Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Jack the ripper , the truth , from the spirit world .

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

  • You are so quick to shut others down yet you can't find the killer
    you know so much yet know so littl
    No, we analyse and evaluate evidence. And for 40 years all stories involving Royalty have been categorically proven false.
    Regards

    Herlock






    "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

    Comment


    • secondly science is not an authority in this world nor is the government god is so proof is given within the church and there are millions of spiritualist all around the world who are able to communicate with the spirit world see and hear spirits talk to them and also receive messages from the spirit world which can be validated
      This is your opinion. Not everyone believes in god of course. But Iíd say that most believers donít believe in spiritualism.
      Regards

      Herlock






      "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

      Comment



      • Pav would have been seen by thousands of people , so what time did he stop seeing those people and retire to his quarters , he could have then got out of the place he was staying at and got a train to London or a coach
        For him to have got from Scotland to London, then to commit two murders undetected and hen returned to Scotland outdoor have taken 24 hours in 1888. Do you not think that someone would have noticed that he was missing?

        The very idea is a joke.
        Regards

        Herlock






        "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

        Comment


        • I am the hard nosed materialist that Harry mentioned. Abby is a Christian and he knows that Iím an Atheist/Humanist. I have absolutely no issue with those that have a religious belief. Itís entirely down to the individual. I would never tell Abby or Harry that they are wrong to believe. It could be me thatís wrong of course. Also, religious belief in no way affects how I interact with either of them. They are both honest, intelligent, knowledgeable posters. We agree on some things and disagree on others. This is par for the course. (obviously Iím always right but hey..)I just wanted to get that one out of the way in case Pegasus tried to say that I think that the religious are all fools. I donít.

          There is a big difference though between religious belief and the belief or promulgation of spiritualism. The religious cannot prove the existence of god and the non-religious cannot disprove the existence of god. Itís a matter of having faith or not having faith. Spiritualism however is a phenomenon which could lend itself to being proven or disproven. The burden of proof is on the proposer. Spiritualists claim that Spiritualism is real therefore the burden of proof is on them. They have already convinced themselves but can they convince sceptics? This challenge has been thrown out over the years and not a single piece of evidence has been forthcoming. James Randi offered a massive some of money but no one claimed it. Time and time again Spiritualists have been caught out in fraudulence. They prey on those poor grieving people who are desperate to speak to dead relatives by giving them meaningless generalities in alleged spirit form. Con men. Pure and simple. Until any of them provide proper evidence (and thatís evidence that the rest of the human race ask for and not just their version of evidence) then we should continue to dismiss them. I firmly believe that they should be pursued by law if they are receiving any financial remuneration.

          Pegasus has come on here with a story which every single one of us knows to be false. The evidence that disproves it is a cast-iron Mount Everest. We even have a man giving us the name of a non-existent police officer (notice that he hasnít responded on this issue.)

          This is not an error. Itís not an incorrect interpretation of the evidence. Itís a complete lie and should be named as such.
          Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 09-19-2019, 02:14 PM.
          Regards

          Herlock






          "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Pegasus View Post

            Please think about what you are saying , so people from two different police forces could not possibly know each other or be part of the same masonic Lodge .

            O.m.g no wonder no one but me has solved the case thinking like that

            has nobody in the London police force ever made friends with other police officers from other forces think about it
            You are missing the point, these are two junior officers who in no way reported to any of those others you mention, in what way do you claim they were involved?
            Your claims are simply ridiculous

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Pegasus View Post

              The police often referred to their intuition which are Feelings they know to trusted over many years intuition is the voice of God Clarifying truth to us where our five senses cannot clarify once you know that intuition feelings come from God and the angels you learn to trust them
              It is not evidence or anything like it, unfortunatly it is a fantasy you are living.

              Comment


              • I would think that these cases might have aroused curiosity of the genre-fond without any silly suggestions of Royal Conspiracies based on a illegitimate marriage and child, unproven links between the five women, and a presumption of a killers tally, and I think the introduction of those kinds of ideas has caused people, serious researchers, to reject any conspiracy ideas as a result. Shame. Obviously after 130 fruitless years of any conclusions in any of the cases, there is either data that is no longer known about or available, or some people didn't tell the whole truth. Which would be a conspiracy.
                Michael Richards

                Comment


                • The basic problem with this thread is that there is no evidence put forward, just the word of a person who claims he speaks to the dead and to God, it should not be treated seriously unless serious evidence is put forward.

                  Evidence presented against is sidestepped, with claims that trains or coaches could have been used to travel, when it is pointed out that travel in the time suggested is not possible, it is simply ignored. When facts are shown to be wrong such as Abberline and Freemasonary, the response is how do you know? Its all been covered up.

                  Very little of what the poster has put up is on topic, it is purely a thread about his belief in spiritualism.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                    For him to have got from Scotland to London, then to commit two murders undetected and hen returned to Scotland outdoor have taken 24 hours in 1888. Do you not think that someone would have noticed that he was missing?

                    The very idea is a joke.
                    .Prince eddy was in london on all occasions there is no photos or other visual footage like film to prove that he was at any of those locations outside of London you are hindering yourself by continuing on this train of thought that there is evidence that prince Eddy was not in London it is too coincidental that he was not in London in any of the murders

                    Eddie lived in London why was he coincidentally outside of London on all the murders this is what I said to you without being argumentative you have to have concrete evidence that he was actually there otherwise you are throwing away a golden opportunity to find the truth because you're Hindering yourself

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
                      I would think that these cases might have aroused curiosity of the genre-fond without any silly suggestions of Royal Conspiracies based on a illegitimate marriage and child, unproven links between the five women, and a presumption of a killers tally, and I think the introduction of those kinds of ideas has caused people, serious researchers, to reject any conspiracy ideas as a result. Shame. Obviously after 130 fruitless years of any conclusions in any of the cases, there is either data that is no longer known about or available, or some people didn't tell the whole truth. Which would be a conspiracy.
                      Prince Albert Victor never had a child but he was married to any cook he spared her life because he loved her and married her he gave her over £1,000 and threatened her with other people that if she tells anybody she would be killed by the police and by him she had no choice but to stay quiet

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Elamarna View Post
                        The basic problem with this thread is that there is no evidence put forward, just the word of a person who claims he speaks to the dead and to God, it should not be treated seriously unless serious evidence is put forward.

                        Evidence presented against is sidestepped, with claims that trains or coaches could have been used to travel, when it is pointed out that travel in the time suggested is not possible, it is simply ignored. When facts are shown to be wrong such as Abberline and Freemasonary, the response is how do you know? Its all been covered up.

                        Very little of what the poster has put up is on topic, it is purely a thread about his belief in spiritualism.
                        I do understand your point it is just my word as someone who talks to the Dead that is not evidence to you I do appreciate that but please don't forget that when you tell me Prince Albert Victor had an alibi for every night in question that is not concrete evidence
                        prove to me today that Prince Albert Victor was anywhere else on the night of the murders no one can prove that to me Queen Victoria's diary is not evidence neither is any other paperwork people lie in paperwork haven't people fiddled their taxes



                        please don't assume that any paperwork or written accounts of factual anything can be doctored

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Elamarna View Post

                          You are missing the point, these are two junior officers who in no way reported to any of those others you mention, in what way do you claim they were involved?
                          Your claims are simply ridiculous
                          The killing in Mitre square with Catherine eddowes the police officer who found the body was there with the Ripper holding the light so the Ripper could do the killing and the ripping he distorted his report PC Watson I believe

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Elamarna View Post

                            It is not evidence or anything like it, unfortunatly it is a fantasy you are living.
                            Every one of you I live in a fantasy because none of you have solved the crime none of you know who the Ripper is so you are all black dogs chasing your tail
                            I know that Prince Albert Victor is the Ripper because I can talk to the dead and see the Dead I just can't prove it to you but I know in my heart who he was

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                              No, we analyse and evaluate evidence. And for 40 years all stories involving Royalty have been categorically proven false.

                              you say all royal conspiracy theories have been proven false who were they prove and by and who gave that person authority and why did you believe them I don't give them authority I don't believe him neither do many others at certainly Stephen knight does not believe them either

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
                                I am the hard nosed materialist that Harry mentioned. Abby is a Christian and he knows that Iím an Atheist/Humanist. I have absolutely no issue with those that have a religious belief. Itís entirely down to the individual. I would never tell Abby or Harry that they are wrong to believe. It could be me thatís wrong of course. Also, religious belief in no way affects how I interact with either of them. They are both honest, intelligent, knowledgeable posters. We agree on some things and disagree on others. This is par for the course. (obviously Iím always right but hey..)I just wanted to get that one out of the way in case Pegasus tried to say that I think that the religious are all fools. I donít.

                                There is a big difference though between religious belief and the belief or promulgation of spiritualism. The religious cannot prove the existence of god and the non-religious cannot disprove the existence of god. Itís a matter of having faith or not having faith. Spiritualism however is a phenomenon which could lend itself to being proven or disproven. The burden of proof is on the proposer. Spiritualists claim that Spiritualism is real therefore the burden of proof is on them. They have already convinced themselves but can they convince sceptics? This challenge has been thrown out over the years and not a single piece of evidence has been forthcoming. James Randi offered a massive some of money but no one claimed it. Time and time again Spiritualists have been caught out in fraudulence. They prey on those poor grieving people who are desperate to speak to dead relatives by giving them meaningless generalities in alleged spirit form. Con men. Pure and simple. Until any of them provide proper evidence (and thatís evidence that the rest of the human race ask for and not just their version of evidence) then we should continue to dismiss them. I firmly believe that they should be pursued by law if they are receiving any financial remuneration.

                                Pegasus has come on here with a story which every single one of us knows to be false. The evidence that disproves it is a cast-iron Mount Everest. We even have a man giving us the name of a non-existent police officer (notice that he hasnít responded on this issue.)

                                This is not an error. Itís not an incorrect interpretation of the evidence. Itís a complete lie and should be named as such.
                                Sherlock homeboy

                                Peep this

                                The juwes are the men that will not be blamed for nothing .

                                Next to a blood stained piece cloth belonging to catherin eddows .

                                ​​​​​​The juwes , meaning members of the masonic house

                                the chief of police made his officers wash the writing off the wall , police procedure demanded at the time that the writing be photographed because they believed it was associated with the killing of Catherine eddowes.

                                so if they believe why didn't the chief of police believe that also. He did believe that because he knew the Killing was going to take place and he knew the Juwes referred to the Masons which he was a member of


                                he had police wash the writing off of the wall so the handwriting couldn't be copied and associated with anybody and to take attention away from the Masons

                                the answer is there right in front of you there was an argument with other police at the time they complained that it was wrong to rub the evidence off of the wall but they were overridden by a higher rank

                                you are not a detective you don't have a nose for these things you have to work intuitively many people have suggested that was a cover up and it was that's why you're not a policeman

                                this is why you and everybody else in this chat room have not solved the crime because your not police officers the answer is right in front of your face it was a masonic killing
                                Last edited by Pegasus; 09-19-2019, 03:05 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X