much else. Or is it that most of you are not quite as convinced about Barrett as you'd have us believe?

            Graham
            Oh, I get it now. You want to play tennis without a net.

            Okay then, carry on. Let's watch Caz and Icon go at it in full debate, and let the best debater win! I promise to sit by as silently as Anne Graham for the next six months, and Lord Orsam is banned and Mike is busy with the Liverpool pub scene, so there shall be no interruptions. Let the debate begin!

            Comment


            • Oooh dear....a phrase containing the words 'touched' and 'sore point' springs to mind. I wish a 'debate' would begin, because thus far from the Barrettites we've had only statements.

              Graham
              We are suffering from a plethora of surmise, conjecture and hypothesis. - Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure Of Silver Blaze

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Observer View Post
                With regard to the diary. When do you think it was created? I know you have expressed your thoughts on the this issue before, but could you just refresh our memories.
                Oooh oooh, I know - ask me sir, ask me!!!
                Iconoclast
                Soldier of Fortune, Man of Peace, Destroyer of Images, Nice Guy, Genius

                Comment


                • Originally posted by caz View Post
                  And on that note, Abby, why are you here, if it's not to make snarky remarks and poke fun at the posters who, unlike yourself, have not been able to solve the mystery of who created the diary or why? If that is your idea of entertainment, you go for it, but don't expect a warm reception.
                  because the truth is important. Looking forward to you and Ike debate over the authenticity of the diary. You have a lovely Easter too Caz.
                  "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 Graham View Post
                    To those posters who are totally convinced that the Diary was a merry money-making jape conceived and executed by Mike "Fitzgerald" Barrett and no other - why do you still post here if your minds really are made up? What are you trying to acheive, if anything? Why don't you leave the debate between those silly people who believe that Jim really did write it and that he really was the Ripper, and those even sillier persons who think that it might just be an old creation that just may have been passed down through the Graham family? Trying to convert us, or what? I mean, it's not as if you're prepared to actually debate the issue - you just make statements and not much else. Or is it that most of you are not quite as convinced about Barrett as you'd have us believe?
                    You could pose that exact same question to the pro-diarists. Why are they here? The case has been closed (in their mind).

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Graham View Post
                      Oooh dear....a phrase containing the words 'touched' and 'sore point' springs to mind. I wish a 'debate' would begin, because thus far from the Barrettites we've had only statements.

                      Graham
                      Not in the least, Graham. I welcome your suggestion. But the chance of Ike and Caz going toe-to-toe is roughly similar to the chance of Italy and Germany going toe-to-toe in late 1944: slim and none. They perceive a common enemy and have an unspoken non-aggression pact. And when a Diary disbeliever does not take the field, the battle goes deadly silent: all becomes Quiet on the Western, Eastern, Southern, and Northern fronts for weeks on end--for the same metaphysical reasons outlined in Post #177. You can't debate with someone who has no position. Ike might be able to debate an agnostic, but it is unlikely a true agnostic would debate Ike. Why would she, or he? They are seeking enlightenment, not war.
                      Last edited by rjpalmer; 04-09-2020, 03:33 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Iconoclast View Post

                        I'd be willing to consider investing a proportion of Ms Iconoclast's inheritance on the self-same nag were it to be ridden by anyone other than Bongo Barrett.
                        Really. Strange that, I would have thought that you would have considered it an also ran. By the way forget Bongo Barrett, if the late great Mama Cass was on it's back it would still romp home

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Iconoclast View Post

                          Oooh oooh, I know - ask me sir, ask me!!!
                          I'll tell you what, the next time the jokers playing at Sid Jame's Park win a piece of silverware I'll ask you

                          Comment


                          • My God, RJ, take it easy, man! You'll do yourself a mischief, the way you carry on!

                            Graham
                            We are suffering from a plethora of surmise, conjecture and hypothesis. - Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure Of Silver Blaze

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Graham View Post
                              Oooh dear....a phrase containing the words 'touched' and 'sore point' springs to mind. I wish a 'debate' would begin, because thus far from the Barrettites we've had only statements.

                              Graham
                              Why do you suppose Mike Barrett bought the maroon coloured leather diary in March 1992?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Observer View Post

                                Really. Strange that, I would have thought that you would have considered it an also ran. By the way forget Bongo Barrett, if the late great Mama Cass was on it's back it would still romp home
                                In fairness, I said I would consider it. Leaves the door open to not doing it.
                                Iconoclast
                                Soldier of Fortune, Man of Peace, Destroyer of Images, Nice Guy, Genius

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X