Author of the Month :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
Join us at this forum every month for a discussion with famous popular authors from around the world. 
Welcome! Log InRegister
I notice that Creighton returns in Void to his usual recitation from Walter Allen’s “logbook”:

https://www.google.co.uk/search?tbm=bks&q=%22faint+marks+were+repainted%22 . . .

We already know that to uphold the “truth” of Allen’s account, Creighton resorts in Void to the desperate expedient of assuming that Allen was wrong about so basic a detail as the identity of the witness.

Where this leaves “Faint marks were repainted, some were new” is as yet unclear to me. If these are not the observations of Humphries Brewer, but rather of “Witness M”, it becomes harder to account for Humphries Brewer having (supposedly) been aware of them. Are we to imagine “Witness M” yelling “Faint marks were repainted, some were new!” at Raven, in Humphries Brewer’s hearing?

Creighton gravitates in Void to a supposition that the “witness” episode was connected with Lady Arbuthnot’s Chamber. I noted one small problem with this scenario, in advance, in 2014:

https://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread998893/pg10#pid17649502

The more marks there are, the harder it is to spot those which are (supposedly) repainted or new. Lady Arbuthnot’s Chamber is not a good location for this story.

M.

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
Faint hope 271 Martin Stower 18-Jul-21 16:27
Re: Faint hope 96 greengirl5 18-Jul-21 21:57
Re: Faint hope 90 Merrell 19-Jul-21 08:58
Re: Faint hope 85 greengirl5 19-Jul-21 13:06
Re: Faint hope 84 Merrell 19-Jul-21 13:09
Re: Faint hope 146 Martin Stower 19-Jul-21 14:14
Re: Faint hope 107 Martin Stower 18-Jul-21 22:12


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.