tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post7560050578434169938..comments2024-01-19T04:32:25.260+11:00Comments on Ned Kelly : Death of the Legend: Kelly Vault ControversyDeehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14104818673788818740noreply@blogger.comBlogger96125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-84809019678444425312016-10-08T17:25:25.301+11:002016-10-08T17:25:25.301+11:00I do understand Spudee. Would be interested to re...I do understand Spudee. Would be interested to read some of your gear though...Mark Perryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05162533821220639075noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-73521784461071406242016-10-07T09:15:15.869+11:002016-10-07T09:15:15.869+11:00Mark you must be some sort of cryptographer to hav...Mark you must be some sort of cryptographer to have determined that my post was a bit of a 'smart arse'. Try as I might I can't find a trace of it. But as far as Sharon's possible response to participating in the Beechworth Kelly Walk, pro Kelly or not, I suspect that she too would be appalled at most of its ludicrous content. However, as you rightly suggest, any change would indeed be not good for business.<br /><br />As to the 'heroic' crims in Australian history, I too am perplexed and this would be a great thesis for someone like Stuart to pursue. But I don't think the concept is unique to Oz. The Brits seemed to have venerated their highwaymen back in the day and we all know about the Yanks and their outlaws.<br /><br />Finally and without blowing my own trumpet, I have in fact written many articles on Australian military and social history which have been published in major newspapers here as well as overseas. I have also had published a fairly complex and lengthy biography. However, as I lack the courage to deal with vindictive and nasty cyberic (is there such a word?) people, I will retain my anonymity by way of my nom de plume. I'm sure you will understand Mark.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-24616771775981734682016-10-05T13:00:34.876+11:002016-10-05T13:00:34.876+11:00Stuart. Thanks for the considered feedback. Appre...Stuart. Thanks for the considered feedback. Appreciated. I am not simply pro Ned. I think Morrisseys book is one of the most important on the subject. The thing is, you can voice your concerns to the management of the vault. <br /><br />Spudee. Yes, I do indeed believe in free speech. Unlike Stuarts response, i detect a bit of "smart arse" in yours? I could be wrong. It's often difficult when reading a post. PLEASE ENLIGHTEN ME? <br /><br />No, I haven't been on the walk. I would say things I shouldn't. I am "that" guy...<br />But i've been a student of the Kellys for many years. So no need. And would Sharons response to the walking guides patter be the same as yours? Sharon is pro Kelly and would have a different viewpoint..<br /><br />A total about face in the guides story would make it less appealing too. And not so good for business. I am sure you are aware of that aspect. Whether right or wrong.<br /><br />And here's the BIG question: Why do the vast majority of Aussies venerate crims? Stuart would need to write a thesis to even scratch the surface i suspect... Graeme Seal did a fair job of addressing this in his book "The Outlaw Legend". Interested in your thoughts though. <br /><br />And here's the other thing I wonder? How does the average "Ned Head" present the story to their young children? I was always taught to respect the Police and believe in them. Kids with Ned fans for parents may not be getting the same message.. Which bothers me. Anyway, that's a discussion for another time. And a robust one I bet it will be...<br /><br />Anyway, the point I continually try and make here on this firebrand of a forum when peoples work is criticised is that good manners cost nothing. Another good cliche is putting your money where your mouth is. I look forward to seeing your name on the bookshelves soon ....<br /><br /><br />Cheers again and goodbye.<br />Mark. Adelaide. Mark Perryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05162533821220639075noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-89048106209478967212016-10-02T16:10:08.480+11:002016-10-02T16:10:08.480+11:00Of course we are all entitled to our opinions Mark...Of course we are all entitled to our opinions Mark and mine is that the Vault is a waste of time and the price of admission. Both Stuart and I have pointed out the nonsense on display there regarding the Republic of North East Victoria. But despite the lack of sources for the claim they still spruik this unsupported myth. <br /><br />If they want to be taken seriously as some sort of museum and archive then they need to at least be honest. But I will certainly apologise if they can produce sourced proof of the republic claim. Maybe you have some with which to enlighten us Mark? As far as the 'guide' is concerned, have you ever been on the walk and listened to what he tells the public? If so and as one whom I sure expects honesty in history, I would expect that you would bring his guff to the attention of the appropriate authority. <br /><br />Apparently you don't believe in free speech if it is not what you want to hear. But the beauty of a blog like this is that we are allowed to express opinions, something I would have thought you would be in favour of.<br /><br /> Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-38621128614388165462016-10-02T15:35:29.991+11:002016-10-02T15:35:29.991+11:00Hi Mark, I just googled "trip advisor ned kel...Hi Mark, I just googled "trip advisor ned kelly vault" and read all the comments back to January 2014, i.e. before it started up. It comes up under the Burke Museum. Only about 10 out of the 122 comments mention the Kelly Vault. These, plus all other comments just like my own, highly praise the Burke Museum itself. The most commented on features are the Burke Museum's great general collection, the stunning Victorian era streetscape, costumes, Japanese armour, and endless fascinating bits and pieces. As I said, it's one of my ideal museums. It also has a great Beechworth research collection, but their microfilm reader is an old model that can't print or save to USB. If anyone knows of a working one somewhere that could be donated, I'm sure they'd love to hear about it.<br /><br />Of the 10 comments that mention the Kelly Vault, all were positive. They say they added interest and knowledge to the Kelly story, and have no complaints at all. That's great, but given the ongoing endless slagging off of Fitzpatrick and the rest of the police force as the cause of all Ned's troubles, what historical "knowledge" is actually being added? <br /><br />Can we take the emotional attachment to Beechworth out of the equation, and consider the Benalla Pioneer and Costume Museum, which last year was renamed the Benalla Costume and Kelly Museum. When you go there now, you can go into an old portable cell and listen to an audio recording of the Kelly story that is almost straight out of Kenneally. So biased, historically naïve, and uncritical. Do we say nothing, despite their hard work upgrading their museum with this brand new focus? Do we leave unchallenged the wild historical errors being presented as real Australian history? Do we see things that are utterly at odds with clear historical facts, and let our kids swallow it blindfolded? <br /><br />What got me going on this Kelly stuff was the complete drivel being fed to my kid at school about what a great Australian legend Ned Kelly was. The book had the drunken Fitzpatrick, the police picking on the poor horse thieves, the gang's self defence at Stringybark Creek, and the heroic last stand with the police deliberately shooting into an inn full of women and children. Gosh, I almost started worshipping Ned myself. <br /><br />After a week's basic research it was obvious that the school book was rubbish. Putting the record straight means changing views on certain things. People are strongly attached to their views, and invest a lot of emotional energy into them, and into keeping them. I had no views at all on Ned Kelly before this, as we never did bushrangers at school, just the gold rushes, which are historically much more important anyway. After looking at a couple of Kelly topics, and seeing how much twaddle has been talked over the years, and how selectively biased a lot of the "research" has been, it seemed that an objective look at all the available evidence on some specific topics had a good chance of clearing some fog.<br /><br />I could just as easily support Ned Kelly against his critics as be one of the critics on an issue, if that is where the evidence leads. However, on the 2 topics examined so far (Fitzpatrick and the Last Words), the analysis shows that Fitzpatrick's testimony can be corroborated, and that there were no famous last words. The first one changes the game, as no-one can say, except on blind faith, that Fitzpatrick was the cause of Ned's troubles. Rather, Ned was the cause of Ned's troubles. This means a major rethink of all subsequent parts of the Kelly story is in order. It also means no longer perpetuating nonsense as historical truth. I did not 'defecate' on the Vault, as you put it, just note its obvious bias. My main issue was with the walking tour commentary, similar thing to Spudee's experience. The Vault and the tour are 2 different things.Stuart Dawsonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-52050726758850379512016-09-29T14:16:16.742+10:002016-09-29T14:16:16.742+10:00Spudee and Stuart. Good Afternoon. Nice work!! ...Spudee and Stuart. Good Afternoon. Nice work!! I am sure Patrick Watt and Matt Shore welcome your enlightened comments about all their hard graft on the Vault. You couldn't have shat on them/the vault harder if you tried. Congrats. <br /><br />I indeed look forward to visiting your museums and seeing your names on the bookshop shelves soon.<br /><br />Your paper Stuart on Fitzpatrick was brilliant. And it IS time old Alex is rehabilitated. Your thoughts on a lot of the Kelly story I concur with. Your other well vented thoughts about the guide work or the vault border on cruel and malicious though. You can spruik all this negative crap here if you want to a narrow audience. Or you could contact Matt directly with your thoughts. You will get a fair hearing. <br /><br />For the record, I believe the Vault does a great job and is a good experience. Even if I didn't, I would have the decorum not to defecate on it on a public forum such as this. <br /><br />Good luck with the storms headed your way.<br />Love Mark. Adelaide. Mark Perryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05162533821220639075noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-78071850692249487732016-09-29T08:36:05.179+10:002016-09-29T08:36:05.179+10:00Hi Spudee, I have been a folk museum buff since I ...Hi Spudee, I have been a folk museum buff since I was about 10 or so, and have been to stacks of folk museums and national trust type places in Vic and interstate. The Burke Museum itself is marvellous, pretty much my idea of what an ideal museum should be, packed with interesting stuff crammed in everywhere. The Kelly Vault project by contrast I just felt ripped off. When I saw it, I thought everything in it could easily have been kept in the Burke. As others have said, it has become a Kelly shrine with little connection to historical reality. I would much prefer a gold rush exhibition in that space, which is what Beechworth history was really all about.<br /><br />There is a free bushrangers exhibition (‘Wild Colonial Boys’) in the old Treasury Building in Melbourne from now until August 2017. I gather it is not large, and has a Kelly section including Dan's armour which they have borrowed from the Police Museum. I hope to get there within the next couple of weeks and will be very interested in the signage, if they bother to say the steel suits were designed to protect the upper body while shooting downhill at a derailed train, or if they rabbit on about the glorious 'last stand'. “Bullet proof at 10 yards” is just right for what the gang intended.Stuart Dawsonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-69019924114075293142016-09-28T16:30:07.465+10:002016-09-28T16:30:07.465+10:00The more I think about it, the clearer it becomes ...The more I think about it, the clearer it becomes about the true motives of many of the individuals and organisations connected to 'Kelly country'. The wide-spread mythology associated with that region on the Kelly outbreak greases many of the financial cogs that benefit from what people want to believe about the story. To have the illusions shattered by truth would probably present a more mundane tale of an murderous, organised crime group and today especially, that is not publicly palatable. Better to feed them what they want to hear than accurate history.<br /><br />And of course you were spot-on Stuart about the mercenary motives of our 'Kelly guide'. We had purchased a Gold Ticket (similar to Willy Wonka) which included entry to a number of attractions as well as 2 walks. As the guide checked tickets, he moaned about the fact that he was only paid for non Gold Tickets which were in the majority. And here was me naively thinking that he may have been a volunteer!.<br /><br />The visit to the Vault left me with that 'tapas' feeling - you know the one where you pay $80 and say 'is that it?' Very poor indeed. There was even a slightly political feel to the visit when another visitor asked the Vault attendant 'what was the date Ned was executed? His reply was 'the eleventh of November which as you know, is a notorious date for Australia.' I suppose it...'Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-13793434769270155502016-09-27T20:20:55.644+10:002016-09-27T20:20:55.644+10:00Hi Spuddee, unfortunately the Beechworth tourist b...Hi Spuddee, unfortunately the Beechworth tourist bureau seem to think that generating interest in Ned Kelly via redundant Kenneally-style 1920s pro-Kelly drivel with a generous sprinkling of Ian Jones, is more important than generating interest in Ned Kelly via new findings and factual evidence. I emailed them copies of both my articles (Fitzpatrick and the Last Words) right after they were published, and received an acknowledgement that they got them, so it's not as though they don't know. The trouble will be with the guide you got. I assume the guides are pro-Kelly nuts picking up some casual work, as nothing else explains their appalling bias and deliberate refusal to question wildly wrong old beliefs. It's like a religion for some of them, and they won't have a bar of rational discussion about Neddykins' failings.<br /><br />I did the Kelly Vault visit plus a walking tour ages ago when I was finishing writing up the Fitzpatrick article, chuckling quietly to myself about the crap I was told and how the central pillar of the Kelly myth (that "rotten" Fitzpatrick) would soon be demolished. Alas, I had not bargained with the Kelly cult... Sort of like a cargo cult, except with bushrangers. <br /><br />Two things stood out in the Kelly Vault. One was how little stuff they had. A massive enlarged photocopy of the 56 pages Jerilderie Letter, each individually framed like a Rembrandt, occupies most of the wall space in one room. How stupid is that, when anyone can download it as a PDF from the State Library? <br /><br />The second thing is the holy of holies, a manuscript chapter of Ian Jones' 'Short Life' in a glass display case, like veritable saint's bones, with his corrections and source references written on the open page. I was going to mail them the Version 16 draft of my heavily scribbled Fitzpatrick article for their collection, as it was a sea of red ink on most pages, because things kept changing as the work went on. I decided against it, however, as it had some rather blunt comments that there was no need to circulate. (It was toned down a lot before sending it in for consideration by the journal, but such is life.) <br /><br />The interesting thing was how Ian Jones wrote his references onto the typed manuscript. I would guess that his editor would have typeset the book script from that, then typed up the references, in the same order from the manuscript pages, for placing at the back of the book. The would explain the extraordinarily difficult referencing system where there are no numerical citations, like most books, but a sort of stream of references for each chapter that parallel the main text. Makes it damn hard to work through, that's for sure. <br /><br />The NE Republic is the last big balloon to burst, if we don't count the readiness of people to glorify the armour instead of seeing massacre suits made for shooting down into the gully at the intended derailed train. Some Kelly fans might be surprised to hear that 'North East Victoria' was the name of a police district that came into effect during the Kelly hunt. (See the Police Gazette district lists for each of those years.) Funny how the alleged Kelly republic was named after a police district!!! Stuart Dawsonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-18032416917025848772016-09-25T16:53:32.401+10:002016-09-25T16:53:32.401+10:00Visited the Kelly Vault today and sad to see that ...Visited the Kelly Vault today and sad to see that a number of references to the North East Republic are still on display as is the piece of metal allegedly an off-cut of Joe Byrne's armour. <br /><br />Later and against my better judgement my wife and I went on the guided Kelly walk. I should have listened to my inner and more sensible voice. Very early in the proceedings the 'guide' showed where his allegiance lay with what appeared to be a script written by every Kelly supporter known to man. There were about a dozen people on the walk and we learned about the corrupt and brutal police, the poor selectors of the region, noble Ned and of course the Republic of North East Victoria thrown in for good measure.<br /><br />But what really disturbed me was not just the obvious bias but the blatantly inaccurate and misleading information being fed to my fellow walkers - Fitzpatrick was a drunk throughout his police career, the special police train not only carried 60 officers and journalists but also many of their wives and on and on it went. We left the walk before its conclusion thoroughly disgusted.<br /><br />During the walk I held my tongue as instructed by my wife but I was furious at what the Beechworth Tourist Information supports as 'history'. The problem is that the garbage spruiked to people who know little or nothing of the Kelly story will be taken as fact, to be recanted later to continue the vicious cycle.<br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-78526962158525102482016-07-08T10:09:04.224+10:002016-07-08T10:09:04.224+10:00The no pic show is a shame on Blogger. Perhaps Dee...The no pic show is a shame on Blogger. Perhaps Dee, get your own forum platform?<br /><br />I will try and at least attach the pictures that I put up through a link from my Ironicon site as a reply where my pics don't show.<br /><br />For those interested, if you have a link to a webpage or a picture hyperlink you want us to see you can use the NAME/URL in Select profile button-<br /><br />For instance here is a picture to show Darrens off cut would be highly distorted if Cold Chistel was used to cut off.<br /><br />Example: I use name 'Bill' - and write 'See Darren's off cut simulation'<br />and use this hyperlink where is says URL<br />http://www.ironicon.com.au/images/d-armour-distortion.jpg <br /><br />The link next to my name should be live link to click on showing the you the picture.<br /> Bill - See Darrens off cut simulationhttp://www.ironicon.com.au/images/d-armour-distortion.jpgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-18398405656513906222016-07-07T22:22:36.949+10:002016-07-07T22:22:36.949+10:00Hi Peter, unfortunately Blogger have changed somet...Hi Peter, unfortunately Blogger have changed something about the Blogspot functionality and inactivated code from third parties that we had been using to display images. Ive had several attempts at finding a solution but so far without luck. I usually run out of time whenever I find some spare to fiddle with the Blog and lately Ive been preoccupied with other things. I’ll have another look at it pretty soon, as its really had a negative effect on the quality of the discussions.<br /><br />As far as Darren Suttons book is concerned, the last I heard he had decided not to proceed with it, but has been invited to provide some sort of commentary on his work to the Vault for publication on their Facebook page. However, no date has been set for this, so apparently we must simply wait till he feels like it. Its certainly long overdue.Deehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14104818673788818740noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-14871599152502173932016-07-05T20:22:25.945+10:002016-07-05T20:22:25.945+10:00Dee, do you know if Darren Sutton is still on trac...Dee, do you know if Darren Sutton is still on track to publish his evidence re the Byrne armour in the near future? Also, what has happened to all the pictures that used to be on this particular subject?Peter Newmannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-39064352762319272542016-01-10T13:46:17.858+11:002016-01-10T13:46:17.858+11:00Darren,
You see me cutting that little THIN plate...Darren, <br />You see me cutting that little THIN plate model only to simulate how that blacksmith in the other video was cutting the breast plate. Are you suggesting Joe Byrne's suit was cut differently?<br />Points 1-4 <br /><br />1, <br />Sorry Darren but my images above are about 'cut and fit angles' and not about 'metal temperatures'.<br /><br />2, <br />Having made notes and rough sketches of your piece just after I was with you in 2008, I note it was cut from the inside along the curved surface showing chisel chomp marks. I drew the sketch for Bill K and Monash University as further observable information. I also note the cutting off from outside the curve on the short sides.<br />I also noted -<br />"I agree the off cut part found does look as if it has been hammered flat - since you would expect jagged edge 'un-finnished' "<br /><a href="http://www.ironicon.com.au/images/darrens-joe-byrne-sketch.jpg" rel="nofollow">http://www.ironicon.com.au/images/darrens-joe-byrne-sketch.jpg </a><br /><br />3, <br />The item you call 'boiler plate' was 'cast iron' ( not plate iron) probably used to line the inside of charcoal fired Furnas. But it could also have been a bolt on weight on a crane as there were some 4 big bolt holes in it for fixing. I considered it had nothing to do with the making of Joe Byrne's armour. This cast iron form just happens to have a similar shape to your piece. In the blacksmith cutting video, this indicates just how difficult it is to cut and separate iron plate on an anvil. Your curved cast iron would be no help in shaping the armour except as a template? <br />The blacksmith in the video scores the plate while red hot, grooving then shearing blows on the anvil edge to shear separate as shown. There is absolutely no proof the armour was (bent) curved on that cast iron form, and if you tried you could not even do it to make it fit. Ask any professional blacksmith boiler maker using hand tools.<br /> <br />For those interested that cast iron form can be seen in the picture of Darren sitting at the table. ( about half way up this page) It is nonsense to suggest that that cast iron form had anything to do with bending the whole side of Joe Byrne's armour, nor even your off cut.<br /><br />4, <br />It does not matter what the metal composition actually was. But as you mention this, your piece was concluded by ANSTO, to contain NO lead [ Pb], unlike the Joe Byrne suit which, from 8 samples taken, 6 had lead. ( that is 75% certainty) Your piece by comparison had [Mo] Molybdenum, [Cu] Copper, [Ni] Nickel, while Joe's suit had none. <br /><br /><br />Darren, why did you not take up our offer to have your metal tested by Bill K ?<br /><br />And, as Spudee asks 'why do we have to wait till August' for you to prove your case?<br />Billhttp://www.ironicon.com.aunoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-50761898824889749002016-01-10T11:09:13.456+11:002016-01-10T11:09:13.456+11:00Thanks for your thoughts Sharon and Matt. There ha...Thanks for your thoughts Sharon and Matt. There have been other criticisms of Anonymice ( I SO like that as the plural of Anonymous! ) that, in the Spirit of Brian McDonalds urging to be more respectful in 2016, I haven’t let through as they were a bit too rude, but I understand everyones frustration. On the other hand, by allowing everyone a say, the Anonymice such as Jane, we can demonstrate to all the other Kelly places, and to everyone reading the Blog a degree of openness and tolerance that is found NOWHERE ELSE in the Kelly World. Even Matt Shore has begun deleting fair comment by people from what he describes as “Fake” Facebook Accounts. The truth is that these are REAL people who for one reason or another want to be Anonymous - as I do. And, in the Kelly World, given the sort of language that appears on their Websites and FB Pages, I think thats perfectly reasonable. I do actually think ‘Jane’, for all her rambling way of expressing things is genuinely interested and not just stirring as many of the others I could name are obviously doing. Thats why I took the time to give her my answers. I have NO PROBLEM with people being Anonymice, except that distinguishing one from another gets tricky as ‘Jane’ found out - it would be much better if everyone picked a name, real or made up, and an AVATAR, as I have done, and stuck to it. Personal attacks and vulgar abuse I will continue to delete, but the rest my commitment to free speech obliges me to let through. “Such is life” !!Deehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14104818673788818740noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-21135098129624989002016-01-10T10:16:00.721+11:002016-01-10T10:16:00.721+11:00Dee, at the risk of making myself a target, I agre...Dee, at the risk of making myself a target, I agree with others who think that certain of these anonymous posters of late are getting very tiresome. Seems they just want to derail or sink proceedings by sheer overload. They are sure serving their purpose in alienating viewers. Too bad there is not a way for you to reply to them behind the scenes and spare the rest of us, but since they are anonymous I guess there isn't a way. I am sure they prefer to have their "inquiries" seen by all.<br />Oh, yeah, that is interesting that Jane has been in the Kelly world the same amount of time I have. Perhaps drawn in by the Heath Ledger film or Carey's book? Another thing, this whole game of who is whom and what gender gets old, too. As for who Dee is, or whether s/he sits down or stands up to pee, I don't care. Dee has presented herself as female, so I will just go with the current narrative until proven otherwise.Sharon Hollingsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11500349415203451928noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-59173942067980453872016-01-09T22:27:06.347+11:002016-01-09T22:27:06.347+11:00Dee, it's long overdue to cut Anonymous loose....Dee, it's long overdue to cut Anonymous loose. He/she hasn't made any contribution whatever here, only strange questions, unsupported allegations of bias by you, and lots of disordered thought bubbles and weird allegations. Gibberish!Matt Johnsonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-63983168111166600352016-01-09T18:21:14.092+11:002016-01-09T18:21:14.092+11:00So you’re not Jane anymore? Another mistake? Or ju...So you’re not Jane anymore? Another mistake? Or just carelessness? Or maybe this is another Anonymous masquerading as Jane? Or vice versa? But thanks for letting everyone know my work has no credibility. I am sure a person who can read Ian MacFarlanes book and just happen to forget its packed with references will be taken great note of. Oh and not to forget she is backed up by the Wizards. <br /><br />As for standing by your ‘original comment made in the first reply’ I might have to run a readers Poll to see if any of us agree on which particular comment in your first reply you’re referring to - once we’ve worked out which ‘reply’ from Anonymous was actually the original one to which you refer.<br /><br />But just for the record, your interest seemed to have narrowed down to Q6, which was about the lack of proper references in Morrisseys book, and I answered that in my previous comment by saying that in fact there ARE references in the Book, though they are not presented in the usual way. So in fact as there ARE references, your Q6 becomes invalid. How can a question about the lack of references in a book be valid when the book actually DOES contain references? I also gave you a free hit in my expression of regret that I hadn’t made that clear in the original post. And to make it clear regarding your Q7 which was based on an assumption that Morrisseys and MacFarlanes books had NO references, again, because the assumption is false, the question is invalid and has no answer. Exactly why Morrissey chose to do it the way he did is a question for him.<br /><br />So kindly stop asserting that I don’t answer your Questions because I have answered fully your 7 listed and ones and many of the others scattered throughout your commentary. Deehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14104818673788818740noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-37578932931811518242016-01-09T17:33:46.434+11:002016-01-09T17:33:46.434+11:00To be fair he did say it would be this year someti...To be fair he did say it would be this year sometime, so August 2106 is consistent with that! SO now at least we have the deadline set in concrete! Better late than never I say!Deehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14104818673788818740noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-49274683474798176632016-01-09T16:56:19.576+11:002016-01-09T16:56:19.576+11:00Ok Dee,
I have given you five times (count them!...Ok Dee,<br /><br /> I have given you five times (count them!) a chance for you to show you are capable of backing up your own work and things that you say on this blog. But, to date, you have proven you ignore advice and criticisms. Then you go back to my original posts (note the lowercase ‘p’, it’s not a proper noun…) where you have comments like: <br /><br />“Vague and sweeping generalisations”<br /><br />“You make a reply very difficult by making such non-specific criticisms” <br /><br />But you can reply to them! You just did! (BUT only with insult which just backs up another one of my points.)<br /><br />I stand by my original comment made in the first reply! Because clearly you’re the only one who doesn’t get it! And thank you to the other Anonymous for the comment made (good to see someone on here understood my original statement)<br /><br />Your work has no credibility so I will just let everyone know that at this stage:<br /><br />I hereby ordain that the wizardry above nullifies all future claims by the aforementioned “Dee”. End of discussion. Thank you and goodnight.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-1668992824124333192016-01-09T15:00:44.880+11:002016-01-09T15:00:44.880+11:00Wait a minute! When did Darren send that email to...Wait a minute! When did Darren send that email to Bill? I assume from the date stamp at the top that it was received at 10:50 today (9 January 2016). If that is the case I assume that the comment "I would suggest you wait until August when I will reveal all,...' suggests that Darren is talking about August 2016! If this is indeed the case, could Darren please explain why there is yet another delay in him producing the evidence which he believes will confirm the authenticity of the metal off-cut purportedly from Joe Byrne's armour? After all this has been going on for almost 10 years now!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-19204459362035738282016-01-09T12:31:35.298+11:002016-01-09T12:31:35.298+11:00Any knowledgeable person would regard someone clai...Any knowledgeable person would regard someone claiming that Ian MacFarlanes book had no references as being ignorant, and would be perfectly justified in doubting the claim to be ‘genuine’ and to be making arguments in good faith. Not in the least ‘ridiculous’ as you say. So you only have yourself to blame for the predicament you’re now in, and why should I accept as genuine your attempt to extricate yourself from it by saying it was just a ‘mistake’? A ‘mistake’ like the one where you quoted Ian Jones swearing about Alex McDermott? The ‘mistake’ you made by uncritically accepting your childs teachers advice about Wkjipedia? You’re far too careless. <br /><br />I will say this regarding Morrisseys book : References are actually provided, but not in the usual fashion,and so my disappointment was on behalf of the ordinary reader who has not read the other works of Morrissey and who may not be familiar with the way in which records can be accessed. I didnt make this clear in that original Post, and so I again wonder if that is a book you’ve not actually read because if I was to be criticised in regards to what I said about Morrisseys book I would have thought it should have been my creation of the impression that there were no references at all in it. Its curious that you didnt notice that.<br /><br />So now you see why your Q6 has given you away, because its based on ignorance of both of these books. It therefore doesn’t require an answer and nor does Q7. <br /><br />In the future Jane feel very free to criticise anything I say in any of my Posts, but try and be directed in your challenges and more careful about your facts. Deehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14104818673788818740noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-78156489071188534492016-01-09T10:50:23.218+11:002016-01-09T10:50:23.218+11:00
Bill,
Up until now I have let your comment... <br />Bill,<br /> Up until now I have let your comments go unanswered.<br />Your video showing you cutting a piece of mild steel must be some sort of joke. If you think that the armour piece I have was cut off this way then it shows your total lack of understanding of metal working, blacksmithing and metallurgy.<br />I will correct the following points.<br />1) The armour was heated to at least 800 degrees to enable it to be cut.<br /><br />2) The armour was cut from the outside of the suit not the inside.<br /><br />3) The armour was not cut on a flat steel bench or block.<br /><br />4) The armour was not made from mild or black steel.<br /><br /> <br /><br />I will qualify these comments.<br /><br />1) The metal would shatter if heated to less than 800 degrees which is why there is a crack in the armour offcut. The metal was not hot enough at that point.<br /><br />2) The armour clearly has chisel marks from the front of the piece, not the back as you insist on believeing.<br /><br />3) The armour was cut from the outside over a curved piece of boiler plate som 1 ½” thick. I have that item, recovered from the forge site. It matches the curve perfectly as witnessed by reputable people.<br /><br />4) Go back to the ANSTO report and read what the metal actually was.<br /><br /> <br /><br />Bill, I thought you were more intelligent than to stoop to making videos and comments about something you know absolutely nothing about to try and discredit me. <br /><br />Your comments on this are poorly researched, based on a total lack of understanding of the processes involved, and after getting some advice yesterday are potentally defamatory.<br /><br />I would suggest you wait until August when I will reveal all, including your attempts to use me and my items to make you look good.<br /><br />Thank You.Darren Suttonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-63312120503945219642016-01-09T01:43:17.608+11:002016-01-09T01:43:17.608+11:00What do you think I mean when I say: “I honestly a...What do you think I mean when I say: “I honestly and genuinely just want answers to my questions.”<br /><br />Then accuse me of not asking these questions in good faith? Seriously? <br /><br />And in another post below you have assumed and accused me of being a NKF member…<br /><br />I’m not, and I find it strange that you just freely make that claim, its immature. Couldn’t I just accuse you of being a disgruntled fan? perhaps that’s why you don’t like them? they didn't like you? (I’m NOT by adding that in by the way, just making a point)<br /><br />You are also assuming that I haven’t read MacFarlanes book because I made the mistake (yep mistake) of adding him into a question? Really….<br /><br />Even when said person is taken out of the question and that question is then taken from your exact words you still can’t answer it. The best you have to say is I’m not asking in good faith but as I stated to you before “I honestly and genuinely just want answers to my questions.”<br /><br />All I asked was what your opinion was in the matter to Morrissey’s book and the lack of references. You wrote about it! <br /><br />It’s just ridiculous that you accuse me of things like not being genuine and you do it despite the fact I have already said I am. And you have no idea who I am. <br /><br />I’m not attacking you. (your work is only what I question)<br /><br />You can’t back up what you have said in your own blogs even right now! Instead you just make excuses to avoid it. <br /><br />It would be fair to assume at this point that you can’t answer my questions maybe? <br /><br />So I have a challenge for you, since it states in your comments about this blog and you have said to me directly, challenges are allowed. My challenge is: Reference your work! Your next blog for example, just reference under it where you source your information.<br /><br />That way people can see what you’re saying has substance yes? I for one would happily debate with you on your points/posts if they come from valid sources and you reference.<br /><br />It’s fine to have an opinion. But “accurate facts” have to be based on what is KNOWN to be facts.<br /><br />You haven’t actually stated at all that anything you say is based on facts… just opinion.<br /><br />I want to remain Anonymous but I’m happy to sign my comments with a name if you like? (So I am not mistaken by you for a NKF members) not that I believe being a member would be a bad thing either! <br /><br />But if this helps.<br /><br />I have been involved with the Kelly story now for 13 years, (and if you think everyone is having a fit trying to work out who you are, wait till they read that! hahaha!) so please don’t take me for someone who would come into this without full knowledge of everything I ask. I’m not an idiot, don’t treat me like one. <br /><br />So your challenge, if you choose to accept it <- its immature I know but it has to be said!<br /><br />My challenge is: Reference your work! (Every bit of it, where you add information that is what you believe to be a fact, or is information available) next blog for example, just reference under it where you source your information.<br /> <br />Surely this is a fair challenge?<br /><br />from now on i will be<br /><br />Jane <- (its old fashioned, ha!) <br /><br /> now that i have once again said i just want the questions answered, can you or can't you answer them?<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2798312463652733622.post-49573173850880872912016-01-08T23:36:47.761+11:002016-01-08T23:36:47.761+11:00Great Video Bill and now we all know what you look...Great Video Bill and now we all know what you look and sound like! In his email to me Darren seemed pretty confident that he will be able to explain all this, so it will be a fascinating revelation when he finally makes it all Public. And he did PROMISE it will be this year. Deehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14104818673788818740noreply@blogger.com