"The Mole People" - Jennifer Toth - Documentary film?
Nymphetamine
but can find no information on it anywhere. It was on a news show,
20/20, PBS 13, etc can't remember which. I think there was a separate
follow-up show which focused mainly on interviewing Bernard, one of
the 'mole people'.
Does anyone else remember seeing these documentaries or know if they
have been released on DVD or video? I finally got around to seeing the
"Dark Days" DVD and it reminded me of this original documentary.
Thor Lancelot Simon
Nymphetamine <nymphe...@aol.com> wrote:
>I saw this documentary (to compliment the book?) in the mid-nineties
>but can find no information on it anywhere. It was on a news show,
>20/20, PBS 13, etc can't remember which. I think there was a separate
>follow-up show which focused mainly on interviewing Bernard, one of
>the 'mole people'.
Beats me. You're aware that much of the material in the book is,
essentially, fabricated?
There's at least one web page pointing out the many obvious factual
inconsistencies in the book. Personally, being rather familiar with
the territory, I don't believe Toth explored anywhere any more obscure
than the Amtrak "tunnel" (really a grade separation) under Riverside
Park.
--
Thor Lancelot Simon t...@rek.tjls.com
But as he knew no bad language, he had called him all the names of common
objects that he could think of, and had screamed: "You lamp! You towel! You
plate!" and so on. --Sigmund Freud
Nymphetamine
> Beats me. You're aware that much of the material in the book is,
> essentially, fabricated?
>
> There's at least one web page pointing out the many obvious factual
> inconsistencies in the book. Personally, being rather familiar with
> the territory, I don't believe Toth explored anywhere any more obscure
> than the Amtrak "tunnel" (really a grade separation) under Riverside
> Park.
I don't know about the book beyond the fact that it came out about the
same time as the TV doc and the same people (Bernard "Lord of the
Tunnels", Fran, Shorty, etc) are interviewed which means a) it clearly
wasn't fabricated and b) there is a connection between the book and
the doc.
What 'beats me' is why the book gets all the attention and the
documentary gets none.
Gary G. Taylor
TV doc is listed at http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0300811/ ... very cursory
listing, though, and no indication of any video release.
--
Gary G. Taylor * Rialto, CA
gary at cdfound dot org / http:// geetee dot cdfound dot org
"The two most abundant things in the universe
are hydrogen and stupidity." --Harlan Ellison
David Brodbeck
"Nymphetamine" <nymphe...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1e71a87c.03090...@posting.google.com...
>
> I don't know about the book beyond the fact that it came out about the
> same time as the TV doc and the same people (Bernard "Lord of the
> Tunnels", Fran, Shorty, etc) are interviewed which means a) it clearly
> wasn't fabricated and b) there is a connection between the book and
> the doc.
While I see your second conclusion there, I don't see how 'a' follows
Dave 'all men are Socrates' Brodbeck
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.515 / Virus Database: 313 - Release Date: 01/09/2003
Michael Wares
> essentially, fabricated?
>
> There's at least one web page pointing out the many obvious factual
http://www.columbia.edu/~brennan/abandoned/mole-people.html
Michael Wares
Nymphetamine
> TV doc is listed at http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0300811/ ... very cursory
> listing, though, and no indication of any video release.
That is something from 2001 on Discovery, what I saw was around 1994
and not on a cable channel.
Nymphetamine
> While I see your second conclusion there, I don't see how 'a' follows
The people in the book aren't fabrications and the proof is the
documentary; a crew followed them around interviewing and filming them
in the tunnels.
John Francis
Sort of like "THe Blair Witch Project?".
Your cite isn't 'proof' - it's simply two related fabrications.
--
Hello. My name is Darth Vader. I am your Father. Prepare to die.
GFLEET10
SEE IT
Simon Slavin
nymphe...@aol.com (Nymphetamine) wrote:
>I saw this documentary (to compliment the book?) in the mid-nineties
>but can find no information on it anywhere.
I commend to you www.google.com. It took me 50 seconds to
come up with these:
http://www.urban-resources.net/pages/molepeople.html
http://www.projectorbooth.com/movies/movie.asp?movie=624&review=625
Nymphetamine
> Sort of like "THe Blair Witch Project?".
>
> Your cite isn't 'proof' - it's simply two related fabrications.
Spoken like someone who hasn't seen the documentary proof you are
commenting on.
Or worse, like one of those who believes the moon-landing was a
fabrication as well...
Nymphetamine
> > There's at least one web page pointing out the many obvious factual
> > inconsistencies in the book. ....
>
>
> http://www.columbia.edu/~brennan/abandoned/mole-people.html
That is the only web page and the only individual pointing out the
"many" inconsistencies, most of which are trivial errors regarding
measurments, locations, placements and the like (ever been down there
before?), none of which has any bearing on this documentary (or the
various other documentaries, news reports, etc)
John Francis
Sorry, you'll have to try harder than that if you want to score points around here.
Attacking the messenger doesn't help your credibility at all. You have to explain
why the documentary you cite is in any way more convincing as 'proof' than a known
fabrication (such as the Blair Witch Project; many people did believe that, after
all). For extra credit you also have to demonstrate why the previously-referenced
web sites which dispute the 'facts' in your so-called documentary are wrong.
Thor Lancelot Simon
The fundamental point is that Joe, I, and many others have visited many
of the locations Toth claims to have -- or, at least, the nearest physical
locations to them that are actually present on *this* Earth, in *this*
universe -- and that much of what she says is there quite simply isn't.
There aren't seven levels below Grand Central. There isn't a tunnel system
under Central Park. There isn't a tunnel from Grand Central to Penn
Station. There aren't longitudinal, 10-foot-high spaces under the
platforms at Grand Central, and there are no natural caves in Manhattan.
Yet Toth claims to have *personally been in* many of these nonexistent
places. Though there are many quibbles over fairly minor facts on
Joe's page, you'll find that he also points out several of the instances
in which Toth directly claims to have been somewhere that doesn't exist.
One place she unquestionably was -- and that you can even see in the
documentary film -- is the grade separation "tunnel" under Riverside
Park. That's all well and good. Making up a fiction story about the
denizens of a number of other nonexistent tunnels under Manhattan, based
evidently on those trips to the Riverside Park tunnel and, quite possibly,
on the scene in the hoary sequel to the movie _Ghostbusters_ that's set
in a fictionalized version of the Beech tunnel (watch that film, if you
can stand to, and then note certain remarkable similarities between its
tunnel scenes and things that Toth either claims to have seen herself,
reports unskeptically from others' statements, or claims to be facts
about early New York City subway projects) is *not* good -- it's trash
journalism, and trash writing; it's certainly something one should be
highly aware of when considering any of Toth's work.
Lon Stowell
I'm sorry, but like the man said, you really really do have to
show something that a reasonable person [sorry, this excludes you]
would take as some sort of evidence that what you claim to be
fact is anything other than a lunatic raving.
That only one web page has been posted may have more to do with
nobody taking an old Sci-Fi plot serious enough to waste
time on than it does any merit to the contrary ravings.
Besides, they would have been eaten by the sewergators long
ago anyway.
TdN
The strange thing about that page is that it doesn't address the
photographs Margaret Morton took for that book, and for her more
complete "The Tunnel".
I agree that Toth seems to be a sloppy journalist, too ready to
believe whatever her informants tell her, but it's as though Brennan
is ignoring the documentary photographs.
Re: television earlier than the 2000 "Dark Days," there was a 1996 TV4
production called "Subway Cops and Mole Kings," which could well have
been shown on a US PBS station; more info here:
http://www.wild-dream.com/wild-dream.html
This 1997 article talks about NBC News television interviews with Toth
informant "Bernard"--perhaps this is what the OP remembers seeing?
http://eserver.org/bs/17/Singer.html
T "Superman always wins, though" dN
Thor Lancelot Simon
TdN <triann...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>wa...@fordham.edu (Michael Wares) wrote in message news:<2b413897.03090...@posting.google.com>...
>> t...@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon) wrote in message news:<bj4693$kd4$1...@panix5.panix.com>...
>> >
>> > Beats me. You're aware that much of the material in the book is,
>> > essentially, fabricated?
>> >
>> > There's at least one web page pointing out the many obvious factual
>> > inconsistencies in the book. ....
>>
>>
>> http://www.columbia.edu/~brennan/abandoned/mole-people.html
>>
>> Michael Wares
>
>The strange thing about that page is that it doesn't address the
>photographs Margaret Morton took for that book, and for her more
>complete "The Tunnel".
>
>I agree that Toth seems to be a sloppy journalist, too ready to
>believe whatever her informants tell her, but it's as though Brennan
>is ignoring the documentary photographs.
Well, I've tried to go to most of the places "documented" in that book
myself, much like Joe has. I was familiar with most of the general
environs already when the book appeared. Many of them simply are not
there; many of the descriptions read like worked-over descriptions of
either the Riverside Park tunnel or a few points along the same rail
line between there and Penn Station (e.g. the point where it ducks under
the power plant). No number of photographs of somewhere else will cause
there to be seven levels under Grand Central, nonexistent tunnels under
Central Park that Toth pretends to have walked through, tunnels connecting
GCT and Penn Station, 10-foot-high spaces running lengthwise under GCT's
platforms, or so forth. It is easy to go to these places yourself and
confirm that what is claimed to be there is not there. Toth's claims to
have been in these nonexistent places are fabrications.
"documentary photographs" of a place that doesn't exist are certainly
photographs of _some_ place, but they're also certainly not any kind of
demonstration that the place is what or where it's claimed to be. Needless
to say, most of Toth's wild inventions curiously lack photographic
corroboration -- must one really wonder why?
Nymphetamine
> I commend to you www.google.com. It took me 50 seconds to
> come up with these:
>
> http://www.urban-resources.net/pages/molepeople.html
> http://www.projectorbooth.com/movies/movie.asp?movie=624&review=625
It took me 15 seconds to find those, which say nothing about a
Toth-related documentary film.
Nymphetamine
> You have to explain
> why the documentary you cite is in any way more convincing as 'proof' than a known
> fabrication
If you don't believe the tunnels exist, take a long walk down there.
If you don't believe they were inhabited, take a look at the many
documentaries, housing reports, police reports, ad nauseum
> For extra credit you also have to demonstrate why the previously-referenced
> web sites which dispute the 'facts' in your so-called documentary are wrong.
If you think its my responsibility to prove your facts wrong before
you prove them right, then lol.
Again, I am not interested in trivial errors such as measurments and
locations.
Nymphetamine
> I'm sorry, but like the man said, you really really do have to
> show something that a reasonable person [sorry, this excludes you]
> would take as some sort of evidence that what you claim to be
> fact is anything other than a lunatic raving.
>
> That only one web page has been posted may have more to do with
> nobody taking an old Sci-Fi plot serious enough to waste
> time on than it does any merit to the contrary ravings.
>
> Besides, they would have been eaten by the sewergators long
> ago anyway.
Still bitter that Toth was first to publish and (possibly) film? Time
to move on, let it go already before you burst a vessel.
Nymphetamine
> Well, I've tried to go to most of the places "documented" in that book
> myself, much like Joe has. I was familiar with most of the general
> environs already when the book appeared.
Says you. Toth was first to publish, and you are relegated to
discussing her in newsgroups. Quiet your angry nit-picking pointless
agenda.
Nymphetamine
> The strange thing about that page is that it doesn't address the
> photographs Margaret Morton took for that book, and for her more
> complete "The Tunnel".
>
> I agree that Toth seems to be a sloppy journalist, too ready to
> believe whatever her informants tell her, but it's as though Brennan
> is ignoring the documentary photographs.
>
> Re: television earlier than the 2000 "Dark Days," there was a 1996 TV4
> production called "Subway Cops and Mole Kings," which could well have
> been shown on a US PBS station; more info here:
>
> http://www.wild-dream.com/wild-dream.html
That isn't it, but it's an interesting doc I didn't know of, thanks.
> This 1997 article talks about NBC News television interviews with Toth
> informant "Bernard"--perhaps this is what the OP remembers seeing?
>
> http://eserver.org/bs/17/Singer.html
Excellent. That actually mentions the SECOND program on NBC. The first
(I think Toth-related) one is what I am trying to find information
about, it featured various 'mole people' including Bernard. A year or
so later when the tunnels and their inhabitants came up again in the
news, there was a second show, but this time it was just a sit down
interview with Bernard "Why are you still here?" etc
That article was written in 1994, so this was all earlier that I had
thought. (Coincidentally it was written by a Richard Singer; Marc
Singer made Dark Days.)
David Brodbeck
Yes, the Secret Goal in Life (tm) of all afu posters is to do pretend
journalism. Damn, how did he figure it out?
And 'Says you,' that is a fine argument.
Dave 'publish or perish' Brodbeck
Charles A Lieberman
> > For extra credit you also have to demonstrate why the previously-referenced
> > web sites which dispute the 'facts' in your so-called documentary are wrong.
>
> If you think its my responsibility to prove your facts wrong before
> you prove them right, then lol.
It is, Ms. Toth, your responsibility to prove your own facts right.
--
Charles A. Lieberman | "I don't think QANTAS has target radar, or indeed
New York, NY, USA | any air to air or air to ground attack capability
cali...@bigfoot.com | that would require a target radar." --Paul Tomblin
Don Freeman
previously-referenced
> > web sites which dispute the 'facts' in your so-called documentary
are wrong.
>
> locations.
And facts. Don't forget facts. We wouldn't want them to get in the
way of a good story.
Lars Eighner
<6l26b.4528$Pa2....@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com>,
the lovely and talented Don Freeman
broadcast on alt.folklore.urban:
> And facts. Don't forget facts. We wouldn't want them to get in the
> way of a good story.
If "The Mole People" were true and were a work of scholarship, it
seems to me its author would have been obliged to have disquised the
actual locations. So, the argument that "I have been to such and
such coordinates and the tunnel the book says is there isn't" doesn't
really hold much water. Moreover, an author cannot be faulted for
reporting that a certain informant *says* such and such; the problem
occurs if she uncritically accepts what the informant says as fact.
As has been pointed out, the photographs in "The Tunnel" were made
somewhere, and I have been to some of those somewheres and have seen
some of the things in the photographs with my own eyes. It simply
is (was) a fact that there are poor people in New York City and some
of them, at least for a time, live(d) underground. If there was
a secret underground city, I didn't see any evidence of that,
but there certainly seemed to be a degree of order and society
in the clusters of dwelling I saw.
The author of "The Mole People" does seem to be rather credulous,
but by the same token, her critics seem to read more into her
claims than is actually in the ink and paper.
--
Lars Eighner -finger for geek code- eig...@io.com http://www.io.com/~eighner/
Don't care if it's true - just love it. --Eric Hocking
Thor Lancelot Simon
It's simple to determine that many of the places Toth claims to have
visited don't exist. You can easily go to their stated locations, and
note that they aren't there. You can also easily consult myriad
published sources to determine that those of them she claims to have
been built never were, and that those she claims to be natural features
(e.g. "caves in the schist bedrock under manhattan") aren't there either.
I don't know where your "Toth was first to publish" non-sequitur comes
from. I am curious, however, why you become so distressed when Toth's
fabrications are pointed out. I'd think that if you were interested
in her work, you'd be interested to learn that much of it is not
journalism but rather invention.
Joseph Brennan
>The strange thing about that page is that it doesn't address the
>photographs Margaret Morton took for that book, and for her more
>complete "The Tunnel".
The people who lived in the Riverside Park structure have been well
documented, by Margaret Morton's book and by an occasional series of
articles in the New York Times that eventually followed some of the
people into their later lives outside the tunnel. These are what
Toth's book should have been-- accurate, realistic, and focused on the
real people and the circumstances that brought them into the tunnels.
I did say, quote,
The sections about life in the Riverside Park tunnel are supported
in general by other accounts, and interestingly the descriptions of
this one tunnel are also the most accurate
>I agree that Toth seems to be a sloppy journalist, too ready to
>believe whatever her informants tell her, but it's as though Brennan
>is ignoring the documentary photographs.
I've seen Morton's photos of the Riverside Park structure, but not any
of the seventh level under Grand Central, people with webbed feet,
waiting rooms with fountains, the caverns of Manhattan, or the ESP
rays the Mole People use to communicate (see Toth's last chapter!).
I might be mistaken, but the photos were not in the first edition
of Toth's book, were they?
>This 1997 article talks about NBC News television interviews with Toth
>informant "Bernard"--perhaps this is what the OP remembers seeing?
>
>http://eserver.org/bs/17/Singer.html
Whew. He's busy drawing parallels with the literary underground and
these "alternate communities". There's a touch of truth in it for the
people in the Riverside Park structure, according to Morton and the
Times. Some of them went out to work every day, and lived in the
structure because they had not been able to find cheap housing. But
it's not like they were intentionally establishing a new
sociopolitical structure and singing "Revolutionaries are we".
I can't say I noticed any of this alternate community amongst the
zoned out denizens of the subway. That's not the same as alternate
reality, right?
Joe Brennan
Don Freeman
"Lars Eighner" <eig...@io.com> wrote in message
news:slrnblhfk0....@pearl.io.com...
> In our last episode,
> <6l26b.4528$Pa2....@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com>,
> the lovely and talented Don Freeman
> broadcast on alt.folklore.urban:
>
> > And facts. Don't forget facts. We wouldn't want them to get in
the
> > way of a good story.
>
> If "The Mole People" were true and were a work of scholarship, it
> seems to me its author would have been obliged to have disquised the
> actual locations.
Not sure exactly why that would be but for now let's say that's true.
Why then give what appear to be real and exact locations? Why not
instead give ambiguous location descriptions with the disclaimer "to
protect the identities of ..."?
I don't think anyone is disputing the claim that homeless people live
in abondoned locations within the subway system or, for that matter,
anywhere else they can find undisturbed shelter. It's the
embellishment for the sake of publicity (and financial gain?) that is
being commented on.
Don "from the general location of the Ferry Building, SF" Freeman
Charles A Lieberman
Lars Eighner <eig...@io.com> wrote:
> If "The Mole People" were true and were a work of scholarship, it
> seems to me its author would have been obliged to have disquised the
> actual locations. So, the argument that "I have been to such and
> such coordinates and the tunnel the book says is there isn't" doesn't
> really hold much water.
Why is it better (better scholarship, better journalism, whatever) to
give a false location than to give none at all? If she'd said "I can't
say exactly where this is, but it's in such-and-such an area," we
wouldn't be having this particular branch of this conversation. This is
a plausible (barely) way to cover this hole, but I'd think it would be
easier not to have left a hole to cover.
Also, I'm the wrong Charles for this, but I think people are saying
there aren't only not caves where Toth says there are, but there can't
be (or at least aren't) natural caves anywhere in Manhattan.
Charles "Or I could be full of schist" Lieberman
Lon Stowell
> jo...@panix.com (John Francis) wrote in message news:<bj8jpv$r0o$1...@panix5.panix.com>...
>
>> You have to explain
>> why the documentary you cite is in any way more convincing as 'proof' than a known
>> fabrication
>
> If you don't believe the tunnels exist, take a long walk down there.
> If you don't believe they were inhabited, take a look at the many
> documentaries, housing reports, police reports, ad nauseum
Take a hike asshole.
>
>> For extra credit you also have to demonstrate why the previously-referenced
>> web sites which dispute the 'facts' in your so-called documentary are wrong.
>
> If you think its my responsibility to prove your facts wrong before
> you prove them right, then lol.
When you finish that first hike, take another one in the opposite
direction.
>
> Again, I am not interested in trivial errors such as measurments and
> locations.
Time for doe snot.
Lon Stowell
>
> Still bitter that Toth was first to publish and (possibly) film? Time
> to move on, let it go already before you burst a vessel.
You were a tiresome and not particularly amusing troll before
you attempted to infest the group, and you are becoming less
amusing and more tiresome by the minute.
me
> jo...@panix.com (John Francis) wrote in message news:<bj8jpv$r0o$1...@panix5.panix.com>...
>
> > You have to explain
> > why the documentary you cite is in any way more convincing as 'proof' than a known
> > fabrication
>
> If you don't believe the tunnels exist, take a long walk down there.
I think you are missing the fact that some of these people have.
> If you don't believe they were inhabited, take a look at the many
> documentaries, housing reports, police reports, ad nauseum
The ones that don't exist? No one doubts that people inhabit
underground locations. The question is to the extent and manner
that was represented in the material in question.
> > For extra credit you also have to demonstrate why the previously-referenced
> > web sites which dispute the 'facts' in your so-called documentary are wrong.
>
> If you think its my responsibility to prove your facts wrong before
> you prove them right, then lol.
The question really is why did you believe what you saw?
> Again, I am not interested in trivial errors such as measurments and
> locations.
Many of the discrepincies weren't trivial. They did lend themselves
to many possible explanations. Some of them were fairly serious in
that the more reasonable explanations were that she was lied to and
didn't realize it. The worst of them, and they were few, was that
she represented having visited places that didn't exist. If she
did that, even if it was only a small portion of the total text,
it places the balance of her work in serious question.
Don Freeman
"Charles A Lieberman" <cali...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:calieber-C08659...@news.fu-berlin.de...
>
> Also, I'm the wrong Charles for this, but I think people are saying
> there aren't only not caves where Toth says there are, but there
can't
> be (or at least aren't) natural caves anywhere in Manhattan.
But they looked so real when Linda Hamilton was running through them.
Don Freeman
> Approximately 9/5/03 03:02, Nymphetamine exceeded any reasonable
limit:
> >
and
> > locations.
>
Simon Slavin
>"David Brodbeck" <brod...@swgc.mun.ca> wrote in message
>news:<bj5pum$88t$1...@nntp-stjh-01-01.rogers.nf.net>...
>
>> While I see your second conclusion there, I don't see how 'a' follows
>
>The people in the book aren't fabrications and the proof is the
>documentary; a crew followed them around interviewing and filming them
>in the tunnels.
I presume that you're going to continue by saying that the
documentary isn't a fabrication because there's also a book
about the Mole People.
Don Freeman
"Simon Slavin" <sla...@hearsay.demon.co.uk@localhost> wrote in
message news:BB7EDBD79...@10.0.1.2...
>
> I presume that you're going to continue by saying that the
> documentary isn't a fabrication because there's also a book
> about the Mole People.
>
danny burstein
>message news:BB7EDBD79...@10.0.1.2...
>>
>> I presume that you're going to continue by saying that the
>> documentary isn't a fabrication because there's also a book
>> about the Mole People.
And a Superman double episode.
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dan...@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
Nymphetamine
> It's simple to determine that many of the places Toth claims to have
> visited don't exist. You can easily go to their stated locations, and
> note that they aren't there. You can also easily consult myriad
> published sources to determine that those of them she claims to have
> been built never were, and that those she claims to be natural features
> (e.g. "caves in the schist bedrock under manhattan") aren't there either.
Are you still lost in the wrong thread? This isn't about her book, or
her shoddy researching skills, or her probable gullibility regarding
her mole-subjects. Dumbing it down a bit, Toth is to the 'moles' as
Columbus is to America; take that any way you want, but take it
somewhere else.
All I want is as the subject states - and so far TdN is the only one
who found some related information about it. "It" being the first
filmed documentation of the underground NYC inhabitants, which oddly
seems to be hiding as well as its subject matter.
David Brodbeck
news:<bjag75$8nn$1...@panix5.panix.com>...
>
> > It's simple to determine that many of the places Toth claims to have
> > visited don't exist. You can easily go to their stated locations, and
> > note that they aren't there. You can also easily consult myriad
> > published sources to determine that those of them she claims to have
> > been built never were, and that those she claims to be natural features
> > (e.g. "caves in the schist bedrock under manhattan") aren't there
either.
>
> Are you still lost in the wrong thread? This isn't about her book, or
> her shoddy researching skills, or her probable gullibility regarding
Well, iuf you didn't want afu types (that typically demand evidencee etc)
then you should not have posted here. Besides, threads iun these parts
morph into things that an infinite number of monkeys, given and infinite....
> her mole-subjects. Dumbing it down a bit, Toth is to the 'moles' as
> Columbus is to America; take that any way you want, but take it
> somewhere else.
Aha, that one was on the GRE when I wrote it....
>
> All I want is as the subject states - and so far TdN is the only one
> who found some related information about it. "It" being the first
> filmed documentation of the underground NYC inhabitants, which oddly
but if half the stuff is made up, then what is the point? Ahh well, what
the hell do I know
Dave 'dumb as an infinitely big bag of monkeys' Brodbeck
> seems to be hiding as well as its subject matter.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.515 / Virus Database: 313 - Release Date: 01/09/2003
Bob Beck
> ... but take it somewhere else.
As you say.
bob "plonk" beck
Nymphetamine
> but if half the stuff is made up, then what is the point?
"half the stuff" is not made up. The point is IF the moles lied or
exaggerated to Toth about minor details as all people are want to do,
and you are focusing on her accepting and reporting those lies instead
of focusing on the subject ie the moles themselves, then (at best)
you're in the wrong thread. At worst, you fail to see the difference
between an authors interpretations of supposed claims, and video
evidence - which exists, and what I am looking for.
Lon Stowell
> "David Brodbeck" <brod...@swgc.mun.ca> wrote in message news:<bjcpcd$f84$1...@nntp-stjh-01-01.rogers.nf.net>...
>
>> but if half the stuff is made up, then what is the point?
>
> "half the stuff" is not made up.
This is true, *all of the stuff* is made up.
> The point is IF the moles lied or
> exaggerated to Toth about minor details as all people are want to do,
> and you are focusing on her accepting and reporting those lies instead
> of focusing on the subject ie the moles themselves, then (at best)
> you're in the wrong thread.
Well, so far we have one vote claiming this....
> At worst, you fail to see the difference
> between an authors interpretations of supposed claims, and video
> evidence - which exists, and what I am looking for.
You need a special research assistant to do this. I believe
the noted spanish researcher Chupa C. Abra may be on assignment,
but we can probably reach the south american specialist,
Candy Roo for the normal finders fee.
Nymphetamine
> > "half the stuff" is not made up.
>
> This is true, *all of the stuff* is made up.
*Right* there were no tunnels, no inhabitants, no eskimoes, no
holocaust, no moon-landing, and elvis is alive and lives in your
mothers panties. Save your nonsense for a forum where your credibility
isn't shot.
> > At worst, you fail to see the difference
> > between an authors interpretations of supposed claims, and video
> > evidence - which exists, and what I am looking for.
>
> You need a special research assistant to do this.
You seem specially educated, go fetch.
David Brodbeck
news:<TBs6b.280415$Oz4.72909@rwcrnsc54>...
>
> > > "half the stuff" is not made up.
> >
> > This is true, *all of the stuff* is made up.
>
> *Right* there were no tunnels, no inhabitants, no eskimoes, no
> holocaust, no moon-landing, and elvis is alive and lives in your
> mothers panties. Save your nonsense for a forum where your credibility
> isn't shot.
Umm, sonny boy, Lon is loaded with credibility here.
Now, listen, there may very well be tunnels (hell there is a subway, there
must be tunnels) but not the ones she claims. There are probably homeless
people living in such places, no doubt. But, if there is made up stuff, the
book has no credibility.
Calling someone a Holocaust denier is rather nasty.
Eskimos prefer to be called Inuit.
Elvis is dead, it says so in a Forgotten Rebels song.
Dave 'eater of raw meat' Brodbeck
>
> > > At worst, you fail to see the difference
> > > between an authors interpretations of supposed claims, and video
> > > evidence - which exists, and what I am looking for.
> >
> > You need a special research assistant to do this.
>
> You seem specially educated, go fetch.
Lars Eighner
<bjfbsg$aft$1...@nntp-stjh-01-01.rogers.nf.net>,
the lovely and talented David Brodbeck
broadcast on alt.folklore.urban:
> Eskimos prefer to be called Inuit.
Really?
David Brodbeck
> In our last episode,
> <bjfbsg$aft$1...@nntp-stjh-01-01.rogers.nf.net>,
> the lovely and talented David Brodbeck
> broadcast on alt.folklore.urban:
>
>
> > Eskimos prefer to be called Inuit.
>
> Really?
>
for the Inuit people (well, not specifically for them, but they are the
majority there) called Nunavut.
'what did the government give the Inuit?'
'Nunavut'
irony and all that...
Dave
John Francis
>holocaust, no moon-landing, and elvis is alive and lives in your
>mothers panties. Save your nonsense for a forum where your credibility
>isn't shot.
You're the one with credibilty problems here, you know.
You take a book which extrapolates from a few non-disputed facts (such
as the existence of a couple of disused tunnels, and that homeless people
exist and will colonise just about any available niche) and weaves around
this a fantasy including cave complexes below Manhattan, great underground
constructs below parks and stations, and a whole sub-culture therein.
You fail to discern the line between fact and fantasy, and expect people
here to share your delusion. That's one strike against your credibility.
When what you want doesn't happen you start getting abusive. Another strike.
Nor, as yet, have you addressed a single one of the substantive criticisms
levelled against the book, preferring instead to concentrate on some of the
more trivial issues. Third strike - you're out of here.
--
Hello. My name is Darth Vader. I am your Father. Prepare to die.
"ash966"
On 4 Sep 2003, Nymphetamine wrote:
> "Gary G. Taylor" <knot...@knotcdfound.org> wrote in message news:<K6s5b.10629$j36....@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com>...
>
>
> > TV doc is listed at http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0300811/ ... very cursory
> > listing, though, and no indication of any video release.
>
> That is something from 2001 on Discovery, what I saw was around 1994
> and not on a cable channel.
This web site has a video for sale called _In Search of the Mole People_
and it says the video is based on the Toth book. It was produced by Studio
7 in New York. It is also available in 5 libraries in the US, according to
OCLC Worldcat:
Title: In search of the mole people Author: David, Viktor
Libraries with Item: "In search of the mole peo..."( Record for Item | Get
This Item )Location Library Code
KS SOUTHWESTERN COL KKX
NY SUFFOLK COOP LIBR SYST SDE
OH CLEVELAND PUB LIBR CLE
WA PIERCE CNTY LIBR SYST RLS
SI NGEE ANN POLYTECHNIC LIBR SINAP
Record for Item: "In search of the mole peo..."( Libraries with Item )
Get This Item
Availability: Check the catalogs in your library.
Libraries worldwide that own item: 5
Find Related
More Like This: Search for versions with same title and author | Advanced
options ...
Title: In search of the mole people
Author(s): David, Viktor.
Publication: New York, NY :; Studio7 NY,
Year: 2000
Description: 1 videocassette (52 min.) :; sd., col. ;; 1/2 in.
Language: English
Abstract: An investigative look at the existence of a society living below
the streets of New York City.
SUBJECT(S)
Descriptor: Underground areas -- New York (State) -- New York.
Underground homeless persons -- New York (State) -- New York.
Genre/Form: Documentary films.
Geographic: New York (N.Y.) -- Social conditions -- 20th century.
System Info: VHS.
Note(s): Documentary./ Title from videocassette label.
Class Descriptors: Dewey: 305.569
Other Titles: Mole people
Responsibility: [Studio7 NY presents ; produced and directed by Viktor
David]. Edited by Dan Fisher ; director of photography, Roman Volvich
; producers, Kenny Chery, Erik Dane.
Material Type: Projected image (pgr); Videorecording (vid); VHS tape (vhs)
Document Type: Visual Material
Entry: 20011005
Update: 20011005
Accession No: OCLC: 48093448
Database: WorldCat
PS. People might be more willing to help you if your email address were
valid. You can mung it if you don't want spam, you know.
--ASH
>
********************************************************************************
Andrea Herman
email: ash...@bitstream.net
*******************************************************************************
"Oh don't the days seem lank and long
When all goes right and nothing goes wrong
And isn't your life extremely flat
When you've nothing whatever to grumble at?"
--W.S. Gilbert
Dan Hartung
No! Please play with the troll a little while longer.
Dan "Waiting to see its horns get caught in the bridgework" Hartung
Lon Stowell
> Bob Beck wrote:
>> In alt.folklore.urban Nymphetamine <nymphe...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>>... but take it somewhere else.
>>
>>
>> As you say.
>>
>> bob "plonk" beck
>
> No! Please play with the troll a little while longer.
Still not sure if it is a troll or a net.kook in training.
Not a particularly interesting, amusing, or even original
example of either, but it does still have a few wings
left to be plucked off.
Nymphetamine
> You're the one with credibilty problems here, you know.
>
> You take a book which
Actually I didn't "take a book", the book is YOUR obsession, remember?
49 posts and just 2 of them by people who understand the subject.
Karen J. Cravens
news:1e71a87c.03090...@posting.google.com:
> Actually I didn't "take a book", the book is YOUR obsession, remember?
>
> 49 posts and just 2 of them by people who understand the subject.
Well, I missed your original post, since you crossposted. But I went back
and read it, and I'm pretty sure I understand the subject, and can give
you an authoritative (albeit not all-encompassing) answer to your original
question: No. No, I don't.
HTH, HAND.
--
Karen J. Cravens
Lon Stowell
>
> 49 posts and just 2 of them by people who understand the subject.
49 posts and 1 net.kook, the 1 other exception is just stringing
along for the joke.
Bill Kinkaid
wrote:
>This web site has a video for sale called _In Search of the Mole People_
>and it says the video is based on the Toth book. It was produced by Studio
>7 in New York. It is also available in 5 libraries in the US, according to
>OCLC Worldcat:
>
>Title: In search of the mole people Author: David, Viktor
>
>Libraries with Item: "In search of the mole peo..."( Record for Item | Get
>This Item )Location Library Code
>KS SOUTHWESTERN COL KKX
>
>NY SUFFOLK COOP LIBR SYST SDE
>
>OH CLEVELAND PUB LIBR CLE
>
>WA PIERCE CNTY LIBR SYST RLS
>
>SI NGEE ANN POLYTECHNIC LIBR SINAP
>
Bill in Vancouver
Nymphetamine
> On 4 Sep 2003, Nymphetamine wrote:
> This web site has a video for sale called _In Search of the Mole People_
> and it says the video is based on the Toth book. It was produced by Studio
> 7 in New York. It is also available in 5 libraries in the US, according to
> OCLC Worldcat:
> Publication: New York, NY :; Studio7 NY,
> Year: 2000
I saw that one on amazon -
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASINB000050933/ref=nosim/suco01 -
but it was made in 2000, the original is from around 1994.
This site is down but the google cache shows it has some excellent
information - http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:mhAfZD_f488J:www.metrostate.edu/cgi-bin/troxy/lproxy.cgi/URL-muse.jhu.edu/journals/wide_angle/v020/20.4pike.html+bernard+%22jennifer+toth%22+news&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
- if only the damn footnote links worked. Note there are no negative
comments about Toth or her work, but then again that author is a
scholar, not an angry newsgroupie pinhead.
TeaLady (Mari C.)
news:1e71a87c.03090...@posting.google.com:
> if only the damn footnote links worked. Note there are no
> negative
> comments about Toth or her work, but then again that author is
> a scholar, not an angry newsgroupie pinhead.
>
1st of all, AFU is full of folks who like to personally check into
the facts and figures - if someone claims there is a green hotdog
walking up the street, we will check to see if it is really
there; truly green, or is perhaps merely moss-like in color; truly
walking, or just crawing a bit; and if it is truly going up the
street, and isn't just wandering in a circle. You seem to think we
are not scholars, not a one of us, and that is a very wrong
assumption to make. Very wrong.
That author you cited did not state he investigated her
"journalistic account" for accuracy; he made the same mistake many
people make, assuming the journalist has told the absolute truth.
We all know journalists never lie and do not fudge, exaggerate, or
invent. They only ever always tell us the complete unvarnished
truth of things, which they have carefully checked and cross-
checked, before putting it all down to paper.
Don't we ?
Reporting the statements of the people in her book is one thing -
if we can take her word that these folk said what she is reporting
them to say. Claiming to be in places which don't exist is
another. And if she has claimed to be in places that don't exist,
then how can we believe that her sources actually said what she
says they said ?
And so far as "documentaries" - I know of too many that were
staged and scripted, even when non-actors were used, in order to
fit into the vision of the producer/writer/journalist. The most
famous one (that I can think of right now) being the Blair Witch
Project - which, even though the makers fessed up to faking, some
people still think is real (I live across the street from one such
person).
I do not doubt that there are people living in the tunnels in NYC.
I do not doubt this lady talked to some of them, and maybe even
visited a tunnel or two. I do not doubt that some of these people
were featured in a "documentary" that was devised to promote her
ideas and book. I will give this person that much credibility.
But given the fact that, in this thread, the accounting of several
people who have tried to find all the places she so eloquently
described is that they failed to find most of them, and solid
evidence apparantly exists to refute her claims on several
locations, I doubt that her articles, her book, or her documentary
are hard solid factual evidence of anything other than her and her
subjects' gullibility - no matter how much frothing and foaming you
manage to do, or how many "scholars" you manage to find.
Especially when the only "scholars" you seem to care for are those
who agree with you.
--
TeaLady
"Stated to me for a fact. I only tell it as I got it. I am
willing to believe it. I can believe anything." Sam Clemens
Mari Conroy
David Brodbeck
> (lunactic rantings snipped...)
> comments about Toth or her work, but then again that author is a
> scholar, not an angry newsgroupie pinhead.
Those are not mutually exclusive categories....
Dave 'living proof' Brodbeck
Nymphetamine
> Reporting the statements of the people in her book is one thing -
The one thing which can be filmed and documented, in this case was
filmed and documented, POSSIBLY by Toth etc, (definitely by many
others since), and aired back in 94, and what I am looking for in
2003, hence this thread.
> Claiming to be in places which don't exist is another.
Which may or may not have happened, reported in a book, which is
another subject, that I am not interested in.
Tony Prochazka
Dan Hartung <danha...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> No! Please play with the troll a little while longer.
>
> Dan "Waiting to see its horns get caught in the bridgework" Hartung
Please! It cost me a *lot* of money to get my teeth fixed.
Tony Prochazka
--
"Of course, for slayage of betta-sized animals, the preferred weapon is a
4" stiletto-heeled shoe and a camcorder." Andy Walton pitches his latest
screenplay.
Tony Prochazka
> 49 posts and just 2 of them by people who understand the subject.
That's a novel spin on "less than 5% of people agree with me."
Leo G Simonetta
wrote:
> Lon Stowell <lon.s...@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<TBs6b.280415$Oz4.72909@rwcrnsc54>...
>
> > > "half the stuff" is not made up.
> >
> > This is true, *all of the stuff* is made up.
>
> *Right* there were no tunnels, no inhabitants, no eskimoes, no
> holocaust, no moon-landing, and elvis is alive and lives in your
> mothers panties. Save your nonsense for a forum where your credibility
> isn't shot.
Oh, my heavens. Mine!
Leo "Furrfu" Simonetta
"*Right* there were no tunnels, no inhabitants, no eskimoes, no
holocaust, no moon-landing, and elvis is alive and lives in your
mothers panties. Save your nonsense for a forum where your
credibility isn't shot." Nymphetamine explains truth to Lon
--
Leo G. Simonetta
lsimo...@newsguy.com
Dave, Chris & Ben Oinonen Ehren
dan...@panix.com wrote on 9/5/03 6:44 PM:
>> "Simon Slavin" <sla...@hearsay.demon.co.uk@localhost> wrote in
>> message news:BB7EDBD79...@10.0.1.2...
>>>
>>> I presume that you're going to continue by saying that the
>>> documentary isn't a fabrication because there's also a book
>>> about the Mole People.
>
> And a Superman double episode.
Don't forget the Tick episode. Wait, that was a cartoon. Or should I say
"artist's rendering"?
--
Dave, Chris & Ben Oinonen Ehren
people. I have never run into a list where people demanded standards of
proof before. Cool!
Suggestion: Used to have a job where people would call up asking about hard
to find movies. They'd give me whatever details they could remember and I
would look them up using a database. Kind of like what people can do for
themselves on Amazon now, but with a more structured interface. Thing was,
people always gave bad dates. The actors, director, key words, titles were
usually really good, but the dates were wrong 75% of the time. People often
judge when something happened by linking events that happened about the same
time until they find something they know the year of, but those linkages can
be really faulty.
Nymphetamine might want to give some of these "wrong date" documentaries a
viewing, just in case. It would be a sad thing to have what you want within
reach and pass it by because a memory is off by a couple years.
-Chris
Lee Ayrton
> In article <1e71a87c.03090...@posting.google.com>,
> nymphe...@aol.com (Nymphetamine) wrote:
>
> > 49 posts and just 2 of them by people who understand the subject.
>
> That's a novel spin on "less than 5% of people agree with me."
The lurkers understand me in e-mail.
Lee "And I can prove it with diametric logic" Ayrton
Charles A Lieberman
> Are you still lost in the wrong thread? This isn't about [my] book, or
> [my] shoddy researching skills, or her probable gullibility regarding
> [my] mole-subjects. Dumbing it down a bit, Toth is to the 'moles' as
> Columbus is to America; take that any way you want, but take it
> somewhere else.
I'm a little unclear as to what you were seeking when you posted to AFU,
aside from that it clearly wasn't critical analysis. If you expect
people to take all your claims at face value, perhaps AFU is not the
place for you. If you don't expect that, I fail to understand what
you're complaining about.
--
Charles A. Lieberman | When free speech is outlawed,
New York, New York, USA |
http://calieber.tripod.com/ cali...@bigfoot.com
TeaLady (Mari C.)
news:calieber-159E4F...@news.fu-berlin.de:
> In article <1e71a87c.03090...@posting.google.com>,
> nymphe...@aol.com (Nymphetamine) wrote:
>
>> Are you still lost in the wrong thread? This isn't about [my]
>> book, or [my] shoddy researching skills, or her probable
>> gullibility regarding [my] mole-subjects. Dumbing it down a
>> bit, Toth is to the 'moles' as Columbus is to America; take
>> that any way you want, but take it somewhere else.
>
> I'm a little unclear as to what you were seeking when you
> posted to AFU, aside from that it clearly wasn't critical
> analysis. If you expect people to take all your claims at face
> value, perhaps AFU is not the place for you. If you don't
> expect that, I fail to understand what you're complaining
> about.
>
Nympho perhaps wants us to find a movie - do its homework, so to
speak. Isn't interested in being debunked, or having its current
project debunked. Perhaps was hoping to find a crew of folks to
regal with its expertise in mole-people. Or trying to resurrect an
old and deceased bit of fakery.
I prefer fresh and well thought out fakery. Or at least amusing
fakery. This movie/book/not-the-book sounds like a high school
social sciences class project, one that stars a few random street
people and contains a lot of "they said so, it must be true" hushed
and strained whisperings.
"ash966"
On Mon, 8 Sep 2003, Dave, Chris & Ben Oinonen Ehren wrote:
<snip>
> Suggestion: Used to have a job where people would call up asking about hard
> to find movies. They'd give me whatever details they could remember and I
> would look them up using a database. Kind of like what people can do for
> themselves on Amazon now, but with a more structured interface. Thing was,
> people always gave bad dates. The actors, director, key words, titles were
> usually really good, but the dates were wrong 75% of the time. People often
> judge when something happened by linking events that happened about the same
> time until they find something they know the year of, but those linkages can
> be really faulty.
Thank you! I'm a librarian, and I'm familiar with people who think
everything they see on TV is available in whatever video format they
prefer, whether it was a new show aired yesterday or a 50-year-old feature
film (TCM & Fox Movie Channel[1]) love to torment me by showing movies not
available on video).
> Nymphetamine might want to give some of these "wrong date" documentaries a
> viewing, just in case. It would be a sad thing to have what you want within
> reach and pass it by because a memory is off by a couple years.
>
> -Chris
Not to mention that there may have been a delay between broadcast & video
release. None of the web pages submitted so far have said that _In Search
of the Mole People_ was BROADCAST in 2000. Mr. Nymphetamine has not
claimed to have SEEN the video. Maybe there were problems with
the video rights, a company that had the rights went out of business or
sold the rights, or maybe nobody thought they could sell the video until
_Dark Days_ got so much press. Who knows?
--ASH
PS. That company you worked for sounds familiar. What was the name? I
think I might have referred people to it when I worked customer service
for the Minnesota Public Radio catalog.
1. USAn cable TV channels.
"ash966"
But he doesn't have a valid email address, so I guess all the lurkers who
want to support him so badly are out of luck.
--ASH
********************************************************************************
Nymphetamine
> I'm a little unclear as to what you were seeking when you posted to AFU
"Does anyone else remember seeing these documentaries or know if they
have been released on DVD or video?"
I will break it down into two complete sentences to make it easier for
afu understand.
"Does anyone else remember seeing these documentaries?"
"Does anyone else know if they have been released on DVD or video?"
Nymphetamine
> "Nymphetamine" <nymphe...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1e71a87c.03090...@posting.google.com...
>
> > scholar, not an angry newsgroupie pinhead.
>
Agreed, pinhead
David Brodbeck
"Nymphetamine" <nymphe...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1e71a87c.03090...@posting.google.com...
> "David Brodbeck" <brod...@swgc.mun.ca> wrote in message
news:<bjhj1t$46b$1...@nntp-stjh-01-01.rogers.nf.net>...
> > "Nymphetamine" <nymphe...@aol.com> wrote in message
> > news:1e71a87c.03090...@posting.google.com...
> >
> > > that author is a
> > > scholar, not an angry newsgroupie pinhead.
> >
>
> Agreed, pinhead
Don't misquote sonny boy. If you did know anything about being a 'scholar'
you would know that. You get kicked out of school for stuff like that, at
least here you do.
Besides, my Dad could beat up your Dad
David Brodbeck
Is this group called help.me.find.videos? Perhaps you ought to visit that
group. Lurk and read a ng before posting. Or, perhaps you did.
Ahh who the hell knows
Peter T. Daniels
I think Mr. Lieberman's question was: "Why did you post to AFU?" given
that AFU is for debunking fairytales like Toth's book (whether or not
someone made a movie based on it), and you seem to belive that Toth's
book is true and aren't interested in hearing that it isn't.
--
Peter T. Daniels gram...@att.net
Sara Moffat Lorimer
> On Mon, 8 Sep 2003, Lee Ayrton wrote:
>
> > On or about Mon, 8 Sep 2003, Tony Prochazka of ant...@zip.com.au wrote:
> >
> > > In article <1e71a87c.03090...@posting.google.com>,
> > > nymphe...@aol.com (Nymphetamine) wrote:
> > >
> > > > 49 posts and just 2 of them by people who understand the subject.
> > >
> > > That's a novel spin on "less than 5% of people agree with me."
> >
> > The lurkers understand me in e-mail.
> >
> >
> > Lee "And I can prove it with diametric logic" Ayrton
> >
>
> But he doesn't have a valid email address, so I guess all the lurkers who
> want to support him so badly are out of luck.
The lurkers write to each other, expressing how they would like to
support him. Her. It. (There is a sekret cabal, but oddly enough it's
made up of lurkers.)
--
SML
please remove your hat when sending me e-mail
JC Dill
<gram...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>> "Does anyone else remember seeing these documentaries?"
>>
>> "Does anyone else know if they have been released on DVD or video?"
>
>I think Mr. Lieberman's question was: "Why did you post to AFU?" given
>that AFU is for debunking fairytales like Toth's book (whether or not
>someone made a movie based on it), and you seem to belive that Toth's
>book is true and aren't interested in hearing that it isn't.
AFU is a ng devoted to discussing ULs. The book and movie are ULish,
and it's possible that some of the people in this newsgroup might be
able to help track down the movie in question. IMHO it's not an
unreasonable post to this newsgroup to seek help in finding a UL-ish
movie. If the OP were posting because they wanted to see the movie to
debunk the UL factor of the book, AFU would be likely to be very
helpful in that regard.
jc
Charles A Lieberman
JC Dill <usenet-s...@vo.cnchost.com> wrote:
> AFU is a ng devoted to discussing ULs. The book and movie are ULish,
> and it's possible that some of the people in this newsgroup might be
> able to help track down the movie in question.
The first sentence is broadly true. The first part of the second
sentence is true to some acceptable degree of likelihood. How the second
part of the second sentence follows I have no idea. Near as I can
understand your reasoning, there's no reason this shouldn't be
alt.do.my.homework, according to you, because, after all, we *can*.
--
Charles A. Lieberman | "I don't think QANTAS has target radar, or indeed
New York, NY, USA | any air to air or air to ground attack capability
cali...@bigfoot.com | that would require a target radar." --Paul Tomblin
David J. Martin
I'd also point out that just because someone initiates a thread, it
doesn't mean they own it. Nymphetamine posted a request for information
that generated discussion of the source material related to his/her
request. If I'm not mistaken, Nymphetamine participated in that
discussion. That the thread diverged from the original point is just
part of USENET life. It's not like someone said "I can answer your
question, but first I'm going to berate you", although that might have
been even more entertaining.
David "thread drift is life" Martin
Don Freeman
for
> afu understand.
>
> "Does anyone else remember seeing these documentaries?"
No.
> "Does anyone else know if they have been released on DVD or video?"
No.
And now that your questions have been answered please don't let the
door hit your ass on the way out.
Nymphetamine
> I think Mr. Lieberman's question was: "Why did you post to AFU?" given
> that AFU is for debunking fairytales like Toth's book and the moon-landing etc
I incorrectly assumed at least one of you may know about a subject you
love to nitpick on? Im certainly not interested in your laughable
agenda, in fact one of you clowns actually thinks I am Toth. A simple,
direct answer such as "I don't know" (or "beats me") would have
sufficed, you know, like the responses in the other ngs this was
posted in...
Lon Stowell
[x-posting deleted]
Lets just say your debating style and general demeanor makes it
very likely you'd be much happier on any or all of those groups
where folks with your limited grasp of concepts are much more
welcome.
Peter T. Daniels
Which shows how you jump to conclusions. I'm seeing this in nyc.transit,
where Toth's book was thoroughly discredited years ago.
It also shows that your integrity is approximately on the level of
Toth's, since I didn't write "and the moon-landing etc".
Charles A Lieberman
> Im certainly not interested in your laughable
> agenda,
So why did you post here?
Leo G Simonetta
<cali...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> In article <1o1slvkbp0gsm6fed...@4ax.com>,
> JC Dill <usenet-s...@vo.cnchost.com> wrote:
>
> > AFU is a ng devoted to discussing ULs. The book and movie are ULish,
> > and it's possible that some of the people in this newsgroup might be
> > able to help track down the movie in question.
>
> The first sentence is broadly true. The first part of the second
> sentence is true to some acceptable degree of likelihood. How the second
> part of the second sentence follows I have no idea. Near as I can
> understand your reasoning, there's no reason this shouldn't be
> alt.do.my.homework, according to you, because, after all, we *can*.
Go to Google and type in "The Mole People" video and (mirable
dictu) the first thing that pops up is
http://www.molepeoplemovie.com/ which is directly linked to aa
page that allows you to buy the video for $17.95 plus shipping
http://www.ccnow.com/cgi-local/sc_cart.cgi?3931573451206071
Happy birthday Google!
Leo "Homework while you wait" Simonetta
--
"*Right* there were no tunnels, no inhabitants, no eskimoes, no
holocaust, no moon-landing, and elvis is alive and lives in your
mothers panties. Save your nonsense for a forum where your credibility
isn't shot." Nymphetamine explains the truth to Lon Stowell.
Lon Stowell
> In article <1e71a87c.03090...@posting.google.com>,
> nymphe...@aol.com (Nymphetamine) wrote:
>
>> Im certainly not interested in your laughable
>> agenda,
>
> So why did you post here?
>
I think the idea was that *we* were all supposed to be
interested in he/she/it's laughable agenda and proclaim
he/she/it the king/queen of usenet or something. And
he/she/it doesn't appear to be willing to settle for
being a California Governor candidate.
Anthony McCafferty
<lon.s...@comcast.net> writes:
>Approximately 9/9/03 14:30, Charles A Lieberman uttered for posterity:
>
>> In article <1e71a87c.03090...@posting.google.com>,
>> nymphe...@aol.com (Nymphetamine) wrote:
>>
>>> Im certainly not interested in your laughable
>>> agenda,
>>
>> So why did you post here?
>>
> I think the idea was that *we* were all supposed to be
> interested in he/she/it's laughable agenda and proclaim
> he/she/it the king/queen of usenet or something.
Well, this seems a common thread; I propose it have a name: Croce's Law.
Anthony "the fac' that I was genius" McCafferty
Simon Slavin
"TeaLady (Mari C.)" <spres...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>AFU is full of folks who like to personally check into
>the facts and figures - if someone claims there is a green hotdog
>walking up the street, we will check to see if it is really
>there; truly green, or is perhaps merely moss-like in color; truly
>walking, or just craw[l]ing a bit; and if it is truly going up the
>street, and isn't just wandering in a circle.
Oh I do like that. It may appear in a future version of the
style-guide.
Nymphetamine
> In article <1e71a87c.03090...@posting.google.com>,
> nymphe...@aol.com (Nymphetamine) wrote:
>
> > Im certainly not interested in your laughable
> > agenda,
>
> So why did you post here?
"Does anyone else remember seeing these documentaries or know if they
have been released on DVD or video?"
I will dumb it down (again) into two complete sentences to make it easier for
Nymphetamine
> If the OP were posting because they wanted to see the movie to
> debunk the UL factor of the book, AFU would be likely to be very
> helpful in that regard.
>
> jc
Sure about that, jc? 87 posts, 1 helpful one (not from afu).
Karen J. Cravens
news:1e71a87c.03090...@posting.google.com:
> Sure about that, jc? 87 posts, 1 helpful one (not from afu).
That would be because you're ignoring helpful posts from afu. I suspect
it's because you're not reading anything that isn't crossposted, in which
case you're not reading this now, so I suppose I should use the third
person when referring to you, but it's too late for that.
I, on t'other hand, am not reading anything that *is* crossposted, so it's
not unlikely that there are even more helpful posts from afuistae that
just aren't readily identifiable as such.
--
Karen J. Cravens
TeaLady (Mari C.)
news:BB8425989...@0.0.0.0:
I am honored that you would even think to include my wordage. Feel
free to use it, Simon, if you wish. Thank you.
Mark Mentovai
> Agreed, pinhead
Come on, play nice.
Part of the problem here is that you're asking a question that amounts
to "hey, has anyone ever seen the episode of /48 Hours/ where..." of
people who fancy themselves scholars, historians, and enthusiasts. You
don't care that the material you're interested in is largely based on
fabrications. Scholars, historians, and enthusiasts do. Since
apparently nobody's seen the reports, about the only on-topic thing to
do is attack the subject matter. It's not personal. Really.
Probably the best you could have expected was a "yeah, I saw it," which
isn't really that helpful anyway.
So, you asked your question in the wrong place. As useful as the
Internet may be, it really sucks for some kinds of research. There's no
reason for anyone to get defensive, or offensive. Agree to disagree.
Move on. Everybody.
You'd do much better in a library. Actually, what I'd suggest first is
getting in touch with your friendly neighborhood representatives of
/Dateline/ and /48 Hours/ and asking about the report you're interested
in. NBC and CBS will be glad to [direct you to someone who can] sell
you transcripts or tapes of the broadcasts.
(Why I singled out those two programs should be obvious.)
Good luck.
Mark
JC Dill
<cali...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>In article <1o1slvkbp0gsm6fed...@4ax.com>,
> JC Dill <usenet-s...@vo.cnchost.com> wrote:
>
>> AFU is a ng devoted to discussing ULs. The book and movie are ULish,
>> and it's possible that some of the people in this newsgroup might be
>> able to help track down the movie in question.
>
>The first sentence is broadly true. The first part of the second
>sentence is true to some acceptable degree of likelihood. How the second
>part of the second sentence follows I have no idea. Near as I can
>understand your reasoning, there's no reason this shouldn't be
>alt.do.my.homework, according to you, because, after all, we *can*.
Except that this isn't a "do my homework" request. It's apparently a
genuinely hard to answer question and the subject IS UL-ish. We are
one of the best places to try to find the answer. I see no foul in
asking. Several people here even did have answers, answers that were
not readily available elsewhere.
jc
Tony Prochazka
> "Does anyone else remember seeing these documentaries or know if they
> have been released on DVD or video?"
>
> I will dumb it down (again) into two complete sentences to make it easier for
> afu understand.
>
> "Does anyone else remember seeing these documentaries?"
>
> "Does anyone else know if they have been released on DVD or video?"
Sorry, I still don't get it. Could you dumb it down a bit further for me
please?
Tony "into Nym" Prochazka
--
"Of course, for slayage of betta-sized animals, the preferred weapon is a
4" stiletto-heeled shoe and a camcorder." Andy Walton pitches his latest
screenplay.
Charles A Lieberman
> > > Im certainly not interested in your laughable
> > > agenda,
> >
> > So why did you post here?
>
>
> "Does anyone else remember seeing these documentaries or know if they
> have been released on DVD or video?"
I'll help you if you'll write 300 words about Roy Rogers for me. I'm not
interested in your agenda.
Charles A Lieberman
> 87 posts, 1 helpful one (not from afu).
Perhaps this reflects more on your decision to post to AFU than on AFU
itself. How many helpful posts would you have anticipated from
rec.pets.cats?
Leo G Simonetta
wrote:
See my upthread post from yesterday:
<9vgslvcq1jujo32o5...@enews.newsguy.com>
Where you may find:
Go to Google and type in "The Mole People" video into the search
box and (mirable dictu) the first thing that pops up is
http://www.molepeoplemovie.com/ which is directly linked to aa
page that allows you to buy the video for $17.95 plus shipping
http://www.ccnow.com/cgi-local/sc_cart.cgi?3931573451206071
Google it's not just for posting.
Leo "Always helpful" Simonetta
--
One of the things which attracted me to this froup when I started
reading it was the way in which people who said and did stupid things
were made the butt of viciously clever taunts, jokes, and insults.
Mike Holmans on one of the many charms of afu
Dan Fingerman
<news:1e71a87c.03090...@posting.google.com>:
> I will dumb it down (again) into two complete sentences to make it
> easier for afu understand.
>
> "Does anyone else remember seeing these documentaries?"
>
> "Does anyone else know if they have been released on DVD or
> video?"
In the words of one recent champion of AFU culture:
"You are a liar and a troll. Your words are meaningles."
--
DTM :<|
Don Freeman
> JC Dill <usenet-s...@vo.cnchost.com> wrote in message
news:<1o1slvkbp0gsm6fed...@4ax.com>...
>
> > If the OP were posting because they wanted to see the movie to
> > debunk the UL factor of the book, AFU would be likely to be very
> > helpful in that regard.
>
Then why keep posting the same question to a group that you have
already determined will not give you the answer you need? Why not
concentrate on the group that gave you your one helpful answer? By
your constant insistence in posting to this group you have alienated
the majority of the members, and by doing so you have lost any chance
of them even being remotely willing to help you even if they were
able.
That, coupled with the fact that someone here as already directed you
to where you can find the video but you have conveniently ignored him,
leads one to think that your stated purpose is just a sham to cover up
your pathetic need for attention.
Well you have got it, but don't push your luck. You are quickly
reaching the level in which you will begin to bore the group to such a
degree that you will find yourself completely ignored and thereby
nullifying your cheap, initial, victory in the trolling department.
In other words you should find more productive waters as this pond is
about to dry up for you.