What a bunch of crap! I've only seen one episode of this series, but it's also all I could stand. This episode is not only ridiculously unscientific in its approach, it's dangerously so because it presents a bunch of illogical supposition as fact and deductive logic. This is dangerous because those unfamiliar with actual critical thinking will be fooled by the scientific-sounding false logic into thinking this makes sense and the conclusion is correct. The truth is they start out with a conclusion and cherry-pick just the vague facts that they can shoehorn to fit their chosen narrative. They twist the interpretation of selected bits of folklore, innuendo, and mystique to try to make connections that don't exist. The "symbols" used as "evidence" are so vague as to be meaningless and the assumptions the host makes are nothing more than mental leaps to overcome his biased desire to prove his premise. Starting with a conclusion and work backward by selectively choosing just the so-called "facts" to support their hypothesis is the FURTHEST THING from the scientific method. In fact it's what con-men and fake psychics do to trick people into believing them. This is at best dishonest and at worst harmful because it takes advantage of the human brain's desire for order. The host does nothing but string together isolated bits of dubious information from so-called experts to weave a preconceived narrative. At one point he reconnects with a supposed "Ripper expert" names Dr. Dan (a doctor of what and from where should be asked), a nutter who looks like they may have had to physically wrestle to run a comb through his hair. The host relates that the description the police were working from at that time described the suspect as having "dark hair, a mustache, a dark suit, and about 30 years old". The host then asks this self-appointed "expert" to compare that to an equally vague description of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. "Doctor" Dan obliges citing "evidence" reminiscent of the Salem Witch Trials including things like 'Doyle was 29, had a mustache and always wore a suit". (Well then, he must be guilty). From this the host concludes that Jack the Ripper must be Arthur Conan Doyle because of the eerily similar, but exceptionally vague and useless description. The number of people in London matching that description at the time was probably in the millions. The Vaughn description about a man in 1888 London is about as useful as trying to find a specific hipster in 2019 Brooklyn by describing him as "mid-20's, Caucasian, with a beard, and jeans". Literally 1/4 of the population in London at the time was about 30, dark haired, with a mustache and a suit-(is this a spoof and I just didn't realize it?) The worst is a modern "composite sketch" of this uselessly vague description that he compares to a photo of Conan Doyle. First, this is based on witness accounts which are proven to be the absolutely least reliable form of evidence (look it up), then the description is so vague as to be useless, and despite all this, they are going to develop a sketch? C'Mon! Apparently the absurdity of a sketch done 100 years after a crime, without ever talking to a witness, based on a loose description of just '30 years old, dark hair, and a mustache' is lost on this show. I'd call it a joke, but this is far too damaging to rational thought to be funny. With the only physical descriptors being '30, dark hair and mustache', the artist is able to make the suspect look like anyone (including a generic white guy). And what does Doyle look like?, you guessed it, a very generic white guy. Bingo, call off the search, we've got our man!
At one point he tries to prove that the Ripper had to have medical training (because Doyle did). This theory is based on the Ripper mutilating a woman in about 9 minutes and taking out her kidney. When the host replicates the situation without any medical training, he does it very calmly and painfully slowly. We get the sense that he's taking his time to prove that it would take a layman more than 9 minutes. Despite dragging his feet, he completes the dissection in well under 5 minutes however, he inexplicably concludes "I'm convinced it would have taken me double that if I'd had the same conditions he did". He goes on to make the assumption that it was "pitch black" when the Ripper killed, but somehow completely ignores the excited state of the killer and the sense of urgency he would have felt. He falsely states that medical training would be needed to find the kidney, but the medical professional rightly points out that this would be true only if the goal was to find the kidney specifically. The truth is that the kidney had no particular significance to the Ripper. It just happens to be what he took. He could have just as easily taken the spleen, the heart, or gall bladder, but again this is a fact ignored by the host. In fact, in his typical false-logic that is easily missed by the fact that the host sneaks in such statements, he assumes the kidney was the goal rather than just a random organ taken by the killer. This baseless assumption that the killer targeted the kidney leads to view to the conclusion the host wants-The Ripper must have had medical training which means Doyle is a likely suspect. This example is typical of how the host manipulated the viewer and leads them around by the nose...and it's slimy as hell.
Finally, the host uses the logical fallacy of "appeal to authority" by invoking hiss status as a Freemason. If true, he should be expelled from the Freemasons for dishonesty. Masonry is an organization that teaches morality and the deception the host engages in is immoral. He interprets every scratch, scrawl, and scribble as Masonic in nature. From the makers marks on stones to a bit of graffito scrawled on the wall in the neighborhood where a murder was committed and where The Ripper May have walked past. I've been a Mason for over a decade and none of the symbols he attributes to Masonry are correct. The "V" is not Masonic (although in a rare moment of honesty he passingly admits that a "V" or "^" has been used as a symbol to represent an endless list of ideas by countless cultures and individuals. In this case though, it can only mean The Ripper was a Freemason. Finding stones etched with "+" and an "X" with dots between each of the lines are also supposed to be Masonic in nature. And even though as a Past Master, I've never heard of any such thing, the host has no trouble connecting them to Masonry. Then comes the farce of following the stones to the United Grand Lodge of England (UGLE). They never tell you that the marked stones also lead in the opposite direction from their start point and continue well past the UGLE. In this presentation the stones are supposed to be a hidden message to lead you from their chosen start point to their chosen end point. -please!
Rather than interpreting the word "Juwes" found in the graffito blocks from a murder scene as a misspelling by a under-educated individual or recognizing that word spellings were often varied and spelled phonetically especially by the uneducated in the 19th century, he contorts the meaning of allegorical tale of 3 brothers, Jubela, Jubelo, and Jubelum. He claims he's heard them referred to as the "Ju's". This is yet another contortion by the host to shoehorn Masonry into his theory because Doyle was a Mason. In Masonic ritual these characters are NEVER referred to as the Ju's for several reasons. 1) associating violent criminals like these ruffians with the Jewish identity would be anti-Semitic and highly offensive to Jewish Masons. And Masonry is based on accepting all men in harmony so decisiveness is eliminated from Lodges 2) these characters already have a collective name, "the 3 ruffians" so there's never been a need to invent another term 3) if we gave the host the benefit of the doubt and assume he isn't again purposely misleading us to advance his theory and hypothetically assume that he actually did hear these characters referred to as Ju's, it would have been a local thing because this use is not common-it would not be a Masonic thing, but an individual thing 4) again, in a hypothetical case that such a word existed and was written it would not contain a "W" and be spelled "Juwes" but rather "Ju's"- the ruffians' names are Ju-bela Ju-belo, and Ju-belum not Jew-bela, etc. 5) as a doctor and renowned author, Doyle was an exceptionally well-educated and literate man and would not have misspelled "Jews " if that's what he intended.
If you have a brain in your head avoid this show.
At one point he tries to prove that the Ripper had to have medical training (because Doyle did). This theory is based on the Ripper mutilating a woman in about 9 minutes and taking out her kidney. When the host replicates the situation without any medical training, he does it very calmly and painfully slowly. We get the sense that he's taking his time to prove that it would take a layman more than 9 minutes. Despite dragging his feet, he completes the dissection in well under 5 minutes however, he inexplicably concludes "I'm convinced it would have taken me double that if I'd had the same conditions he did". He goes on to make the assumption that it was "pitch black" when the Ripper killed, but somehow completely ignores the excited state of the killer and the sense of urgency he would have felt. He falsely states that medical training would be needed to find the kidney, but the medical professional rightly points out that this would be true only if the goal was to find the kidney specifically. The truth is that the kidney had no particular significance to the Ripper. It just happens to be what he took. He could have just as easily taken the spleen, the heart, or gall bladder, but again this is a fact ignored by the host. In fact, in his typical false-logic that is easily missed by the fact that the host sneaks in such statements, he assumes the kidney was the goal rather than just a random organ taken by the killer. This baseless assumption that the killer targeted the kidney leads to view to the conclusion the host wants-The Ripper must have had medical training which means Doyle is a likely suspect. This example is typical of how the host manipulated the viewer and leads them around by the nose...and it's slimy as hell.
Finally, the host uses the logical fallacy of "appeal to authority" by invoking hiss status as a Freemason. If true, he should be expelled from the Freemasons for dishonesty. Masonry is an organization that teaches morality and the deception the host engages in is immoral. He interprets every scratch, scrawl, and scribble as Masonic in nature. From the makers marks on stones to a bit of graffito scrawled on the wall in the neighborhood where a murder was committed and where The Ripper May have walked past. I've been a Mason for over a decade and none of the symbols he attributes to Masonry are correct. The "V" is not Masonic (although in a rare moment of honesty he passingly admits that a "V" or "^" has been used as a symbol to represent an endless list of ideas by countless cultures and individuals. In this case though, it can only mean The Ripper was a Freemason. Finding stones etched with "+" and an "X" with dots between each of the lines are also supposed to be Masonic in nature. And even though as a Past Master, I've never heard of any such thing, the host has no trouble connecting them to Masonry. Then comes the farce of following the stones to the United Grand Lodge of England (UGLE). They never tell you that the marked stones also lead in the opposite direction from their start point and continue well past the UGLE. In this presentation the stones are supposed to be a hidden message to lead you from their chosen start point to their chosen end point. -please!
Rather than interpreting the word "Juwes" found in the graffito blocks from a murder scene as a misspelling by a under-educated individual or recognizing that word spellings were often varied and spelled phonetically especially by the uneducated in the 19th century, he contorts the meaning of allegorical tale of 3 brothers, Jubela, Jubelo, and Jubelum. He claims he's heard them referred to as the "Ju's". This is yet another contortion by the host to shoehorn Masonry into his theory because Doyle was a Mason. In Masonic ritual these characters are NEVER referred to as the Ju's for several reasons. 1) associating violent criminals like these ruffians with the Jewish identity would be anti-Semitic and highly offensive to Jewish Masons. And Masonry is based on accepting all men in harmony so decisiveness is eliminated from Lodges 2) these characters already have a collective name, "the 3 ruffians" so there's never been a need to invent another term 3) if we gave the host the benefit of the doubt and assume he isn't again purposely misleading us to advance his theory and hypothetically assume that he actually did hear these characters referred to as Ju's, it would have been a local thing because this use is not common-it would not be a Masonic thing, but an individual thing 4) again, in a hypothetical case that such a word existed and was written it would not contain a "W" and be spelled "Juwes" but rather "Ju's"- the ruffians' names are Ju-bela Ju-belo, and Ju-belum not Jew-bela, etc. 5) as a doctor and renowned author, Doyle was an exceptionally well-educated and literate man and would not have misspelled "Jews " if that's what he intended.
If you have a brain in your head avoid this show.
