Moved thread: Response to Curt Rowlett

Moderators: Michael Butterfield, Aud8us

Level 5
User avatar
Posts: 435
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 8:20 am

Re: Moved thread: Response to Curt Rowlett

Postby aquiman » Sat Aug 28, 2010 7:02 am

MichealJackson wrote:Might I add that I never said I agreed With Mr. Penns Radian Theory. Only that it was worthy of discussion. More interesting is Mr. Penn. Hes probably not you-know-who but strange player in this saga, indeed.

There. I quoted you too. Ass. You talk about wasting space, yet you continue to talk about this idiot radian theory that WAS worthy of discussion 20 years ago, but not any longer. It's been discussed to death... and debunked.

And then you mention NAMBLA??? Hey pal, you're the one who calls himself Michael Jackson. It ties in more to you than Encyclopedia Brown.

Congratulations. You have a knack for making enemies immediately.


Re: Moved thread: Response to Curt Rowlett

Postby MichealJackson » Sat Aug 28, 2010 7:23 am

Thats rude. Uncalled for. Atleast I know where your passions lie.

So back to the Zodiac. This seems familiar, an angry loner, in his basement..... plotting against his enemys...hmm...Where have I...? It escapes me. How can something be debunked when you lack any reasonable evidence that refutes it? Least Penn tried. Looked at the evidence and offered a hypothesis, may be farfetched like everything else hes produced. But its something. Whats with the animus?


Re: Moved thread: Response to Curt Rowlett

Postby metaltomato » Sat Aug 28, 2010 9:47 am

This thread, unfortunately, needs locking. MJ sounds like a troll to me, and the thread has become nothing more than name calling for some time now imho.

If you think Penn's Radian Theory is still valid, please feel free to make your arguments, however, given the nature and purpose of this board, you shouldn't be surprised that you are shouted down if you post up half baked ideas dressed as truth or inconclusive speculation marauding as theory.

It's funny that "quoting" became an issue in this thread. Quoting is exactly what too many do NOT do in this case. The idea that seems to be in the forefront of those who would revisit this case with fresh eyes IS in many ways to quote the killer. To LISTEN to the exact nature of what he said and did rather than interpret his words and actions in terms that suit our own purposes, and then to apply a certain degree of scientific method to our theories.

To my mind, going back and forth and playing "Guess-the-Troll" may be fun, but has no place on this board.

Level 4
Posts: 139
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 8:25 am

Re: Moved thread: Response to Curt Rowlett

Postby jeff » Sat Aug 28, 2010 11:13 am

I’d like to take part for MJ, because I hate it when people are picking on one person. But in this case MJ has to blame himself. Bullitt made a reasonable and polite question. There was absolutely no need to attack him.

That being said, people should focus more on arguments rather than taking things personally and turning issues into feuds. As Metaltomato said, “going back and forth and playing "Guess-the-Troll" may be fun, but has no place on this board.”

User avatar
Posts: 1276
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 6:42 pm

Re: Moved thread: Response to Curt Rowlett

Postby Michael Butterfield » Sat Aug 28, 2010 5:49 pm

You know, I have to say that there's something ironic and yet disappointing about watching a person come to this forum, complain about the length of this thread, and then add more nonsense to this thread-- all the while complaining that moderators aren't doing their job to control the flow of nonsense in this thread. This is a bit like watching Tom Voigt-- who was jailed for acts of online stalking and harassment-- as he complains that I haven't provided contact information on this site.

MJ is not here to engage in any legitimate debate, nor is he here to discuss the radian theory. MJ is here for one reason: To stir up trouble. A troll of the first order.

Let's be clear about this, since some people seem to have trouble grasping the facts: Gareth Penn put forth a specific theory-- that two Zodiac crimes scenes formed a radian with Mt. Diablo. This theory has since been embraced and promoted by others, including Steve Hodel and Raymond Grant. Penn's radian theory has been proven to be invalid-- and irrefutably debunked. The two scenes do not form such an angle, period. End of debate. If MJ wants to embrace some other notion about radians and crime scenes, that's fine, but that is a different theory altogether from Penn's. For the record, Penn's theory has been demonstrated to be invalid, and anyone with common sense has already recognized that fact.

MJ is a troll who is not worth our time. I knew he would be trouble as soon as I saw that he was incapable of correctly spelling Jackson's first name.

Level 1
Posts: 19
Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2013 3:39 am

Re: Moved thread: Response to Curt Rowlett

Postby dagmajor » Mon Oct 10, 2016 3:57 pm

The reason why Mr. Penn's "radian theory" is invalid, is because he bases it off the trigonometry definition of radian rather than the mathematical application of radian. In fact, every radian theory I have seen so far does. Mr. Butterfield is correct in his assertion concerning this matter.
Living IN America does not make you an American; Living FOR America does.


Return to Gareth Penn’s Radian Theory

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests