Muskie Discussion Forums

Forums | Calendars | Albums | Quotes | Language | Blogs Search | Statistics | User Listing
You are logged in as a guest. ( logon | register )
Moderators: sworrall, Slamr

View previous thread :: View next thread
Jump to page : 1 2 3
Now viewing page 3 [30 messages per page]

More Muskie Fishing -> Muskie Biology -> Hall verdict on Spray record
 
Message Subject: Hall verdict on Spray record
Larry Ramsell
Posted 1/19/2006 5:53 PM (#172944 - in reply to #172403)
Subject: RE: Hall verdict on Spray record




Posts: 1291


Location: Hayward, Wisconsin
Mr. Worrall:

Thank you. Hope you like this one too:

I thought a letter I just ran across might be of benefit at this point in time. I received it from Hall President John Dettloff some time ago during his Lawton investigation (he and I had been at odds during his investigation):

"...I must say I have a lot of admiration for you because you aren't putting your feelings above the truth. Now that you know all of the facts, you have the guts to care only about making sure our muskie history is corrected and correcting any injustices that were caused by falsifications. That is the mark of a great historian and, believe me, I'll make sure to publically support you the best I can and to relay these thoughts...So I think you have nothing to worry about. Your involvement in this matter may be late in coming but is, never the less, very important in helping to insure this matter of a falsified world record isn't swept under the rug, our history corrected, and any injustices done to the true world record holder are rectified."

Well folks, my principals haven't changed, but I guess John's "public support" of me doesn't apply to Louie.

Musky regards,
Larry Ramsell

IGotTheFeverBIG
Posted 1/19/2006 8:29 PM (#172971 - in reply to #172887)
Subject: RE: Hall verdict on Spray record





Posts: 43


Location: S. Wisconsin
I assume more people will start playing with these pictures, and you will see a lot more comparison's like mine, only better. Awareness will serve to uncover the truth. It's only a matter of time...

ckarren- GUH-REAT post. Even an non-pro can see that little "k" is all wrong. If you go through the REST of those affadavits, they are very vague and non committal. Excellent points. At least by the ones with NO conflict of interest.

But just that one frogery ALONE...proves FRAUD...tosses out ALL of Spray's records...not my rules, THEIR'S...

Doesn't it seem like Louie handed over the second Affadavit in 1979 to the FWFHF and NOT Field & Stream? I wonder why he did not want both looked at at once...?

If you were around Louie you would have to keep an eye on your wallet...;)

IGotTheFeverBIG
Posted 1/19/2006 8:36 PM (#172972 - in reply to #172944)
Subject: RE: Hall verdict on Spray record





Posts: 43


Location: S. Wisconsin
Fantastic Posts Larry...I can't praise your class and dedication enough...between your work in the WMRP, your Knowledge of History, and your support of the Truth in the WR controversy...

I guarantee 200 years from now, YOUR NAME will be associated with the Mighty Muskellunge more than any other human being...yes even Lou Spray...;)

Thank you for...just being you...I mean it.



Edited by IGotTheFeverBIG 1/19/2006 9:44 PM
ToddM
Posted 1/19/2006 9:48 PM (#172981 - in reply to #172403)
Subject: RE: Hall verdict on Spray record





Posts: 20212


Location: oswego, il
The fact that Detlofff used a 51" musky for his example here and not a replica of the actual spray fish would lead me to believe he does actually believe the fish is real either.
HGN
Posted 1/23/2006 8:30 AM (#173398 - in reply to #172403)
Subject: RE: Hall verdict on Spray record


History tells us that ALL cover-ups get exposed in due time, theFWFHoS couldn't have been more obvious. Tick-tock,tick-tock
firstsixfeet
Posted 1/31/2006 9:31 PM (#175020 - in reply to #173398)
Subject: RE: Hall verdict on Spray record




Posts: 2361


HGN - 1/23/2006 8:30 AM

History tells us that ALL cover-ups get exposed in due time, theFWFHoS couldn't have been more obvious. Tick-tock,tick-tock


Usually they are exposed because someone keeps a real record, or spills the beans. Nobody has spilled the beans on this one. I do not see anywhere that states these signatures that so much is made of are actually signatures of who is there,or just a list of who is there. I loved somebody claiming that academia should not be involved in the analysis of this fish. Of course most of the technique and methodology devoloped to deal with these type of problems come right from academia to start with, and, this is the type of inane problem they love to deal with. Somebody should get these photos to MIT and Harvard graduate classes, bet they would love them. It(the anti-academia argument)is an extended version of how people try and blow off intelligence by claiming "well, he might be book smart but he doesn't have any common sense". If memory serves that same individual making the argument has in the past lifted up his own certificates etc. as proof of his own veracity in arguments, LOL, but maybe my memory is slipping. Either way, I think I will let them figure this one out by themselves without my comments on their proofs or lack thereof. I just read this thread. Funny stuff.
sworrall
Posted 2/1/2006 8:33 AM (#175078 - in reply to #175020)
Subject: RE: Hall verdict on Spray record





Posts: 32880


Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin
I hope the next round will be more conclusive. Recreating the exact picture parameters should not be impossible, should it? Sue could make the fish in a day out of Wally World craft cloths and fillers, I bet. Or, she could wait until the Goon trip and use the fish she intends to catch.
Jump to page : 1 2 3
Now viewing page 3 [30 messages per page]
Jump to forum :
Search this forum
Printer friendly version
E-mail a link to this thread

(Delete all cookies set by this site)