Your favourite unsolved mystery?

Bill Lee

MadDog76 wrote: »

I was just curious as to what "mystery" you were referring to in this incident ............ thought maybe I'd missed something ............ but obviously I hadn't

Well it's quite mysterious that one twin travelled to Cork to fetch the other, then they left for the UK without telling anyone, then got up to the shenanigans they did on the motorway, when one appears to be speaking in tongues while on the ground and at one point tells a Police Officer (I don't believe you, you're not real" (or something), develops superhuman strength while carrying a number of serious injuries, while the other goes off and kills someone. And then they go back to "normal" and never explain their actions. And no alcohol or drugs were involved.

The theory that the madness of one twin was able to "infect" the other is fascinating and certainly something I find mysterious.

jonon9

Greg81 wrote: »

The Buzzer UVB-76

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UVB-76

I find the Buzzer super interesting but I also find it somewhat eerie.

Capt'n Midnight

I've no interest in unsolved murders. Its no mystery that most murderers try to hide their tracks.

In the US of A nearly 185,000 cases of homicide and non-negligent manslaughter went unsolved from 1980 to 2008

And yet people still focus on a few dozen fashionable disappearances that are regurgitated ad nauseum on "edutainment" channels

Why are people so interested in this stuff ?

LoveLamps

http://www.irishcentral.com/news/The-man-who-went-to-Ireland-to-disappear-VIDEO.html

dubstarr

LoveLamps wrote: »

http://www.irishcentral.com/news/The-man-who-went-to-Ireland-to-disappear-VIDEO.html

Ah thats so sad.

MadDog76

Bill Lee wrote: »

Well it's quite mysterious that one twin travelled to Cork to fetch the other, then they left for the UK without telling anyone, then got up to the shenanigans they did on the motorway, when one appears to be speaking in tongues while on the ground and at one point tells a Police Officer (I don't believe you, you're not real" (or something), develops superhuman strength while carrying a number of serious injuries, while the other goes off and kills someone. And then they go back to "normal" and never explain their actions. And no alcohol or drugs were involved.

The theory that the madness of one twin was able to "infect" the other is fascinating and certainly something I find mysterious.

Or ......... they both had mental issues ......... "mystery" solved!!

LoveLamps

dubstarr wrote: »

Ah thats so sad.

Kinda nice at the same time. By the looks of it he died the way he wanted

lazygal

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Denver_Airport_conspiracy_theory

Not sure if this has been posted but I came across this over the weekend. I love a good conspiracy theory!

Kenny Logins

On the subject of conspiracy theories, this is by far my favourite collection - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_237

The mystery? How much of the detail contained within "The Shining" was coded messages left by Stanley Kubrick, and how much was simply coincidence and continuity error? I guess we'll never know...

duploelabs

Kenny Logins wrote: »

On the subject of conspiracy theories, this is by far my favourite collection - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_237

The mystery? How much of the detail contained within "The Shining" was coded messages left by Stanley Kubrick, and how much was simply coincidence and continuity error? I guess we'll never know...

Don't think I said 'oh f*ck' to myself watching that documentary, so many theories rang true but some were just too far fetched

Kenny Logins

duploelabs wrote: »

Don't think I said 'oh f*ck' to myself watching that documentary, so many theories rang true but some were just too far fetched

Jon Ronson's "Boxes" documentary gives us a glimpse at the level of detail the Stanley Kubrick obsessed over in his films ( http://vimeo.com/78314194 ) so I've no doubt that a large amount of coded messages were deliberately placed in The Shining, but I have no idea why, or what they mean. The guesses are very entertaining though. :pac:

stop animal cruelty

Can anyone recommend some books on unsolved mysteries??

Dyr

duploelabs wrote: »

Don't think I said 'oh f*ck' to myself watching that documentary, so many theories rang true but some were just too far fetched

I managed to sit through about half of it in growing disbelief that a project that was thrown together like a youtube playlist was classified as a documentary on netflix

There's your conspiracy right there.

bjork

Madeline McCann


Not what happened but the big cover up and why?

J Mysterio

bjork wrote: »

Not what happened but the big cover up and why?

What?

Billy86

Kenny Logins wrote: »

Jon Ronson's "Boxes" documentary gives us a glimpse at the level of detail the Stanley Kubrick obsessed over in his films ( http://vimeo.com/78314194 ) so I've no doubt that a large amount of coded messages were deliberately placed in The Shining, but I have no idea why, or what they mean. The guesses are very entertaining though. :pac:

He even got investigated/followed by the CIA for a bit after Dr Strabgelive I think I have read, because the War Room was so ridiculously accurate down to obscure little details, and with it being Cold War times, they were very secretive with that kind of thing back then. :pac:

MRnotlob606

How Adam Sandler still finds work.

bjork

J Mysterio wrote: »

What?

exactly!

Beano

MRnotlob606 wrote: »

How Adam Sandler still finds work.

his own production company produces his movies. Sony signed him to a long contract back when he was making money. There were plenty of emails about him released as part of the sony hack.

CUCINA

Dallas...who shot (no, not JR) JFK?
Saw a programme recently where the theory was that Oswald hit JFK first, but the fatal head shot happened when a Secret Service agent, travelling behind in the convoy. panicked on hearing the shots, stood up, and his rifle went off accidentally.
So a huge cover-up to avoid embarrassment. Jack Ruby, who owned a joint frequented by local cops, was let into the basement to kill Oswald. The end result was a white-wash Warren Commission report, which incidentally had Gerard Ford as one of its authors.
Easier to believe all that in light of the Watergate scandal little more than ten years later, with Mr. Ford granting Nixon a pardon for his follies.

thomil

Billy86 wrote: »

He even got investigated/followed by the CIA for a bit after Dr Strabgelive I think I have read, because the War Room was so ridiculously accurate down to obscure little details, and with it being Cold War times, they were very secretive with that kind of thing back then. :pac:

From what I gathered, it wasn't so much the war room, but the interior sets for the B-52. Kubrick's trademark perfectionism apparently resulted in the set echoing the real aircraft down to the last detail, dito for the procedures onboard the aircraft. Considering that the B-52's mission at the time was still nuclear first strike, I can kind of understand why US authorities might be a bit edgy about it being shown, even if it was in a movie like Dr. Strangelove.

Cianmcliam

CUCINA wrote: »

Dallas...who shot (no, not JR) JFK?
Saw a programme recently where the theory was that Oswald hit JFK first, but the fatal head shot happened when a Secret Service agent, travelling behind in the convoy. panicked on hearing the shots, stood up, and his rifle went off accidentally.
So a huge cover-up to avoid embarrassment. Jack Ruby, who owned a joint frequented by local cops, was let into the basement to kill Oswald. The end result was a white-wash Warren Commission report, which incidentally had Gerard Ford as one of its authors.
Easier to believe all that in light of the Watergate scandal little more than ten years later, with Mr. Ford granting Nixon a pardon for his follies.

A great theory, it was claimed that agent George Hickey shot Kennedy with the AR-15 rifle that was in the follow up car, an accidental shot fired off in panic. Unfortunately it fails at the first hurdle, the Charles Bronson film shows Hickey still seated at the moment of the fatal headshot. He would have had to stand up in order for the bullet to miss the people sitting in front of him and the windscreen, the film shows he remained seated.

Oswald shot all three shots and managed to hit the target, Kennedy's head, once.

CUCINA

But wasn't JFK shot twice, first time through the throat, with the bullet travelling on to hit Governor Connally?

Cianmcliam

CUCINA wrote: »

But wasn't JFK shot twice, first time through the throat, with the bullet travelling on to hit Governor Connally?

Yes, the shot was low and missed the head, hitting JFK in the neck and going on to wound Connolly. Wouldn't have been a mortal wound according to the doctors who treated him.

check_six

Good documentary about the Kennedy assassination a few years back debunked the theory that Oswald couldn't have fired three accurate shots in the time frame available. They demonstrated how a trained marksman (Oswald had been trained while in the army) could comfortably complete the task with time to spare. They also looked at the trees that now obscure part of the road from the point of view of the book depository building. Fifty years ago the trees were a lot smaller and allowed a good view of the road the motorcade was on.

Their conclusion, it was definitely possible for Oswald to be the only assassin. No grassy knoll people were required for events to pan out the way they did. Doesn't mean there wasn't a shadowy cabal pulling his strings in the background and obscuring things afterwards!

check_six

(double post)

CUCINA

Yes, for every plausible explanation about how it WAS Oswald, there seems to be another equally plausible explanation about how it couldn't be his doing.

Oliver Stone has a lot to answer for with his distorted representation of the facts, in keeping with the Hollywood policy of never letting the truth get in the way of a good story. For instance, in the film, there was a lengthy explanation about how the magic bullet hit Kennedy then changed direction in order to continue to hit Connally. In the film, as far as i can remember, this was illustrated with a side view of the car showing Kennedy in the back seat, and Connally in the front, both sitting at the same height, but in fact the back seat was higher than the front seats in that particular vehicle (a Lincoln Continental?).

Another interesting aspect of all this Kennedy business is the old chestnut about the similarities between his circumstances and that of Abraham Lincoln.
(Lincoln's secretary was named Kennedy, he was shot in a theatre, Kennedy was shot in a Lincoln, his assassin was found in a theatre etc., etc.).

Anyway, getting back to the thread title, this is definitely my favourite mystery, from a long time back. I was once certain that it couldn't have been Oswald, but then people like Gerald Posner came along to spoil my certainty.
Now, who knows, maybe somebody will come along and rain on Posner's parade?

Cianmcliam

check_six wrote: »

Good documentary about the Kennedy assassination a few years back debunked the theory that Oswald couldn't have fired three accurate shots in the time frame available. They demonstrated how a trained marksman (Oswald had been trained while in the army) could comfortably complete the task with time to spare. They also looked at the trees that now obscure part of the road from the point of view of the book depository building. Fifty years ago the trees were a lot smaller and allowed a good view of the road the motorcade was on.

Their conclusion, it was definitely possible for Oswald to be the only assassin. No grassy knoll people were required for events to pan out the way they did. Doesn't mean there wasn't a shadowy cabal pulling his strings in the background and obscuring things afterwards!

Yep, Oswald's army records show his accuracy improved during rapid firing a rifle over single shots. I would say it's most likely he used the iron sights on the rifle after bitter experience from the failed assassination on Gen. Walker proved that the scope wasn't accurate enough. His one and only shot then missed, like his first shot at Kennedy.

The iron sights would be even faster to use and more than adequate to sight shots from the distances involved. All the tests done for TV shows and conspiracy demos assume he used the telescopic sights when in fact the shims required to set it up weren't even with the rifle when it was found. This means the people trying to duplicate his effort are probably not using the same method and it takes them longer to fire each shot.

Gongoozler

I really don't know much about the whole jfk thing. I'd like to see a summary of the most plausible ideas. Is the any documentaries?

youcancallmeal

Gongoozler wrote: »

I really don't know much about the whole jfk thing. I'd like to see a summary of the most plausible ideas. Is the any documentaries?

Good round up here