|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
John V. Omlor
Chief Inspector
Username: Omlor
Post Number: 687
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 27, 2004 - 7:13 am: |       |
Actually,
I'd be just as delighted with the sentence "Read Paul Feldman's book for proof" whether it was offered seriously or with sarcasm dripping from the screen.
In fact, I'm even MORE delighted now, since everyone who reads it can only assume that it must have been a joke even when originally posted.
Yes, it will make an excellent t-shirt to go in the catalog.
Tin matchbox empty, the Poste House, the Crashaw quote being separated and cited in both books, the mistaken details about the murders, the non-existent people, the purely Aristostilean dramatic structure, the handwriting, the lack of provenance, and all the rest -- no wonder we have so many souvenir items from Diary World.
I guess we'll have to start on online store -- www.diaryworld.com/shopping/imagination or perhaps just www.nothingnewnothingreal.com.
Still...
--John
PS: Hey, the came out as real links. I'm not going there. Adventurers can let me know what you find.
(Message edited by omlor on August 27, 2004)
(Message edited by omlor on August 27, 2004) |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Chief Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 854
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 27, 2004 - 7:51 am: | |
John,
it appears if you can speak either Japanese or Chinese you can buy the first link!
Fancy that,
I do so want some of these t shirts (what about mugs!!)
"Think things, not words." - O.W. Holmes jr |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 1110
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 28, 2004 - 7:12 am: | |
Now, i have a feeling this one is complex. But am I right in thinking the problem is the word farthings?
Jenni
"Think things, not words." - O.W. Holmes jr |
David Cartwright
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, November 28, 2004 - 9:14 am: | |
Hi All. I've just popped over to this board, as a momentary diversion from looking at "genuine" suspects. If it wasn't obvious before, then Philip Sugden, (thank God for him) has comprehensively exposed this diary as a fraud. We had the Hitler Diaries exposed before this one came along, and that's probably where the forgers got the idea from. This is the red-herring to end all red-herrings in the JTR case, and , if they're still around, the forger or forgers must be falling about laughing at the mayhem they've caused in Ripperology. Well, I'll get back to researching the real contenders now.
Best wishes to you all.
David Cartwright. |
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 1333
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 29, 2004 - 5:18 am: | |
Hi David,
The word 'fraud' implies a fake created for profit. Yet the most commonly suspected faker sold the diary back in 1993 for £1. And I don't think he's had an awful lot to fall about laughing at since he brought the wretched thing to London.
The convicted faker of the Hitler Diaries was exposed by science within a very short time and went to prison for his efforts.
Science has so far failed to expose the diary or watch as modern fakes. Opinion thinks it can do the job equally well, but it has yet to succeed.
Love,
Caz
X
|
Lee McLoughlin
Sergeant
Username: Lee
Post Number: 33
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 29, 2004 - 6:13 am: | |
Hi Caz,
But the diary has also been dated at 1921, give or take 12 years so 1909-1933 and the watch scratches have been dated at "Several 10's of years" but clearly that is nowhere near 100 years.
So science has so far failed to prove the diary to be geniune, however the reports have cast reasonable doubts.
For what it's worth I think the "fake" was created in the mid 1930's - mid 1940's. These dates are highly possible. The diary ink could have easily been put to paper in 1933 as reports have said and the watch was created shortly afterwards as suggested by the reports into the scratches.
Best Wishes,
Lee |
John V. Omlor
Chief Inspector
Username: Omlor
Post Number: 887
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 29, 2004 - 7:54 am: | |
Hi David,
It's a hoax.
The rest is just verbal dancing by the bored.
Thanks for visiting,
--John |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 1337
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 29, 2004 - 9:52 am: | |
The word 'fraud' implies a fake created for profit
Campers!!!!!!
we don't always get what we want but sometimes we gat what we deserve!!
Jenni |
Dan Norder
Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 391
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - 11:09 am: | |
Lee, I'm not a supporter of the diary or watch, but your statement that 'the watch scratches have been dated at "Several 10's of years" but clearly that is nowhere near 100 years.' is simply untrue. The watch reports claim that they are "at least several tens of years" (emphasis added) and also include statements to the effect of possibly or prabably more. Either way means the scratches could easily be roughly 110 years old, if the reports turn out to be accurate in the opinions expressed within.
I don't care which side you are arguing on, editing relevant details out of someone's words to try to support your opinions more strongly isn't kosher.
Dan Norder, editor, Ripper Notes |
Lee McLoughlin
Sergeant
Username: Lee
Post Number: 37
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - 11:28 am: | |
Dan,
I am sorry if it looks like I'm trying to put words into people's mouths or bend the edvidence to suit my own thoughts, but I am honestly not trying to.
I cant remember if it is this thread or another, but I have said that, in my own opinion, the report should have said at least 100 years if they have thought it could have been that old. The use of the phrase "several 10's of years", in my opinion, is a phrase that I wouldn't have wanted to hear if I thought the watch geniune article.
sorry if any of my post was misunderstood. As I read the quote you have used from a previous post of mine, it is easy to understand why people might have misunderstood me.
Best Wishes,
Lee |
Dan Norder
Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 392
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - 12:26 pm: | |
Lee,
Please see the watch results thread, as I don't think this is the right place to discuss this.
Dan Norder, editor, Ripper Notes |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page