|
Post by fred on Aug 21, 2016 12:59:36 GMT -6
Looks like the natives are restless next door. I think I ruffled some feathers... kind of inadvertently I may add. Just thought I would set ol' Staint Pat straight, but it seems to have reached farther than I anticipated. Oh, well... times are tough all over: "Life" is out of business.
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Aug 21, 2016 14:07:15 GMT -6
Fred, Have not read Spanky's board since Feb., would love to support AZ there, but the last time I did, I mentioned the moderator was being condescending in his posts to AZ. My post was removed and I was banned. Short of Blackie, AZ, Trish, and one or two others it is a bin of lunacy, acolytes, and suck ups. They obviously love off colored print.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Aug 21, 2016 14:09:23 GMT -6
Oh, may have also mentioned he was insecure.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Aug 21, 2016 14:12:28 GMT -6
I did not mention that he probably still lives in mommy's basement. Nor did I ask him what pictures he had or other info he had on the board members of the LBHA.
|
|
|
Post by montrose on Aug 21, 2016 14:28:08 GMT -6
Fred,
The point of online forums is that no has to agree with anyone. Everyone is welcome to their own opinions.
The challenge with thelbha forums is not variety of opinions. It is massive falsification of evidence to support points of view. I used to say there were thousands of false posts there. But now there are tens of thousands of posts with fake data and evidence.
An online forum has unwritten social norms. The first is that we treat each other as equals. That principal does not exist on thelbha forums, their web site or their community.
There are over a thousand posts exposing the deliberate lies posted over there, by myself and many others. No one seems to care.
The other site is so tainted with false data as to be useless.
I participate in numerous boards on military history, mostly things that would board you to tears. I know of no other community that would tolerate the massive fraud and falsification of data that occurs on LBH forums.
I see no reason to read the other board or respond to anything there. Every single poster there is enabling the fraud, and destroying history.
Post false evidence here, and you will be called out on it. Post false evidence there, and the clowns will respond to the false data, even if actual data is posted. Gerry, Blaque, Fred etc: this means you.
Respectfully,
William
|
|
|
Post by fred on Aug 21, 2016 18:21:14 GMT -6
The point of online forums is that no has to agree with anyone. Everyone is welcome to their own opinions. The challenge with thelbha forums is not variety of opinions. It is massive falsification of evidence to support points of view. I used to say there were thousands of false posts there. But now there are tens of thousands of posts with fake data and evidence. An online forum has unwritten social norms. The first is that we treat each other as equals. That principal does not exist on thelbha forums, their web site or their community. There are over a thousand posts exposing the deliberate lies posted over there, by myself and many others. No one seems to care. The other site is so tainted with false data as to be useless. I participate in numerous boards on military history, mostly things that would board you to tears. I know of no other community that would tolerate the massive fraud and falsification of data that occurs on LBH forums. I see no reason to read the other board or respond to anything there. Every single poster there is enabling the fraud, and destroying history. Post false evidence here, and you will be called out on it. Post false evidence there, and the clowns will respond to the false data, even if actual data is posted. Gerry, Blaque, Fred etc: this means you. Will, I do not really disagree with you: there is no reason for bickering and certainly no reason for the nonsense we see over there. You will never, however, cure the ills of distorted opinion and that is what makes those boards so worthless. As for myself, I have made three posts there since June 10th. At least one was something of an admonishment and only one I can think of where I presented some poor, misinformed learner about the ravine confronting Reno's command. That person hasn't posted since I put that up a few days-- I think it was-- so maybe it did some good, sending him back to his books. One never knows... one can only be hopeful. As everyone here-- and elsewhere, who know me-- I am particularly sensitive regarding my timing studies. Therefore, I bridle at those who question them without proper support and I know how "keogh" developed his, what he left out, what he conveniently used to support his "theories," and what he deliberately changed, ignoring an overwhelming preponderance of contrary evidence, and then how he distorted and ignored context to justify changing times for certain events. His so-called timeline is simply a compendium of distortions and self-serving justifications to satisfy his prejudices. And anyone who claims the Peter Thompson "saga" needs to be incorporated into a time-motion analysis is simply ODing on hemp. I consider Gerry Schultz a good friend, but his Thompson beliefs simply defy any logical depiction of reality. So, as for my participation next door, it is limited, my only posts coming from truly offensive clap-trap from innocent babes. There is hope. I would just love to see ol' St. Patrick over here, flinging about some of his hero-worship claptrap. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
Gerry
Junior Member
Peter
Posts: 63
|
Post by Gerry on Aug 23, 2016 9:47:47 GMT -6
The point of online forums is that no has to agree with anyone. Everyone is welcome to their own opinions.... Post false evidence here, and you will be called out on it. Post false evidence there, and the clowns will respond to the false data, even if actual data is posted. Gerry, Blaque, Fred etc: this means you. And anyone who claims the Peter Thompson "saga" needs to be incorporated into a time-motion analysis is simply ODing on hemp. I consider Gerry Schultz a good friend, but his Thompson beliefs simply defy any logical depiction of reality. Fred. montrose, You hit it on the head as online forums are concerned. One should be able to post their opinions and not have any allusions that anyone has to agree with the opinion. I really do not see much difference in most blogs sites concerning the Battle of the LBH. People come and go with a variety of opinions; some leave mad, some just leave and others stick around. Steve Adelson, NPS, made a good comment while talking to visitors to the LBH, most visitors have never been there before but most have heard of Custer, Sitting Bull, Crazy Horse and the Battle of the Little Big Horn and each have an opinion of what took place. Fred, You have stated, "I am particularly sensitive regarding my timing studies." That is not only an opinion but a historical fact. My personal studies of the Battle, of course, have been through the study of Private Peter Thompson and the man's narrative. I have engaged in many different discussions arising from various opinions expressed by many members of these type of sites. Overwhelming I find opinions the largest obstacle to understanding the Thompson narrative. Is this not true in all study of this battle? As my study continues, one of the logical conclusions that I can draw is: a proper timeline of the movements of Thompson. A timeline that may in itself clear up the misunderstandings based on improper opinions. Of course any timeline is an opinion stated by the author based on their interpretation of historical events and facts. Thus it becomes very personal and is guarded by the author. Carry On. Gerry
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Aug 23, 2016 11:35:29 GMT -6
Gerry,
I guess I am butting in here. Any timeline you come to regarding Peter Thompson's movements has no impact on the overall timeline for the battle. Fred's timeline is not impacted by Thompson's movements in anyway that I can see. Having seen your scroll in June of 15 and having not put it down to compare and contrast with Fred's maybe I am wrong. I was impressed with all of the work you put in.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by fred on Aug 23, 2016 13:12:00 GMT -6
Of course any timeline is an opinion stated by the author based on their interpretation of historical events and facts. Thus it becomes very personal and is guarded by the author. No, no, no, Gerry; this is where you and the Bill Rini's of the world go astray when assessing my so-called "timeline." It is neither "an opinion stated by the author," nor "based on [any] interpretation of historical events and facts." First of all, I do not interpret facts. Facts are there for all to see and need no interpretation unless they are changed, distorted, or taken out of context. And since I have "interpreted" nothing, I have not stated any "opinion." I have simply taken the historical record, used corroborating evidence (more historical record), and set it down within the context of the event and what is possible. Where exceptions arise to the preponderance of evidence, I explain why I have eliminated those exceptions. 97% of the entries in that study are supported by at least one piece of "evidence," and 94.5% are supported by primary, eyewitness, first-hand accounts. The remaining 3% are essentially irrelevant entries. I have seen your "scroll" and I have a copy of Rini's and John Gray's so-called timelines and each of those three are designed with a goal in mind: the justification of some theory or belief. Your scroll has been unable to accurately depict the movements of attendant events and unable to place all events within a context that makes sense. Having said that, I have seen a true love of your work and a true belief, all based on your understanding and belief in the Thompson story. Unfortunately, I see neither conviction portrayed in either Bill's or Gray's studies, both of which I believe ( know) were contrived with a single purpose in mind... and it wasn't the truth. To be perfectly honest, I was more concerned and much more interested in your study than either of the others. You bring a conviction and a belief to the game that is exceptionally difficult to break or even confront. Since I know how Bill began his work, I rejected it almost from the get-go. Gray's-- after studying so many accounts-- made absolutely no sense whatsoever, so of the three, Gray's turns out to be the worst. Rini's at least has some cogent points, not far off from my own. So again-- and you and all the others may scoff at my smugness-- but until you can prove me wrong, it is everyone else who is wrong. My standard was set by those who were there: not by my interpretations or my opinions. My opinions are utterly irrelevant. So please, do not denigrate my work to the level of an opinion. One other thing: there is great honesty in your work... remember that; and I respect you greatly for it. You have shown an honesty and a decency in everything you have done with Peter Thompson. I cannot say that about others. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
Gerry
Junior Member
Peter
Posts: 63
|
Post by Gerry on Aug 23, 2016 13:43:02 GMT -6
Gerry, I guess I am butting in here. Any timeline you come to regarding Peter Thompson's movements has no impact on the overall timeline for the battle. Fred's timeline is not impacted by Thompson's movements in anyway that I can see. Having seen your scroll in June of 15 and having not put it down to compare and contrast with Fred's maybe I am wrong. I was impressed with all of the work you put in. Regards, Tom Tom, By no means are you butting in. This is what these forums are about. The open sharing of information and opinions. My intent in commenting is not to compare one against an other. Fred has way to much time and effort put into his works. So do I, as it pertains to the Thompson narrative. It has just been a joy putting the Thompson timeline together. Discussions on this board and the other have moved me in many fashions to ignore what I have gained from all involved. It was my pleasure back in June of 15 meeting you and have our discussion. Should have been longer but as you found out, time is short when visiting the battlefield. Gerry
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Aug 24, 2016 6:05:37 GMT -6
Gerry
Here is where I see a difference. If someone does not believe Thompson they are not going to put in the time researching. So for that reason what you are doing will produce more material because of your interest. What you absolutely don't do that Rini does is to mislead or misrepresent something as fact.
I have a general interest in SFRC and in doing some research have found that there is a substantial amount of material available. Benteen being sent the left and myself riding it made me ponder the reason why 3 companies were sent over that terrain. Now knowing that Herendeen had been in a battle in SFRC and finding a map where it is labeled warrior's trail are clues that maybe Custer was informed of this and Benteen was going to be where he cut off SFRC if necessary.
I also think it quite possible that if Custer had held on the Rosebud and not moved up Davis Creek that a one day further scout up the Rosebud would have discovered fresher tracks of warriors with village infra structure. I also think Herendeen would know the route from the Rosebud to SFRC. He could have told Custer been there done that if he wanted to regarding the 1874 expedition.
My current opinion is that Custer had a good reason to send Benteen in that direction. Benteen would hit SFRC several miles up that drainage. It was empty so he took the adjacent drainage (Noname) back to the main body trail.
Regards
AZ Ranger
|
|
|
Post by fred on Aug 24, 2016 13:18:18 GMT -6
Gerry,
I have given this much thought and because of our relationship and my respect for you, I think you and I need to get together-- time and terrain permitting-- and have a serious discussion of the Peter Thompson business. I think we need to walk the area you believe Thompson walked; I think we need to go over some of his comments and what he claimed to have seen; and I think we need to take a long, hard look at your "scroll" to see where it compares and where it differs from my study.
Maybe by doing that we can make better sense of the Thompson tale... I am always willing to listen and learn and if we can put things together better, maybe it will be a learning process for us both. As long as you are willing to listen to reason and to ultimately reject things we decide are Thompson's fantasies-- if any-- then we have a forum for discussion.
Right now-- and I realize this is far down the road-- June 2018 looks like it can work... providing I am still alive!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If not, I will send down thunderbolts upon your head!!!
Does this work for you?
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by wild on Aug 24, 2016 15:20:43 GMT -6
I wonder is Thompson's narrative as credible as Gerry's cannon balls in the Valley of Death [posted april 26th]
The photo is interesting and relevant to our study of the LBH in that it demonstrates an early attempt to make a battle field more interesting. There were 180 rounds fired at the Light Brigade over approx 2000 metres .The brigade were under fire for 7.5 minutes. Now that will spread the cannon balls over a wide area. The area shown in the photo might be entitled to one or two rounds but not the 50 odd I counted. The valley without the balls just does not tell the story of the battle. Likewise perhaps Peter just wanted to dress up his story.
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Aug 25, 2016 5:40:51 GMT -6
Gerry, I have given this much thought and because of our relationship and my respect for you, I think you and I need to get together-- time and terrain permitting-- and have a serious discussion of the Peter Thompson business. I think we need to walk the area you believe Thompson walked; I think we need to go over some of his comments and what he claimed to have seen; and I think we need to take a long, hard look at your "scroll" to see where it compares and where it differs from my study. Maybe by doing that we can make better sense of the Thompson tale... I am always willing to listen and learn and if we can put things together better, maybe it will be a learning process for us both. As long as you are willing to listen to reason and to ultimately reject things we decide are Thompson's fantasies-- if any-- then we have a forum for discussion. Right now-- and I realize this is far down the road-- June 2018 looks like it can work... providing I am still alive!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If not, I will send down thunderbolts upon your head!!!Does this work for you? Best wishes, Fred. Count me in on that if the parties agree. Would like to see my friends get together and participate. Steve
|
|
|
Post by montrose on Aug 25, 2016 8:30:17 GMT -6
|
|