We just noticed the history poseurs sent forth a silly messenger boy, Smitty (who we also believe is "fleas" on Yahoo and "SatDiver" on HH), to say an attorney reviewed our blog and found "libel," "slander," and "malicious content" (whatever that last means; we suppose it could be calling Solomon "goofy," although we have scientific poll numbers to back that up!). After we stopped laughing and blowing assorted beverages out our nostrils, we decided to offer up a little message for the good folks at HH:
Bring it on, mates.
As we've said, you enjoy the privilege of spouting garbage, lies and innuendo about Odyssey and it's supporters 24/7 on your blog (which is really all it is), while also practicing a draconian form of censorship of views counter to your own. Even banishing people is not beneath you. We knew an effort to hold you accountable for your publicly accessible words would ultimately lead to a response and a threat (even if veiled). After all, this is the predictable behavior of cowards. We're not, in other words, the least bit surprised.
We've little doubt that mucho gnashing of teeth and rendering of flesh is going on at HH and we rejoice in it. And the volume of website hits we've received in a little more than a week tells us we're onto something right and proper here. So we shall continue unabated; that's a promise set in stone.
One bit of disappointment: HH, the next time you want to threaten us, spare us the pathetic utterances of an emasculated errand boy and contact us directly, would you?
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Doc Docs Update
Well, it's clear Doc's court documents in his Odyssey libel case are popular. Of the four we've received from readers who obtained them from the public record, they've been viewed a whopping 195 times to date (see below).
If any of you have additional information from the public record related to Odyssey or HH, or if you want to share some good salacious gossip (preferably at the history poseurs expense), we'd love to see it. We can't guarantee we'll print everything, but if our lawyer tell us it's okay, you can bet you'll read it here first!
And please keep reading! Thanks....
If any of you have additional information from the public record related to Odyssey or HH, or if you want to share some good salacious gossip (preferably at the history poseurs expense), we'd love to see it. We can't guarantee we'll print everything, but if our lawyer tell us it's okay, you can bet you'll read it here first!
And please keep reading! Thanks....
Yep, he's goofy alright
Our super scientific objective poll has closed and the numbers are conclusive: according to our readers, Solomon is indeed goofy looking. By a final tally of 30 to 1 (it's good to know Solomon is reading us), voters said the man is not only an angry twit (well, okay, we actually said that), but also downright silly looking.
We think he would have been perfectly cast as a gimp on Benny Hill, but that's probably just us.
Out next poll, also "germane" to the HH poseurs, is whether Doc will be found guilty, or not guilty by reason of insanity, in his upcoming Odyssey libel trial. Of course, we shouldn't rule out, as Doc has claimed, that the FBI and US Attorney General will ride in to save the day for him. But, let's put it this way, we're not holding our collective breath on that outcome
We think he would have been perfectly cast as a gimp on Benny Hill, but that's probably just us.
Out next poll, also "germane" to the HH poseurs, is whether Doc will be found guilty, or not guilty by reason of insanity, in his upcoming Odyssey libel trial. Of course, we shouldn't rule out, as Doc has claimed, that the FBI and US Attorney General will ride in to save the day for him. But, let's put it this way, we're not holding our collective breath on that outcome
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Speaking of "credentials"...
You don't need to read HH for long to see Doc and Solomon constantly touting their membership in the Council for British Archaeology (CBA). They clearly expect this bit of information to render those in opposition speechless, or as they would prefer, to fall to one's knees to grovel in the midst of greatness.
The more practical reality is that, for a mere 28 pounds ($55), anyone can join and claim the same membership rights and privileges while also receiving:
The more practical reality is that, for a mere 28 pounds ($55), anyone can join and claim the same membership rights and privileges while also receiving:
- 6 issues of British Archaeology (we see these stacked, unread, on the back of Doc's toilet; whereas Solomon places them in a highly visible area so visitors will see what a right-smart smarty pants he is)
- 3 membership newsletters
- A regional membership (whatever that means)
- A "voice in the work of the Council" (oh sure, gotta make those paying dues members feel involved!)
- An annual report
So, the next time you see Doc or Solomon pulling out this lame trump card (it's no different than someone claiming to be an expert on senior citizens issues because they happen to carry an AARP card), you'll have some perspective in hand, even if they don't.
A Legend (in his own mind)
One of the main tenets of the HH creed is to continually attack the credentials of the researchers and archaeologists employed by Odyssey. They demand this information as if they have a personal right to it, even when giving it to them would violate all common sense -- you wouldn't, after all, hand your business card or resume to a group devoted to constantly insulting you.
Nevertheless, as one peruses the HH website, it's amazing the self-proclaimed expertise, brilliance, and talents of the HH nitwit-erati, none of which is substantiated or backed up with proof or specific detail. We've already posted about that angry twit, Solomon, who claimed he was an "historian and archaeologist" (though he was referred to merely as an "amateur" in the New Yorker piece), but what of our clueless wonder, Doc?
No one understands why Doc is celebrated by himself and his HH compatriots as an expert in anything, although he does claim the title "captain" for himself. See if you agree with us that the public statements below from the HH website (the Sussex thread), jibe with what you know about our favorite whipping boy, Doc. These posts, by the way involved a conversation between Doc and our our good friend Jeff K, who was more than holding his own against the HH rabble regarding the Sussex before his arguments became inconsistent with the party line, he was unjustifiably accused of lying, threatened with legal action, and ultimately banned.
As usual, Doc was pursuing his repetitive, circular, illogical nonsense regarding Odyssey and the Sussex when Jeff took him on directly:
Jeff K (2/25/07): "Doc... I guess you never put a puzzle together when you were a kid. Looking at one piece at a time you really can't tell what it is, but once you put all the pieces together, BINGO. Everyone of those ten points contributes to it being the Sussex, and not one says it is not."
Doc (2/25/07): "Jeff, There you go again, guessing. I've been getting paid to do puzzles for a very long time. Sometimes I get to travel all over the world doing it. Neat job and it pays well. Evidence is something I know."
Hmmm, "pays well"? Now, that's interesting. That directly contradicts Doc's recent letters to the court pleading poverty and crying about not being able to afford a defense attorney or travel to Tampa for his trial deposition. What gives?
Jeff (2/25/07): Doc, Then maybe you could enlighten us with your past achievements in solving puzzles.
Yes Jeff, we agree: by all means Doc, blow us away with your esteemed background which we mere mortals can only dream of...we're waiting:
Doc (2/25/07): Jeff, That would be off topic and not appropriate in this forum, rules Solomon and I set up in the beginning. Even in the Coffee Shop you won't find in depth personal stuff. There is a large group of members here who are professionals and making a living doing what most people only dream of.
Oh, we see. It's not "off topic" to suddenly brag about your so-called expertise, excellent pay and international travel involved in "puzzle solving," but when asked to provide some specifics about that claim, you cannot do it because that would be crossing a line. Right. How terribly convenient for you. And hypocritical, as well.
Yes, we're sure many of you, like us, have "dreamed" since childhood about driving a tow-boat rescuing sun-burned tourists (we think that's what he does), posting several thousand times a year about nothing, being personally sued for libel, and resorting to calling old friends "pedophiles" in public forums.
Positively dreamy, all that.
Nevertheless, as one peruses the HH website, it's amazing the self-proclaimed expertise, brilliance, and talents of the HH nitwit-erati, none of which is substantiated or backed up with proof or specific detail. We've already posted about that angry twit, Solomon, who claimed he was an "historian and archaeologist" (though he was referred to merely as an "amateur" in the New Yorker piece), but what of our clueless wonder, Doc?
No one understands why Doc is celebrated by himself and his HH compatriots as an expert in anything, although he does claim the title "captain" for himself. See if you agree with us that the public statements below from the HH website (the Sussex thread), jibe with what you know about our favorite whipping boy, Doc. These posts, by the way involved a conversation between Doc and our our good friend Jeff K, who was more than holding his own against the HH rabble regarding the Sussex before his arguments became inconsistent with the party line, he was unjustifiably accused of lying, threatened with legal action, and ultimately banned.
As usual, Doc was pursuing his repetitive, circular, illogical nonsense regarding Odyssey and the Sussex when Jeff took him on directly:
Jeff K (2/25/07): "Doc... I guess you never put a puzzle together when you were a kid. Looking at one piece at a time you really can't tell what it is, but once you put all the pieces together, BINGO. Everyone of those ten points contributes to it being the Sussex, and not one says it is not."
Doc (2/25/07): "Jeff, There you go again, guessing. I've been getting paid to do puzzles for a very long time. Sometimes I get to travel all over the world doing it. Neat job and it pays well. Evidence is something I know."
Hmmm, "pays well"? Now, that's interesting. That directly contradicts Doc's recent letters to the court pleading poverty and crying about not being able to afford a defense attorney or travel to Tampa for his trial deposition. What gives?
Jeff (2/25/07): Doc, Then maybe you could enlighten us with your past achievements in solving puzzles.
Yes Jeff, we agree: by all means Doc, blow us away with your esteemed background which we mere mortals can only dream of...we're waiting:
Doc (2/25/07): Jeff, That would be off topic and not appropriate in this forum, rules Solomon and I set up in the beginning. Even in the Coffee Shop you won't find in depth personal stuff. There is a large group of members here who are professionals and making a living doing what most people only dream of.
Oh, we see. It's not "off topic" to suddenly brag about your so-called expertise, excellent pay and international travel involved in "puzzle solving," but when asked to provide some specifics about that claim, you cannot do it because that would be crossing a line. Right. How terribly convenient for you. And hypocritical, as well.
Yes, we're sure many of you, like us, have "dreamed" since childhood about driving a tow-boat rescuing sun-burned tourists (we think that's what he does), posting several thousand times a year about nothing, being personally sued for libel, and resorting to calling old friends "pedophiles" in public forums.
Positively dreamy, all that.
He's got a fever...
Whilst looking for other comedic material, we stumbled on this comment from Solomon regarding the research ship fire that Doc tried to pin on Odyssey while attempting to drive down their share price:
Solomon (8/20/06): "So, whether the burning research vessel was theirs or not, the fact that they didn't bother to state the fact of the matter is an indication of the company's careless management."
Yes, that's right Mr. Goofy (hey, 30 of 31 votes don't lie), Odyssey has "careless management" because they did not bother to respond directly to the HH carbuncles who were spreading false rumors about this vessel fire with ill intent toward OMEX.
Incidentally, Solomon also failed to update this post once the information became known that the vessel was not Odyssey's. Once more displaying his and his colleagues "commitment" to historical accuracy and truth.
Some more of that "grand moral vision" in play, obviously.
Solomon (8/20/06): "So, whether the burning research vessel was theirs or not, the fact that they didn't bother to state the fact of the matter is an indication of the company's careless management."
Yes, that's right Mr. Goofy (hey, 30 of 31 votes don't lie), Odyssey has "careless management" because they did not bother to respond directly to the HH carbuncles who were spreading false rumors about this vessel fire with ill intent toward OMEX.
Incidentally, Solomon also failed to update this post once the information became known that the vessel was not Odyssey's. Once more displaying his and his colleagues "commitment" to historical accuracy and truth.
Some more of that "grand moral vision" in play, obviously.
Monday, April 28, 2008
Frick and Frack
Solomon on Odyssey and the media (from the HH website):
Doc on Odyssey and the media (from his letter to court):
As an aside, just as in this pleading, Doc has asked the court several times to dismiss his case, including as recently as last week. The judge's answer? "Uh unh, nope."
Reuters shows a propensity to republish OMR's self-serving nonsense. This is not the role of journalism. It is pathetic. Has Reuters stock in OMR? It may as well. The BBC is not doing much better, but then, when does it ever?… No qualification and no supporting evidence….I will not risk boring you with more along the same lines. I will mention that the Associated Press has also been receiving my wrath. Lastly, you may notice that these mistakes all promote the position of OMR, which has some very powerful friends. Do I think some of these journalists are bent? Is the Pope a Catholic?[Yes, all of us know how absolutely terrible the BBC is and the poor reputation they have internationally for shallow, shoddy reporting. Good one, Solomon!]
Doc on Odyssey and the media (from his letter to court):
Two international incidents between the United Kingdom and the Kingdom of Spain have taken place recently involving Odyssey Marine. The Kingdom of Spain has publicly branded Odyssey Marine as pirates. The world press have expressed their views and taken Odyssey to task in very strong terms (I attach recent publications). These prominent negative sentiments have been published by more important players than I, in very high profile media. I do not expect that Odyssey will take the UK Sunday Times (London), L’Express (Paris, La Gaceta (Madrid) [sic] and others to court in this matter. why [sic] should I be singled out for my opinions? I believe it is because I have published information already in the public domain that Odyssey would rather not have the public reminded of, and because I ask questions of the supporters of Odyssey that cannot be easily answered.Frick and Frack contradicting one another? Shocking.
As an aside, just as in this pleading, Doc has asked the court several times to dismiss his case, including as recently as last week. The judge's answer? "Uh unh, nope."
Solomon's "Foot-in-ass" problem
Snooty, snot-nosed Solomon is at is again. Mr. Civility ("we shall do our best, blah, blah, blah"), perhaps sensing how foolish his site appears to the general public, is now resorting to name-calling and accusing Odyssey of lying (well, the latter is hardly a first). Here' what he posted this morning:
Solomon: "OMR has to tackle regularly Stemm's foot-in-mouth problem. Here is the We don't know for sure what shipwreck this is, right now... Bloomberg News Video statement with Stemm claiming: Sometimes people just dump things off of ships to prevent the ships from sinking...Well yes, they do, but as has been pointed out a number of times both here and elsewhere, that has nothing whatever to do with what OMR found and what is more, Stemm knows it. Yes, listen to Stemm answering the Bloomberg presenter and much of what he has to say does not relate specifically to the Black Swan. You are watching a PR man at work, spinning the story in preparation for the admiralty arrest case. As I keep reminding: do not take anything OMR at face value. Nothing is as it seems."
"Stemm knows it"? That sounds rather definitive. So, in addition to your lack of credentials in history and archaeology (we're still awaiting your undoubtedly impressive CV, incidentally), you're now going to venture into mind reading? Solomon, you don't know what Stemm "knows," nor do you have a clue what they found, any more than you comprehend how Odyssey operates as a business.
And yes, Mr. Goofy (well, according to our super scientific, objective poll), we all know a sound legal strategy is to "spin" (or, as you mean it: "lie") before going into a court where the truth will be revealed. It's a good thing court decisions aren't merely based on a bunch of bitter, hateful automatons who try with all their limited mental capacity to simply will the outcome through disingenuous thoughts and words, now isn't it? (Although, we don't discount the entertainment value of the effort.)
Finally, Sport, we think you're the last person on the planet who should be questioning others' credibility. As we, and our readers, have shown in a short period of time, you, your members and your website, have a very difficult time with even the basics: whether it's who's currently on Odyssey's board of directors, the depth of the BS find, the endless, stupid and often contradictory speculations on the BS, or your ability to act in an ethical, honest manner when it comes to reporting on events involving Odyssey (as Doc's ship fire posts aptly demonstrated), you're consistently off-base and just flat-out wrong.
No karma for you!
Solomon: "OMR has to tackle regularly Stemm's foot-in-mouth problem. Here is the We don't know for sure what shipwreck this is, right now... Bloomberg News Video statement with Stemm claiming: Sometimes people just dump things off of ships to prevent the ships from sinking...Well yes, they do, but as has been pointed out a number of times both here and elsewhere, that has nothing whatever to do with what OMR found and what is more, Stemm knows it. Yes, listen to Stemm answering the Bloomberg presenter and much of what he has to say does not relate specifically to the Black Swan. You are watching a PR man at work, spinning the story in preparation for the admiralty arrest case. As I keep reminding: do not take anything OMR at face value. Nothing is as it seems."
"Stemm knows it"? That sounds rather definitive. So, in addition to your lack of credentials in history and archaeology (we're still awaiting your undoubtedly impressive CV, incidentally), you're now going to venture into mind reading? Solomon, you don't know what Stemm "knows," nor do you have a clue what they found, any more than you comprehend how Odyssey operates as a business.
And yes, Mr. Goofy (well, according to our super scientific, objective poll), we all know a sound legal strategy is to "spin" (or, as you mean it: "lie") before going into a court where the truth will be revealed. It's a good thing court decisions aren't merely based on a bunch of bitter, hateful automatons who try with all their limited mental capacity to simply will the outcome through disingenuous thoughts and words, now isn't it? (Although, we don't discount the entertainment value of the effort.)
Finally, Sport, we think you're the last person on the planet who should be questioning others' credibility. As we, and our readers, have shown in a short period of time, you, your members and your website, have a very difficult time with even the basics: whether it's who's currently on Odyssey's board of directors, the depth of the BS find, the endless, stupid and often contradictory speculations on the BS, or your ability to act in an ethical, honest manner when it comes to reporting on events involving Odyssey (as Doc's ship fire posts aptly demonstrated), you're consistently off-base and just flat-out wrong.
No karma for you!
Sunday, April 27, 2008
Doc Docs
Our wonderful readers continue to provide terrific materials to HH Watch. Below you'll find two more publicly available court documents related to Odyssey's libel case against Doc, or "nauticalresearch," as he's known on Yahoo. These are letters he sent to the court and they are, as he likes to say (even when he's wrong), a "matter of public record."
It's also clear these documents are of interest to our readers: the two documents posted last week have already been viewed on average nearly 40 times a piece.
Look to us to continue providing public information like these documents related to issues involving HH and Odyssey Marine.
Doc Letter to the Court: October 8, 2007
Doc Letter to the Court: November 16, 2007
And please keep reading!
It's also clear these documents are of interest to our readers: the two documents posted last week have already been viewed on average nearly 40 times a piece.
Look to us to continue providing public information like these documents related to issues involving HH and Odyssey Marine.
Doc Letter to the Court: October 8, 2007
Doc Letter to the Court: November 16, 2007
And please keep reading!
Blowin' Smoke
It's amazing the rich material one can stumble on in a short period of time over on the HH website. We decided to check out their "Odyssey Marine Exploration" thread this morning and immediately found something posted by Doc that, once again, perfectly illustrates how the history poseurs use disinformation in their vicious campaign to discredit Odyssey.
Some of you may remember the research ship that caught fire off the coast of Louisiana a couple years ago. There was some speculation at the time that it might be an Odyssey-owned vessel. This was undoubtedly because of the ship's name, the Odyssey Voyager. Let's be clear from the outset: this was not an Odyssey-owned ship and the company quickly publicly stated so. Of course, that didn't stop the low-life Doc from using this tragedy to try to harm Odyssey:
DOC (8/13/06): "[Odyssey's] track record to date seems to demonstrate boundless optimism that has yet to be reflected in their traded stock. While I haven't been able to establish the ownership in the vessel noted below, if in fact it proves to be theirs I would expect this operation will be dead in the water. A radio intercept was forwarded to me by another skipper at the time the fire first broke out. From the position of the crane I would assume that they might have had an ROV in the water at the time of the fire."
A serious charge: if this was Odyssey's vessel, Doc claimed the fire would ruin company operations. And even though he possessed no evidence, he recklessly speculates the company also had an ROV in the water; meaning, they lost a very expensive piece of equipment to boot. (As an aside, isn't it amazing Doc always has some secret source -- his "intel net," as he calls it -- willing to send him "information" about Odyssey, or really anything going on in the world? Very "germane," not to mention convenient, don't you think?)
Doc provides an "update" a couple of days later, and continues his speculative garbage, openly discussing the damage he expects the vessel fire to cause OMEX's share price:
DOC (8/16/06): "Well, the good news is that the fire is out. It was so intense that they let it burn itself out rather than fight it. I talked with USCG Lt. Lamm in Louisiana. The vessel was registered in Vanutu, a little island nation that is a 'flag of convenience' like Panama. There was no report on owner or leasor. I am still mystified as to why no press release by Odyssey Marine as, true or false, this is serious business that reflects on their stock valuation in the market place. I'm going to check their stock. It's been going down steadily with only one upward spike when they prematurely announced that all was well with the Sussex recovery.
Right. Doc is so concerned about Odyssey's stock valuation he wants clarity from the company lest it causes them harm, right? Of course, he wouldn't be trying to impact the stock price negatively through his smarmy insinuations, now would he? In fact, and as most people of normal intelligence know, if the burning ship had been Odyssey's, they would have immediately put out a press release saying so, as that obviously would be a material event. Even still, Odyssey did publicly deny the vessel was theirs, but was that enough for Doc? What do you think? In fact, his final sordidly disgusting post on the matter shows his motivation all along:
DOC (8/20/08): "The stock is now listed as distressed and I'd guess that is the truth of it."
We're certain that, like us, you'd expect Doc, or the HH forum moderators, in the interest of accuracy and full disclosure, to update these posts to let readers know that the burning ship was ultimately proven NOT to be an Odyssey vessel. You would assume a website allegedly committed to historical accuracy and truth would want its readers to have all the facts about events and matters HH's posts about, right?
As we have shown time and time again, that's not the modus operendi of HH. Their approach is simply this: get the big lie out, hope it sticks, and let it ideally wreak as much havoc as possible.
Some of you may remember the research ship that caught fire off the coast of Louisiana a couple years ago. There was some speculation at the time that it might be an Odyssey-owned vessel. This was undoubtedly because of the ship's name, the Odyssey Voyager. Let's be clear from the outset: this was not an Odyssey-owned ship and the company quickly publicly stated so. Of course, that didn't stop the low-life Doc from using this tragedy to try to harm Odyssey:
DOC (8/13/06): "[Odyssey's] track record to date seems to demonstrate boundless optimism that has yet to be reflected in their traded stock. While I haven't been able to establish the ownership in the vessel noted below, if in fact it proves to be theirs I would expect this operation will be dead in the water. A radio intercept was forwarded to me by another skipper at the time the fire first broke out. From the position of the crane I would assume that they might have had an ROV in the water at the time of the fire."
A serious charge: if this was Odyssey's vessel, Doc claimed the fire would ruin company operations. And even though he possessed no evidence, he recklessly speculates the company also had an ROV in the water; meaning, they lost a very expensive piece of equipment to boot. (As an aside, isn't it amazing Doc always has some secret source -- his "intel net," as he calls it -- willing to send him "information" about Odyssey, or really anything going on in the world? Very "germane," not to mention convenient, don't you think?)
Doc provides an "update" a couple of days later, and continues his speculative garbage, openly discussing the damage he expects the vessel fire to cause OMEX's share price:
DOC (8/16/06): "Well, the good news is that the fire is out. It was so intense that they let it burn itself out rather than fight it. I talked with USCG Lt. Lamm in Louisiana. The vessel was registered in Vanutu, a little island nation that is a 'flag of convenience' like Panama. There was no report on owner or leasor. I am still mystified as to why no press release by Odyssey Marine as, true or false, this is serious business that reflects on their stock valuation in the market place. I'm going to check their stock. It's been going down steadily with only one upward spike when they prematurely announced that all was well with the Sussex recovery.
Right. Doc is so concerned about Odyssey's stock valuation he wants clarity from the company lest it causes them harm, right? Of course, he wouldn't be trying to impact the stock price negatively through his smarmy insinuations, now would he? In fact, and as most people of normal intelligence know, if the burning ship had been Odyssey's, they would have immediately put out a press release saying so, as that obviously would be a material event. Even still, Odyssey did publicly deny the vessel was theirs, but was that enough for Doc? What do you think? In fact, his final sordidly disgusting post on the matter shows his motivation all along:
DOC (8/20/08): "The stock is now listed as distressed and I'd guess that is the truth of it."
We're certain that, like us, you'd expect Doc, or the HH forum moderators, in the interest of accuracy and full disclosure, to update these posts to let readers know that the burning ship was ultimately proven NOT to be an Odyssey vessel. You would assume a website allegedly committed to historical accuracy and truth would want its readers to have all the facts about events and matters HH's posts about, right?
As we have shown time and time again, that's not the modus operendi of HH. Their approach is simply this: get the big lie out, hope it sticks, and let it ideally wreak as much havoc as possible.
Saturday, April 26, 2008
HH bs on the BS
As part of our efforts to hold HH accountable to the words they post on their public website, we read the entire publicly accessible thread about the Black Swan find, dated from May 2007 through January 2008. As painful (and often boring) as it was, we found some real gut-splitting howlers, as well as the usual paranoia and delusions of grandeur HH has about its place in the world and the industry.
Check these out and see if, like us, you're amazed these guys think they have the right to proclaim themselves "experts" on Odyssey, the BS, and marine history and archaeology. And, as far as the whole "grand moral vision" thing goes? [Loud Buzzer Noise.]
Enjoy!
DOC (5/2o/07): "Now why, if OMR has had time to recover all these silver coins did they not recover a Bronze Cannon?"
[Hmmm, intriguing question. How about because there wasn't one to be recovered?]
DOC (5/21/07): "It is most heartening to see the points made by HHI thrust at OMR by shareholders. While not conclusive it is also apparent that OMR was not completely forthcoming in answering those questions. The pattern of deception by OMR has not changed...There was other questionable activity in January by OMR when the heavily indebted company for the first time ever made healthy bonus stock options to most inside employees, not to mention the exclusive arrangement with Mr. Bears' Galleon Partners.I expect a firestorm very shortly."
[Yes, of course, we OMEX shareholders followed the lead of HH when it came to interpreting Odyssey's BS explanation. No self-delusion going on here, no sir.]
DOC (5/21007): "OMR's twisting of History was what brought them under the gunsights of HHI; either they didn't know what they were talking about or were trying to create the impression that they had done proper research. Our investigation indicates that OMR has always been piscine in aroma."
[Piscine? Doc was really working the thesaurus this night. Perhaps this is when he also stumbled on "germane"?]
Solomon (5/21/07): "OMR keeps all its research secret, under the false pretext that it is protecting its investment. False, because none of this archival research of old government papers has any bearing on where the Sussex is. Reuters shows a propensity to republish OMR's self-serving nonsense. This is not the role of journalism. It is pathetic. Has Reuters stock in OMR? It may as well. The BBC is not doing much better, but then, when does it ever?… No qualification and no supporting evidence….I will not risk boring you with more along the same lines. I will mention that the Associated Press has also been receiving my wrath. Lastly, you may notice that these mistakes all promote the position of OMR, which has some very powerful friends. Do I think some of these journalists are bent? Is the Pope a Catholic?"
[Are Solomon's hysterical histrionics justified? But of course! Everyone knows Odyssey controls the world's press to promote its own interests and to enrich management. Well, except for the New Yorker magazine, of course, which is clearly under the hypnotic influence of HH, at least according to them. By the way, we bet the Associated Press was absolutely terrified to face the infamous Wrath of Solomon. Oh yeah.]
Solomon (5/22/07): "Having used Falmouth as their base last year, why do you think OMR switched to Gibraltar? I can understand that they wanted to avoid an English court room, but why not chose a convenient French port nearby? How do you explain the misreporting always being in favour of OMR? Coincidence?"
DOC (5/22/07): "As Solomon and I have both said, there is a lot more to this than meets the eye and OMR has never been forth coming. They can't even read history and get it right."
[Interesting lecture, especially coming from a "researcher" who recently said it was "public record" that Henri Delauze was a current member of OMEX's board of directors. He was only off by two years.]
DOC (5/22/07): "In other news my intel net is giving me tentative confirmation that this recovery represents more than one wreck. At this point I wonder if we can sift the English from the Spanish. Of course, had this been done with trained and accredited archaeologists we wouldn't be in this mess."
[Doc has an "intel net"? Their info wasn't very good, obviously. We're shocked.]
DOC (5/24/07): "Members,I suspect that OMR may possibly have raided a Spanish treasure ship in the Med and one or more Treasure Ships within the EEZ of the UK. There simply wasn't enough time for archaeology, much less the recovery recorded to date. I suspect that the play will move more swiftly as the various government agencies have been brought into the melee. I am quite sure that OMR has outsmarted themselves once again."
[We're quite sure we know who outsmarted themselves in this post. Once again.]
Solomon (5/25/07): "We know that the legal authorities of three nations at least are now investigating OMR. We assist in this as we can and as we have throughout. I have no good reason to believe the spin put by OMR on its latest news. I do not accept it as fact that these treasures have come from any one shipwreck, or that it came from near British waters, or that OMR even conducted the salvage. For all I know, others vacuumed a variety of sites on behalf of OMR. The value of OMR stock has plummeted. Insiders have been selling. The message is plain. As far as I am concerned, our work in public is now done."
[Oh if only this had been true!]
Gollum (5/25/07): "Great Work! I'll be interested in seeing what new news comes out in the next few days, and what OMR's Stock does accordingly. When the storm hits, I will take delight on all those idiots on Yahoo Forums who have denegrated [sic] Doc and History Hunters. I hope their losses will not be small! Can you say: 'Schadenfreude?'"
[Well, isn't that sweet?]
Doc (5/25/07): "No one seems to be addressing the fact that no archaeology was done by OMR. How does one recover and conserve 500,000 coins in less than two weeks, much less stop at the store and buy that many buckets and partially fill them? You simply don't. The only possible answer, which may be of some interest to the SEC, is that the recovery was made at some time in the past. Just how far in the past as regards SEC filings and share trading is the crucial point with regard to fraud. Without a good general knowledge of the protocols of the science the Public has swallowed the tale as the truth. In fact, it simply isn't possible."
Solomon (6/30/07): "Proponents of OMR paid hackers to attack this site from Christmas Eve and for the following two months. We tracked down many of them, some of whom were using mobile phones to try and avoid being located in the real world. We located even these....I am no longer surprised at the depths to which OMR proponents sink."
[Note that no evidence whatsoever is provided to back up Solomon's certainty that Odyssey or its supporters were behind HH web attacks. And considering HH still can't fix the current IE glitch on their site, what's to rule out they didn't hose it site themselves?]
Solomon (7/2/07): "Reading the rollcall above of honoured members of History Hunters and recalling the names of other members who have also played a part, I am very proud. We have nailed our Colours to the mast and I am beginning to have confidence that we will eventually nail the bad guys to the floor. Three Cheers!"
[Solomon is fond of getting nailed metaphors. Insert joke here.]
Sovereign (7/8/07): "Odyssey Marine and its supporters have been attacking - often personally and viciously - the character of Claudio Bonifacio. Their motive is obvious: he found the Mercedes in Portuguese waters. Anyone doubting this should consider that the main television channel of Portugal sent out two divers and filmed it."
[You mean the same Claudio Bonifacio who was arrested by Spanish authorities for violating cultural patrimony laws? Yeah, we know that guy. Sure.]
Sovereign (7/12/07): "The truth begins to appear. This is a noteworthy piece that seems to offer strong confirmation of the suspicions of History Hunters...This is exactly where we have argued that she is, based on the permit to survey issued by Portugal to Claudio Bonifacio, the RTP documentary and the permit application by Subsea. We have other, reliable evidence for this. It explains, as mentioned above, the attacks on Bonifacio, and quite possibly his arrest and the seizure of his research papers...Equally certain is that the enormous explosion that destroyed the ship spread the wreckage over a wide area - say 2 km, part of which are in internmational [sic] waters - and that the coins sank straight to the seabed, in Portuguese waters."
Administration (7/12/07): "Yahoo promoters have written there that nobody important reads those posts. No doubt they would like to believe this, for their posts are often complete garbage, designed to deter detractors. Perhaps also, they are ashamed of their own posts, as they are often childish, generally dishonest and in UK law at least, often actionable in law. Nobody should be under the misapprehension that their words exist in only some sort of juvenille [sic] playground, or that they are anonymous."
[Too bad Doc didn't heed his Admin's advice; it may have spared him a lawsuit and a court trial. We'd also like to note that regardless of whether "important people"read OMEX's Yahoo site, we seriously doubt anyone takes seriously or acts on information available there. To suggest that NATO, the U.S. State Department, or the Spanish government read and act on the anonymous posts at Yahoo is not only deeply naive, but profoundly stupid.]
Solomon (7/12/07): [Regarding the UK's official protest over Spain's illegal seizure of the Odyssey ship, the Alert] "Does the British government really understand what has been happening here? Arrested? This was not my understanding of what happened this morning, which was that the Alert was invited, probably along the lines of "you are invited to help with our enquiries". Now they are in Spain, of course, it is a different matter. A dios, chums. I wonder if the Alert has the same bunch of kids on board as when they sailed towards Portugal? If I were to follow the same blithering nonsense of Morris, posting in Yahoo, I could now call the bunch of them criminals. But I am neither that previous [sic], not [sic] that stoopid [sic]. I can wait. P.S. Are we sure that the above vessel isn't a trawler?"
[Yes, that's right, the Alert was politely "invited" by armed Spanish Naval vessels pointing weapons at it. And we suppose the captain's arrest was merely to give him a place to rest. By the way, the trawler reference picks up on the frequently mentioned, less-than-subtle suggestion by some HH posters that Odyssey picked up the BS coins by a trawling net. Oh sure.]
Solomon (7/14/07): [In reference to HH's initiating a "project" to assist all those parties, including several governments, fighting Odyssey over the BS] "I should mention that as this preliminary stage is now complete and I have no experience in maritime archaeology, marine surveying, maritime law, marine salvage or any other aspect of this project, I am now taking a step back. Doc has pleanty [sic] of experience in all these matters and a much clearer idea how this project should be managed. Further, there are other, major projects on land which demand my attention."
DOC (7/14/07): "Solomon, I will give this my very best effort. I do hope that this comes together as we have envisioned in the future. As you have stated, and I will repeat, HHI has major projects already underway that represent critical investments of both time and money that we must see thru to completion. If we are given the nod by the governments that are involved in the "Mercedes" case we will assemble our team of professionals and give them free rein and all the support we can muster."
[We assume HH's grandiose plan to assemble an anti-Odyssey "Dream Team" (led, ahem, by Doc) to inject itself in the middle of the BS proceeding had no takers. Again, we're shocked.]
So there you have it, a "best of HH" featuring wild speculations, paranoia, delusions of grandeur, and unadulterated ignorance.
Stay tuned, we're just getting warmed up here, folks.
UPDATE: Unlike HH, we strive to be fair and accurate. Since this older post mentions that HH hadn't yet been able to fix the IE glitch on their site, we can now report that that problem apparently has been fixed. At least, we're not having any difficulties getting in any longer with our IE Browser. Now, let's see how long it takes them to ban our IP address, which has been a chronic complaint of our readers. (5/28/08)
Check these out and see if, like us, you're amazed these guys think they have the right to proclaim themselves "experts" on Odyssey, the BS, and marine history and archaeology. And, as far as the whole "grand moral vision" thing goes? [Loud Buzzer Noise.]
Enjoy!
DOC (5/2o/07): "Now why, if OMR has had time to recover all these silver coins did they not recover a Bronze Cannon?"
[Hmmm, intriguing question. How about because there wasn't one to be recovered?]
DOC (5/21/07): "It is most heartening to see the points made by HHI thrust at OMR by shareholders. While not conclusive it is also apparent that OMR was not completely forthcoming in answering those questions. The pattern of deception by OMR has not changed...There was other questionable activity in January by OMR when the heavily indebted company for the first time ever made healthy bonus stock options to most inside employees, not to mention the exclusive arrangement with Mr. Bears' Galleon Partners.I expect a firestorm very shortly."
[Yes, of course, we OMEX shareholders followed the lead of HH when it came to interpreting Odyssey's BS explanation. No self-delusion going on here, no sir.]
DOC (5/21007): "OMR's twisting of History was what brought them under the gunsights of HHI; either they didn't know what they were talking about or were trying to create the impression that they had done proper research. Our investigation indicates that OMR has always been piscine in aroma."
[Piscine? Doc was really working the thesaurus this night. Perhaps this is when he also stumbled on "germane"?]
Solomon (5/21/07): "OMR keeps all its research secret, under the false pretext that it is protecting its investment. False, because none of this archival research of old government papers has any bearing on where the Sussex is. Reuters shows a propensity to republish OMR's self-serving nonsense. This is not the role of journalism. It is pathetic. Has Reuters stock in OMR? It may as well. The BBC is not doing much better, but then, when does it ever?… No qualification and no supporting evidence….I will not risk boring you with more along the same lines. I will mention that the Associated Press has also been receiving my wrath. Lastly, you may notice that these mistakes all promote the position of OMR, which has some very powerful friends. Do I think some of these journalists are bent? Is the Pope a Catholic?"
[Are Solomon's hysterical histrionics justified? But of course! Everyone knows Odyssey controls the world's press to promote its own interests and to enrich management. Well, except for the New Yorker magazine, of course, which is clearly under the hypnotic influence of HH, at least according to them. By the way, we bet the Associated Press was absolutely terrified to face the infamous Wrath of Solomon. Oh yeah.]
Solomon (5/22/07): "Having used Falmouth as their base last year, why do you think OMR switched to Gibraltar? I can understand that they wanted to avoid an English court room, but why not chose a convenient French port nearby? How do you explain the misreporting always being in favour of OMR? Coincidence?"
DOC (5/22/07): "As Solomon and I have both said, there is a lot more to this than meets the eye and OMR has never been forth coming. They can't even read history and get it right."
[Interesting lecture, especially coming from a "researcher" who recently said it was "public record" that Henri Delauze was a current member of OMEX's board of directors. He was only off by two years.]
DOC (5/22/07): "In other news my intel net is giving me tentative confirmation that this recovery represents more than one wreck. At this point I wonder if we can sift the English from the Spanish. Of course, had this been done with trained and accredited archaeologists we wouldn't be in this mess."
[Doc has an "intel net"? Their info wasn't very good, obviously. We're shocked.]
DOC (5/24/07): "Members,I suspect that OMR may possibly have raided a Spanish treasure ship in the Med and one or more Treasure Ships within the EEZ of the UK. There simply wasn't enough time for archaeology, much less the recovery recorded to date. I suspect that the play will move more swiftly as the various government agencies have been brought into the melee. I am quite sure that OMR has outsmarted themselves once again."
[We're quite sure we know who outsmarted themselves in this post. Once again.]
Solomon (5/25/07): "We know that the legal authorities of three nations at least are now investigating OMR. We assist in this as we can and as we have throughout. I have no good reason to believe the spin put by OMR on its latest news. I do not accept it as fact that these treasures have come from any one shipwreck, or that it came from near British waters, or that OMR even conducted the salvage. For all I know, others vacuumed a variety of sites on behalf of OMR. The value of OMR stock has plummeted. Insiders have been selling. The message is plain. As far as I am concerned, our work in public is now done."
[Oh if only this had been true!]
Gollum (5/25/07): "Great Work! I'll be interested in seeing what new news comes out in the next few days, and what OMR's Stock does accordingly. When the storm hits, I will take delight on all those idiots on Yahoo Forums who have denegrated [sic] Doc and History Hunters. I hope their losses will not be small! Can you say: 'Schadenfreude?'"
[Well, isn't that sweet?]
Doc (5/25/07): "No one seems to be addressing the fact that no archaeology was done by OMR. How does one recover and conserve 500,000 coins in less than two weeks, much less stop at the store and buy that many buckets and partially fill them? You simply don't. The only possible answer, which may be of some interest to the SEC, is that the recovery was made at some time in the past. Just how far in the past as regards SEC filings and share trading is the crucial point with regard to fraud. Without a good general knowledge of the protocols of the science the Public has swallowed the tale as the truth. In fact, it simply isn't possible."
Solomon (6/30/07): "Proponents of OMR paid hackers to attack this site from Christmas Eve and for the following two months. We tracked down many of them, some of whom were using mobile phones to try and avoid being located in the real world. We located even these....I am no longer surprised at the depths to which OMR proponents sink."
[Note that no evidence whatsoever is provided to back up Solomon's certainty that Odyssey or its supporters were behind HH web attacks. And considering HH still can't fix the current IE glitch on their site, what's to rule out they didn't hose it site themselves?]
Solomon (7/2/07): "Reading the rollcall above of honoured members of History Hunters and recalling the names of other members who have also played a part, I am very proud. We have nailed our Colours to the mast and I am beginning to have confidence that we will eventually nail the bad guys to the floor. Three Cheers!"
[Solomon is fond of getting nailed metaphors. Insert joke here.]
Sovereign (7/8/07): "Odyssey Marine and its supporters have been attacking - often personally and viciously - the character of Claudio Bonifacio. Their motive is obvious: he found the Mercedes in Portuguese waters. Anyone doubting this should consider that the main television channel of Portugal sent out two divers and filmed it."
[You mean the same Claudio Bonifacio who was arrested by Spanish authorities for violating cultural patrimony laws? Yeah, we know that guy. Sure.]
Sovereign (7/12/07): "The truth begins to appear. This is a noteworthy piece that seems to offer strong confirmation of the suspicions of History Hunters...This is exactly where we have argued that she is, based on the permit to survey issued by Portugal to Claudio Bonifacio, the RTP documentary and the permit application by Subsea. We have other, reliable evidence for this. It explains, as mentioned above, the attacks on Bonifacio, and quite possibly his arrest and the seizure of his research papers...Equally certain is that the enormous explosion that destroyed the ship spread the wreckage over a wide area - say 2 km, part of which are in internmational [sic] waters - and that the coins sank straight to the seabed, in Portuguese waters."
Administration (7/12/07): "Yahoo promoters have written there that nobody important reads those posts. No doubt they would like to believe this, for their posts are often complete garbage, designed to deter detractors. Perhaps also, they are ashamed of their own posts, as they are often childish, generally dishonest and in UK law at least, often actionable in law. Nobody should be under the misapprehension that their words exist in only some sort of juvenille [sic] playground, or that they are anonymous."
[Too bad Doc didn't heed his Admin's advice; it may have spared him a lawsuit and a court trial. We'd also like to note that regardless of whether "important people"read OMEX's Yahoo site, we seriously doubt anyone takes seriously or acts on information available there. To suggest that NATO, the U.S. State Department, or the Spanish government read and act on the anonymous posts at Yahoo is not only deeply naive, but profoundly stupid.]
Solomon (7/12/07): [Regarding the UK's official protest over Spain's illegal seizure of the Odyssey ship, the Alert] "Does the British government really understand what has been happening here? Arrested? This was not my understanding of what happened this morning, which was that the Alert was invited, probably along the lines of "you are invited to help with our enquiries". Now they are in Spain, of course, it is a different matter. A dios, chums. I wonder if the Alert has the same bunch of kids on board as when they sailed towards Portugal? If I were to follow the same blithering nonsense of Morris, posting in Yahoo, I could now call the bunch of them criminals. But I am neither that previous [sic], not [sic] that stoopid [sic]. I can wait. P.S. Are we sure that the above vessel isn't a trawler?"
[Yes, that's right, the Alert was politely "invited" by armed Spanish Naval vessels pointing weapons at it. And we suppose the captain's arrest was merely to give him a place to rest. By the way, the trawler reference picks up on the frequently mentioned, less-than-subtle suggestion by some HH posters that Odyssey picked up the BS coins by a trawling net. Oh sure.]
Solomon (7/14/07): [In reference to HH's initiating a "project" to assist all those parties, including several governments, fighting Odyssey over the BS] "I should mention that as this preliminary stage is now complete and I have no experience in maritime archaeology, marine surveying, maritime law, marine salvage or any other aspect of this project, I am now taking a step back. Doc has pleanty [sic] of experience in all these matters and a much clearer idea how this project should be managed. Further, there are other, major projects on land which demand my attention."
DOC (7/14/07): "Solomon, I will give this my very best effort. I do hope that this comes together as we have envisioned in the future. As you have stated, and I will repeat, HHI has major projects already underway that represent critical investments of both time and money that we must see thru to completion. If we are given the nod by the governments that are involved in the "Mercedes" case we will assemble our team of professionals and give them free rein and all the support we can muster."
[We assume HH's grandiose plan to assemble an anti-Odyssey "Dream Team" (led, ahem, by Doc) to inject itself in the middle of the BS proceeding had no takers. Again, we're shocked.]
So there you have it, a "best of HH" featuring wild speculations, paranoia, delusions of grandeur, and unadulterated ignorance.
Stay tuned, we're just getting warmed up here, folks.
UPDATE: Unlike HH, we strive to be fair and accurate. Since this older post mentions that HH hadn't yet been able to fix the IE glitch on their site, we can now report that that problem apparently has been fixed. At least, we're not having any difficulties getting in any longer with our IE Browser. Now, let's see how long it takes them to ban our IP address, which has been a chronic complaint of our readers. (5/28/08)
Your karma is showing...
It's amazing what you can discover when you start taking a closer look at seemingly innocuous details (turning over the rock, as it were). For example, we noticed the following this morning: HH moderators have their own unique identifier box. Here are Solomon's and our good buddy Doc's:
Note that Doc has posted more than three times that of Solomon. Is it any surprise, then, about the copious garbage he's strewn all over Yahoo? Doc makes the classic mistake of assuming quantity equals quality (though the frequent use of "germane" just makes you smarter, apparently). We especially love the "karma" rating. Solomon has nearly double that of Doc's. We speculate this is the result of Doc's nefarious actions that led to his Odyssey libel suit and his penchant for calling people (old friends to boot) "pedophiles" over on Yahoo.
We conclude by pointing out that both karma ratings are pretty darned low for folks claiming a "grand moral vision," but, we see how many are buying into that nonsense.
We conclude by pointing out that both karma ratings are pretty darned low for folks claiming a "grand moral vision," but, we see how many are buying into that nonsense.
Friday, April 25, 2008
Tic Toc...Doc!
Our good friends who post over at Yahoo already beat HH Watch to this, but we think it's a hoot and worth posting here as well.
Yesterday we called out Doc's bogus claim that Henri Delauze is a current member of Odyssey's board of directors. This error, which was only off by two years, was punctuated by Doc's arrogantly snorting that this was a "matter of public record" (as if he actually checked, which he clearly did not). Yet it was only this afternoon that he finally corrected it and the manner in which he did it is very revealing about HH and their tactics. [Please note the differences in text highlighted red.] Here's Doc's original post:
So, whether it's who is currently on OMEX's board of directors (surely one of the easiest things to check online), the depth at which the Black Swan was found (also easily located in online court filings and press releases), or the spinning of fantastical conspiracy theories that have no basis in reality, the output generated by HH is thoroughly questionable. We recommend you consume it at your own risk.
To conclude, this is who we're dealing with. And we suspect it's why we're already up to nearly 800 hits in just a couple of days of existence. Those interested in Odyssey, and the many fascinating issues swirling around it, are demanding accountability from the history poseurs. And, if they refuse to meet the responsibility, we're more than happy to do it for them. Whether they like it or not.
Yesterday we called out Doc's bogus claim that Henri Delauze is a current member of Odyssey's board of directors. This error, which was only off by two years, was punctuated by Doc's arrogantly snorting that this was a "matter of public record" (as if he actually checked, which he clearly did not). Yet it was only this afternoon that he finally corrected it and the manner in which he did it is very revealing about HH and their tactics. [Please note the differences in text highlighted red.] Here's Doc's original post:
Scribe, As I recall a principal in the British company that attempted that recovery of the Mercedes worked with Comex for many years. Just in case anyone has forgotten Henri Delauze of COMEX sits on the Board of OMR, it is a matter of public record, since shortly after his vessel and ROV were used by Gregg Stemm to film the alleged HMS Sussex.Here's Doc's new post, with nary a mention that he was off by two years in his original claim:
As I recall a principal in the British company that attempted that recovery of the Mercedes worked with Comex for many years. Just in case anyone has forgotten Henri Delauze of COMEX used to sit on the Board of OMR, it is a matter of public record, since shortly after his vessel and ROV were used by Gregg Stemm to film the alleged HMS Sussex. Although he has since left it is still germane.Intellectually dishonest? Unethical? Would this practice be rebuked by the academic community? We certainly think so. (By the way, there's that word "germane" again; Doc must feel smarter every time he types it.) This also demonstrates a pattern of shoddy, sloppy, amateur research and a willingness to bend the "facts" (that's a nice way of saying "lie") to satisfy the HH agenda. In other words, we have a bunch of amateurs masquerading as dismissive academics (hilarious to watch, is it not?) who can't even manage the basics.
So, whether it's who is currently on OMEX's board of directors (surely one of the easiest things to check online), the depth at which the Black Swan was found (also easily located in online court filings and press releases), or the spinning of fantastical conspiracy theories that have no basis in reality, the output generated by HH is thoroughly questionable. We recommend you consume it at your own risk.
To conclude, this is who we're dealing with. And we suspect it's why we're already up to nearly 800 hits in just a couple of days of existence. Those interested in Odyssey, and the many fascinating issues swirling around it, are demanding accountability from the history poseurs. And, if they refuse to meet the responsibility, we're more than happy to do it for them. Whether they like it or not.
Doc around the clock
One of our readers reports that Doc failed to show up at his court appearance yesterday in Tampa for his Odyssey libel case. The judge threw out Doc's request for the case to be dismissed and he agreed with Odyssey and mandated Doc obey the court to submit his legal filings to both the court and Odyssey.
We assume this means Doc's high-falutin prediction that the FBI and Attorney General's office would get intimately involved and have his case thrown out fell through. (We're stunned.)
Doc's behavior throughout this process reminds us of a Heinrich Heine quote: "Ordinarily he was insane, but he had lucid moments when he was merely stupid."
We assume this means Doc's high-falutin prediction that the FBI and Attorney General's office would get intimately involved and have his case thrown out fell through. (We're stunned.)
Doc's behavior throughout this process reminds us of a Heinrich Heine quote: "Ordinarily he was insane, but he had lucid moments when he was merely stupid."
An Odious Agenda
It's cheap but amusing entertainment watching the HH clan fall over themselves trying to determine where the Mercedes actually went down. Their consensus appears to be that it was not any where near where Odyssey said it found the Black Swan treasure.
The irony in this, of course, and it apparently escapes the history poseurs, is that this would actually confirm why Odyssey told the court it cannot definitively say the treasure and artifacts archaeologically recovered are from the Mercedes.
Now, if they are implying, and we think they are, that Odyssey is openly lying about where they found the treasure, then the HH folks are even more paranoid and conspiratorially minded than we ever imagined possible. Why they think Odyssey would gamble lying to the court about anything related to the find, especially since the ships' data is all electronically captured and available, is beyond our comprehension.
Also, in a post about the apparent large gap between the coins on the manifest and what Odyssey actually recovered (cue mysterious music), Solomon writes:
Second, Odyssey only operated for six days? [Loud buzzer noise.] Try again, Solomon. Odyssey worked for weeks on the Black Swan recovery. In fact, the last time they worked the site they were out for nearly three weeks. Once again, HH won't let the facts get in the way of a good smear.
Lastly, note the clear undertone of accusation regarding Odyssey's explanation for the Black Swan recovery (apparently the HH clan fails to realize there's a lot they don't know about how Odyssey operated during this time, nor is it their business), punctuated by cheap shot innuendo that if only the "contractors" were questioned "under oath" the truth would come out. Again, no evidence or reasonable information is provided to support this line of scummy reasoning. Nope, it's merely driven by HH's fundamental belief that Odyssey is lying about everything and they're on to it.
That is not history, nor the pursuit of the truth, but an obvious and odious agenda.
The irony in this, of course, and it apparently escapes the history poseurs, is that this would actually confirm why Odyssey told the court it cannot definitively say the treasure and artifacts archaeologically recovered are from the Mercedes.
Now, if they are implying, and we think they are, that Odyssey is openly lying about where they found the treasure, then the HH folks are even more paranoid and conspiratorially minded than we ever imagined possible. Why they think Odyssey would gamble lying to the court about anything related to the find, especially since the ships' data is all electronically captured and available, is beyond our comprehension.
Also, in a post about the apparent large gap between the coins on the manifest and what Odyssey actually recovered (cue mysterious music), Solomon writes:
Some may have been looted by the same British scuba divers I know visited the site earlier, though I do not have detail specific to that aspect. If so, then I doubt the number of coins stolen was particularly large. The question therefore arises: why did not OMR take all that was there? The duration of the OMR salvage operation was six days. Why did they stop, leave the site and eventually return to Gibraltar? If asked under oath, how would the contractors to OMR answer?First of all, scuba divers? At 1,100 meters (3,608 feet)? Really? Interesting.
Second, Odyssey only operated for six days? [Loud buzzer noise.] Try again, Solomon. Odyssey worked for weeks on the Black Swan recovery. In fact, the last time they worked the site they were out for nearly three weeks. Once again, HH won't let the facts get in the way of a good smear.
Lastly, note the clear undertone of accusation regarding Odyssey's explanation for the Black Swan recovery (apparently the HH clan fails to realize there's a lot they don't know about how Odyssey operated during this time, nor is it their business), punctuated by cheap shot innuendo that if only the "contractors" were questioned "under oath" the truth would come out. Again, no evidence or reasonable information is provided to support this line of scummy reasoning. Nope, it's merely driven by HH's fundamental belief that Odyssey is lying about everything and they're on to it.
That is not history, nor the pursuit of the truth, but an obvious and odious agenda.
What are they afraid of?
It's come to our attention from a few of our readers that they've had recent difficulty accessing the HH website. Their access has apparently been blocked by the HH nitwit-eratti.
What are the history poseurs so afraid of that they have to go to the extreme extent to block the IP addresses of those who merely want to read what they're posting (these readers are not HH members nor are they interested in posting information or comments...which would only be removed anyway)? Is it because of the number of times Yahoo readers have caught the HH clowns making basic mistakes with simple information?
We think so. They simply can't handle or abide accountability.
In our opinion, this is a most revealing tactic from a group who claims to embrace the importance of history, truth and the pursuit of knowledge. In fact, their behavior is more in line with communist bureaucrats. We're reminded of the government office in the former Soviet Union who did nothing but erase traces of those who had fallen out of favor with leadership, including air-brushing people out of photographs and destroying all historical references to them.
HH is no different. In fact, on their website they've openly admitted to purging hundreds of members to try to eliminate people they consider enemies. Yet they never tire of attacking Odyssey for supposed secrecy, distortions and silencing of critics. Rich irony, eh?
We also note that, despite being corrected by both this website and members of Yahoo, Doc has still not amended or taken down his posting of clearly incorrect information regarding the current composition of Odyssey's board of directors. Once again demonstrating that HH has no problem manufacturing "truths" to suit their agenda.
The "grand moral vision" in play, we suppose.
What are the history poseurs so afraid of that they have to go to the extreme extent to block the IP addresses of those who merely want to read what they're posting (these readers are not HH members nor are they interested in posting information or comments...which would only be removed anyway)? Is it because of the number of times Yahoo readers have caught the HH clowns making basic mistakes with simple information?
We think so. They simply can't handle or abide accountability.
In our opinion, this is a most revealing tactic from a group who claims to embrace the importance of history, truth and the pursuit of knowledge. In fact, their behavior is more in line with communist bureaucrats. We're reminded of the government office in the former Soviet Union who did nothing but erase traces of those who had fallen out of favor with leadership, including air-brushing people out of photographs and destroying all historical references to them.
HH is no different. In fact, on their website they've openly admitted to purging hundreds of members to try to eliminate people they consider enemies. Yet they never tire of attacking Odyssey for supposed secrecy, distortions and silencing of critics. Rich irony, eh?
We also note that, despite being corrected by both this website and members of Yahoo, Doc has still not amended or taken down his posting of clearly incorrect information regarding the current composition of Odyssey's board of directors. Once again demonstrating that HH has no problem manufacturing "truths" to suit their agenda.
The "grand moral vision" in play, we suppose.
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Credentials? Who wants to know?
One of our kind readers sent us this picture with a caption taken from an older version of the HH website. The reader questions whether Solomon has the proper credentials to refer to himself as a "historian and archaeologist" (note the absence of the key qualifier "amateur"). Considering that Solomon and his HH colleagues relentlessly question and criticize the credentials of Odyssey's staff archaeologists and historical researchers, we think this a completely legitimate question.
To our understanding, Solomon is an ex-TV producer. Of course, if he would like to send us his CV to counter our skepticism, or prove us wrong, we'd be happy to publish his credentials and humbly recant.
To our understanding, Solomon is an ex-TV producer. Of course, if he would like to send us his CV to counter our skepticism, or prove us wrong, we'd be happy to publish his credentials and humbly recant.
(Note we erased Solomon's real name, because, well, we're just nice like that.)
However, since we're a whore for polls, we must point out that, as of now, the numbers overwhelmingly confirm that Solomon is indeed one goofy-looking fellow. We mean that in the nicest way, of course.
UPDATE: One of our readers just suggested we run a caption-writing contest for the above picture of Solomon. And since the photo obviously lends itself well to that sort of thing, we think this is a boffo idea. Submit your captions now and the winner will win their very own "trailer trash" t-shirt chosen by the HH folks to represent HH Watch. Have fun with it!
There he goes again....
It's pretty amazing Doc has the gall to use the handle "nauticalresearcher." The guy rarely gets things right, and just this evening he's provided yet another example of his sheer incompetence to even get basic information correct.
Over at HH, Doc posted:
Seriously Doc, if you can't even get the basic facts right, why should anyone listen to or take you seriously about the more complicated stuff? We're sure your HH pals will be impressed; then again, perhaps they'll realize why the "history poseurs" label is beginning to stick.
Over at HH, Doc posted:
Breaking news alert for you, Doc -- Delauze hasn't served on Odyssey's board of directors for over two years. And while we would never deem it appropriate to give such basic pointers to someone with the lofty title of "nautical researcher," we must point out that you could have easily determined this by merely visiting the company's corporate website. Regardless, you've once again given us a hearty laugh and that is definitely a matter of public record.Scribe, As I recall a principal in the British company that attempted that recovery of the Mercedes worked with Comex for many years. Just in case anyone has forgotten Henri Delauze of COMEX sits on the Board of OMR, it is a matter of public record, since shortly after his vessel and ROV were used by Gregg Stemm to film the alleged HMS Sussex.
Seriously Doc, if you can't even get the basic facts right, why should anyone listen to or take you seriously about the more complicated stuff? We're sure your HH pals will be impressed; then again, perhaps they'll realize why the "history poseurs" label is beginning to stick.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Yes we can
This blog is less than 48 hours old and we've already received nearly 500 hits. We think we're on to something, and we suspect it has to do with people wanting HH held to at least some degree of accountability for their words and actions against Odyssey. We also wouldn't rule out that the history poseurs' Stalinist tactics, their stifling of dissent and inability to accept criticism, and their complete intolerance toward those who disagree with them, have also created a large pool of enemies and detractors.
Regardless, we're thrilled with the interest and will strive to maintain it. Again, please continue to send in your ideas and suggestions -- we've already received some fantastic material. And if you would like to submit something about HH and Odyssey (or anything, really), please do. We can attribute it to you, or not, whichever your preference.
Keep reading! Thanks.
Regardless, we're thrilled with the interest and will strive to maintain it. Again, please continue to send in your ideas and suggestions -- we've already received some fantastic material. And if you would like to submit something about HH and Odyssey (or anything, really), please do. We can attribute it to you, or not, whichever your preference.
Keep reading! Thanks.
Legalese Laughs
This was the final HH Watch post deleted from Yahoo. Enjoy.
The HH interpretation of Odyssey's interrogatories has begun in earnest, with much comedic effect. The players are "SatDiver" ("smithvi," "gldn_flz," "beavus_chryst,"), nauticalresearch" ("Doc"), and that brilliant legal mind (and ex-TV producer) "Solomon."
SatDiver: "In general, the expectation when asked to provide an interrogatory answer is to provide a specific answer to the question, and all of the information that you have regarding the question. Answers are to be responsive, complete, and not evasive in any way."
Simple translation: Stating the obvious is apparently not enough, wordiness also counts for points. What the long-winded SatDiver is clearly implying is Odyssey evaded answers. And with that, let the HH mutual admiration society come to order:
Solomon: "Thank you, satdiver, for your elucidation. The interrogatories do not appear to be satisfactory to my untutored eye. Assuming OMR has data for the shipwreck and the candidates for its identity, perhaps a maritime archaeologist would have been best employed in composing the responses. This case seems to be testing the patience of the Judge, going by his increasingly frosty responses to OMR. How sternly he deals with Stemm will be interesting. Personally, I do not see this case proceeding much further. Will we see OMR continuing to fail in meeting the basic requirements? Or can a leopard change its spots?"
Translation: Ex-TV man admits he doesn't know much about legal interrogatories, but that doesn't stop him from saying these just won't do. "Increasingly frosty" reactions by the judge? Apparently Solomon hasn't read all the court documents and transcripts, for if he had, he would have noted the snarky, highly amusing comments directed at James Goold by the judge early on in the case.
SatDiver: "Certain aspects speak volumes in these issues. Don't know, is not just, don't know....but don't know, including the definition of dont know, with a specific explanation as to why you don't know…. 'Potential' identification, can be just that, and submitted as such, with supporting evidence as to the hypothesis. There can be virtually no harm with a potential identification, IF properly documented."
Translation: We apologize, but this is un-translatable. It appears the excited, highly agitated atmosphere of mutual agreement reduced "SatDiver" to pure gibberish. But even that couldn't stop Doc from positing an unsolicited opinion:
Doc: "In my opinion the interrogatories noted raise more questions than the Admiralty arrest in the case of the Black Swan, Viz; Mr Stemm thinks it might be the Mercedes but he is uncertain because history and research demonstrates that vessel is in another location??? Mr Stemm thinks it might be a 'Pirate Vessel?' (from the same time period the artifacts) that his company has researched? There are a few things that the resources of history have taught us; The Mercedes was not lost 100 miles or even 200 miles West of the Straits of Gibraltar. The Mercedes was a sovereign vessel in the service of the Kingdom of Spain. The Mercedes was sunk within the Territorial Seas of Portugal. Others have attempted recovery of this 19th Century loss and been refused permission. The cargo consists of property of the Kingdom of Spain and one of his subjects. The artifacts themselves tell a story of their origin and ownership that cannot be refuted."
Translation: Besides demonstrating ignorance of the proper use of semi-colons and colons, "Doc" offers up a laundry list of definitive conclusions about the BS without one shred of historical evidence. No surprise there, of course.
UPDATE: Several readers wrote in to say they would be most interested in seeing some definitive historical evidence posted by HH to back-up their assertion that the Mercedes was a Spanish sovereign warship. And indeed, we looked for that as well on their website and there's nary a shred of evidence, nor a convincing original historical document, posted. Guess they just want us to take their word for it.
The HH interpretation of Odyssey's interrogatories has begun in earnest, with much comedic effect. The players are "SatDiver" ("smithvi," "gldn_flz," "beavus_chryst,"), nauticalresearch" ("Doc"), and that brilliant legal mind (and ex-TV producer) "Solomon."
SatDiver: "In general, the expectation when asked to provide an interrogatory answer is to provide a specific answer to the question, and all of the information that you have regarding the question. Answers are to be responsive, complete, and not evasive in any way."
Simple translation: Stating the obvious is apparently not enough, wordiness also counts for points. What the long-winded SatDiver is clearly implying is Odyssey evaded answers. And with that, let the HH mutual admiration society come to order:
Solomon: "Thank you, satdiver, for your elucidation. The interrogatories do not appear to be satisfactory to my untutored eye. Assuming OMR has data for the shipwreck and the candidates for its identity, perhaps a maritime archaeologist would have been best employed in composing the responses. This case seems to be testing the patience of the Judge, going by his increasingly frosty responses to OMR. How sternly he deals with Stemm will be interesting. Personally, I do not see this case proceeding much further. Will we see OMR continuing to fail in meeting the basic requirements? Or can a leopard change its spots?"
Translation: Ex-TV man admits he doesn't know much about legal interrogatories, but that doesn't stop him from saying these just won't do. "Increasingly frosty" reactions by the judge? Apparently Solomon hasn't read all the court documents and transcripts, for if he had, he would have noted the snarky, highly amusing comments directed at James Goold by the judge early on in the case.
SatDiver: "Certain aspects speak volumes in these issues. Don't know, is not just, don't know....but don't know, including the definition of dont know, with a specific explanation as to why you don't know…. 'Potential' identification, can be just that, and submitted as such, with supporting evidence as to the hypothesis. There can be virtually no harm with a potential identification, IF properly documented."
Translation: We apologize, but this is un-translatable. It appears the excited, highly agitated atmosphere of mutual agreement reduced "SatDiver" to pure gibberish. But even that couldn't stop Doc from positing an unsolicited opinion:
Doc: "In my opinion the interrogatories noted raise more questions than the Admiralty arrest in the case of the Black Swan, Viz; Mr Stemm thinks it might be the Mercedes but he is uncertain because history and research demonstrates that vessel is in another location??? Mr Stemm thinks it might be a 'Pirate Vessel?' (from the same time period the artifacts) that his company has researched? There are a few things that the resources of history have taught us; The Mercedes was not lost 100 miles or even 200 miles West of the Straits of Gibraltar. The Mercedes was a sovereign vessel in the service of the Kingdom of Spain. The Mercedes was sunk within the Territorial Seas of Portugal. Others have attempted recovery of this 19th Century loss and been refused permission. The cargo consists of property of the Kingdom of Spain and one of his subjects. The artifacts themselves tell a story of their origin and ownership that cannot be refuted."
Translation: Besides demonstrating ignorance of the proper use of semi-colons and colons, "Doc" offers up a laundry list of definitive conclusions about the BS without one shred of historical evidence. No surprise there, of course.
UPDATE: Several readers wrote in to say they would be most interested in seeing some definitive historical evidence posted by HH to back-up their assertion that the Mercedes was a Spanish sovereign warship. And indeed, we looked for that as well on their website and there's nary a shred of evidence, nor a convincing original historical document, posted. Guess they just want us to take their word for it.
Diving Doc: How low can he go?
Of all the history poseurs, Doc, or "nauticalresearch," easily generates the most contempt and loathing of those who oppose HH and their anti-Odyssey campaign.Why? Well, go to Yahoo and read his literally thousands of pointless posts. He's repetitive, sloppy, contradictory, illogical, libelous, crude and just flat out stupid (did we forget anything?). He apparently thinks the chronic use of the word "germane" qualifies him as an intellectual. And, while his history poseur brethren for the most part keep their skepticism about and hatred toward Odyssey confined to the HH website, Doc has posted nearly 24/7 for almost two years in an obvious attempt to discredit and harm the share price of Odyssey (to little effect, we'd observe).
For these "noble" efforts, Doc finds himself in a court of law, with a hearing scheduled for tomorrow, in fact.
In addition to this stellar background, Doc has had several virtual online meltdowns that appear to have been the result of, hmmm, how shall we say, 'the mass consumption of adult beverages'? (HH Watch has received first-hand accounts of Doc's excessive tippling and subsequent angry, bitter rants to all those around him.) This resulted in several hilarious exchanges in which he accused Jeff and others of controlling the Yahoo board (we know better than that, don't we?) by eliminating and altering his posts, and he threatened others and accused a couple of Yahoo posters of being "pedophiles."
In other words, the guy's an absolute peach and a wonderful representative of the HH posse. (Though, to be fair, we're certain there must be some who are embarrassed by Doc's actions and his libel lawsuit, and we've speculated this may also explain Solomon's occasional rebukes of and bitchiness toward Doc).
For your reading pleasure, then, we've assembled a couple of publicly available court documents related to Doc's ongoing libel lawsuit brought against him by Odyssey. So, now you can judge for yourself the limits of Doc's intelligence and good sense. Happy reading!
Odyssey Complaint
Doc Response (3/5/08)
Docket History
News article about Lawsuit
UPDATE: One of our readers suggested we add "thin-skinned" to the list of Doc adjectives. We concur.
A "grand moral vision"
This is another post that was deleted by Yahoo. In it, we shared our thoughts about the history poseurs proclamation of a new and “grand moral vision” for themselves in their mad quest against Odyssey. Enjoy.
It’s interesting Doc and Solomon suggest they only had a passing interest in Odyssey and would have simply moved on if they hadn’t been “attacked” first. Of course, no explanation or evidence is provided about how they were attacked, or by whom.
This goes against the actual *history* of their dealings with Odyssey on their website, and on the Yahoo board. (And, as many have shown here before, it’s ironically the history of their own words that have shown the history poseurs to be distorters, liars and hypocrites.) They’ve been openly hostile to the company since day one – so hostile, in fact, that co-founder Doc finds himself in a courtroom battling libel charges, despite his suggestions that the case would be quickly dismissed with the assistance of the FBI and Attorney General's office. Right.
Let's go to the tape:
Solomon: "If you know anything about History Hunters, we look to reasoned argument based on evidential reasoning. That is, reason and evidence. Provide an argument without supporting evidence, or worse yet, tell lies, and you will at least pique my curiosity. Attack us for this and suffer the consequences."
This arrogant, sniffling, self-important statement perfectly captures the delusional, True Believer nature of the HH folks. Reasoned argument? HH doesn’t allow argument! Post an alternative opinion about Odyssey, no matter how mild its dissent, and watch how fast it disappears from the HH website. But that’s not all, the person's login will be deleted and their IP address banned. How’s that that for “reasoned argument” and "grand moral vision"?
We're also left incredulous by Solomon's claims that the “sheer hatred” directed at Spain by Yahoo posters will practically bring the civilized world to an end. Have there been some nasty comments about Spain on the Yahoo board, and has some of it been over the line? No question, but so what? To suggest that the comments of a bunch of anonymous people posting on an obscure Yahoo financial board is equivalent to Randolph William Hearst and his newspaper's efforts to stir up hatred for a country long ago, is not only incredibly ignorant about history, but also completely lacking in historical perspective. Actually, we’d rank it up there with histrionic, drama queenery at its finest.
To suggest these faceless Yahoo posts “threatens foreign policy,” relations with NATO (a “forced clash”?), and hostility between the Spanish and American people is nothing more than pure, unadulterated stupidity.
Finally, we think the fact that “Solomon” and Doc define their viewpoints as a “grand moral vision,” whereas they label critics of HH and Odyssey supporters as “evil,” says it all. It perfectly demonstrates the simplistic world view of people completely incapable of nuance, perspective, historical knowledge and understanding.
UPDATE: Doc has a date in his libel case in a Tampa courtroom tomorrow, April 24, 2008. Will he show? Will the FBI be present? Stay tuned.
It’s interesting Doc and Solomon suggest they only had a passing interest in Odyssey and would have simply moved on if they hadn’t been “attacked” first. Of course, no explanation or evidence is provided about how they were attacked, or by whom.
This goes against the actual *history* of their dealings with Odyssey on their website, and on the Yahoo board. (And, as many have shown here before, it’s ironically the history of their own words that have shown the history poseurs to be distorters, liars and hypocrites.) They’ve been openly hostile to the company since day one – so hostile, in fact, that co-founder Doc finds himself in a courtroom battling libel charges, despite his suggestions that the case would be quickly dismissed with the assistance of the FBI and Attorney General's office. Right.
Let's go to the tape:
Solomon: "If you know anything about History Hunters, we look to reasoned argument based on evidential reasoning. That is, reason and evidence. Provide an argument without supporting evidence, or worse yet, tell lies, and you will at least pique my curiosity. Attack us for this and suffer the consequences."
This arrogant, sniffling, self-important statement perfectly captures the delusional, True Believer nature of the HH folks. Reasoned argument? HH doesn’t allow argument! Post an alternative opinion about Odyssey, no matter how mild its dissent, and watch how fast it disappears from the HH website. But that’s not all, the person's login will be deleted and their IP address banned. How’s that that for “reasoned argument” and "grand moral vision"?
We're also left incredulous by Solomon's claims that the “sheer hatred” directed at Spain by Yahoo posters will practically bring the civilized world to an end. Have there been some nasty comments about Spain on the Yahoo board, and has some of it been over the line? No question, but so what? To suggest that the comments of a bunch of anonymous people posting on an obscure Yahoo financial board is equivalent to Randolph William Hearst and his newspaper's efforts to stir up hatred for a country long ago, is not only incredibly ignorant about history, but also completely lacking in historical perspective. Actually, we’d rank it up there with histrionic, drama queenery at its finest.
To suggest these faceless Yahoo posts “threatens foreign policy,” relations with NATO (a “forced clash”?), and hostility between the Spanish and American people is nothing more than pure, unadulterated stupidity.
Finally, we think the fact that “Solomon” and Doc define their viewpoints as a “grand moral vision,” whereas they label critics of HH and Odyssey supporters as “evil,” says it all. It perfectly demonstrates the simplistic world view of people completely incapable of nuance, perspective, historical knowledge and understanding.
UPDATE: Doc has a date in his libel case in a Tampa courtroom tomorrow, April 24, 2008. Will he show? Will the FBI be present? Stay tuned.
A thin line between love and hate
This is the first post that was deleted by Yahoo, which tells me it hit a major nerve over at history poseur central. In this post, we examined the strained, rather bitchy relationship between Solomon and Doc that shows up occasionally on HH.
In these exchanges, Solomon calls out Doc for his repetitive postings, over reliance on secondary sources, lack of original thought, and finally, failing to take responsibility for a rather provocative charge he makes against Odyssey but then quickly recants.
Solomon: "Doc, Thank you for providing all those online references. It appears to be the same list as you posted earlier to this thread. Anyway, I prefer to go to the original sources, than rely on opinion, no matter how distinguished. Do you know if any of these contain such source material? You are right, I think, to point out that on the web are two different stories for the Merchant Royal. In one, the emphasis is on her captain and his personal wealth, and it hints at pirated treasure. I do not accept the integrity of this tale and suspect that it was planted, much as some try to manipulate the stock market with gossip. I would look further into it, except that I do not believe that the Merchant Royal is relevant to anything current. That may change as we move into summer.
Gossip manipulating the stock market? Now whatever could he be talking about here? Odyssey?
Doc: "Solomon, I agree, as you suggest we should perhaps wait for the moment until the Merchant Royal comes to the front of the class."
Solomon: "Doc, You may misunderstand me: I have no reason to believe that the Merchant Royal has been found - do you? On that basis, waiting is not the issue, but rather if it is found at some future point."
Doc: "Solomon, I quite agree that the Merchant Royal hasn't been found. I do however object to the corruption of History."
Yes, the corruption of history, something HH knows all about. See how Solomon baits and then turns the fangs on Doc? Interesting dynamic, no?
On another day:
Solomon: "Doc, the recovered ingots will have their identifying marks. Regarding the piece you quoted, the part that matters, I think, is just this: 'in November 2006 Odyssey offered direct participation in the recovery of the treasure' ... How does OMR invite Spain to join this venture without also mentioning the target and location?"
Doc: "Solomon, I have not the faintest clue but to the best of my knowledge Spain refused and has specifically stated that none of their ships could be salvaged without their permission."
Now Solomon clearly becomes annoyed:
Solomon: "Doc, there is no 'but', for these are two separate issues. The one I was addressing, to which you have not the faintest clue, was this quote posted by you: 'in November 2006 Odyssey offered direct participation in the recovery of the treasure.' You surely posted this for a reason and therefore do have some clue as to its import. You have my interpretation."
Well now! I believe someone just got a dressing down. Doc?
Doc: "Solomon, Sorry if I replied too quickly. Yes, two separate issues. What I intended to say was that I have no idea why Odyssey would approach Spain in view of Spain's stated position with regards the recovery of any of her lost vessels. After all the friction with Spain over the Sussex, I question why the offer would even have been made unless Spain had some vested interest in this "project". The Spanish position was made crystal clear by her Counsel, James Goold, after the Juno and La Galga episode and it has been stated since in the public record as well.I have no knowledge of what was discussed by Odyssey and Spain with regards Stemm's offer of participation."
Backtrack and change the topic, a Doc speciality (as we'll see in greater depth when we later profile him).
So, all you Yahoo readers who are tired of Doc's endless non sequiturs and mindless repetitiveness, we're not the only ones who get annoyed!
In these exchanges, Solomon calls out Doc for his repetitive postings, over reliance on secondary sources, lack of original thought, and finally, failing to take responsibility for a rather provocative charge he makes against Odyssey but then quickly recants.
Solomon: "Doc, Thank you for providing all those online references. It appears to be the same list as you posted earlier to this thread. Anyway, I prefer to go to the original sources, than rely on opinion, no matter how distinguished. Do you know if any of these contain such source material? You are right, I think, to point out that on the web are two different stories for the Merchant Royal. In one, the emphasis is on her captain and his personal wealth, and it hints at pirated treasure. I do not accept the integrity of this tale and suspect that it was planted, much as some try to manipulate the stock market with gossip. I would look further into it, except that I do not believe that the Merchant Royal is relevant to anything current. That may change as we move into summer.
Gossip manipulating the stock market? Now whatever could he be talking about here? Odyssey?
Doc: "Solomon, I agree, as you suggest we should perhaps wait for the moment until the Merchant Royal comes to the front of the class."
Solomon: "Doc, You may misunderstand me: I have no reason to believe that the Merchant Royal has been found - do you? On that basis, waiting is not the issue, but rather if it is found at some future point."
Doc: "Solomon, I quite agree that the Merchant Royal hasn't been found. I do however object to the corruption of History."
Yes, the corruption of history, something HH knows all about. See how Solomon baits and then turns the fangs on Doc? Interesting dynamic, no?
On another day:
Solomon: "Doc, the recovered ingots will have their identifying marks. Regarding the piece you quoted, the part that matters, I think, is just this: 'in November 2006 Odyssey offered direct participation in the recovery of the treasure' ... How does OMR invite Spain to join this venture without also mentioning the target and location?"
Doc: "Solomon, I have not the faintest clue but to the best of my knowledge Spain refused and has specifically stated that none of their ships could be salvaged without their permission."
Now Solomon clearly becomes annoyed:
Solomon: "Doc, there is no 'but', for these are two separate issues. The one I was addressing, to which you have not the faintest clue, was this quote posted by you: 'in November 2006 Odyssey offered direct participation in the recovery of the treasure.' You surely posted this for a reason and therefore do have some clue as to its import. You have my interpretation."
Well now! I believe someone just got a dressing down. Doc?
Doc: "Solomon, Sorry if I replied too quickly. Yes, two separate issues. What I intended to say was that I have no idea why Odyssey would approach Spain in view of Spain's stated position with regards the recovery of any of her lost vessels. After all the friction with Spain over the Sussex, I question why the offer would even have been made unless Spain had some vested interest in this "project". The Spanish position was made crystal clear by her Counsel, James Goold, after the Juno and La Galga episode and it has been stated since in the public record as well.I have no knowledge of what was discussed by Odyssey and Spain with regards Stemm's offer of participation."
Backtrack and change the topic, a Doc speciality (as we'll see in greater depth when we later profile him).
So, all you Yahoo readers who are tired of Doc's endless non sequiturs and mindless repetitiveness, we're not the only ones who get annoyed!
We're on our way
Friends, we've received a terrific response so far to the "HH Watch" website. Lots of supportive emails, ideas and contributions. Please keep ‘em coming: we want this site to be fully participatory -- in other words, the exact opposite of the History Poseurs website.
As we’ve seen, HH will do anything to try to kill criticism and the questioning of their "ideas," but free speech, the open exchange of ideas, and the evisceration of HH’s lies and distortions are alive and well!
Upcoming features, which will continue to have a satirical, irreverent bent, include all the HH Watch posts gutlessly deleted by Yahoo, as well as an in-depth look at "Doc" and Odyssey's case against him, analysis of HH's Black Swan comments, and much more.
Thanks for your continued support and keep the ideas and suggestions coming!
As we’ve seen, HH will do anything to try to kill criticism and the questioning of their "ideas," but free speech, the open exchange of ideas, and the evisceration of HH’s lies and distortions are alive and well!
Upcoming features, which will continue to have a satirical, irreverent bent, include all the HH Watch posts gutlessly deleted by Yahoo, as well as an in-depth look at "Doc" and Odyssey's case against him, analysis of HH's Black Swan comments, and much more.
Thanks for your continued support and keep the ideas and suggestions coming!
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
"Do your worst and we will do our best" ~ Solomon
We're different in several key ways from the History Poseurs, but let's start with the most basic stuff. First, when you come to our site, you can immediately dive into content. No hassles, no problems.
But when you go to the HH website, you invariably end up with this welcoming message:
But when you go to the HH website, you invariably end up with this welcoming message:
This has been going on for quite some time and much hilarious banter has been posted by the HH webmaster trying to fix the problem. Members are baffled enough about it they're even asking if they have been secretly banned. (HH is known to wipe out hundreds of memberships at once to try to eliminate that one pesky dissenter who dares to read what's been publicly posted. See what we mean by Stalinist techniques?)
Ah well, must be Odyssey attacking them again.
'What's that?' you say. Oh, you haven't heard? HH told the New Yorker that Odyssey maliciously attacked their website. Of course, no evidence was provided, nor did the reporter bother to ask for it, but who needs proof when you run a site all about historical truths. Solomon poofs on about it with some frequency, as in this:
If we had found everything as reported, we would have moved on quickly to other matters. The original business plan as stated by OMR looked - on the surface at least - to be quite sound. It was the apparent contradictions between these objectives and reality that aroused our particular interest - and still do. Yes, we can now claim a grand, moral vision, but at least from my own perspective - for I have no interest in salvage and beyond yachting, little in matters maritime - our interest originally was merely to report. I would go further and say that if we had not come under attack, we would probably have just passed on by.
Try to ignore the obvious contradiction in the statement -- that HH was already questioning Odyssey's business plan but it was only after their website came "under attack" that they went nuclear -- to see what's he's really saying: Odyssey brought the HH attacks on themselves.
This is the kind of paranoid, self-delusional thinking ("grand, moral vision" indeed) that drives most of what HH posts about Odyssey.
Stay tuned, there's so much more.
P.S. As of this evening, the final of three posts we made about the history poseurs have been removed from Yahoo. A truly gutless action, and deeply disturbing, but that's what this website is all about: exposing HH lies to reveal the truth.
UPDATE: The HH webmaster has given up trying to cure the IE glitch. Now their website simply says "Best Viewed with Firefox." LOL.
You hate us, You really hate us!
Well, that sure didn't take long. Check it out: We've been given our very own banner ad on the HH website
. We're positively beaming!
We're also really grooving on the t-shirt. So much so we're thinking about making it part of our HH Watch collection.
And who knows? Maybe those HH members tired of the Stalinist bureaucratic treatment of dissent, not to mention the droning pontificating "lectures" from HH founders and true believers, will be interested in reading a different perspective every now and again. (They'll find it here, that's for sure.)
This is what's referred to as being "intellectually curious" -- not that HH founders are familiar with that concept, mind you.
Thanks for the props, boys.
P.S. One of our readers sent the following comment: "People in glass mobile homes shouldn't throw Bud bottles." Indeed.
Update: The History Poseurs have taken down our banner ad, not surprisingly. Perhaps they were surprised by the number of members clicking on it. We can't have that now can we?
. We're positively beaming!We're also really grooving on the t-shirt. So much so we're thinking about making it part of our HH Watch collection.
And who knows? Maybe those HH members tired of the Stalinist bureaucratic treatment of dissent, not to mention the droning pontificating "lectures" from HH founders and true believers, will be interested in reading a different perspective every now and again. (They'll find it here, that's for sure.)
This is what's referred to as being "intellectually curious" -- not that HH founders are familiar with that concept, mind you.
Thanks for the props, boys.
P.S. One of our readers sent the following comment: "People in glass mobile homes shouldn't throw Bud bottles." Indeed.
Update: The History Poseurs have taken down our banner ad, not surprisingly. Perhaps they were surprised by the number of members clicking on it. We can't have that now can we?
Mining Solomon's Insecurity
Perhaps our ex-TV man, "Solomon," is perturbed at being called the poster child of the goofy-looking Englishman (take a look for yourself). All we know is we're delighted he's now insecurely referring to us as "sycophantic pumpers" of OMEX (the obvious opposite of his team's moronic, baseless bashing of Odyssey). Until now he's acted above it all, but a nerve has clearly been hit. Some point soon we'll be featuring profiles of the HH nitwit-erati, but until then, you'll have to take our word that old Solomon is a crusty, rather bitchy co-founder of HH who delights in showing off his ignorance about Odyssey, while voicing his unhappiness they don't personally consult him on their private business matters.Here's his latest "masterpiece" talking, ironically enough, about Odyssey's "insecurity":
Why does a salvage company seek to arrest a shipwreck? Mainly, I think, to secure it. That is, to ensure exclusive access to the wreck site. This is what OMR wants. OMR repeatedly claims to fear looters. OMR has refused for over a year to reveal the location of their site. The company and its sycophantic pumpers claim that this secrecy helps protect the site. They are wrong. Where exactly can a potential salvor not survey and salvage? Which shipwrecks cannot be surveyed and salvaged? There can be no protection for a secret wreck in a secret location. Any salvage company finding the site would have no idea if it is supposed to be protected by the Florida court. The only protection right now is if OMR is telling the truth on depth, for scuba divers cannot reach 1100 feet. But if we are right and the Mercedes is in less than 1,100 feet, there is no protection at all. Fact is, OMR keeping secrets works against their interest. Now, why would OMR work against what would appear to be its own interest? ~ Solomon
In other words, how dare Odyssey not tell Solomon and his angry band of clowns where the BS shipwreck was found! It's worth mentioning Odyssey has been unequivocal about finding the wreck in 1,100 meters (and not "feet," as HH incorrectly states), so is Solomon calling the company liars? Once again, the obvious self-delusion that the history poseurs deserve to be kept informed about the internal operational workings of Odyssey reveals much. (By the way, Solomon, in addition to getting the depth of the BS find wrong, Odyssey's stock ticker is "OMEX," not "OMR." Do you demonstrate such laxness with historical citation?
Solomon also displays naivete and ignorance about the too common practice of "grab bucket" attempts to seize treasure from the ocean bottom. Odyssey has shown evidence of shipwrecks being grievously damaged by companies dropping indiscriminate, large metal buckets to grab whatever can be seized. This is quite the contrast to Odyssey's patient approach and sensitive archaeological processes which account for each and every artifact recovered from a shipwreck site. Of course, you'll never catch HH acknowledging these efforts, for they are contrary to their preconceived conviction that Odyssey is the devil itself and must be exorcised.
Tell you what Solomon, if secrecy is such a terrible thing when it comes to finding and excavating shipwrecks, why don't you post the coordinates of the Spanish shipwreck Doc allegedly found in the Virgin Islands. Fair play, right?
Solomon also displays naivete and ignorance about the too common practice of "grab bucket" attempts to seize treasure from the ocean bottom. Odyssey has shown evidence of shipwrecks being grievously damaged by companies dropping indiscriminate, large metal buckets to grab whatever can be seized. This is quite the contrast to Odyssey's patient approach and sensitive archaeological processes which account for each and every artifact recovered from a shipwreck site. Of course, you'll never catch HH acknowledging these efforts, for they are contrary to their preconceived conviction that Odyssey is the devil itself and must be exorcised.
Tell you what Solomon, if secrecy is such a terrible thing when it comes to finding and excavating shipwrecks, why don't you post the coordinates of the Spanish shipwreck Doc allegedly found in the Virgin Islands. Fair play, right?
Right.
UPDATE: Is Solomon goofy looking? Vote on our new online poll, located on the right, upper side of this blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)