Mysteries :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For serious discussion of the controversies, approaches and enigmas surrounding the origins and development of the human species and of human civilization. (NB: for more ‘out there’ posts we point you in the direction of the ‘Paranormal & Supernatural’ Message Board). 
Welcome! Log InRegister
LonelyAngel Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Martin Stower Wrote:
>
>
> > All of which tending to show that you have an
> > unusual level of investment in the issue. Why is
> > this?
>
>
> "An unusual level of investment in this issue"??
> Coming from YOU, Martin Stower? Are you yanking
> my chain?
>
> Loveritis declares ""In other words, it seems as
> though the book is a dud." based on a review, and
> fully accepting the authority and credentials of
> the reviewer, and to you that is OK.
>
> But I come on and make three or four posts
> questioning that and it is NOT OK? I am
> "invested" here?
>
> You can't even think straight anymore can you?
>
> This Vyse issue is central to your emotional core,
> and it's about to be blown wide open again. The
> first salvo comes before the book is even
> available to the public, from an established
> critic of Scott's work. You and Loveritis jump on
> that and hope the issue is closed, the debate shut
> down?
>
> In the age of Amazon and Tripadvisor, you think
> ONE review from someone no one can describe as
> unbiased on these matters is going to be lorded on
> here by all and sundry as the definitive word, not
> to be questioned? One blogger decides it for us
> all doe he?
>
> Not in my world, buster. I'll judge for myself
> and not go on the word of a third party. You
> evidently will, providing that third party is on
> your "side" of the argument.
>
> Where's your empiricism there? Where's your
> dedication to the facts? Where's your desire to
> see something for yourself, to see the evidence
> first hand? Out the window, along with your
> objectivity.
>
> The blogger knows the importance of getting in
> there first, he knows that a lie can be halfway
> round the world before the truth has got its pants
> on. That's why he went out of his way to produce
> a lengthy critique of a book he found completely
> "uninteresting". Mmmm. A bit like you and the
> boys on here, criticising the book on here for the
> best part of the last year when you haven't even
> seen it. At least he can claim to have read it.
>
>
> The first salvo has been fired in this battle,
> from the usual and predictable orthodox quarters.
> If that's the worst this blogger can do, I think
> some big guns - like Mr Bauval - better wheel
> themselves out pretty quickly to try to rubbish
> Scott and suppress this dangerous book before
> anyone with an open mind gets a hold of it.
>
> But this isn't "alternative" history against
> traditional history, this is about mainstream
> history, so the standard prejudice against Scott
> here won't stand up. He's not promoting a "far
> out" theory, he's trying to establish some facts
> in a murky corner of Egyptology.
>
> I find it interesting, but no Mr Stower, I'm not
> "invested" here in any intellectual or emotional
> sense of the word. I can take it or leave it.
> You, on the other hand, can't take it and won't
> leave it, so I suggest you put your tin helmet on,
> gird your loins, grit your teeth and prepare for a
> long war.
>
> Good luck sir!

Thanks for showing us how not invested you are.

Yes, Sean, I’ve put the work in on the topic—whereas you purport to be just some bloke on a message board, who’s
“withholding his judgement”. Do try to keep in character.

“This Vyse issue is central to your emotional core, and it’s about to be blown wide open again.”

See what I mean?

Perhaps you’d like also to explain the “blown wide open again” (my emphasis). In several years of trying, all Scott Creighton blew was his own trumpet—and now you’re doing it for him. You’ve even got the huffing and puffing down pat.

I look forward to your cogent comments on the review you find so objectionable. Doubtless you are working on them at this very moment, which is why we have yet to see any.

Are you under the impression that Loveritis (sic: Loveritas) and I are relying on Jason’s review? If so, you’ve forgotten quite a lot, including what you wrote quite recently here:

http://grahamhancock.com/phorum/read.php?1,1067713,1067782#msg-1067782

“Martin, on my own experience alone, I would regard YOU as the foremost expert in the defence of Vyse.”

Anyone interested may see that I’ve already amplified a number of the points raised by Jason:

http://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/review-of-scott-creightons-the-great-pyramid-hoax-part-two

As for the OP by Loveritas, it is, of course, the latest in a series based on multiple sources.

By the way, I was sorry to hear that you experienced identity theft in 2011. It was wise of you to take precautions in advance, by registering as LonelyAngel in 2007.

M.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 26-Sep-16 20:14 by Martin Stower.

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
Creighton v Vyse : Court Resumes 3265 loveritas 25-Sep-16 10:45
Re: Creighton v Vyse : Court Resumes 916 cladking 25-Sep-16 13:25
Re: Creighton v Vyse : Court Resumes 981 Martin Stower 25-Sep-16 13:47
Re: Creighton v Vyse : Court Resumes 913 cladking 25-Sep-16 13:57
Re: Creighton v Vyse : Court Resumes 810 D-Archer 26-Sep-16 13:40
"The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 977 LonelyAngel 25-Sep-16 16:52
My Lord, I call a surprise witness: SCOTT CREIGHTON 1010 LonelyAngel 25-Sep-16 16:54
Re: My Lord, I call a surprise witness: SCOTT CREIGHTON 973 Martin Stower 25-Sep-16 18:52
Re: My Lord, I call a surprise witness: SCOTT CREIGHTON 806 LonelyAngel 26-Sep-16 14:37
Re: My Lord, I call a surprise witness: SCOTT CREIGHTON 898 Martin Stower 26-Sep-16 19:36
Re: My Lord, I call a surprise witness: SCOTT CREIGHTON 884 Martin Stower 25-Sep-16 19:42
Re: My Lord, I call a surprise witness: SCOTT CREIGHTON 852 Thanos5150 25-Sep-16 21:05
Re: My Lord, I call a surprise witness: SCOTT CREIGHTON 808 Martin Stower 25-Sep-16 23:11
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 832 Martin Stower 25-Sep-16 17:48
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 797 LonelyAngel 25-Sep-16 18:05
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 825 Martin Stower 25-Sep-16 18:19
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 858 LonelyAngel 25-Sep-16 19:35
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 778 Martin Stower 25-Sep-16 19:53
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 741 LonelyAngel 25-Sep-16 20:00
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 845 Martin Stower 25-Sep-16 20:16
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 871 LonelyAngel 25-Sep-16 20:50
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 767 Martin Stower 25-Sep-16 23:07
Right To Review. 760 DScribr 26-Sep-16 13:31
Re: Right To Review. 796 Martin Stower 26-Sep-16 20:23
Re: Right To Review. 767 DScribr 27-Sep-16 03:34
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 864 R Avry Wilson 25-Sep-16 21:24
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 841 LonelyAngel 25-Sep-16 21:33
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 866 R Avry Wilson 26-Sep-16 01:17
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 919 cladking 26-Sep-16 02:03
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 847 Martin Stower 26-Sep-16 09:26
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 797 cladking 26-Sep-16 13:52
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 815 Martin Stower 30-Sep-16 00:06
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 830 cladking 30-Sep-16 01:33
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 833 LonelyAngel 26-Sep-16 14:21
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 658 cladking 26-Sep-16 15:04
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 799 LonelyAngel 26-Sep-16 13:48
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 788 Martin Stower 26-Sep-16 20:12
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 790 R Avry Wilson 26-Sep-16 21:36
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 727 cladking 26-Sep-16 21:43
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 760 Martin Stower 26-Sep-16 01:40
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 860 cladking 25-Sep-16 21:49
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 832 LonelyAngel 25-Sep-16 22:07
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 782 cladking 25-Sep-16 22:18
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 855 Martin Stower 25-Sep-16 22:45
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 862 LonelyAngel 26-Sep-16 10:31
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 753 Origyptian 26-Sep-16 15:29
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 865 LonelyAngel 26-Sep-16 15:44
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 832 Martin Stower 27-Sep-16 13:13
Re: "The book is downright uninteresting" yet he couldn't wait to write lengthy hatchet job review 907 Martin Stower 26-Sep-16 18:11
Re: The New Inquisition 929 Thunderbird 26-Sep-16 20:35
Re: The New Inquisition 737 Martin Stower 26-Sep-16 20:43
Re: The New Inquisition 698 cladking 26-Sep-16 21:24
Re: The New Inquisition 782 Martin Stower 26-Sep-16 21:53
Re: The New Inquisition 810 cladking 26-Sep-16 23:27
Re: The New Inquisition 763 Thanos5150 26-Sep-16 23:31
Re: The New Inquisition 759 cladking 27-Sep-16 01:25
The old copy/paste trick....... 868 DScribr 28-Sep-16 00:28
Re: The Conspiracy 732 Thunderbird 27-Sep-16 00:58
Is Jason Colavito a credible expert witness? 1272 drrayeye 26-Sep-16 17:01
Re: Is Jason Colavito a credible expert witness? 1049 eyeofhorus33 26-Sep-16 19:54
Re: Is Jason Colavito a credible expert witness? 856 drrayeye 26-Sep-16 20:26
Re: Is Jason Colavito a credible expert witness? 786 M. J. Thomas 26-Sep-16 20:20
Re: Is Jason Colavito a credible expert witness? 798 cladking 26-Sep-16 21:31
Lover's premise 885 drrayeye 26-Sep-16 22:18
Re: Lover's premise 768 Martin Stower 26-Sep-16 22:20
Jason Colavito IS a credible expert witness! 882 DScribr 27-Sep-16 18:39
Re: Jason Colavito IS a credible expert witness! 1004 Martin Stower 27-Sep-16 19:16
Re: Jason Colavito IS a credible expert witness! (I swear it!!!) 989 DScribr 28-Sep-16 00:21
Re: Is Jason Colavito a credible expert witness? 845 Barbelo 26-Sep-16 20:38
Re: Is Jason Colavito a credible expert witness? 800 Martin Stower 26-Sep-16 20:47
Oh Oh 884 drrayeye 26-Sep-16 22:20
Re: Oh Oh 725 Martin Stower 26-Sep-16 22:25
Re: Oh Oh 857 Barbelo 26-Sep-16 22:26
Re: Oh Oh 763 drrayeye 27-Sep-16 06:33
You're Not On The Same Page 835 Barbelo 27-Sep-16 10:19
You've got a lot to learn 859 drrayeye 29-Sep-16 05:36
Re: You've got a lot to learn 870 Barbelo 29-Sep-16 07:04
Re: You've got a lot to learn 769 Martin Stower 29-Sep-16 14:13
Re: You've got a lot to learn 803 DScribr 29-Sep-16 18:23
Re: You've got a lot to learn 715 Origyptian 29-Sep-16 14:58
Re: You've got a lot to learn 933 Martin Stower 29-Sep-16 15:16
Can anyone be a credible expert witness? 766 cladking 27-Sep-16 04:10
Re: Can anyone be a credible expert witness? 861 Thanos5150 27-Sep-16 06:02
Re: Can anyone be a credible expert witness? 772 Barbelo 27-Sep-16 10:23
Re: Can anyone be a credible expert witness? 826 cladking 27-Sep-16 15:14
Re: Can anyone be a credible expert witness? 768 Barbelo 27-Sep-16 21:11
Living in the dark ages. 752 cladking 27-Sep-16 14:00
Re: Living in the dark ages. 808 Origyptian 27-Sep-16 14:35
Re: Living in the dark ages. 815 cladking 27-Sep-16 14:51
Re: Living in the dark ages. 814 Origyptian 27-Sep-16 15:33
Re: Living in the dark ages. 783 cladking 27-Sep-16 16:11
Re: Living in the dark ages. 763 Barbelo 27-Sep-16 21:16
Re: Living in the dark ages. 759 Origyptian 27-Sep-16 21:36
Re: Living in the dark ages. 725 Martin Stower 29-Sep-16 14:16
Re: Living in the dark ages. 803 Origyptian 29-Sep-16 14:31
Re: Living in the dark ages. 765 Martin Stower 29-Sep-16 15:33
Re: Living in the dark ages. 923 Thanos5150 27-Sep-16 16:54
Re: Living in the dark ages. 852 cladking 27-Sep-16 17:22
Re: Living in the dark ages. 767 Thanos5150 27-Sep-16 18:02
Re: Living in the dark ages. 770 cladking 27-Sep-16 18:14
Oooohh... touchy 979 LonelyAngel 05-Oct-16 19:03
Re: Oooohh... touchy 737 Martin Stower 05-Oct-16 19:24
Re: Oooohh... touchy 959 LonelyAngel 05-Oct-16 19:37
Re: Oooohh... touchy 845 Martin Stower 05-Oct-16 21:08
Re: Oooohh... touchy 811 LonelyAngel 05-Oct-16 21:35
Re: Oooohh... touchy 614 Martin Stower 05-Oct-16 21:37
Re: Oooohh... touchy 812 LonelyAngel 05-Oct-16 21:41
Re: Oooohh... touchy 739 Martin Stower 05-Oct-16 22:00
Re: Oooohh... touchy 881 LonelyAngel 06-Oct-16 09:43
Re: Oooohh... touchy 795 Martin Stower 06-Oct-16 11:56
Re: Oooohh... touchy 804 LonelyAngel 06-Oct-16 13:44
Re: Oooohh... touchy 666 earllt 06-Oct-16 14:33
Re: Oooohh... touchy 704 Martin Stower 06-Oct-16 15:22
Re: Oooohh... touchy 769 Martin Stower 06-Oct-16 15:19
Re: Oooohh... touchy 752 LonelyAngel 06-Oct-16 15:28
Re: Oooohh... touchy 873 Martin Stower 06-Oct-16 20:18
Re: Oooohh... touchy 774 LonelyAngel 07-Oct-16 10:00
Re: Oooohh... touchy 690 Martin Stower 07-Oct-16 10:37
Re: Oooohh... touchy 670 LonelyAngel 07-Oct-16 10:40
Re: Oooohh... touchy 707 Martin Stower 07-Oct-16 11:26
Re: Oooohh... touchy 762 LonelyAngel 07-Oct-16 11:58
Re: Oooohh... touchy 725 Martin Stower 07-Oct-16 12:10
Re: Oooohh... touchy 769 LonelyAngel 07-Oct-16 12:45
Re: Oooohh... touchy 753 Martin Stower 07-Oct-16 13:05
Re: Oooohh... touchy 741 LonelyAngel 07-Oct-16 13:35
Re: Oooohh... touchy 751 Martin Stower 07-Oct-16 13:42
Re: Oooohh... touchy 751 LonelyAngel 07-Oct-16 13:48
Re: Oooohh... touchy 671 Martin Stower 07-Oct-16 13:55
Re: Oooohh... touchy 727 LonelyAngel 07-Oct-16 14:00
Re: Oooohh... touchy 778 Martin Stower 07-Oct-16 14:47
Re: Oooohh... touchy 758 LonelyAngel 07-Oct-16 15:01
Re: Oooohh... touchy 741 Martin Stower 07-Oct-16 15:22
Re: Oooohh... touchy 619 LonelyAngel 07-Oct-16 15:47
Re: Oooohh... touchy 713 Martin Stower 07-Oct-16 16:37
Re: Oooohh... touchy 745 Jon Ellison 07-Oct-16 17:12
Re: Oooohh... touchy 726 Martin Stower 07-Oct-16 18:22
Re: Oooohh... touchy 748 Jon Ellison 07-Oct-16 18:41
Re: Oooohh... touchy 743 Martin Stower 07-Oct-16 19:02
Re: Oooohh... touchy 718 LonelyAngel 07-Oct-16 20:01
Re: Oooohh... touchy 696 Martin Stower 07-Oct-16 20:58
Re: Oooohh... touchy 710 LonelyAngel 07-Oct-16 21:52
Re: Oooohh... touchy 1059 Martin Stower 07-Oct-16 22:35
Re: Oooohh... touchy 802 LonelyAngel 08-Oct-16 10:29
Re: Oooohh... touchy 720 Morten 08-Oct-16 15:36
Re: Oooohh... touchy 662 LonelyAngel 08-Oct-16 17:35
Re: Oooohh... touchy 748 LonelyAngel 08-Oct-16 17:41
Re: Oooohh... touchy 916 Martin Stower 08-Oct-16 20:01
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz 643 LonelyAngel 08-Oct-16 20:14
Re: Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz 716 Martin Stower 08-Oct-16 20:35
Philosophy: Schrödinger's cat 657 LonelyAngel 08-Oct-16 21:03
Re: Philosophy: Schrödinger's cat 790 Martin Stower 08-Oct-16 21:50
Re: Philosophy: Schrödinger's cat 693 LonelyAngel 09-Oct-16 09:22
Re: Philosophy: Schrödinger's cat 721 Martin Stower 09-Oct-16 16:46
Re: Philosophy: Schrödinger's cat 759 LonelyAngel 10-Oct-16 10:27
Re: Philosophy: Schrödinger's cat 938 Martin Stower 10-Oct-16 17:12
Re: Philosophy: Schrödinger's cat 631 LonelyAngel 11-Oct-16 13:32
Re: Philosophy: Schrödinger's cat 745 Martin Stower 11-Oct-16 16:54
Re: Philosophy: Schrödinger's cat 679 LonelyAngel 11-Oct-16 16:59
Re: Philosophy: Schrödinger's cat 754 Martin Stower 11-Oct-16 17:36
Re: Philosophy: Schrödinger's cat 679 randompHactor 11-Oct-16 17:38
Re: Philosophy: Schrödinger's cat 697 eyeofhorus33 11-Oct-16 18:10
The Three Stooges 853 LonelyAngel 11-Oct-16 19:52
Re: The Three Stooges 810 eyeofhorus33 11-Oct-16 19:55
Re: The Three Stooges 874 Martin Stower 11-Oct-16 23:02
Re: The Three Stooges 822 Luminescence 12-Oct-16 01:03
Re: Oooohh... touchy 773 Thunderbird 06-Oct-16 17:59
Racing for the Cliffs. 804 cladking 06-Oct-16 14:10
Re: Racing for the Cliffs. 690 LonelyAngel 06-Oct-16 14:33
Re: Racing for the Cliffs. 698 Jon Ellison 06-Oct-16 14:39
Re: Racing for the Cliffs. 769 LonelyAngel 06-Oct-16 14:41
Re: Racing for the Cliffs. 859 Jon Ellison 06-Oct-16 14:48


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.