Rennes-le-Château

You forgot to mention the Loch Ness Monster connection
Nutcase

The Loch Ness Monster wants to know why you forgot to mention the fact that Jean Luc Chaumeil has tried to tout and sell fake documents in the past and failed to explain to us why we should believe him this time.

_________________
"In the Aude, the peasants rather believe in the malignant spirit, the fairies and the underground geniuses than with the Virgin and the Angels”

You forgot to mention the Loch Ness Monster connection
Nutcase

[size=18]No I did mention it.

I said:

The Loch Ness Monster wants to know why you forgot to mention the fact that Jean Luc Chaumeil has tried to tout and sell fake documents in the past and failed to explain to us why we should believe him this time.

It still applies.

[/quote]

_________________
"In the Aude, the peasants rather believe in the malignant spirit, the fairies and the underground geniuses than with the Virgin and the Angels”

You forgot to mention the Little Red Riding Hood connection
Nutcase

As Little Red Riding Hood went tripping off to Grandma's House she asked " why did you forgot to mention the fact that Jean Luc Chaumeil has tried to tout and sell fake documents in the past and failed to explain to us why we should believe him this time."

"My what Big LIES you have" said LRH

_________________
"In the Aude, the peasants rather believe in the malignant spirit, the fairies and the underground geniuses than with the Virgin and the Angels”

GARBAGE FROM A NUTCASE WHO IS A MENTAL DEFECTIVE

Yep! I guess we've established beyond doubt now that Smith (aka Rennes17) wants to avoid answering this:

Why did you forgot to mention the fact that Jean Luc Chaumeil has tried to tout and sell fake documents in the past and failed to explain to us why we should believe him this time."

_________________
"In the Aude, the peasants rather believe in the malignant spirit, the fairies and the underground geniuses than with the Virgin and the Angels”

What about the Yeti connection, nutcase?

You know my response now.

I like the title of this thread, I'm flattered.

It the old 'if you're unable to attack the message then attack the messenger' routine.

Doesn't work, we're beyond that.

_________________
"In the Aude, the peasants rather believe in the malignant spirit, the fairies and the underground geniuses than with the Virgin and the Angels”

THE NUTCASES GET THEIR FACTS WRONG BECAUSE THEY ARE UNABLE TO THINK PROPERLY

See Debunking for Dummies tip # 6

You're just another nutcase. Another example of distorted reasoning.
CAN GO AROUND AND AROUND WITH YOU AND IT WILL NOT GET ANYWHERE BECAUSE YOU DO NOT KNOW HOW TO THINK PROPERLY.

You're getting tedious.

You're not very good at defending your ascertions are you Smith?

_________________
"In the Aude, the peasants rather believe in the malignant spirit, the fairies and the underground geniuses than with the Virgin and the Angels”

JIM BECK'S TEN COMMANDMENTS

1. The Louis Lawrence Tomb was really the "Poussin Tomb"

2. Forget about Adrien Bourrel's testimony that the Louis Lawrence Tomb was built in 1933. That was a lie and Pierre Jarnac cannot be trusted.

3. Don't worry if you cannot find any independent references to the Louis Lawrence Tomb being the "Poussin Tomb" outside of Pierre Plantard and Philippe de Cherisey.

4. The parchments are genuine - don't worry if you cannot find any independent references to them outside of Pierre Plantard and Philippe de Cherisey.

5. None of Jean-Luc Chaumeil's documented archive relating to the "parchments" can be trusted because he once tried to pull Henry Lincoln's leg over a Rumanian treasure.

6. Believing that the Louis Lawrence tomb was a "Poussin tomb" without any evidence and ignoring the testimony of Adrien Bourrel is sensible and is not to be deemed pseudo-history

7. Believing that the "parchments" are genuine without providing any evidence and ignoring the archive of Jean-Luc Chaumeil is sensible and not to be deemed pseudo-history.

8. Quote the spurious and questionable statements made by people like Dan Brown, Henry Lincoln and Picknett & Prince as if they were historical facts. When their spurious statements are challenged and seen to be discredited, begin to rubbish the nature of debunking.

9. There is a Rennes-le-Chateau mystery. The source of Sauniere's wealth cannot be explained. The evidence of Sauniere's notebooks is to be ignored because it is impossible that he acquired his wealth from the selling of masses. It does not matter about the Trial between Berenger Sauniere and the Carcassonne Bishopric and what evidence that produced.

10. Keep repeating points 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 always rubbishing debunking in the process.

This is Jim Beck's continuous agenda on this Messageboard in a nutshell.
There is no longer any need to read any of his messages ever again.
Just keep looking this up for reference.