ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi , Charles Norrie , Lockerbie bombing , Pan Am 103 , US-Iran relations

Reply
Old 2nd September 2010, 04:21 AM   #121
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,771
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Rolfe, there is no point in trying to discuss things with you, until you tell us exactly what is your theory of what went on.

That's a complete non-sequitur. This isn't a competition between different theories, this is you trying to persuade us that your theory is credible.

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
You are unwilling to do the basic reading (which I have done, and you have not).




Charles, with practically every post you make, you demonstrate abysmal ignorance of those pesky facts you disdain so much. That's what the basic reading is for. Finding out the nature of the facts your theory has to explain.

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
You seem to have a short fuse and a low incredulity level.

Look, I'm not the one who's gathered four yellow cards and a day on the naughty step since the start of this thread. And I think you'll find that a "low incredulity threshhold" is a common feature among JREF members. We like to crash-test theories by running them into the wall. If the theory is sound, the pieces are from the wall. Right now, all the pieces I'm finding are from your jerry-built hypothesis though.

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
I don't know where you believe the device was introduced or when. Such little things matter you know.

Then you haven't been reading my posts.

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
I don't know whether you believe in the Bedford story (and his telling of it or not).

"Believe". Such a strong word. Bedford's story is however the only recorded sighting of a brown(ish) Samsonite hardshell suitcase anywhere in the incident, apart from the bomb bag. And the circumstances of the sighting are singular, and the place where it was sighted was very close to where the explosion was eventually determined to have occurred.

So in my opinion it's the best bet for the introduction of the primary suitcase. That, and other reasons which favour a Heathrow introduction.

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
I'm not certain why the Bedford story was introduced at the trial as it appears to fly in the face of what is the Crown's contention that a timer bomb was flown without difficulty from Luqa to London via Frankfurt having been labelled there with one of Mr Fhimah's famous tags. If that is so surely it would have been transferred on the tarmac at Heathrow when 103A arrived at 17:40?

It's odd that Bedford was apparently a prosecution witness, I agree. But they could hardly sweep him under the carpet after he'd given evidence to the FAI, so I assume they thought they'd better call him and try to undermine his story.

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
So what is Bedford describing as the two rogue suitcases. Mr Kamboj had no recollection of them. It is Kamboj's word versus Bedford's and he had taken part in a reconstruction with the Met police, a reconstruction that may have influenced his recollection. If you notice it is nowadays not standard police procedure to have recosnstructions as it can induce a false recollection syndrome.

Kamboj just doesn't remember. In the end, he said that if Bedford says that's what happened, it probably did. You still have absolutely no explanation why Bedford described seeing "a maroony-brown hardshell suitcase, of the type Samsonite make" in the container, less than a fortnight after the bombing and before the pieces of Samsonite primary suitcase had even been picked up off the grass never mind forensically examined.

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
It is general held that AVE4041 PA held the first class baggage (first off at JFK).

Sorry, not good enough. AVE4041 held first, interline baggage from connecting flights arriving at Heathrow during the day. Nobody has ever suggested that only the first class luggage in this category was placed in that container. If you know different, give us the source you're using. Second, it held luggage from PA103A. Some commentators do suggest there was some sorting at that point, but the numbers involved imply that if this was so, it would have been the first class bags (a relatively small number) that were loose-loaded, and the pleb class (most of them) that were put in the container. Karen Noonan's case being in the container also supports that reading.

"General held" doesn't even cut it it it's true. In this case, I don't even think this is generally held.

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Rolfe you are a very difficult woman of fixed but unclear views, who loves to wallow in unclear detail, is prepared to blog but not to slog, and I have come to hold your views in contempt. Such a pity when you are quite capable of being a creative imaginative think.

When I see you slogging rather than simply making stuff up to suit yourself, I'll accept your right to criticise others. And as I said, I don't blog.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 2nd September 2010 at 04:23 AM.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 04:24 AM   #122
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,771
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Rolfe, if you follow my thesis, that an Iranian by the needs of qesas had to plant the first device, or no qesas, it was probably done to a IA plan. The main point of the first explosion was to turn the radr transponder off and damage the pressure hull with a relatively small 15 by 15 inch hold, which had been 8 by 8 at the exit from the container

Oh, I follow your thesis all right. I enjoy imaginative fiction!

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 06:29 AM   #123
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,707
Charles...are you going to answer my legitmate questions, or are you going to just sit there and bicker with everyone?
__________________
--------------------------------------
Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit!

Sabretooth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 06:46 AM   #124
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
None of your questions sabre or Rolfe are in anyway legitimate or sensible.

I think you're probably trying to get at me because you've just spent your time there nitpicking and blogging, and you've really no idea of theory building or proof or anything. Sabre is a typical US incredulist who cannot believe the precious CIA can get up to anything as wicked as the Lockerbie bombing. Rolfe is just a no-hoper contrarian who blogs away because she has nothing better to do in life.

I'm not up against you, but my theory is being quashed on Wikipedia. And I can prove it.

Enjoy the rest of your very silly and wastrel lives.
CharlesNorrie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 06:48 AM   #125
Guybrush Threepwood
Trainee Pirate
 
Guybrush Threepwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: An Uaimh
Posts: 2,538
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
I'm not up against you, but my theory is being quashed on Wikipedia. And I can prove it.
Then please do so...
Guybrush Threepwood is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 06:51 AM   #126
Ambrosia
Good of the Fods
 
Ambrosia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,499
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Just a bit of an aside about the small bomb and the importance of positioning.

The Official Version would have us believe that the bomb was sent on its merry unaccompanied way from Malta, to be loaded into AVE4041 wherever the loaders chose to put it. I can't say what the chances were that it would end up close enough to the skin to breach the hull, even, but certainly less than 50%. Maybe 30%?
I think that the positioning of the bomb and the way that it blew the whole plane apart is just another sad coincidence.

I have no problem believing that the bomb was placed into the cargo hold with the perpetrators fully believing it to be powerful enough to blow the plane out of the sky no matter it's actual position within the hold relative to the skin of the aircraft. I think that the bombers wanted to blow up the plane and didn't much care where or when it happened so long as it was at cruising altitude and not on the tarmac, I think it just so happened that the bomb was placed within the container in about the right place to destroy the plane entirely

Charles your theory does not square with the evidence. It reads like a fanciful explanation of what happened, and I don't see you putting forward facts or sources of evidence to support your claims.

You say:

Originally Posted by Norrie website
It's been a paper exercise. All the information with the exception of odd questions to Mr Bollier and Mr Marquise ... is in the public domain.
So show us the evidence thats already in the Public domain that proves your case, point us to the public domain sources you found in your years of trawling the web, and please explain why your hypothesis makes the most sense out of all the available evidence to hand
Ambrosia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 07:01 AM   #127
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,707
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
To expand on what GT said, the positioning of the bomb seems to have been extraordinarily unlucky. Or not, as the case may be.

There were a couple of earlier aircraft bombing attempts, at least one of them a Jibril operation, where the bomb merely blew a hole in the baggage hold and the plane limped back to land. I think in one case some passengers were sucked out of the hole and killed but the rest were saved.

However, in the Air India crash in 1985, which involved a 747 just like the Lockerbie incident, the plane did pretty much the same as Maid of the Seas did. This was because the bomb, planted by Sikh extremists, was (apparently by chance) exactly on a structurally weak spot where two large parts of the aircraft were joined at manufacture.

Much has been made of the cross-sectional position of the Lockerbie bomb being in precisely the spot in the container closest to the skin of the plane. However, it appears that the saggital section positioning was just as important, at the section 41/42 fuselage join. (I'm taking this from Carl Davies, who is a bit of a CTer, but this information appears to be accurate.)

The AAIB report had to do quite a bit of calculation and so on to show how the small explosion could have done so much damage. They did however conclude that there was only one device on board. Which Charles thinks means they know there were two but they're just obliquely hinting at the second to tease us.

The single baggage container with the Frankfurt transfer luggage was the last on, because there was a very small time window between the feeder flight and the transatlantic one. This seems to have been the case routinely, and as far as I know it was always at position 41. I have a suspicion that whoever planted the bomb knew enough about the baggage loading for that flight to spot this opportunity.

ETA: I'm not sure the Mach Stem effect could have been reliably predicted by the terrorists. However, the effect of position 41 was presumably predictable, after what happened to Air India 182.

Rolfe.
To expand a bit on what I was referring to:

It doesn't take much to have an aircraft suffer severe or critical damage due to explosive decompression. Here's a rather famous example:

Aloha_Airlines_Flight_243WP

However, AAF243 was not quite the disaster as this:

China_Airlines_Flight_611WP

The potential for even a small defect to cause wholesale destruction is clearly evident. Which is why there should be little, if any, “surprise” coming from any experienced investigator of the PA103 disaster.
__________________
--------------------------------------
Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit!

Sabretooth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 07:10 AM   #128
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,707
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
None of your questions sabre or Rolfe are in anyway legitimate or sensible.

Sabre is a typical US incredulist who cannot believe the precious CIA can get up to anything as wicked as the Lockerbie bombing.
I never said, or even implied, that I felt the CIA could be 100% trustworthy. You are failing Reading Comprehension 101.

I POINT BLANK asked you about two serious flaws I found in your theory...due to the lack of a hand-slapping from the mods, I can safely assume my questions were done so in good taste.

Your lack of integrity and obvious question-dodging are duly noted.

Either debate YOUR accusations or leave. All you're doing now is trolling in an attempt to irritate people.
__________________
--------------------------------------
Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit!

Sabretooth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 07:22 AM   #129
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,771
Originally Posted by Ambrosia View Post
I think that the positioning of the bomb and the way that it blew the whole plane apart is just another sad coincidence.

I have no problem believing that the bomb was placed into the cargo hold with the perpetrators fully believing it to be powerful enough to blow the plane out of the sky no matter it's actual position within the hold relative to the skin of the aircraft. I think that the bombers wanted to blow up the plane and didn't much care where or when it happened so long as it was at cruising altitude and not on the tarmac, I think it just so happened that the bomb was placed within the container in about the right place to destroy the plane entirely

You could be right. However, I don't think the PFLP-GC were amateurs, and they'd had cases before where similar amounts of explosives had inflicted sub-lethal damage.

It could just have been coincidental positioning, it's just that there is so much alleged coincidence in this case already, I'm getting a bit allergic to it.

Originally Posted by Ambrosia View Post
Charles your theory does not square with the evidence. It reads like a fanciful explanation of what happened, and I don't see you putting forward facts or sources of evidence to support your claims.

So show us the evidence thats already in the Public domain that proves your case, point us to the public domain sources you found in your years of trawling the web, and please explain why your hypothesis makes the most sense out of all the available evidence to hand

I wish he's do that, but the best I ever got from him in the past was the assertion that he'd provided his hypothesis, and it must be regarded as correct until we were able to refure it. Of course refuting it is not the problem, getting Charles to understand that it has been refuted is the problem.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 2nd September 2010 at 08:17 AM.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 07:47 AM   #130
zooterkin
Nitpicking dilettante
Deputy Admin
 
zooterkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 41,496
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post

I think you're probably trying to get at me because you've just spent your time there nitpicking and blogging, and you've really no idea of theory building or proof or anything.

Quote:
Rolfe is just a no-hoper contrarian who blogs away because she has nothing better to do in life.
How many times do you need to be told that Rolfe does not blog? If you can't get a simple fact like that right, how do you hope to deal with something important?
Quote:
I'm not up against you, but my theory is being quashed on Wikipedia. And I can prove it.
Is this something different from what has already been explained to you, regarding publishing your own, original, material on wikipedia?
Quote:
Enjoy the rest of your very silly and wastrel lives.
Well, it's been fun for a while, but I can't help feeling you're on a path to getting yourself banned here, or at least spending long periods on suspension, whether deliberately or not. One must work quite hard to get banned, but you do seem to be prepared to put in the effort.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell
Zooterkin is correct Darat
Nerd! Hokulele
Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232
Ezekiel 23:20
zooterkin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 08:01 AM   #131
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Go and look Mr Threepwood, a character I only know from Wodehouse, at the Pan Am 103 conspiracies page. You will see that there is no theory that links the US Government and Iran to Lockerbie, and when I tried to post one is disappeared in half an hour. Why? Mr Bert Stossberg who reverted my entry ran (or runs) a website on KAL-007, backing official theory, which as we know (vide Robert Johnson of Oxford University) is rubbish.
CharlesNorrie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 08:27 AM   #132
zooterkin
Nitpicking dilettante
Deputy Admin
 
zooterkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 41,496
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Go and look Mr Threepwood, a character I only know from Wodehouse, at the Pan Am 103 conspiracies page.
This page?
Quote:
You will see that there is no theory that links the US Government and Iran to Lockerbie, and when I tried to post one is disappeared in half an hour.
Could you give us a clue when this happened, or the revision number? I don't see it on the first page of the history.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell
Zooterkin is correct Darat
Nerd! Hokulele
Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232
Ezekiel 23:20
zooterkin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 08:29 AM   #133
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,707
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Go and look Mr Threepwood, a character I only know from Wodehouse, at the Pan Am 103 conspiracies page. You will see that there is no theory that links the US Government and Iran to Lockerbie, and when I tried to post one is disappeared in half an hour. Why? Mr Bert Stossberg who reverted my entry ran (or runs) a website on KAL-007, backing official theory, which as we know (vide Robert Johnson of Oxford University) is rubbish.
Because wikipedia requires facts and sources, not assumptions and story telling.

Just because one or two loonies believe a work of fiction, it doesn't make it worthy of wiki.
__________________
--------------------------------------
Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit!

Sabretooth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 08:54 AM   #134
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,771
Originally Posted by Charles
You will see that there is no theory that links the US Government and Iran to Lockerbie, and when I tried to post one....

I think you'll find that's the problem right there. Wiki is an encyclopedia, not a platform for posting your own personal obsessions. Wiki is recording and referencing theories that actually have a presence in the public domain.

Since you had steadfastly refused to publish your theory until this week, then your theory was not in the public domain, therefore it was not part of the literature of "Lockerbie conspiracy theories" - which is what the page is about.

Now that the theory is published on the internet, there might be some possibility of inserting some reference to it, linking to the pdf you published. However, wiki doesn't necessarily like this either, since writing an article and self-publishing it is a pretty obvious way for people to get round this problem and it isn't as if it hasn't been tried plenty times before.

Because of this, editing an entry to add a link to your own self-published article is also likely to be edited out. If someone else were to do it, it might have more traction. No I'm not going to do it.

The Official Version is dead in the water unless your name is Dick Marquise or Kenny MacAskill, frankly. Editing alternative theories out of Wikipedia isn't going to save it, and anyone with half a brain knows this. While your pdf remains accessible, you are not being suppressed.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 09:44 AM   #135
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
The reference I put in the Pan am Flight 103 conspiracy theories was


For a conspiracy theory that blames the US and Iranian governments jointly through their agencies the CIA and Pasdaran see adifferentviewonlockerbie.blogspot.com


It went within 30 minutes courtesy of Mr Bert Stossberg on the grounds of being "unnotable", not a word in my dictionary.

If you have a look at my theory, which you may not like, you will see that I have no less than 75 references in 30 pages of theory. Don't say you can't check my stuff. I've never seen a footnote in this blog,
Edited by Professor Yaffle:  Edited for civility

Last edited by Professor Yaffle; 2nd September 2010 at 03:56 PM.
CharlesNorrie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 09:47 AM   #136
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Quote:
Since you had steadfastly refused to publish your theory until this week, then your theory was not in the public domain, therefore it was not part of the literature of "Lockerbie conspiracy theories" - which is what the page is about.
But it's there now and referenced Rolfe at adifferntviewonlockerbie.blogspot.com

I have never seen you ever produce a single reference in your work, so it stinks.

Mod WarningAgain, please make it clear when you are quoting another person. If you are having trouble using the quote function, feel free to PM me for help, or make your quotes clear in another way, such as by using italics or a different colour and using the name of the person you are quoting. If you refuse to do so, escalating moderation action including suspension or banning may apply.
Posted By:Professor Yaffle

Last edited by Professor Yaffle; 2nd September 2010 at 04:03 PM.
CharlesNorrie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 09:50 AM   #137
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,771
"Unnotable" is a wiki editorial term for something too light-weight to include. It's as I suspected, you're a one-man-band on this, and you referencing your own publication isn't weighty enough for the encyclopaedia. You need to acquire a following and some credibility.

Good luck with that.

This isn't a blog, so you wouldn't expect foot-notes. Forum posts don't normally take that form. Nevertheless, posters here mostly reference their theories a lot better than you're doing with yours.

ETA: You have enough posts to post links now, Charles. You can include complete urls and they will automatically link.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 2nd September 2010 at 09:51 AM.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 09:53 AM   #138
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,771
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
I have never seen you ever produce a single reference in your work, so it stinks.

What work of mine would that be, then?

Maybe posts 1, 3 and 5 in this thread? http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=181471

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 2nd September 2010 at 09:55 AM.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 10:26 AM   #139
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Ambrosia, you've rather made a point for me. If the bomb were placed at such a point it did so much damage destroying the power systems and control cable harness, it could not have been put there by accident. The odds are rather against it. And by whatever route the bomb got onto the plane why did it get into a first-off container in the forehold. It is rather unlikely. The bag loaded at Luqa was nothing special, yet it went into AVE4041 PA, whivh either contained first class luggage (first class passengers to that most class ridden of all countries don't want to be delayed) or an interline container. Thank you. I'll put the point in my next revision. Next helpful criticism someone. Not you, Rolfe or sabretooth.
CharlesNorrie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 10:27 AM   #140
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Exactly Rolfe. Carping about trivialities is not work.Will you take yourself elsewhere.
CharlesNorrie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 10:29 AM   #141
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Rolfe, unnotable is not a word in any dictionary I use. And my theory is accurately referenced, though you are to lazy to check any such references.
CharlesNorrie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 10:31 AM   #142
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
I don't think references your own comments in this blog/forum or whatever it is really counts, do you Rolfe.
CharlesNorrie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 10:57 AM   #143
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,707
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Ambrosia, you've rather made a point for me. If the bomb were placed at such a point it did so much damage destroying the power systems and control cable harness, it could not have been put there by accident. The odds are rather against it.
No, your view is called "tunnel-vision". There are plenty of factors that can contribute to this structural failure. I mentioned one of them already:

http://en.wikipedia.com/Mach_stem

Quit pretending you are some professional investi-googler.


Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Next helpful criticism someone. Not you, Rolfe or sabretooth.
You know...I've been nothing but cordial with you, Charles...

So you want to pick and choose members? You'll only answer or acknowledge those that (somehow) back your theory? This isn't the forum for that. Go make your own forum so you all can hold hands and drink special Kool-Aid together.

In other words, go peddle your garbage somewhere else.
__________________
--------------------------------------
Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit!

Sabretooth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 10:59 AM   #144
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,707
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
I don't think references your own comments in this blog/forum or whatever it is really counts, do you Rolfe.
Do you not know what the word "irony" means??

Or, possibly, the word "hypocrite"?
__________________
--------------------------------------
Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit!

Sabretooth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 11:34 AM   #145
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,771
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Exactly Rolfe. Carping about trivialities is not work.Will you take yourself elsewhere.

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Next helpful criticism someone. Not you, Rolfe or sabretooth.

Tough. You don't own the forum, Charles.

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Ambrosia, you've rather made a point for me. If the bomb were placed at such a point it did so much damage destroying the power systems and control cable harness, it could not have been put there by accident. The odds are rather against it. And by whatever route the bomb got onto the plane why did it get into a first-off container in the forehold. It is rather unlikely. The bag loaded at Luqa was nothing special, yet it went into AVE4041 PA, whivh either contained first class luggage (first class passengers to that most class ridden of all countries don't want to be delayed) or an interline container. Thank you. I'll put the point in my next revision.

Charles, it would almost definitely have been in that container if it got on the plane any way other than through the check-in desks at Heathrow.

As far as I can tell, all the interline luggage arriving at Heathrow during the afternoon went into that container. There would have been room for perhaps another 40 to 45 items of luggage after that. When PA103A landed, almost all the US-bound luggage from that plane was added to it. A few items were loose-loaded elsewhere.

There were 49 US-bound passengers on PA103A. It's arithmetically impossible for 49 passengers to generate around 40 to 45 items of first-class luggage and only a few items of pleb-class luggage. What went into AVE4041 from PA103A was either all pleb-class (with the first-class being the few bags over that were loose-loaded), or mostly pleb-class.

Karen Noonan's case was one of the first to go into the container, as it was on the bottom layer. She was a young woman returning from an extended vacational stay in Europe. She interlined into Frankfurt from Vienna, and joined PA103A there. Her holiday photographs were found at Lockerbie and returned to her family. Some were shown on TV recently. What makes you think she was travelling first-class?

At least, that is how I understand the evidence with regard to the baggage loading from the connecting flights. If I'm wrong I'd be glad to be put right. Charles, please provide the primary documentation you're using for your counter-intuitive assertion.

Ambrosia is right though. It's entirely possible the positioning of the bomb in such a bad place was coincidental. Random positioning, by definition, doesn't avoid the especially good or especially bad places.

ETA: What bag from Luqa, Charles? There was no bag from Luqa, we all know that.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 2nd September 2010 at 11:35 AM.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 11:48 AM   #146
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
I think I know the English language better than you, sabre. I am English and live in London.

You have attacked my views from the first and have not even demonstrated you've even read them.

Send me a 120 page thesis and I might talk to you.

I have considered over 20 theories of Lockerbie, and only the one I put forward begins to fit.

It necessarily contains gaps because the real perpetrators and progenitors, the US government, the Iranian one, their agencies the CIA and the Pasdaran (have you heard of it) will not ever reveal their real roles.

Why am I a hypocrite? Because I speak what I happen to believe is nearer the truth than anyone else has put forward.

I know about irony, and it is clear you do not. There is nothing in my thesis near to irony. Or your comments. Do you actually know how many types of irony there are. I thought not.

You have not been cordial sabre. You have bullied me from the start, because you don't believe the agencies of your precious country can be up to no good. Or that a presidential candidate would agree to an atrocity to save his candidacy. It almost makes me happy to live in a constitutional monarchy.

I don't know what "Kool-aid"ing together is. Again it is a bit of local American jargon that I am unfamiliar with.

The garbage, unfortunately for you will continue. In about three days it is four pages long, which is more than you've ever achieved, I suspect, in your whole bogging existence. Why don;t you go off and subscribe to the Frank Duggan memorial website.

Cheap sixth-form 16-17 jibes are an unworthy way of arguing.
Edited by Professor Yaffle:  Edited for civility

Last edited by Professor Yaffle; 2nd September 2010 at 03:59 PM.
CharlesNorrie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 11:51 AM   #147
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,771
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Rolfe, unnotable is not a word in any dictionary I use. And my theory is accurately referenced, though you are to lazy to check any such references.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/unnotable
http://thesaurus.com/browse/unnotable

I told you, I'm not going on an Easter-egg hunt trawling through large texts trying to spot the typo or irrational inference you think supports your fantasy. You need to provide your support source up-front for the points people are disputing in your thesis. That's how you support your theory.

You could start by giving us your source for your assertion that the luggage in AVE103 was first class.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 11:54 AM   #148
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,771
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
I don't think references your own comments in this blog/forum or whatever it is really counts, do you Rolfe.

Counts for what? I told you, I don't blog. The only things I have written on Lockerbie are forum posts. You said you hadn't read any of these that were referenced. I gave you a link to some that were.

Notice I was proposing a pretty anti-American Lockerbie conspiracy theory. I didn't get any serious opposing argument at all. Because it was all properly referenced, and if asked, I could have provided further references for any point that was still in doubt.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 11:59 AM   #149
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Oh good Rolfe. A claim at last. What bag from Malta.

Now, why was there any bag at all.

The CIA were at Lockerbie.

The CIA found McKee's suitcase and interfered with it. (Read Johnston, which you've never bothered to do.)

The CIA replaced McKee's suitcase at Lockerbie, with a hole cut in its side. (Read Johnston again.)

A fragment of Toshiba chip appeared in a face plate of AVE4041.

If the claim is that a suitcase exploded in AVE4041 it could not have got stuck in the face plate, on the outside of the container.

In the trade, we know it as the non-Newtonian chip.

The AAIB handed it to the RARDE, as they did not want to handle an obvious plant like that.

So why should I believe any evidence claimed to be found on the ground at Lockerbie from suitcase to clothing to Newcastleton fragments.

Your theory says that you believe certain findings at Lockerbie are true, and some are not. But you never ever tell us what you believe and what you don't.

I threw all the evidence out, and started again. You could too, rather than using you usual abuse.
CharlesNorrie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 11:59 AM   #150
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 18,802
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
I know about irony, and it is clear you do not.

<snip>

Cheap sixth-form 16-17 jibes are an unworthy way of arguing.
Edited by LashL:  Removed quote of moderated content.

Quote:
I don't know what "Kool-aid"ing together is. Again it is a bit of local American jargon that I am unfamiliar with.
Jonestown Massacre
Quote:
Drinking the Kool-Aid refers to the Jonestown Massacre; the phrase suggests that one has mindlessly adopted the dogma of a group or leader without fully understanding the ramifications or implications

Last edited by LashL; 3rd September 2010 at 05:38 PM.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 12:05 PM   #151
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Rolfe, I am not proposing an anti-American conspiracy theory. I am trying to solve Lockerbie. I have argued that compared with what the Iranians proposed/threatened to do (between 5 and 12 aircraft (1500-3000 people) the Americans got a good bargain losing only 270 to 290 on IR-655.

You should thank Richard Lawless (who he - he's only got a name/"Pan Am 103" count of 114, so you could look that up) for that astute bit of bargaining. But the Iranians want their revenge.
CharlesNorrie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 12:11 PM   #152
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Since bogging/writing i this forum my hit rate of

"Charles Norrie" "Pan Am 103"

has gone up from a mere 58 to over 1300. Wow!
CharlesNorrie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 12:19 PM   #153
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Dear Carlitos,

I cannot be mouthing a group leader as I am alone, it seems producing my theory. It really is mine alone, whether you like it or not. The is no leader of the Charles Norrie faction.
CharlesNorrie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 12:20 PM   #154
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 18,802
You're welcome for the explanation for the American cultural reference of which you were previously unaware.

ETA - for context:
Originally Posted by sabretooth47
So you want to pick and choose members? You'll only answer or acknowledge those that (somehow) back your theory? This isn't the forum for that. Go make your own forum so you all can hold hands and drink special Kool-Aid together.

Last edited by carlitos; 2nd September 2010 at 12:22 PM.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 12:39 PM   #155
CharlesNorrie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 101
Mr Carlitos,

I really don't know what you are talking about, if anything. I respond here to people who sensibly engage with my stuff not South Park foul-mouths and dimmos
CharlesNorrie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 12:48 PM   #156
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,771
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Oh good Rolfe. A claim at last. What bag from Malta.

Now, why was there any bag at all.

The CIA were at Lockerbie.

The CIA found McKee's suitcase and interfered with it. (Read Johnston, which you've never bothered to do.)

The CIA replaced McKee's suitcase at Lockerbie, with a hole cut in its side. (Read Johnston again.)

None of that is evidence that anything at all was planted at Lockerbie.

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
A fragment of Toshiba chip appeared in a face plate of AVE4041.

If the claim is that a suitcase exploded in AVE4041 it could not have got stuck in the face plate, on the outside of the container.

In the trade, we know it as the non-Newtonian chip.

In this trade, we know all about Newtonian physics. Indeed, homoeopaths have occassionally described me as being "stuck in a Newtonian paradigm". You still haven't shown your working to support your claim that a fragment from close to the explosion couldn't have got stuck in a plate on the outside of the baggage container.

Ever watched a snooker match, Charles?

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
The AAIB handed it to the RARDE, as they did not want to handle an obvious plant like that.

The AAIB passed it on to RARDE for forensic examination and identification. Because that was RARDE's job, not the job of the AAIB investigators. Unless you have a signed statement from Mr. Claiden that says, take this obvious plant away, Thomas, fabrication of evidence is your line!

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
So why should I believe any evidence claimed to be found on the ground at Lockerbie from suitcase to clothing to Newcastleton fragments.

No, if you want to claim that any evidence presented in the case was fabricated and/or planted, you have to explain how this happened. We do have rules of evidence and corroboration in Scotland you know, and bent investigators have to put in a bit of effort to circumvent them.

Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Your theory says that you believe certain findings at Lockerbie are true, and some are not. But you never ever tell us what you believe and what you don't.

I threw all the evidence out, and started again. You could too, rather than using you usual abuse.

My approach is to examine whether any claim that a particular piece of evidence has been fabricated has any foundation to it. In a couple of cases, the answer appears to be yes.

If your approach is to assume a priori that none of the physical evidence is genuine, then I do hope you're never called up for jury service, that's all.

If I were to start abusing you, I think you'd notice. I haven't started, and as unlike you I'm not keen on collecting yellow cards, I'll refrain.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 2nd September 2010 at 12:58 PM.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 12:52 PM   #157
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 18,802
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Mr Carlitos,

I really don't know what you are talking about, if anything. I respond here to people who sensibly engage with my stuff not South Park foul-mouths and dimmos
Dude, you stated that you weren't familiar with the "Kool Aid" reference, which is well known in America. I provided it, linked to a wiki article that explained it further, and cited the original quote in context so you would understand its relevance. Most people would just say "thanks," and leave it at that. Good luck with your Lockerbie theory.

Rolfe - sorry for the partial derail

Last edited by carlitos; 2nd September 2010 at 12:53 PM. Reason: quote
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 01:11 PM   #158
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,707
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
I think I know the English language better than you, sabre. I am English and live in London...
Then maybe you can explain your lack of comprehension. I've asked a number of different and legitimate questions that you have completely ignored. You obviously haven't understood any of the posts I've made, either. So, for your convenience, here is my history of posting with direction toward you:

Originally Posted by sabretooth47 - compiled and editted for simplicity
Post #2:
I asked if my comprehension was correct of your blog; in that you believe the U.S. voluntarily assisted the bombing of PA103 to allow Iran it’s revenge for IR655.

Post #10:
I summarized your article and asked that you show proof of your claims, as you do not adequately do so on your blog.

Post #32:
I am again asking for clarity. You show a bias toward an Iranian news source. Then you claim I’m the one being ignorant.

Post #42:
I am still awaiting clarity and facts. I point out a glaring contradiction in your blog that requires an answer.

Post #43:
I ask that you provide proof of your theory that the U.S. fears Iran of “what it might do”.

Post #45:
You claim your blog is “impregnable”. I disagree with you and I state as to why.

Post #84:
I, again, make a plea for you to clarify yourself. Your claims are nothing more than speculation.

Post #105
I simplify my question and ask for a specific detail. You say the bomb evidence was planted. I ask that you show proof that this statement can be considered valid.

Post #110:
I ask another simple question. I asked why you felt the CIA was aware of the plot but still killed 4 or 5 of its agents anyway.

Post #111:
I ask another simple question. Why do you feel it was such a surprise that a small bomb caused total destruction? I provided facts as to why you shouldn’t be “surprised”.

Post #123:
I asked if you were going to answer my questions.

Post #127:
I posted more evidence of my claims in post #111.

Post #128:
I explained to you why my questions we valid and why “hand-waving” them away just not change facts.

Post #133:
I explained, albeit coarsely, as to why your Wiki article was rejected.

Post #143:
I explained that your view is very narrow-minded. If you truly seek answers, you cannot cherry-pick your arguments and sources.

Post #144:
You complained that Wiki would not accept your own published blog as a source, but then ridiculed Rolfe for the same thing. That is a clear definition of hypocrisy.
Never...in ANY of my posts...have I made the comment that I feel the CIA or the U.S. gov't are a group of angels or free of ridicule...yet you accuse me of the same.

Again, I will state: The Burden of Proof Always Falls On the Accuser, not the other way around.

If you want me, or anyone else for that matter, to take your hypothesis seriously, then you will need to support your stories with facts and evidence...not guesswork and assumptions.
__________________
--------------------------------------
Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit!

Sabretooth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 01:56 PM   #159
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,707
Originally Posted by CharlesNorrie View Post
Since bogging/writing i this forum my hit rate of

"Charles Norrie" "Pan Am 103"

has gone up from a mere 58 to over 1300. Wow!
I see. So this project is nothing more than a popularity contest? That explains a lot.

__________________
--------------------------------------
Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit!

Sabretooth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 02:44 PM   #160
zooterkin
Nitpicking dilettante
Deputy Admin
 
zooterkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 41,496
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
You're welcome for the explanation for the American cultural reference of which you were previously unaware.
I would just point out, not that anyone cares, that it wasn't Kool-Aid that was used at Jonestown, but Flavor-aid. I think the confusion may have arisen from the Tom Wolfe book, The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell
Zooterkin is correct Darat
Nerd! Hokulele
Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232
Ezekiel 23:20
zooterkin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:28 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.