The Ripper's Haunts by Michael L. Hawley

[David Orsam]

I have posted an article entitled 'The English Detective' containing some comments in response to the above book which, for anyone interested, can be found here:

http://www.orsam.co.uk/theenglishdetective.htm

[mklhawley]

Hi David,

I actually predicted you would respond to my English detective piece in The Ripper's Haunts because it actually rebutted an earlier argument of yours. As everyone knows, you can't let an argument go without a response. Have you figured that out about yourself? I was surprised it took you this long. And I actually predicted this rebuttal, as well; long on detail, but there remains a flaw. Does anyone else see it?

Sincerely,
Mike

[drstrange169]

Hello David,

I can't get this link to open, is it just me or has anybody else had a problem?

[mklhawley]

Hello David,

I can't get this link to open, is it just me or has anybody else had a problem?

Use Google Chrome.

Mike

[David Orsam]

Hello David,

I can't get this link to open, is it just me or has anybody else had a problem?

It should work in internet explorer, Dusty. Occasionally there seems to be a temporary failure with the site but try it again.

[David Orsam]

Hi David,

I actually predicted you would respond to my English detective piece in The Ripper's Haunts because it actually rebutted an earlier argument of yours... And I actually predicted this rebuttal, as well

Hi Mike, so you are admitting that you used your book to "rebut" an earlier argument of mine on this forum – one that was not even concluded - and you think it's an achievement worth boasting about that you supposedly predicted that I would respond to your one-sided account of that argument? Well done.

[David Orsam]

As everyone knows,

Are you claiming to speak for everyone now, Mike?

you can't let an argument go without a response. Have you figured that out about yourself?

To the extent that this is a criticism of me personally, not only do I think it is inappropriate but I'm afraid I don't understand it. If I see a bad argument, which I happen to know is a bad argument through my own research, containing factual errors, then, yes, I am likely to respond to it so that others are aware of the bad nature of the argument and the factual errors. I would have thought this would apply to everyone, including you, so I'm not sure what there is for me to figure out about myself.

On the other side of the coin, it's fair to say that you took the opportunity in your book to continue an unfinished discussion we had on this forum and to present an account of that discussion in which the arguments against you were misunderstood and thus misrepresented. I've made this all perfectly clear in the article. You were, of course, entitled to include whatever you wanted to include in your book and I'm entitled to respond in the way I have done, am I not?

[David Orsam]

but there remains a flaw. Does anyone else see it?

The article may not be perfect, Mike, but the last time you claimed to have found flaws in one of my articles, it transpired that you were wrong about that. Rather than play games, why not say what you think the flaw is so that we can discuss it?