Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Do Some People Really Believe the Earth Is Flat?

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by c.d. View Post
    I've never really understood the reason behind the so called conspiracy to keep people ignorant of the "fact" that the earth is flat. Can anybody enlighten me?

    c.d.
    Yes, their reasoning is that the U.S. never went to the moon, so because they made it look like the Earth was round, they now have to stick to that story.

    Comment


    • #47
      If the Earth was flat it would be empty because all the cats would have pushed everything off the edge long ago.

      Comment


      • #48
        People think that 1 person killed 5 women in London in 1888, people think that Oswald and his mail order gun were magically able to accomplish the assassination, people think there is a great hairy human like beast roaming the North American forests, people doubt that a moon landing ever took place, people think Trump is a sane, smart leader...…..leave people to their imaginations and they might believe anything is possible.
        Michael Richards

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
          People think that 1 person killed 5 women in London in 1888
          Some people think eviscerators were ten a penny in Whitechapel

          I think that's what you meant.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
            People think that 1 person killed 5 women in London in 1888, people think that Oswald and his mail order gun were magically able to accomplish the assassination, people think there is a great hairy human like beast roaming the North American forests, people doubt that a moon landing ever took place, people think Trump is a sane, smart leader...…..leave people to their imaginations and they might believe anything is possible.
            I think 1 person did kill 5 women (maybe some of the slayings are unrelated, but for sure he'd have murdered more than one woman). Probably just some randomass guy.

            It's a typical serial killer pattern, especially the fact he chose prostitutes, and given some of the more bizarre carvings like the eyelid thing. It seems pretty damn unlikely a guy who had that kind of urge would just strike once and never kill again. Unheard of, even... There have been many, many, many serial killers who have done essentially the exact same thing. It's almost a stereotype of a serial killer... I'm sure whatever motivations drove the other hooker-killers to do their thing also drove the Ripper to do what he did... It almost always turns out that all of these men have the same kind of issue and upbringing.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Harry D View Post

              Some people think eviscerators were ten a penny in Whitechapel

              I think that's what you meant.
              Actually the number of actual eviscerations would make other killers almost a cert Harry, (13 Unsolved murders?),..but again, people believe what they want.
              Michael Richards

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

                Actually the number of actual eviscerations would make other killers almost a cert Harry, (13 Unsolved murders?)
                Which thirteen are they? And how many involved evisceration?

                Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
                ..but again, people believe what they want.
                You're proof of that, Mike.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Harry D View Post

                  Which thirteen are they? And how many involved evisceration?

                  You're proof of that, Mike.
                  You are being serious Harry? I had to ask. How many eviscerations do you see....and what total of unsolved murders in the police files do you see? I wouldn't have taken you for a Ripper 101 candidate, but after that response....
                  Michael Richards

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

                    You are being serious Harry? I had to ask. How many eviscerations do you see....and what total of unsolved murders in the police files do you see? I wouldn't have taken you for a Ripper 101 candidate, but after that response....
                    The Whitechapel Murders file is comprised of 11 unsolved murders. Only Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly were eviscerated.

                    Back to you.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Harry D View Post

                      The Whitechapel Murders file is comprised of 11 unsolved murders. Only Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly were eviscerated.

                      Back to you.
                      Nicely done. However depending on who you talk to, the actual number of Unsolved in the files ranges from 11 to 13. You've identified the 3 eviscerations,...so why are they part of a group of Five then? I may be getting on in years, but it seems to me that if your contention is that these rather unique murders should be grouped with murders that were not unique...like Liz Strides for example...the rationale must then be that this particular killer didn't eviscerate all the time. Like Fisherman contends also applies to Torso Man...he contends he didn't disarticulate all the time, even when given the obvious opportunity to do so like in Mary Kellys case.

                      When there is deviation from a pattern there must be a catalyst of some sort for it, so....why would the killer change back and forth, from severe wounds and made privately over days, or made in minutes out in public, to barely fatal wounds made in mere seconds. Then back again.

                      Anyone who wants this proposed long run by one killer to be acceptable to the mainstream academics must answer why there are such substantial differences. And by just citing Ted Bundy they effectively sidestep the question, they do not answer it. What someone else did decades before or decades after these murders isn't relevant until an apples to apples comparison reveals grounds for pre-supposing such a killer.

                      Its like declaring the end of a detective story before its been fully read, based solely on how other detective stories concluded.
                      Michael Richards

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        And by just citing Ted Bundy they effectively sidestep the question, they do not answer it. What someone else did decades before or decades after these murders isn't relevant until an apples to apples comparison reveals grounds for pre-supposing such a killer.

                        Hello Michael,

                        It is not surprising that you simply dismiss any evidence gleaned from what we know of modern day serial killers. It completely destroys your argument that significant differences in murders can only mean different killers.

                        c.d.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by c.d. View Post
                          And by just citing Ted Bundy they effectively sidestep the question, they do not answer it. What someone else did decades before or decades after these murders isn't relevant until an apples to apples comparison reveals grounds for pre-supposing such a killer.

                          Hello Michael,

                          It is not surprising that you simply dismiss any evidence gleaned from what we know of modern day serial killers. It completely destroys your argument that significant differences in murders can only mean different killers.

                          c.d.
                          bingo. the golden state killer had so many differences as an unsub he actually had three different nicknames!
                          "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


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by c.d. View Post
                            And by just citing Ted Bundy they effectively sidestep the question, they do not answer it. What someone else did decades before or decades after these murders isn't relevant until an apples to apples comparison reveals grounds for pre-supposing such a killer.

                            Hello Michael,

                            It is not surprising that you simply dismiss any evidence gleaned from what we know of modern day serial killers. It completely destroys your argument that significant differences in murders can only mean different killers.

                            c.d.
                            In the Whitechapel Murders the "series", by the evidence, is 2 perhaps 3. I just made a list of serial killers on another thread that did not change anything dramatic...so whose argument holds up again?
                            Michael Richards

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

                              bingo. the golden state killer had so many differences as an unsub he actually had three different nicknames!
                              Did he really? Rapes, murders, burglaries..in different areas. Seems like a pattern was there but each of the the jurisdictions didn't work with each other effectively, or at all. Just like Zodiak. He did essentially the same stuff, a number of times.
                              Michael Richards

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                I just made a list of serial killers on another thread that did not change anything dramatic...so whose argument holds up again?


                                But you fail to recognize the ones that do. So I would say that your argument fails.

                                c.d.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X