325 replies to this topic

[chopmo]

From one sales person to another, don't hand me phecies and tell me it's roses. The last guy that danced around the truth I gladly walked out of the interview.

I understand your view and how you could possibly conceive this as your idea. But it is skeptism placed on blue mooned events to say the least, with in saying the evidence you have is on a hunch that VG was a bored mastermind that didn't like paying for prostitutes well practically. There has been very good points brought to your attention that need no more going on about, but the most to note is about the performance of your effort in to showing your case has been nothing more than advertising. Cheap marketing that for the first 3 pages on this thread you could not even give the effort as to actually writing it, you just copied and pasted your sales pitch over and over and for that you have done your own deed. I personally lean towards the theory in which it was the chief surgeon under order of the royals, it just fits their isle of horrors so well and would have more reason.

But for your effort on the forum in trying to state your points you have done poorly, the most of watching you squirm and sell. TO WHICH might I add if your book is not released how in the blue hell can I purchase it? What is the point of advertising if it is not available? [ouch... I hate pointless telemarketers so much...] That I believe has been the biggest puzzle of them all that we have uncovered here. You are indeed phishing for success by stiring some controversy over it, but when you have several people telling you that the letters were bodged and you keep refrencing to those same letters... it doesn't help or stablise your point.

This brought instant laughter because I immediantly thought of this scene, come to think of it you will notice you and the other bloke have both got themselves shot in the leg in this thread.
*only relevant for about the first 10 seconds* (damn youtube give me more control )

http://youtu.be/s1xtYLIP8CU?t=13s

[third_eye]

CrimsonKing, on 21 February 2013 - 09:13 AM, said:

In a way you are saying the imagination is a better tool at making us think than what is really before us?On the Don Mc song

It's not a pre-U exam my dear chap, the tool fits the purpose or the purpose fits the tool ?
It's appreciating a painting, in this case it doesn't matter if Vincent was not famous or if his painting broke more art auction sales records, or if he was even Jack or never shot himself, this painting would still be what it is. A great painting.
It applies to songs and movies, all things art I guess but that opens that strange can of worms : "What you mean Art ? "

[CrimsonKing]

third_eye, on 21 February 2013 - 10:45 AM, said:

It's not a pre-U exam my dear chap, the tool fits the purpose or the purpose fits the tool ?
It's appreciating a painting, in this case it doesn't matter if Vincent was not famous or if his painting broke more art auction sales records, or if he was even Jack or never shot himself, this painting would still be what it is. A great painting.
It applies to songs and movies, all things art I guess but that opens that strange can of worms : "What you mean Art ? "

Agreed man,well said!

[BishopRyan]

Dale Larner, on 19 February 2013 - 03:17 AM, said:

but the readers will be the judge of that.

Readers? There won't be many. You're a fraud and one of the worst kinds. You've fabricated garbage in the hopes of preying fiscally on the stupidity and ignorance of others. Its only slightly less disappointing that this forum has continued to allow you to post your lame self aggrandizing sales pitch. You're an embrassment to the real people who spend the time to document and pass on accurate historical information.

The slander you attempt to pass off as fact borderlines on criminal.

[Lava_Lady]

third_eye, on 21 February 2013 - 10:24 AM, said:

I was not arguing with you Lava_Lady, you misunderstood me, I was applying the profile you provided as a better fit for Warhol.
you mentioned you wanted to know more, I posted what I know about Vincent in relation to topic, there is a lot more and you simply have to read about Vincent, his bio and letters to Theo is a must.
Regarding "why" he cut off his ear you'll have to read all we know about the incident. It was not just one irrational act, a lot of things were happening the days leading up to the incident. You'll have to decide for yourself, Paul Gauguin was there and has his version of the event.
I've been reading up on Vincent since I was in my early teens, he was the reason I chose Fine Arts to tell the truth,

I apologise if I caused you some distress

~edit : laziness leaves a mess everywhere

Hmmm...yes, you did cause distress, of the irritation kind when you wrote,

Quote

Sorry Miss, your unsub profiling is too general and based on it Andy Warhol is a better fit than Vincent.And the association of both to Jack is overwhelmingly inconsistent to timelines.

I think you thought I was applying the characteristics I listed to Van Gogh.  Why else are you saying "I'm sorry miss"


You also wrote,

Quote

Going by the line of deductions based on amateurish profiling,...

  so, yeah... "distress".  Clearly you thought I was saying Van Gogh was guilty.  But, whatever my "distress" won't make me lose sleep.

[Belial]

How could he have done the murders with one ear and a paint brush in his hand?

[G Donnelly]

Belial, on 22 February 2013 - 10:49 AM, said:

How could he have done the murders with one ear and a paint brush in his hand?

He could have tickled them to death with his paintbrush...

However that's unlikely because the crime scenes are too blood splattered.

Edited by Medium Brown, 22 February 2013 - 11:11 AM.

[Dale Larner]

third_eye, on 20 February 2013 - 02:12 PM, said:

He would sooner cut off his ear than to harm another woman, even if she was a "prostitute"
Vincent loved life, loved women or the pureness of a woman. read more about the man, he was a gentle soul. He would sooner harm himself than let harm come to others, specially the ones he loves.

One book I recommend for new readers of Vincent : Lust for life by Irving Stone or if you're not a reader, the movie with Kirk Douglas as Vincent
We know a lot about Vincents life, it is well documented
We know more about Vincents life now because it is well researched, from other documented sources.

We know Vincent, he is not Jack

Vincent was not a gentle soul. His 800 letters reveal his irascible and argumentative nature. For instance, when he moved back home, he was ruthless in his arguments with his preacher father, so much so his father threw him out of the house. This was mostly related to Vincent’s irrational love for his cousin. She didn’t want anything to do with him, but he continued to pursue her relentlessly, like a stalker,

Vincent then went to live with a pregnant prostitute.

His forgiving father allowed him to move back home again later, and Vincent’s arguing and obstinate behavior only intensified. He continued to cause his father harm to the point that others stopped visiting. Vincent was damaging his preacher father’s reputation, and he added to it by dating a neighbor of theirs and kicking up a stir with her family, which caused her to poison herself. She lived, but had to stay away from Vincent.

When Vincent’s father then suddenly dropped dead, his sisters and many in the town blamed Vincent for it because of the stress he had put on his father.

Vincent was not a gentle soul. He was a troublemaker, and he made trouble wherever he went for everyone he came in contact with.

Vincent van Gogh was not as he seems.

And I haven’t even touched on his murderous ways.

Thanks,
Dale Larner

[Dale Larner]

tyrant lizard, on 19 February 2013 - 09:07 AM, said:

The picture that supposedly shows the Mary Kelly hidden within the flowers doesn't hold much water with me, and it's the main selling point. If he was jack the ripper, and he did kill her, why did he make his representation of her from the same place the police took their picture of her? That's quite a coincidence, considering there were a hundred other places he could of of been standing when he made that mental picture.

Not a coincidence. It had to do with the layout of the room. The room was small. The headboard and the right side of the bed were against walls. The location the picture was taken from was really the only angle that would include the full view of Mary Kelly’s body and face, and also the only angle to draw a sketch from.

Thanks,
Dale Larner

[Dale Larner]

Moon Gazer, on 19 February 2013 - 11:12 AM, said:

Just a thought, but with regards to the ripper letters that you were matching up to the Van Gough letters, is there no post mark on letters in those days?  I just wondered with regards to the timing of the letters being received in London and when Van Gough would have had to post them.  Does the timing of the letters and how much time Van Gough would have had to spend travelling tie up?

And is there no doubt in your mind Mr Larner that maybe Van Gough may have had an unhealthy facination with the Ripper murders?  He was seen as quite an unstable chap.

Yes, they stamped letters with postmarks back then, and yes, the matches in timing to the dates of the Ripper letters and to Van Gogh’s life match up very well, ridiculously well, in fact.

If my research had not led to numerous matches between Vincent’s life and Jack’s deeds, then perhaps the reasoning of it only being an unhealthy fascination from afar would be viable. But it turns out he did have an unhealthy fascination with the Ripper murders, though, but it was up close—he committed them. A very unhealthy habit, indeed.

Thanks,
Dale Larner

[third_eye]

Dale Larner, on 02 March 2013 - 11:03 PM, said:

Vincent was not a gentle soul. His 800 letters reveal his irascible and argumentative nature. For instance, when he moved back home, he was ruthless in his arguments with his preacher father, so much so his father threw him out of the house. This was mostly related to Vincent’s irrational love for his cousin. She didn’t want anything to do with him, but he continued to pursue her relentlessly, like a stalker,

Vincent then went to live with a pregnant prostitute.

His forgiving father allowed him to move back home again later, and Vincent’s arguing and obstinate behavior only intensified. He continued to cause his father harm to the point that others stopped visiting. Vincent was damaging his preacher father’s reputation, and he added to it by dating a neighbor of theirs and kicking up a stir with her family, which caused her to poison herself. She lived, but had to stay away from Vincent.

When Vincent’s father then suddenly dropped dead, his sisters and many in the town blamed Vincent for it because of the stress he had put on his father.

Vincent was not a gentle soul. He was a troublemaker, and he made trouble wherever he went for everyone he came in contact with.

Vincent van Gogh was not as he seems.

And I haven’t even touched on his murderous ways.

Thanks,
Dale Larner

YOu've just lost the entire plot now haven't you ?

[Dale Larner]

Antilles, on 19 February 2013 - 01:30 PM, said:

It's as good a theory as any that's around but

The timeline of Van G's life has been mentioned many times in this thread.

It wasn't Vincent.

Starry, starry night....

The timeline of Vincent’s life matches very well to the Ripper murders, as presented by the dating and contents of his own letters.

I know it’s hard to take, but it was Vincent. He was not as he seems.

Thanks,
Dale Larner

[Dale Larner]

freetoroam, on 19 February 2013 - 12:35 PM, said:

The rooms were unfurnished and uninhabited for some time. He was still at the Hôtel Restaurant Carrel, but the rate charged by the hotel was 5 francs a week, which he found excessive. He disputed the price, took the case to a local arbitrator and was awarded a twelve franc reduction on the total bill

=========================================================

Does not sound like a man who had enough money to travel back and forth to England.

Part of what I present in the book is that Vincent had enough money to travel for each of the murders. His brother, Theo, provided him with the means, and Vincent thanked him in his letters for the amounts he received, providing the evidence of how much he received.

Vincent could travel roundtrip to London for less than 100 francs. He had the money, and he made the trips, and he committed the murders.

Thanks,
Dale Larner

[Likely Guy]

So. I'd gather that the book contracts aren't forth coming?

I've read this thread from the start and the whole thing is nothing but self promotion for a project that you want someone else to publish.

Why not self-publish? If you believe so much in your theory, ebook.

[Dale Larner]

Likely Guy, on 06 March 2013 - 04:20 AM, said:

So. I'd gather that the book contracts aren't forth coming?

I've read this thread from the start and the whole thing is nothing but self promotion for a project that you want someone else to publish.

Why not self-publish? If you believe so much in your theory, ebook.

Thanks for the interest and reading through the thread.

Of course, I’m hoping a book contract is forthcoming. My agent is currently pitching the book to publishers.

The traditional publishing route provides distribution.

Thanks,
Dale Larner