Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A problem with the "Eddowes Shawl" DNA match

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

  • Originally posted by mickreed View Post
    And here's another recent review. Maybe he'll take up this idea - if it's not his in the first place.

    I enjoyed the book immensely. I want to thank Russell Edwards for taking the time (and spending the money) to solve what was an enduring mystery. Obviously there are some who find the results that he puts forward as being "suspect." I would love to see Mr. Edwards respond to these allegations in a follow up book.
    Strike me pink Mick

    Don't give him ideas, another book might mean another 6000+ post thread and I might go even more insane than I am now.
    G U T

    There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by mickreed View Post
      It is interesting that JL's only known public response since the Independent story broke is to post this on Facebook.
      Mick, if you look directly below that item you will see the response he gave to a friend's question about the Independent story

      "There is a rumour that one person linked to Ripper industry ..."
      cheers, gryff

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Peter Griffith aka gryff View Post
        Mick, if you look directly below that item you will see the response he gave to a friend's question about the Independent story
        I did see that Gryff. Yes, it's all a conspiracy. If this is the best he can do, then I despair.

        I think Chris put it best in an earlier post. Something to the effect that having 17 documentary makers and a Hollywood film director after you is, of course, not part of the Ripper industry.
        Mick Reed

        Whatever happened to scepticism?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by GUT View Post
          Strike me pink Mick

          Don't give him ideas, another book might mean another 6000+ post thread and I might go even more insane than I am now.
          Go on, mate. We might as well all go mad together. We could end up in Colney Hatch or Leavesden having red ink amendments about our habits added to our records.
          Mick Reed

          Whatever happened to scepticism?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Peter Griffith aka gryff View Post
            I found this on wikipedia
            ...
            The hard work of Chris et al. on 314.1c/315.1c is paying off
            Yes - I think the time I spent learning those Wikipedia mark-up rules was well spent.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by mickreed View Post
              Go on, mate. We might as well all go mad together. We could end up in Colney Hatch or Leavesden having red ink amendments about our habits added to our records.
              Strewth I hadn't thought of that maybe those habits are why I'm as mad as a hatter.

              I bags Colney Hatch if that's the only two choices.
              G U T

              There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by GUT View Post
                Strewth I hadn't thought of that maybe those habits are why I'm as mad as a hatter.

                I bags Colney Hatch if that's the only two choices.
                To what habits do you refer, my good man? I didn't know that eating cucumber sandwiches drove you mad.
                Mick Reed

                Whatever happened to scepticism?

                Comment


                • Hi Henry,

                  Jesus or Jack. It doesn't really matter.

                  If enough people believe something, no matter how unlikely, that belief becomes an article of faith.

                  Which is to say that I do not entirely disagree with your position.

                  Regards,

                  Simon
                  Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

                  Comment


                  • Le Figaro says:
                    L'identité de Jack l'Éventreur reste toujours un mystère


                    "Le site australien casebook.org avait d'ailleurs déjà mis en doutes la théorie de Russell Edwards ..."

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Chris View Post
                      Le Figaro says:
                      L'identité de Jack l'Éventreur reste toujours un mystère


                      "Le site australien casebook.org avait d'ailleurs déjà mis en doutes la théorie de Russell Edwards ..."
                      Bonjour Chris,

                      Mais oui. Vraiment le récit rapporté est très faible.
                      Mick Reed

                      Whatever happened to scepticism?

                      Comment


                      • But Dr Louhelainen has a defender on a discussion board at www.punkinfinland.net, who says
                        "Selittäkää, en nyt tajua, missä on virhe? Siis näiden aussien omat teoriat menivät pieleen -> tuomitaan koko homma?"


                        [courtesy of Google Translate:
                        "Please explain, I do not get it now, where is the error? So the Aussies own theories went wrong -> condemning the whole thing? "]

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Chris View Post
                          But Dr Louhelainen has a defender on a discussion board at www.punkinfinland.net, who says
                          "Selittäkää, en nyt tajua, missä on virhe? Siis näiden aussien omat teoriat menivät pieleen -> tuomitaan koko homma?"


                          [courtesy of Google Translate:
                          "Please explain, I do not get it now, where is the error? So the Aussies own theories went wrong -> condemning the whole thing? "]
                          At least one response seems to recognize this thread and your careful explanation Chris:

                          Tuolla casebookin foorumeilla toi oli selitetty hyvinkin tarkkaan jossain ketjussa
                          Bing translation
                          Right there on the casebookin forums brought was explained very carefully somewhere in the chain.
                          cheers, gryff

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Chris View Post

                            [courtesy of Google Translate:
                            "Please explain, I do not get it now, where is the error? So the Aussies own theories went wrong -> condemning the whole thing? "]
                            It's a bit much Aussies getting all (any?) credit. Even if Chris stands on his head, he doesn't quite qualify.

                            It just means England will have to win the Ashes back to compensate. Mind you, as I'm sure GUT can confirm, claiming what's good is second nature over here. I remember a film about Phar Lap - that's some old horse to you foreigners.

                            The film ended just prior to Phar Lap's final race and the newspaper had set two front pages set up depending on the result. Said something like this.

                            Aussie horse triumphs magnificently

                            New Zealand nag flops
                            Mick Reed

                            Whatever happened to scepticism?

                            Comment


                            • Aussie horse triumphs magnificently

                              New Zealand nag flops

                              claiming what's good is second nature over here.
                              Too right

                              After all we've got to recover from being Pommy convicts somehow.
                              G U T

                              There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Peter Griffith aka gryff View Post
                                You may have noticed that Chris and Mick were quick to point out that the stuff delivered a few days before the book deadline was the Kosminski DNA stuff not CE's DNA. A fact I have since acknowledged.

                                Chris estimates that the CE DNA stuff was completed in early 2013 - so over a year ago.

                                You are right about a paper could have been prepared since the deadline (May this year I believe ) but in at least one interview Dr. JL gave he claims to be surprised by the national reaction - expecting only interest from local papers. If that is true he may not have considered it important to do immeadiately.

                                cheers, gryff
                                Hi gryff, thanks for the info.

                                What does "interest from local papers" mean?

                                Interest from local London, England papers??

                                It's been awhile since London was a one-horse town.

                                Even if one had little prior personal interest in 'Jack the Ripper', surely it would be apparent that the "local papers" would be LONDON papers with some of the highest readership in the world?

                                Best regards,
                                Archaic

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X