Author Topic: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4  (Read 43158 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Forum Admin

  • Administrator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 4645
  • www.alexanderpalace.org
    • View Profile
    • Alexander Palace Time Machine
Re: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4
« Reply #270 on: October 24, 2007, 09:26:23 AM »
Alixz and Belochka are both quite right.  I gave Dick the opportunity on numerous occassions to show some, nay ANY small genuine evidence to support his supposition. He refuses, either by deliberate obfuscation or retreating to the vacuous "I know it to be true" with nothing more.

I'm afraid that this has now, for Mr. Schweitzer, become simply a tautology in the strictest definition:  Logic An empty or vacuous statement composed of simpler statements in a fashion that makes it logically true whether the simpler statements are factually true or false; for example, the statement Either it will rain tomorrow or it will not rain tomorrow.

He won't provide any evidence, he doesn't HAVE the evidence to provide.  I hear a fat lady singing....

Offline AGRBear

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6609
  • The road to truth is the best one to travel.
    • View Profile
    • Romanov's  Russia
Re: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4
« Reply #271 on: November 02, 2007, 12:51:25 PM »
Here is my  first  post when I started this thread:

AA's intestines specimens and questions that may surround them.


THE QUEST FOR ANASTASIA by John Klier and Mingay wrote on p. 225 about Martha Jefferson Hospital in Charlottesville where the specimens of AA was stored, found and later sent out to be tested for DNA / mtDNA:

"Was tampering possible?  The Martha Jefferson Hospital in Charlottesville has been storing specimens from patients since 1978, when it opened a pathology department.  The basement department was relatively easy to enter, according to visitors.  When the Manahan biopsy became the subject of such intense interest, the hospital authorites moved it to a safer place for storage, suggesting some concern by the hospital managment that the existing site was not secure."


At this point in the thread this is not about the matching of mtDNA with samples from Karl Maucher or Marg. Ellerick.    This is just about the possibility of someone  [matters not who] could have tampered with this evidence which is so important in proving AA was not GD Anatasia.

Let me add:  This is not a thread which has any purpose of condeming the hospital, it's staff, it's doctors or anyone responsible for the safe keeping of the specimen.  From reliable sources, I understand the hospital has an excellent reputation.

So let the discussion begin.

AGRBear

At this time,  all there are are theories because no one has evidence which they can provide  which proves a switch occured.

No one has disproved  the theory that it  was possible in those times for  an expert someone,  who was not connected with the hospital,  and,  knew the hospital's  habbits and processors,  to have  switched everything invovled with the samples of AA.

I don't believe anyone has suggested that the actual tests  on the samples provided by Dr.  Gill and  Dr. King  was in question.

Therefore,  those who   believe  AA was FS and not  GD Anastasia will   continue to  use the DNA/mtDNA tests from the intestine samples  to support  their conclusion.

Those who believe AA was GD Anastasia will continue to have doubts about the tampering or  switiching of the  intestine samples because they believe there were people who  had motive,  the money,  and the  opportunity to make it appear that AA was not GD Anastasia  and  added to this made it appear that AA and Karl Maucher were related.

The line was drawn deeper   in 2007   when  Russia announced that  the remains of Tsarvich Alexei and GD Maria may have been found  in July.

I doubt FA or Bob  will allow the thread  to continue much longer since they are convinced that  GD Anastasia was found in the mass grave and that the newly found remains are that of  GD Marie and Alexei.

Before this thread is  locked down,   I want to thank all for having  participating in this discussion.

AGRBear

« Last Edit: November 02, 2007, 12:56:29 PM by AGRBear »
"What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight."

Joubert, Pensees, No. 152

Offline Annie

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 4757
    • View Profile
    • Anna Anderson Exposed!
Re: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4
« Reply #272 on: November 02, 2007, 01:11:06 PM »
Quote
No one has disproved  the theory that it  was possible in those times for  an expert someone,  who was not connected with the hospital,  and,  knew the hospital's  habbits and processors,  to have  switched everything invovled with the samples of AA.

Bear, the problem is there is nothing to disprove, because there is NO evidence ANY wrongdoing or mixup occured other than the desires and fantasies of AA supporters who would prefer to believe that way. Therefore, the burden of proof is not on 'disproving' a switch, but PROVING one, and apparently no one can do that (because it didn't happen!)

Offline Forum Admin

  • Administrator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 4645
  • www.alexanderpalace.org
    • View Profile
    • Alexander Palace Time Machine
Re: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4
« Reply #273 on: November 02, 2007, 01:31:32 PM »
Annie is right, Bear.

ANYONE who has the notion (and that is all it is, after all) that the tissue sample of Anna Manahan was switched has the burden of proof to show otherwise.  Those who accept that the MJH kept accurate records and followed normal safety protocols, and accept that the sample labelled as Anastasia Manahan was indeed what Anna Manahan's have NOTHING to prove. 

The Schweitzers accepted it to be her pathology sample prior to the testing, Dr. Gill et al had no reason to question the accuracy of the label.  Scheitzer NOW disputes the label because he doesn't like the results of the test. Dr. Gill, however, continues to publish papers stating without reservation that the "mystery" off Anna Anderson Manahan has been "solved" (the words quoted are directly from Dr. Gill's published work.)  Since those who performed the testing are quite comfortable and have no doubts that the sample was indeed Anna Manahan's, the clear onus is on those who claim otherwise to show clear, genuine and convincing EVIDENCE otherwise.

Further, you are mistaken that Bob and I are "convinced that  GD Anastasia was found in the mass grave and that the newly found remains are that of  GD Marie and Alexei."  Bob is "convinced" that Anastasia was found in the mass grave, because he was there and saw the skulls for himself. I personally believe it is more likely than not as I feel Bob knows far more about the issue than I do, however, I also believe that we must wait for the recent remains to be tested and the results published and reviewed before we can "close the book" on the entire Anna Manahan charade.

Offline AGRBear

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6609
  • The road to truth is the best one to travel.
    • View Profile
    • Romanov's  Russia
Re: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4
« Reply #274 on: November 02, 2007, 04:53:31 PM »
.....[in part]...

I doubt FA or Bob  will allow the thread  to continue much longer since they are convinced that  GD Anastasia was found in the mass grave and that the newly found remains are that of  GD Marie and Alexei.


AGRBear


...[in part]....

Further, you are mistaken that Bob and I are "convinced that  GD Anastasia was found in the mass grave and that the newly found remains are that of  GD Marie and Alexei."  Bob is "convinced" that Anastasia was found in the mass grave, because he was there and saw the skulls for himself. I personally believe it is more likely than not as I feel Bob knows far more about the issue than I do, however, I also believe that we must wait for the recent remains to be tested and the results published and reviewed before we can "close the book" on the entire Anna Manahan charade.

I stand corrected on Bob and Rob's  points of view on the new discovery.

AGRBear
"What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight."

Joubert, Pensees, No. 152

Offline dmitri

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2018
    • View Profile
Re: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4
« Reply #275 on: November 02, 2007, 05:27:15 PM »
Yes roll on the results. The absurd AA/FS charade has well and truly reached its use by date already.

Offline LisaDavidson

  • Moderator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 2653
    • View Profile
Re: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4
« Reply #276 on: November 11, 2007, 09:37:00 PM »
.....[in part]...

I doubt FA or Bob  will allow the thread  to continue much longer since they are convinced that  GD Anastasia was found in the mass grave and that the newly found remains are that of  GD Marie and Alexei.


AGRBear


...[in part]....

Further, you are mistaken that Bob and I are "convinced that  GD Anastasia was found in the mass grave and that the newly found remains are that of  GD Marie and Alexei."  Bob is "convinced" that Anastasia was found in the mass grave, because he was there and saw the skulls for himself. I personally believe it is more likely than not as I feel Bob knows far more about the issue than I do, however, I also believe that we must wait for the recent remains to be tested and the results published and reviewed before we can "close the book" on the entire Anna Manahan charade.

I stand corrected on Bob and Rob's  points of view on the new discovery.

AGRBear

Also, Forum members should note that Bob Atchison's personal opinion about the remains have not resulted in his being any less committed to free speech with certain caveats on this Forum.

While Bob does believe he saw Grand Duchess Anastasia's skull among the 1991 remains, he nonetheless permits responsible discussion of many other points of view. I might add, the funding for the APTM and this Forum comes out of his own pocket.

Alixz

  • Guest
Re: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4
« Reply #277 on: May 25, 2009, 08:46:51 PM »
This thread is going to combine all of the physical evidence and DNA evidence and any other scientific evidence about Anna Anderson