On the Trail of Delusion, Episode 39, with Bill Brown on location in Oak Cliff

[Bill Brown]

The topic of the Ripley's "affidavits" has been discussed several times in the past. I actually found one of my own posts from 2018.

So, are we now to conclude that the ego driven, selfappointed so-called "Sledgehammer" wasn't aware of these previous discussions, thus showing an absolute lack of basic knowledge about the topic?

So much for "sideline critic"   

You're a troll.

What do previous discussions on the Ripley's affidavits have to do with me, my couple of dinners with Buell Frazier and my current work (along with Frank Badalson) of getting the affidavits authenticated?

And you've been aware of these affidavits for eight years now and haven't done a thing.  Got it.  Thanks.

[Martin Weidmann]

You're a troll.

What do previous discussions on the Ripley's affidavits have to do with me, my couple of dinners with Buell Frazier and my current work (along with Frank Badalson) of getting the affidavits authenticated?

And you've been aware of these affidavits for eight years now and haven't done a thing.  Got it.  Thanks.

What do previous discussions on the Ripley's affidavits have to do with me

Apparently nothing, because you have shown yourself to be clueless

And you've been aware of these affidavits for eight years now and haven't done a thing.  Got it.  Thanks.

What in the world do you think I should have done?

Oh wait... as a die hard LN you expect others to prove that the "evidence" you present is false, right? Any plans of returning to the real world any time soon?

Try for once to prove that the evidence is authentic. It might help you to deal with your ignorance.

my couple of dinners with Buell Frazier

Aha... so first you only ate pizza with Frazier and now it's already a "couple of dinners"   

my current work (along with Frank Badalson) of getting the affidavits authenticated?

Your current work? Don't make me laugh.... All you need to do to find out is ask Frazier, during one of those dinners, or get in touch with Ripley's.

It's easy, it only took me one phone call several years ago.

[Bill Brown]

What do previous discussions on the Ripley's affidavits have to do with me

Apparently nothing, because you have shown yourself to be clueless

And you've been aware of these affidavits for eight years now and haven't done a thing.  Got it.  Thanks.

What in the world do you think I should have done?

Oh wait... as a die hard LN you expect others to prove that the "evidence" you present is false, right? Any plans of returning to the real world any time soon?

Try for once to prove that the evidence is authentic. It might help you to deal with your ignorance.

my couple of dinners with Buell Frazier

Aha... so first you only ate pizza with Frazier and now it's already a "couple of dinners"   

my current work (along with Frank Badalson) of getting the affidavits authenticated?

Your current work? Don't make me laugh.... All you need to do to find out is ask Frazier, during one of those dinners, or get in touch with Ripley's.

It's easy, it only took me one phone call several years ago.

Apparently nothing, because you have shown yourself to be clueless

Not at all.

What in the world do you think I should have done?

Oh wait... as a die hard LN you expect others to prove that the "evidence" you present is false, right? Any plans of returning to the real world any time soon?

Try for once to prove that the evidence is authentic. It might help you to deal with your ignorance.

That's exactly what I'm in the process of trying to do, Dumb Ass.

Aha... so first you only ate pizza with Frazier and now it's already a "couple of dinners"

Correct.  Pizza with him back in November and, well, pizza again with him last month, which is when Frank and I presented him with the Ripley's affidavits, Sideline Critic.

Your current work? Don't make me laugh.... All you need to do to find out is ask Frazier, during one of those dinners, or get in touch with Ripley's.

That you believe that is "all you need to do" tells me all I really need to know about your (lack of) level of research.

We did indeed ask Frazier.  Since then, we've verified the notary, i.e. his full name, where he lived, where he worked, how long he as a notary, etc... We need to be sure he actually was a notary versus a fake name.  We're subjecting the Frazier signature on the affidavit to handwriting analysis.  Of course, it would be better to have the actual document as opposed to a copy.  But still, we're trying it, nevertheless.

This is real research.  It takes time, unfortunately.  And we do indeed plan on coming forth with ALL findings, good, bad or indifferent.  But wait.  You already know about real research.  You made a phone call. 

[Martin Weidmann]

Not at all.


That's exactly what I'm in the process of trying to do, Dumb Ass.


Correct.  Pizza with him back in November and, well, pizza again with him last month, which is when Frank and I presented him with the Ripley's affidavits, Sideline Critic.


That you believe that is "all you need to do" tells me all I really need to know about your (lack of) level of research.

We did indeed ask Frazier.  Since then, we've verified the notary, i.e. his full name, where he lived, where he worked, how long he as a notary, etc... We need to be sure he actually was a notary versus a fake name.  We're subjecting the Frazier signature on the affidavit to handwriting analysis.  Of course, it would be better to have the actual document as opposed to a copy.  But still, we're trying it, nevertheless.

This is real research.  It takes time, unfortunately.  And we do indeed plan on coming forth with ALL findings, good, bad or indifferent.  But wait.  You already know about real research.  You made a phone call.

We did indeed ask Frazier.

And what did he say?

Since then, we've verified the notary, i.e. his full name, where he lived, where he worked, how long he as a notary, etc... We need to be sure he actually was a notary versus a fake name.  We're subjecting the Frazier signature on the affidavit to handwriting analysis.  Of course, it would be better to have the actual document as opposed to a copy.  But still, we're trying it, nevertheless.

If Frazier had confirmed that the affidavits are authentic, you wouldn't need to verify anything else, so I'm taking this comment as confirmation that Frazier denied the authenticity and you are not happy about it.

We're subjecting the Frazier signature on the affidavit to handwriting analysis.

Did you get notarized samples of Frazier's signature for comparison? Normally, a court appointed expert requires between 10 and 15 samples, right? And are you going to publish the report of the handwriting expert? You know, stuff like flowing pen movements, typical loops in certain letters etc....


This is real research.  It takes time, unfortunately.  And we do indeed plan on coming forth with ALL findings, good, bad or indifferent.  But wait.  You already know about real research.  You made a phone call.

As Ripley's has the originals, they are the primary source. Yes, I made a phone call, but you don't know what happened after that. All you can do is make assumptions and babble about "real research", when in reality you have shown time after time that the only "research" you actually do is read Dale Myers book.

[Bill Brown]

We did indeed ask Frazier.

And what did he say?

Since then, we've verified the notary, i.e. his full name, where he lived, where he worked, how long he as a notary, etc... We need to be sure he actually was a notary versus a fake name.  We're subjecting the Frazier signature on the affidavit to handwriting analysis.  Of course, it would be better to have the actual document as opposed to a copy.  But still, we're trying it, nevertheless.

If Frazier had confirmed that the affidavits are authentic, you wouldn't need to verify anything else, so I'm taking this comment as confirmation that Frazier denied the authenticity and you are not happy about it.

We're subjecting the Frazier signature on the affidavit to handwriting analysis.

Did you get notarized samples of Frazier's signature for comparison? Normally, a court appointed expert requires between 10 and 15 samples, right? And are you going to publish the report of the handwriting expert? You know, stuff like flowing pen movements, typical loops in certain letters etc....


This is real research.  It takes time, unfortunately.  And we do indeed plan on coming forth with ALL findings, good, bad or indifferent.  But wait.  You already know about real research.  You made a phone call.

As Ripley's has the originals, they are the primary source. Yes, I made a phone call, but you don't know what happened after that. All you can do is make assumptions and babble about "real research", when in reality you have shown time after time that the only "research" you actually do is read Dale Myers book.

Frazier said he has never seen those documents before.  As for the rest, how about you wait and see?

You want to criticize me over "With Malice", yet you literally ran the other way when I challenged you to a live debate.  There are many podcasts and Youtube channels which would host such a thing.  In a live, real-time debate, I wouldn't be able to run off and use that book as a reference while you and the host hold for a few minutes.  Right?

And yes, we have known notarized Frazier signatures for comparison purposes.  Duh.

You're just going to have to wait and see.  Or you can act like a dickhead.

[Bill Brown]

I have now blocked Martin Weidmann.  I've been a member here since 2008 and this is the first time I've blocked anyone.

If he somehow decides to take me up on my challenge to a debate (yeah right), could someone please let me know?  Thanks.

[Martin Weidmann]

Frazier said he has never seen those documents before.  As for the rest, how about you wait and see?

You want to criticize me over "With Malice", yet you literally ran the other way when I challenged you to a live debate.  There are many podcasts and Youtube channels which would host such a thing.  In a live, real-time debate, I wouldn't be able to run off and use that book as a reference while you and the host hold for a few minutes.  Right?

And yes, we have known notarized Frazier signatures for comparison purposes.  Duh.

You're just going to have to wait and see.  Or you can act like a dickhead.

Frazier said he has never seen those documents before.  As for the rest, how about you wait and see?

And there it is. Frazier denied it and Billy doesn't like that.

You want to criticize me over "With Malice",

No... read the damned book as often as you like, just don't pretend it's "research"

In a live, real-time debate, I wouldn't be able to run off and use that book as a reference

I don't think you would need to use the book as a reference, as long as you can control the conversation. You have been dealing with this stuff for a great number of years and most likely have the details of your preferred narrative in your head, just like religious zealots can quote any part of the bible. Where it gets tricky is when you are confronted with different points of view that undercut what you are saying and for which you don't have an answer. History shows that rather than entering into an honest and open discussion and accepting that you might be wrong about some details, you will instantly start making up stuff and denials and that's where a live debate loses it's value and becomes a mere contest in which your ego will do anything to win. It has very little to do with the facts.

And yes, we have known notarized Frazier signatures for comparison purposes.  Duh.

That would be great, if it were true, but I seriously doubt it. But I could be wrong. Why don't you post just one of those signatures? Would be a perfect way to shut me up, right?

I have now blocked Martin Weidmann.  I've been a member here since 2008 and this is the first time I've blocked anyone.

If he somehow decides to take me up on my challenge to a debate (yeah right), could someone please let me know?  Thanks.

I have now blocked Martin Weidmann.

Insults didn't work, so now Billy is running.... Go figure!