Thomas Horan

Re: Thomas Horan

Postby smithy » Mon Jun 09, 2014 6:31 pm

Strange, isn't it? There's a very nice thread (yours T.!) about Spence which is only a couple of clicks away - and the stuff about "Buzz" is also a long way less than secret. (Sandy, where are you?!)
...and nope, that ain't all, Rocky. :D
Still - I did enjoy quite a lot of the rest of it, I must say.
User avatar
smithy
 
Posts: 956
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 6:19 am

Re: Thomas Horan

Postby Dreamnine.nine » Tue Jun 10, 2014 2:09 pm

I thought the podcast was worth listening to. I hadn't heard much of Horan before or his theory, but it's good we have a board here where we can at least discuss it. Although there remain many holes.
"If, after I depart this vale, you ever remember me and have thought to please my ghost, forgive some sinner and wink your eye at some homely girl."
Dreamnine.nine
 
Posts: 100
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:24 am
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Re: Thomas Horan

Postby morf13 » Tue Jun 10, 2014 2:55 pm

I think the Rocky referred to by Horan was a union worker who Seagull's Husband worked with, NOT a gang member
User avatar
morf13
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6540
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 8:48 am
Location: NJ

Re: Thomas Horan

Postby themysterymachine » Tue Aug 12, 2014 7:44 am

I really gave Horan a fair shake, I always want to read everything and doublecheck, and since discovering his theory I find myself unconsciously trying to prove him wrong.

Sorry if I can't remember the first poster who mentioned LB as being a definite Zodiac case- I completely 100 percent agree, and agree also that Stine was a bonafide Z killing.

One takeaway I got after hearing his theories and looking at the facts again I think you could discount the 4 Vallejo shootings quite easily. The phone calls- they were placed around an hour after when someone could have heard it on a scanner, and he takes credit afterwards with no physical evidence like there is in LB and SF. He just mentions it in a letter. Yes he mentioned the crime scene, but he could have been privy to that info in some other way. And the ammo was very common indeed. I haven't quite satisfied myself on that account as of yet. It isn't as ironclad as I used to think.

BUT- I have asked him a few in depth questions on his blog and he just writes long, convoluted paragraphs that don't add up to much. If you have a provable case, then you should be able to answer a question fairly directly. This is the problem i have with alot of theories, they require many leaps of faith and a lack of real connecting factors. If you throw dozens of references both cultural and physical on a board, you will get patterns, because we tend TO patterns. The human eye will draw connections, the human brain will draw connections, but that doesn't mean they are real. You gotta have some straight lines and some straight answers in there somewhere, and his logic is circular, seemingly. You have to take for granted that THIS happened then THIS happened and then THIS and this to believe ANY of what he says is true. Its like an ourobouros mindmeld or something.

But my biggest beef with him is his disrespectful tone and the laughing amusement he seems to take at anyone who has labored over this case from the beginning. He even called Toschi "not even a good detective". On the basis of what? He just tosses out garbage and you wonder if his case is so provable he has to have a total lack of sportsmanship about it. You gotta be able to show me some connections that don't take dozens of leaps of faith to believe, and show some freaking respect to some people who gave a chunk of their sanity to catch this guy.
themysterymachine
 
Posts: 185
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 3:14 am

Re: Thomas Horan

Postby doranchak » Tue Aug 12, 2014 12:43 pm

"Ouroboros mindmeld" is my new favorite phrase! :lol:

Your assessment of Horan is accurate. He and others such as Grant seem to have a similar approach of creating hyper-elaborate circumstantial scenarios, then greeting you with hostility as soon as you try to point out any problems. And I think many of the problems boil down to a sort of "God of the Gaps" fallacy. In this fallacy, the absence of rational explanations is proof of God's existence. Horan, Grant, and others see the absence of rational explanations as proof of a conspiracy's existence.
User avatar
doranchak
 
Posts: 1763
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 5:26 am

Re: Thomas Horan

Postby Norse » Tue Aug 12, 2014 2:53 pm

doranchak wrote:"Ouroboros mindmeld" is my new favorite phrase! :lol:

Your assessment of Horan is accurate. He and others such as Grant seem to have a similar approach of creating hyper-elaborate circumstantial scenarios, then greeting you with hostility as soon as you try to point out any problems. And I think many of the problems boil down to a sort of "God of the Gaps" fallacy. In this fallacy, the absence of rational explanations is proof of God's existence. Horan, Grant, and others see the absence of rational explanations as proof of a conspiracy's existence.


Excellent point - couldn't agree more.

There are holes in this case. After half a century, almost, that's to be expected. People make mistakes, facts aren't recorded, protocol isn't followed to the letter, officers contradict each other (contradict themselves in some cases!), etc.

Plus - all the material pertaining to the Z case isn't known to us. It's impossible to pass judgment on the job someone like Toschi did without knowing all the details. There could even be evidence in the case we don't know about.

On a general note, for my money you need to provide your audience with a motive if you're going to serve up what is essentially a conspiracy theory. Who stood to benefit from this hoax? To me that remains unclear. We're looking at an elaborate scheme, involving multiple jurisdictions and more than a handful of co-conspirators. You don't perpetrate something like that for giggles. So, why?

Horan's answer to that question seems to be something like: "Go and ask the person who did it!" Which doesn't really cut it.
User avatar
Norse
 
Posts: 1735
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 11:50 pm

Re: Thomas Horan

Postby themysterymachine » Tue Aug 12, 2014 8:41 pm

doranchak wrote:"Ouroboros mindmeld" is my new favorite phrase! :lol:

Your assessment of Horan is accurate. He and others such as Grant seem to have a similar approach of creating hyper-elaborate circumstantial scenarios, then greeting you with hostility as soon as you try to point out any problems. And I think many of the problems boil down to a sort of "God of the Gaps" fallacy. In this fallacy, the absence of rational explanations is proof of God's existence. Horan, Grant, and others see the absence of rational explanations as proof of a conspiracy's existence.

lol, it seemed the only phrase to use that didn't use profanity, which I am inordinately fond of, but don't want to use in a forum- I am trying to be a lady here. :P

"God of the Gaps"- YES. Trying to prove a negative or using the negative to prove a point that is not really provable. Etc. It strains credibility and certainly strains believability. And with a dose of pomposity in there it kinda all makes me wanna puke
themysterymachine
 
Posts: 185
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 3:14 am

Re: Thomas Horan

Postby themysterymachine » Tue Aug 12, 2014 8:44 pm

Norse wrote:
doranchak wrote:"Ouroboros mindmeld" is my new favorite phrase! :lol:

Your assessment of Horan is accurate. He and others such as Grant seem to have a similar approach of creating hyper-elaborate circumstantial scenarios, then greeting you with hostility as soon as you try to point out any problems. And I think many of the problems boil down to a sort of "God of the Gaps" fallacy. In this fallacy, the absence of rational explanations is proof of God's existence. Horan, Grant, and others see the absence of rational explanations as proof of a conspiracy's existence.




On a general note, for my money you need to provide your audience with a motive if you're going to serve up what is essentially a conspiracy theory. Who stood to benefit from this hoax? To me that remains unclear. We're looking at an elaborate scheme, involving multiple jurisdictions and more than a handful of co-conspirators. You don't perpetrate something like that for giggles. So, why?

Horan's answer to that question seems to be something like: "Go and ask the person who did it!" Which doesn't really cut it.

MOTIVE MOTIVE MOTIVE. WHY would they go to such lengths? There is no real reason. They never had to "pin it on z' in Vallejo because nobody even KNEW about he Zodiac then. It just does not make sense and the hyperbole with which he delivers it is such a turn off.

And hey, when are we gonna get a researcher who says, "you know, I am not sure, maybe this is it" instead of everyone getting so positive without proof? I can't stand that. Lets stay in the realm of logic, people, the bonafide evidence in the center, and go from there.
themysterymachine
 
Posts: 185
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 3:14 am

Re: Thomas Horan

Postby Talon » Tue Aug 12, 2014 9:23 pm

Mystery machine said:
And hey, when are we gonna get a researcher who says, "you know, I am not sure, maybe this is it" instead of everyone getting so positive without proof? I can't stand that. Lets stay in the realm of logic, people, the bonafide evidence in the center, and go from there.

It's not about proof, it's about $$$. There is such a minuet amount of real facts out there about this case that almost any scenario one can dream up will fit.
User avatar
Talon
 
Posts: 174
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2014 10:55 am

Re: Thomas Horan

Postby themysterymachine » Wed Aug 13, 2014 1:12 am

Talon wrote:Mystery machine said:
And hey, when are we gonna get a researcher who says, "you know, I am not sure, maybe this is it" instead of everyone getting so positive without proof? I can't stand that. Lets stay in the realm of logic, people, the bonafide evidence in the center, and go from there.

It's not about proof, it's about $$$. There is such a minuet amount of real facts out there about this case that almost any scenario one can dream up will fit.

But it can't fit EVERYTHING. TO me there is a core of clear evidence here in the letters and especially the Stine and LB killings and that forms the center. We have his handwriting. We have some symbols. We have this radian bit and a map and if some fool can fit all that together, not Gareth-Penn style, but PRECISE, its just wanky enough to be fit tightly in a puzzle without having to reach. That's the problem- all the reaching. The farther you stretch from the evidence the farther you are from the truth. Ergo Horan.
themysterymachine
 
Posts: 185
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 3:14 am

PreviousNext

Return to Zodiac Theories

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron