|This is Bills map of SBC :
He drew it for Peter Fitzsimons but it didn’t make it into his book.
Its the best map ever because it shows exactly where everything is at the site
In March this year I asked the question “Is there a Stringybark Creek swindle underway right now?” It had been announced that plans were underway to upgrade signage at Stringybark Creek, and the Department responsible claimed to have involved all ‘stakeholders’ but I exposed the fact that an Australian amateur researcher who probably knows more about that place than anyone else on the planet, Bill Denheld had NOT been consulted. Bills clever and patient research had identified the exact place where the Kelly gang murdered Lonigan and Scanlan, and in other research he located the likely area in the bush where Kennedy was also murdered.
The scandal arose out of the fact that the Department had developed a relationship with a group promoting an alternative site to Bills, a group (the CSI team) that opposed and were hostile to Bill and his findings, and were determined to exclude him from the conversation in the hope they could persuade the authorities to recognise their site in preference to Bills. Undoubtedly there is a keen rivalry between this group and Bill, and both are convinced they have correctly identified the actual site of the Police camp and the murders. – nothing wrong with that – but the way to resolve it is by full disclosure and free and frank discussion of the merits of the two places. That however has not been the way in which the CSI team have operated – they have refused to engage anyone anywhere in the debate about their Report ( and have restated that as their tactic in their latest version of their Report) and instead lobbied the authorities directly.
I wrote then “Nothing more loudly speaks to what’s going on with Heritage Victoria and the DELWP as being a swindle, as this fact, that a widely acknowledged SBC expert and obvious major stakeholder has been deliberately excluded. This is a scandal!”
A year or two back, on their Members Only forum the CSI people were congratulating themselves on having persuaded DELWP to recognise their site, saying signage was already in preparation and all would be revealed in due course. They laughed among themselves at what Bills reaction would be when he discovered what they had managed to pull off. Earlier this year one of them wrote to me saying “In the latter half of 2017 it will become quite clear as to the site that merits endorsement as the most likely site for the police camp as there is work already commenced by independent organisation(s) and which will verify the claims of the respective champions of particular locations.” In fact at that time Bills work was not included in any sort of evaluation, and the only “champions” being considered were the CSI team. Earlier this year on their Members Only site, referring to this Blog someone wrote “A conclusion can be reached (and no doubt will be soon) without the lunatic babble demonstrated by ill-informed/ignorant anonymous contributors to site(s) which have no influence on the decision makers.”
It seemed to me at the time that it was almost a ‘fait accompli” that the CSI teams site was going to be officially recognised. Certainly, that’s what the CI team seemed to believe. So I wrote :“Heritage Victoria will become a laughing stock about a site that is almost sacred ground, a site they’ve allowed themselves to be tricked into misidentifying yet again because they’ve accepted pseudoscience and the authority of Ian Jones rather than consider the evidence, the logic and the genius of Bill Denheld.”
“People will be aghast to think Heritage Victoria and DELWP accepted an absurd argument based on trees in old photos, and unprovable assumptions about huts drawn on maps, and that their claimed consultation with “stakeholders” was a pretence, that a little guy like Bill who challenged the powerful Mr Jones was swept aside because he upset their cosy monopoly of the Kelly story”
I then urged everyone to protest to Heritage Victoria and to DELWP, and to send them copies of the Critique that I wrote of the CSI Report and urge them to reconsider.
Well, its been a huge win for Bill! And I think the CSI prediction that this site would have ‘no influence on the decision makers’ has been proven wrong! Clearly Heritage Victoria and DELWP have had a rethink. They don’t want to become a laughing stock for promoting a place promoted by the tin-foil-hat wearing brigade of pseudo-scientists whose arguments rest on claims about burls on trees and things nobody else can see in photos.
As Bill posted on this Blog last week, DELWP have acknowledged that he is indeed a major stakeholder, and he was invited to meet with the officers responsible for upgrading SBC, at the site itself. According to Bill they’ve accepted that the site promoted by Ian Jones for decades on the Eastern side of the creek is NOT where the Police camp was, and the pathway to it is being removed. Good on them.
In addition, DELWP are going to indicate roughly where the Kelly gang murdered Kennedy, a region of the bush Bill and Leo Kennedy identified several years ago. Visitors will be shocked to see how far Kennedy was chased, and they will never again even be tempted to believe Ned Kelly’s lies about the murders being ‘self defence’. Furthermore, DELWP are going to minimise any references to the Kelly gang and make the slain policemen the main focus of the site. This will be galling news for the Kelly fanatics who write things on Facebook about the police like ‘they got what they deserved’. They wont be able to visit SBC anymore and imagine Ned Kellys behaviour there was anything other than appalling, violent and murderous. Instead Lonigan, Scanlan and Kennedy will be honoured for their service to the Community, their dedication to their job and their duty to uphold peace and the law. Their sacrifice will never be forgotten.
Importantly for Bill and everyone who can see the logic of his argument, instead of recognising the CSI ‘site’ DELWP have decided not to identify ANY particular place as the site of the Police Camp. This tells me that they have not been convinced by the pseudo-science of the CSI team – and I hope my critiques helped in that regard – but politically they are currently unable to go any further. If they ever suggested to the CSI team that their ‘site’ was probably going to get ‘the nod’ then its clear they have now backed right away from that idea. That will be a huge blow for the CSI team who for some time have believed their site was about to be recognised officially and have been somewhat smugly congratulating themselves on getting their site ‘up’. But no, they’ve been knocked back. As for recognition of the true site, the place identified by Bill, I am sure in time it WILL be accepted. Obviously the CSI pseudoscientists are being pushed away and the momentum is now with Bill, but I suspect for political reasons the time is not yet right.
What I expect will happen is that many of the visitors who go to SBC will have heard about Bills work and will want to see the place he has identified. Visitors will be perplexed that its not identified, they will complain and ask why. In time, DELWP will be forced to respond, perhaps firstly by identifying Bills site as a ‘possible’ site of the Camp, then eventually, and perhaps after a proper archaeological evaluation, it will gain the full recognition it deserves.
(Visited 318 times)
47 Replies to “Bill is winning the battle of Stringybark Creek”
Dee you say…."Importantly for Bill and everyone who can see the logic of his argument, instead of recognising the CSI ‘site’ DELWP have decided not to identify ANY particular place as the site of the Police Camp"….This tells me that Bill's site is neither conclusive either and that more than likely the DELWP are leaving the signage off for a good reason. Probably because it is still in debate.
Bill's tenacity and strength of belief are all very well, but he has been wrong before on a few occasions with other Ned Kelly related claims and individualistic assumptions with an often inflexible agenda.
I think most agree that Bill should be acknowledged fairly like several others for his contribution and effort in analysing the SBC site.
Bill's theory (and diagrams) on SBC are an interesting read but are obviously not conclusive for the DELWP.
Not being an insider I am obviously having to speculate at what was going though the minds of the DELWP people when they decided to remove the Jones site and replace it with nothing. Thats a situation I don't believe makes sense in the long term, but in the short term it may be as you say , that its still in 'debate'. However, unless the claims and hints made by the CSI people were made up BS, it would seem the authorities had at least been leaning to the CSI site, but the debate that we have promoted has prompted them to a complete re-think. Inevitably, logic and science will prevail over pseudo-science, so in the fullness of time, now that Bills work is at last on their radar, the two huts site will receive its deserved official recognition.
A N Y O N E who has visited Bill's site with Bill knows it is absolutely the correct place. When Bill produces the 1878 Burman photo during his talk, listeners can clearly see today's identical view in the background.
That can't be done at the CSI site or Jones's, no matter where you look.
Send in the archaeologists !
From the above diatribe:
"A year or two back, on their Members Only forum the CSI"
Could you please give a link to the CSI team's members only forum as I have not been able to find any such forum of the CSi teams
There has never been a CSI forum as such.There was Bruce Johnsons kc2000 site and Chucks forum where SBC was robustly debated.Bill will confirm this as well.The kc2000 debate is still shown on Bills Ironicon site.The above anonymous is 100% correct,there is no such link.
Yes, I was referring to the kc2000 forum which is a closed forum that is not accepting any new members. Its where all the CSI team announcements are made, such as the news that as of 8 days ago an updated version of the CSI report is available.
There is at least one other Forum on the topic of SBC but nothing has happened there for a very long time. The CSI announced somewhere a couple of years back that they wouldn't bother to debate the topic any more but rather let the Authorities read their report and make their minds up accordingly. Well, it seems they have and with the latest information it seems they've dropped their initial enthusiasm for the CSI site And, as they also reported more recently, The Truth will prevail!
Please review the following links to two photographs taken in the same location:
You say …… “When Bill produces the 1878 Burman photo during his talk, listeners can clearly see today’s identical view in the background.”
Can you explain why you think the view in the background is identical. Thank you.
That HIVE OF INACTIVITY – Fitzy's FB hatepage – has nothing to say about any of this. He is still directing the few active members of his hate site towards expensive eBay copies of Frank Hare's "The Last of the Bushrangers".
The Delwp update to stakeholders today was a bit disappointing as the site of the police murders identified by Bill Denheld still won't be featured in the new layout. This is despite more than 40 years of misleading signage in the vicinity. I remember the tree with the tiny metal helmet from those times. Visitors today are entitled to correctness.
I haven't read the Delwp associated papers yet and will try to digest them tomorrow…
Francis Hare's "The Last of the Bushrangers" 4th edn can be read and downloaded free as a PDF from https://archive.org/details/lastbushrangers00haregoog
It's a good idea to get books as PDFs so you can word search. The Hare PDF is a big file – over 11 MB, so it can take a while to download.
Could Bill Denheld please explain why his long time friend Gary Dean is part of the CSI team led by Linton Briggs and why Gary thinks the site 50 yards south of the Kelly tree is the correct one?After all Gary along with Bill actually discovered the first of two fireplaces at the so called Bill Denheld site.Bill after further investigation found the second fireplace himself.Gary or Linton have never ever given their own personal opinions on this subject publicly with Glen Standing and Kelvyn Gill doing all the explaining.Linton originally thought the shootout site was southwest of the current car park.This was also the case at the Beechworth talk a few years ago with same gentlemen of the CSI team missing.The authorities are simply being scared of making an error yet again.I am disappointed that they are removing the yellow brick road as it is a very pleaasant walk along its route,nice and peaceful.Men from Bills team and the CSI have commented in the past that the authorities will never make a definitive decision and that certainly appears to still be the case right up until today.As the 2 contested sites are about 200 mtrs apart it is impossible to locate Michael Kennedys killing location without the shootout site being identified.As a matter of interest Bill do you think Shiela Hutchison may have changed her opinion on where the correct site is?Shiela knows this area even better than Bill and it would be very interesting to know what she thinks now.If I was a descendant of the murdered policemen I would certainly like the site confirmed but will it?
Send in the archaeologists so says Horrie.
Well they have been in the area earlier this year and whatever they did (one thing at least was examine the hut site remnants identified in the CSI mob's report), which they say that this may be the remnants of the shingled hut and include a quote from Kenneally made by Dan that " reported that the police were at the shingled hut on Stringybark Creek, and THAT THEIR TENT WAS PITCHED IN THE OPEN SPACE NEARBY". And Ned Kelly then called out asking McIntyre WHO WAS IN THE HUT. The latter – McIntyre replied no one.
It can reasonably be deduced from these observations that:
1. That the police camp was between Ned and the hut so described.
2. Ned would certainly have been able to deduce – IF THE HUT WAS AT THE spot where the police had camped, that the hut was unoccupied, being able to see it clearly from where he (Ned) was at the time of his enquiry, and
3. As the hut was further away from the camp spot (and therefore further away from Ned) Ned needed to ask McIntyre the question.
So the claim by the CSI team merits serious consideration, as do the other things simply ignored by Bill such as the location of the spring identified by the CSI team (remember Dan was sent to it to watch for the return of the police to camp), and Bill's ridiculous claim he has made that the creek is the spring.
A most detailed survey document clearly providing a cross section layout which conforms to the Herald's special reporter's report, included in the CSI report, which adds to the positioning of the spot of the police camp.
The report is extensive, and provides much evidence in support of their claim, it does not rely on two photographs !! (which it seems is all that Bill has to go on)but includes them as part of the detailed analysis of ALL things that need consideration.
So now Horrie et al and Dee when you do a considered rebuttal to each and all the evidence in the CSI teams report then perhaps your views will be taken with more seriousness.
The report is a must read for any serious discussion to be had and not just the shrill, ill informed (my guess is that Horrie has never spent the time or effort to seriously examine the report)commentary uttered.
The DELWP people doing the work at Stringybark to provide new signage and a new walk "in the general vicinity of where Constable McIntyre escaped and Sergeant Kennedy was killed" have got it right.
I think the CSI team would be satisfied.
Thank you Stuart, that will save me a bit of dough.
Have to agree with you Horrie as it seems to me, after having visited SBC, that Bill's identification of the correct site is spot-on. I suspect that the DELWP thought that removing the walking path to the wrong site would be enough controversy for now. From what Bill has said, they do accept his site as the most likely location of the police camp and the shootout. Perhaps they might revisit this in the future along with suggestions of an archeological dig at that site.
Kenneally as a source? You HAVE to be joking!
And its always a mistake to believe anything Ned Kelly said – he was a notorious liar. All that garbage he wrote about misidentifying Lonigan and pretending he thought there were others in the TENT…
I HAVE already rebutted the CSI report – its a joke! All you've managed to do in response is label it shrill and ill-informed. And as for the stupid red herring about the spring is a creek – thats what Ian Jones believed FOR YEARS – that the Creek WAS the spring! The point is, a case can be made for it and nobody can be sure what Ned meant – its a tiny red herring that the desperate CSI mob use to distract from the huge deficits in their case. Such as saying a bit of temporarily swampy wet ground is a spring? Give me a break! Such as the absurd notion that the photographer put all the actors in completely the wrong place when he took the photos of the place where Lonigan died? Such as you can see a Kelly tree in the background of the Burman photos? Yeah, right!
This thing has a long way to go yet.
Y A W N…
Hi Brian, you're welcome. Also, another Ian Jones error: According to Jones in “Man & Myth” 162-3, in Kelly’s words the police wore “the hated ‘jacket’: the man who had his ammunition pouch thrown across his shoulder with the symbol of Victoria Regina emblazoned on it… who strode through the dusty streets of little towns in his highly-polished jack boots, with his spurs and his splendid black military-looking helmet.… The Irishman in this uniform was a hated figure” to the Irish-Australian selectors. This is nonsense. The Victoria Police uniform ceased to have a military look in 1877, a year before the Kelly outbreak, when a new design with a British "bobby" style, modelled on that of the British Metropolitan Police, was introduced, as can be seen in an 1877 photograph of Constable Fitzpatrick. a majority of the police then were Irish background, and most selectors including Irish-Australians were law-abiding and in favour of the Kelly gang's extermination, as it was called in the papers of the day.
The country police were not hated figures except by criminal low-life. There was a massive community outcry in NE Vic at the SBC murders, and tons of evidence that Kennedy in particular, but the others also, were highly respected in their communities. Jones seems to have let his wrong-headed loathing for Fitzpatrick and his Kenneally-inspired selective reading of the Royal Commission reports and their criticism of the police higher-ups warp his whole view of the colonial police force. Such is life.
For some reason the above links to these photos are not working. These images are from the IRONICON web site.
twohutsslopesteve.jpg Front cover of Bills final document
http://www.ironicon.com.au/images/two-huts-site-slope-700.jpg Bottom of page 5. Copy of Ned Kelly Truth Forum /Stringybark Creek Debate . Link can be found on ironicon web site.
Dee, you have totally demolished the CSI report (actually several times). It is time-wasting pseudo-science, as you wrote (but I thought you were being far too kind). There is no 'evidence' in the CSI team's report to rebut. It is pure guesswork and wishful thinking.
Shiela Hutchison rings a tiny bell. But she is nowhere acknowledged as a SBC expert so far as I know. The CSI group and their supporters have disgracefully been attacking Bill for more than a decade. Kelvyn and others on another forum/site kept promising to deliver decisive evidence for the CSI site – but never did! I made several loud, acidic comments there myself.
Bill rebuilt that site which is well worth a visit. All the material raised here was dealt with there and disproved. The CSI group has never produced evidence for any another site.
Bill certainly has!
Dee, Bill says Stringybark Creek was a spring!
In The Kelly Gang Unmasked book it says: "Stringybark Creek itself was barely a trickle for much of the year, little more than a ditch with a shallow watercourse, sometimes only centimetres wide. Yet, for a small camp, here was a supply of water ample for cooking, laundry and personal hygiene, and cups of tea aplenty" (p. 68).
Irrespective of whether Stringybark Creek was a creek or a spring (which is a furphy anyway), Bill has correctly identified the site of the Police Camp where the police murders took place. Although acknowledged by most thinking people – like Prof. Tim Flannery and John Doyle, Ian MacFarlane and hundreds of others – who know Bill's site is the right place, haters continue to attack Bill. This is is bizzarre because Bill supports Ned probably more than any of them.
Once again we see why Jones' take on the Kelly story is so frustrating. It is widely accepted by many as the bible on the story but when closely examined errors, or downright lies such as this continue to surface. And as we have seen on so many occasions, Ian Jones was aware of these mistakes and inaccuracies but published them anyway.
I presume that seeing as the CSI group feel so strongly about their findings that they would have made some sort of submission to the DELWP's current project. If so, it seems that the DELWP have not at this time taken the group's findings on-board. Hence the removal of the walking track. But as 'Anonymous' feels so strongly about the CSI findings, perhaps he can enlighten us on the absence of the'slope'?
Stringybark Creek Debate. (page 6) Horrie wrote.
"Brian, dear fellow, you have to read what people say carefully.Bill did not say there were no other slopes along SBC. He did say his photo shows the only slope [that fits with Burman perfectly] proving the true site."
The slopes around the Kelly Tree are much higher and don't fit Burman at all.
You know exactly which slope I am referring to. I have been to SBC and I am aware of the many slopes in the area. But as you are a so-called expert on SBC you would know that.
First of all I would like to say that the murder site of Michael Kennedy will NEVER be ratified as its location is totally unknown despite Bill and Leos good efforts.The men that located Sgt Kennedys body all gave conflicting reports on distances from the campsite and also directions from it.Sparrow who found the body and Orr say it was to the NW of the site which would mean near Germans Creek a short distance from where the Kelly gang camped.Other identities including Pewtress said the NE,distances quoted were from a qtr of a mile to a mile and this would mean somewhere near the current camping ground and the Tatong/Tolmie road only if the campsite was the 2 huts location.. Other people say that Kennedy fled in the same direction as McIntyre did to the north then the the northwest towards the Benalla/Mansfield road thus would mean also towards Germans Creek too.If By putting up a sign saying Michael Kennedy was killed somewhere in this area would be totally false in my opinion just as the current campsite location is.German Creek and the NE location near the campsite are quite a distance apart and only one location can be correct.Bill and Leo may have found the correct site but can it be proved? I honestly believe it cannot simply because of all the conflicting evidence provided by men nearly 140 years ago.
Further to that, Royal Commission 1883 General Report, p. xi, “during the Kelly pursuit, men were sent up to do duty in the North Eastern District without any knowledge of the use of the firearms with which they were entrusted. Even at the present time a foot constable is not supposed to undergo any preparatory training for the proper discharge of his duties. This neglect of training seems to have arisen from a desire to avoid imparting a military character to the force. Section 336 of the Regulations declares that "as the police force is not a. military but a civil force, all unnecessary military parade and show, as well as the frequent and unnecessary parade of firearms and other weapons, is to be avoided’." So much for "jack-boots Jones".
Page xiii, “The transfer of very efficient constables from stations in the North-Eastern District, and the substitution of others in every way inferior, had much to do with the impunity with which the Kelly family and their sympathizers were enabled to carry on a wholesale system of horse stealing for years”. Nothing about republican politics.
Royal Commission 1881 Charges against members of the Police Force, Section 1, notes nearly 350 citizens from the North-Eastern police district praised Sgt Steele for his work during the Kelly outbreak and petitioned against being censured by the Commission. That’s more citizens for Steele than there were sympathizers for the Kelly gang!
I think you're right – in the end its guesswork, but if its intelligent guesswork it could be fair to conclude by saying something like 'the best evidence is that Kennedy probably died somewhere around here'
I understood the argument about exactly where to centre on maybe three points – various estimates of distance, McIntyres flight to the north then west, and the claim that Kennedy crossed the creek. Now, when everyone thought the ambush site was on the EAST, this was all put together to a proposal that Kennedys body would be in the North WEST. But as we know when they were searching the NW they couldn't find him, until someone – Sparrow? – went somewhere else and found him. It COULD have been a spot in the NW but then, if we now accept the ambush site was on the WEST not the EAST, then the only place that was also OVER the creek would be the North EAST.
So, the critical element is really the claim that Kennedy was found on the other side of the creek from the camp. Who made THAT claim? Do we think its a reliable claim? Did others agree with it? If we accept that claim as reliable then Kennedys body could only have been somewhere in the NE.
You asked to be enlightened on the absence of the slope. Horrie says that the slope/s near the Kelly tree are much higher than Bills site and do not fit the Burman image. Perhaps you had best talk with Horrie about this. Cheers
Bill is not winning the battle of Stringybark Creek. Just look at the proposed walking trail in the recent Stringy bark Creek interpretation strategy documents made available recently by the delwp people.
See where the southerly end of the trail meanders – in the general vicinity of the Kelly tree !! and so nowhere near the further southern rocks which have been the subject of all this hoo hah about them being the 2 huts and therefore the alleged site of the camp made by the police.
The new report by the csi is also very interesting and has an excellent depiction of the trajectory of the Scanlan bullet from his location some 250 metres to the north of the rocks (and by definition from the vicinity of the csi police camp site) so adding yet another piece of PRIMARY EVIDENCE to their case.
I would think the people of the csi work would be OK with the proposed walking trail as it goes close by their suggested general vicinity for the police camp.
I don't think I need to speak to Horrie 'Anonymous' as he seems to be a strong supporter of Billi's location. But thanks for your kind advice anyway. And cheers to you.
Bill Denheld has already won this. His presentation at his Two Huts site with the Burman backdrop is decisive and completely convincing. He hasn't won DELWP support yet – but that will come when everyone eventually agrees he is right.
The forthcoming DELWP signage will be the poorer for not properly identifying Bill's pure gold research and clear identification of the correct site. That is where the stone monument for the fallen, murdered police should be erected.
On the exact spot where Constable Lonigan was murdered, and nearby where Constable Scanlon was murdered.
Delwp, hurry up and do the right thing!
The retired truck driver and internet serial pest Fitzy has endorsed the ludicrous CSI site on his FB hatepage against an anti-Kelly book:
"The CSI@SBC Site.
"This site fits all the requirements and measurements of McIntyre’s map and descriptions along with those descriptions given by various people who were involved in recovering the police bodies".
No it doesn't.
The diagrams do not show anything other than the position of the logs and Lonigan's position
Fitzy is using his wild unfinished Lonigan nonsense yet again. He goes on to try to demolish Bill Denheld's correct site with silly misquotes and incorrect analysis.
This guy is a time-wasting megafool. And his hatesite is laughable junk!
Jimmy Nelson (??) So you too are unable to explain correctly. IF you have taken the time to look at the very detailed McIntyre diagram in which he not only shows Lonigans position but also the position of the three other police – at 4 moments in the ensuring gun fight, as well as a compass providing directional info and the points to the major towns nearby (you are probably ignorant of the very existence of this detailed diagram reproduced in the CSI report and analysed therein) then your comment that The diagrams do not show anything other than the position of the logs and Lonigan's position is CLEARLY RUBBISH
Speaking of Lonigan's position 'Anonymous', I wonder when Fitzy will release his long awaited report on the multiple wounds. If you know him, perhaps you might like to ask him. Cheers.
You say that the Bill’s presentation at his Two Hut site with the Burman backdrop (image) is decisive and completely convincing. You have also said that the slope near the Kelly tree is much higher than Bill’s site.
Compare the two images above.I fail to see how the backdrop or the slope match the Burman image. Comparably it is clearly evident that a real person would twice the height of the man with his arm raised in the super imposed image over cropped image and provides a true indication of the slope height. Can you explain why you think the view in the background is identical. Thank you. NML
I think there are two anonymice here. One believes in Bill's site. The other doesn't. The one that doesn't keeps asking dumb questions here that noone could answer.
The Macfarlane book has both of the McIntyre diagrams of the SBC murder scene. A first I think. No wonder Fitzy treasures it so much.
I don't think I have ever discussed slopes. You quote me but I have no idea what you are talking about. I've been to SBC several times but never to measure anything, least of all slopes.
All I am saying is that when Bill holds up the Burman photo of 1878 at his Two Huts site presentation, there it is plainly in the background for all to see. Of course, if I took a photo it would not be absolutely identical. But it is obvious its the same place.
You keep asking people here to explain things to you. But your questions are mystifying and a bit obtuse.
I should have made it more clear. At the presentation my wife and I were at, Bill held up an A3 blow up of the Burman photo, which is why everyone at his presentation could clearly see the backgrounds were the same.
[He didn't use any contraption or 'viewer scope', as you outdatedly call it on your current blog Fitzy, it was just the Burman blowup plain and simple. Easy for all to see].
He makes claims that parts of Bill's analysis are not scientific. How would he know. He is not a scientist. He is just a retired truck driver meddling with what he doesn't faintly understand.
I was interested in your opinion on what it was that convinced you about Bill’s site. My apologies can understand my questions seemed a little obtuse.Thank you for your reply and added info. Appreciated.
It was a while ago that you posted this so you may have forgotten.
http://www.ironicon.com.au. scroll down and you will find a copy of the Stringy Bark Creek dee-bate April 2014. Page 6. 3rd post down. You will find your post.
"Brian, dear fellow, you have to read what people say carefully. Bill did not say there were no other slopes along SBC. He did say his photo shows the only slope [that fits with Burman perfectly] proving the true site. The slopes around the Kelly Tree are much higher and don’t fit Burman at all.” Trust that clears that one up. NML
As far as I’m concerned I don’t care what a person does or did for a living. It’s all the same to me. Without truck drivers the supermarket stores would have no dunny paper…..Even scientists need dunny paper. Some need to use it on a more than regular basis. Cheers
I presume that your post is directed at me. I have looked at the Ironicon site and am still having trouble of where the post is you are talking about. Perhaps you can provide me with a direct link to it please?
You will also find the the image I am referring to on the same SBC- Dee-bate… active Link
The image on the bottom of page 5
Please compare that to this image on:
The CSI @ SBC Report is Pseudo-Science September 2016 Blog
(Dee) “flogged this (imagetwohutsslopesteve.jpg) from Bill – it shows nicely the match up between the Burman Photos and how it looks today.
No Brian, I was not directing that post to you. As far as I’m concerned I don’t care what a person does or did for a living. It’s all the same to me. Sorry, I can’t work out how to post pictures or Links. I’m not very experienced with blogs. However, Bill has kindly provided a link that works on the current …
The Madness of the CSI Case current discussion. Click on SBC- Dee-bate.
Page 6. 3rd post down. You will find Horrie’s post. NML
Looking easterly at the Kelly tree site the slope on eastern bank rises from left to right. (as in the Burman pic)
Bill set up his laser level near the Kelly tree and pointed it down the creek (left side) and measured the slope is at it’s lowest end.
He provides a diagram (Burman Photo 1 cross section with slope) Demo of a 1/3rds division. Ground/Slope/Other.
But no comparative demonstration at the two hut site. No laser level pointing over Kennedy’s hat (etc) to the slope behind.
Please compare the height of the gentleman to the tree and the slope behind him in of the both images (As listed above)
Clearly a real person would twice the height of the man in the image collage ( twohutsslopesteve.jpg Front cover of Bills final document )
Therefore the slope would need to be twice the height as the one that is shown in this image. NML
I appreciate the discussion and the effort but we need to be more scientific.
Always depending on how close a photo is take of a person the bigger or smaller he looks.
This may be too technical but, all I want the CSI fellas to do is build themselves a Viewer Scope.
With felt pen draw the outline of the Burman photo image onto a clear plastic A3 sheet and mount it on a beam allowing a peep hole bracket at the other end through which the eye can view their scene. The peep hole needs to be moved in or out depending on the focal length or telescopics.
Set it up on a tripod pointing in the direction they believe the Burman photo was taken.
I have been looking all through that Kelly tree area with my viewer scope , and yes there is a deep slope to the east bank in on area, BUT its not visible through a camera or the viewer scope and capture an imagelike in the Burman photo set up on a tripod. You have to be able to create a similar scene with one view. Its no use saying oh look at that deep slope if only a fraction of it is going to be visible in a photo. Its no use lifting the camera view up to view the slope when the foreground with logs is not in correct perspective.
If the CSI fellas can show us a view that matches the Burman photo scene near the Kelly Tree they may have a case.
So here is the challenge to do just that.
Try this link-
Dear Mr ledbury.
You think that McFarlane was the first to publish the McIntyre map which is held by the Victoria Police, but I beg to differ.
Mr Gills book of 2012 has the map and his book was also published in 2012. I can highly recommend it and now his updated book of 2017 as compulsory reading as it is all facts and takes no side in the pro and anti debates which rage from time to time.
I have both his 2012 and 2017 books and find them very useful. He (Mr Gill) has a web site.
Neither of you are correct, Willhelm and Jim as my copy of the csi report of 2012 has the both the first sketch by McIntyre and his far later very explicit diagram which was first shown to the public by the police people at their stand at Beechworths annual ned Kelly weekend and I had my csi report months before the McFarlane book came out. So a feather in the caps of the csi people on this.
“Always depending on how close a photo is take of a person the bigger or smaller he looks.”
(Obviously this would also apply to the slope in the background)
Compare the height of the gentleman to the tree and the slope behind him in this image
http://www.ironicon.com.au/images/two-huts-site-slope-700.jpg Bottom of page 5. (In Above Link.)
To the Then and Now images page 1 (Above Link) Same tree shown in the background of both images.
Clearly a real person would be much taller than the hand drawn image of the man with his arm raised in the Now image. NML