and the UNeXpLaiNed ©Copyrighted by Dave Ayotte & Caty Bergman

2013 <<<< 2014 >>>> 2015

TOC (Table Of Contents)

    2014-DEC-06 [SAT]   15:45 (PMT) - Could Santa be an Alien?
    2014-NOV-30 [SUN]   12:42 (PMT) - The Serial Killer Cafe
    2014-OCT-25 [SAT]   17:44 (PMT) - The History of Halloween
    2014-SEP-26 [FRI]   21:40 (PMT) - Buying Legal Weed
    2014-AUG-03 [SUN]   11:27 (PMT) - Why We Get Angry
    2014-JUL-13 [SUN]   13:56 (PMT) - Serial Killers and the Ghosts They Create
    2014-MAY-11 [SUN]   10:13 (PMT) - NIGERIA: Boko Haram and the 276 Missing Schoolgirls
    2014-APR-06 [SUN]   14:07 (PMT) - Did Aliens Hijack Malaysian Flight MH370?
    2014-APR-01 [TUE]   17:18 (PMT) - Who Is AmyStrange?

2014: DEC

          2014-DEC-06 [SAT]   15:45 (PMT)                 Table Of Contents

Alien Snowman
Could Santa be an Alien?
2014-12-06  03:45 PM PST

Advanced technology certainly would explain how one person (and some reindeers) could break-in, enter and leave a present at every single house in the world, and all in one night no less.

But, does that mean Santa is an alien. And of course you have to first ask, is there even such a person as santa Claus? The evidence seems to be overwhelming that such a person does not exist. I personally don't believe he exist, but Dave (like the kid that he is) wants to believe that it's possible.

Even if he doesn't exist, the idea of a Santa Claus is real enough and on that theory, let's assume for arguement's sake, that Santa is a real person that flies around the world in one night and visits every house in the world.

I know that's a tough nut to swallow, but let's look at it as a kind of research project. The first thing we like to do is look through the opposing views on the subject, and if you don't believe Santa is real, then of course the opposing view would be that he was real.

There are a lot of people who don't believe in UFOs either, and I have to add that I think UFOs are more probably real than Santa Claus is real, way more probable, but what if Santa was an Alien? Like I wrote earlier, advanced technology would help explain some of the Santa impossibilities like being able to visit every house in the world in one night.

There are also a lot of people who might not like this whole train of thought, of connecting Santa and making fun of serious UFO research.

That's not our intent. We had this interesting question come up in one of our debates and we just wanted to explore it a little in our Blog.

We are not trying to make fun of anything, especially serious UFO research (including groups like MUFON) and we apologize in advance if we do.

But none the less, you can probably make an interesting arguement if you tried to argue that Santa was an alien. It probably wouldn't convince anyone anyway, but it would still be interesting to think about, in our opinion.

So assuming both Santa and Aliens are real, let's first talk about what Santa actually does. In one night (at, or about midnight on Christmas morning), he not only visits, but also breaks into, every house in the whole world. There are around 6 Billion people in the world, many people live together, so lets use an easy number; there are around 1 billion homes in the world. You have to divide that number by the 24 time zones, each of whihch has its own midnight, and you end up with almost an average of 42 million homes an hour, around 690 thousand a minute, and you end up with over 115 thousand homes that he has to visit each second of the night. You would think that it was an impossible task for one man to accomplish in one night, and this is one of the many reasons most people find it hard to believe that Sanata is real, but what if he had help? What if he really wasn't even from around here? What if the agenda is different from what we think, what if it's just a yearly census of all humans being carried out by an alien race. Sometimes they leave gifts to perpetuate the Santa Claus myth, but mostly nobody ever sees them at work.

2014: NOV

          2014-NOV-30 [SUN]   12:42  (PMT)                 Table Of Contents

Book On Jack The Ripper
The Serial Killer Cafe
2014-11-30  12:42 PM PST

IMAGINE a place where you can go to discuss anything you want about serial killers and no one knows your name. Although the psychology of sexual perversions might turn your stomach, the SK-Cafe not only allows it, but also considers it an important part of the discussion here, so consider yourself warned, but the kind of discussions that we're looking for here at the Cafe is that out of the box thinking (even if it's really out there), along the lines of (but not limited to) psychological theories, thoughts and (especially) criticism. But only attack the message, not the messenger. You don't really know who you're dealing with here at the Cafe. The only thing that is not allowed here at the Cafe is writing that you are going to go kill someone. That's a no no. We will report it.

Remember, and it's worth repeating again, you don't really know who you're dealing with here at the Cafe.

And of course, on a lighter note, a discussion on forensics is always welcomed here.

The only down side is that you have to bring your own beverage and snack. We apologize for this inconvenience, but this is an online Cafe and not a brick and mortar store, although maybe some day...

Right now, our Cafe is located at Yahoo, part of the Yahoogroup community, but we hope to fix that in a year or so.

Here's a link to a list of our Yahoogroups:

Our Yahoo Serial Killer Cafe (SKC) was founded on Feb 3, 2004. It's been around for more than a decade. We're no fly-by-night operation. As of this writing though, we only have seven members, including ourselves. It's a small operation, and right now, there is no discussion going on about anything. It's mostly just us posting serial killer news and articles (of interest) now and again, and that's it.

We want to change that.

We have some theories about serial killers that we really want to discuss with other like minded people. For example, the connection between missing persons and serial killers is not as well known as it should be. Dave explained to me once that what got him ultimately interested in missing persons and serial killers, was his interest in UFOs and Bigfoot, and the rest of the world of the unexplained.

When he started (originally called he didn't just want to focus on UFOs and Bigfoot, he wanted to include a little of everything, which included mysterious disappearances (or missing persons), like Jimmy Hoffa.

I myself have looked over many of the facts he's talking about, and missing persons is a lot more than just the disappearance of Hoffa. It's much more than that. It is a universal problem, that mostly, is only noticed in a localized way. When I go downtown Seattle, I see a lot of missing person posters and maybe some outside the city, but out there you get many more missing pet posters than missing persons.

Dave joined a few yahoogroups dealing with ghost when he met another member who's friend had disappeared, and that lead to him joining a missing person's group and Dave thought, what the hell, he figured he would learn a little more about Jimmy Hoffa and other missing persons like the ones along the Long Trail in Vermont. Those events in Vermont was the first time he remembers reading about serial killers.

After a few months, and much research on the subject of missing persons while also researching serial killers, it was obvious even to Dave, that there was more than just a connection between serial killers and missing persons. Ted Bundy and Gary Ridgway are good examples of this larger subset of the even larger subgroup dealing with murder, which includes serial killers.

The numbers are sometimes misleading though.

2014: OCT

          2014-OCT-25 [SAT]   17:44  (PMT)                 Table Of Contents

Happy Halloween
The History of Halloween
2014-10-25  05:44 PM PST

Halloween, in all its different forms, has been celebrated for at least three thousand years, starting with the Celtic tribes, located in what is now present day Ireland, as their way of appeasing those who had died before them, or something along those lines.

The time chosen for this celebration was significant because it was at that time of year when the harvest season had ended and winter was right around the corner. Winter symbolized death to them (the Celts), and we kind of get it, because if we had been around at the time, and only knew what they knew, we would have both thought the same thing. Winter symbolizes death, but Dave even goes further by putting his own spin on the whole death thing. To him, it just made sense that they would think that when life (summer, or harvest season) changed over into death (symbolized by winter) that the worlds between life and death would also be open and the dead could once again roam about amongst the living and cause mischief. And it also made sense to him that they would chose this time of the year (the end of October) as the best time to remember those who went before them. It was also a scary time, because no one knew what death really was, it was a time when the imagination ran wild, and for some reason, the consenses was that for some reason, the dead weren't friendly and that they were there to "trick" the living into crossing over into the world of the dead, and they figured that if they left them offerings or "treats" outside the village that would stop them or somehow divert their attention so that they wouldn't go into the village and do "tricks" and cause trouble for their families, like trying to drag them into the world of the dead, and hopefully they could divert their attention long enough for that time to pass and the dead could no longer try to "trick" the living.

And that's why halloweeners today say, "trick or treat" in many of the places that still continue to celebrate Halloween, but of course, no one's really trying to drag anyone into the world of the dead. That only happens in the movies... we hope anyway, but we have heard rumours about that kind of thing really happening, so I guess we'll have to look a little closer at those rumours some day, some day.

At least that's how Dave sees it, and I got that same impression while doing my own research which was basicly watching the DVD, "The Haunted History of Halloween"[1], with Dave. We've also read through most of the webpages listed in our Related Webpages list below, so this is not going to be a cut and paste job.

We used the DVD as a way to write a general outline, which we've included at the end of this blog post. It's just a quick list of notes Dave took while we watched the DVD. We'll use that as our general outline, and of course, We'll be adding our own little twist to what's considered accepted history. In other words, we're going to do a little speculating.

ONE WORD OF WARNING. We are a big believer in having others double-checking our work, so we highly suggest that you always go back and read our sources yourself. Never take our word for anything. Always check for yourself to make sure our information is accurate.

Now I know we said this wasn't going to be a cut and paste job, but Wikipedia explains Irish Mythology and it's relation to early Irish Literature and how it all ties together with the birth of Halloween, that we decided to just cheat a little bit, and post three of them below.

Anyway, like we wrote earlier, the beginnings of Halloween can be traced back 3,000 years to what is now Ireland. It was celebrated by the Celts and called Samhain. Here's a little something about that from Wikipedia, just to get us started.


"Samhain is a Gaelic festival marking the end of the harvest season and the beginning of winter or the "darker half" of the year. It is celebrated from sunset on 31 October to sunset on 1 November, or about halfway between the autumn equinox and the winter solstice. It is one of the four Gaelic seasonal festivals, along with Imbolc, Beltane and Lughnasadh. Historically, it was widely observed throughout Ireland, and later the Isle of Man and Scotland. Kindred festivals were held at the same time of year in other Celtic lands; for example the Brythonic Calan Gaeaf (in Wales), Kalan Gwav (in Cornwall), and Kalan Goañv (in Brittany)... "[2]

According to Wikepedia, the celebration of Samhain (Halloween) is known to predate the Christian religion by around a thousand years. Of courser we have to take Wikipedia at its word here, at least until we get a hold of this literature and read it for ourselves and than verify the dates, but for now, we'll assume it's true.

According to Wikepedia, the celebration of Samhain (Halloween) is known to predate the Christian religion by around a thousand years. Of course we have to take Wikipedia at its word here, at least until we get a hold of this literature and read it for ourselves and than verify the dates, but for now, we'll assume it's true.

Which brings us back to 3,000 years ago, when a lot of the Irish Mythology at the time was built around the celebration of Samhain, that they either happened on, or began on that day.

And also according to the Wikipedia page on Irish mythology[3], there isn't a whole lot of the original literature specifically about Irish mythology still out there, but (and the following dates are our estimations and not Wikipedia's) you can still read a lot about it in plain old Irish Literature (written around 1000 AD), which is easier to find today than books about Irish Mythology (written about 1000 BC).


"The mythology of pre-Christian Ireland did not entirely survive the conversion to Christianity. However, much of it was preserved in medieval Irish literature, though it was shorn of its religious meanings. This literature represents the most extensive and best preserved of all the branches of Celtic mythology. Although many of the manuscripts have not survived and much more material was probably never committed to writing, there is enough remaining to enable the identification of distinct, if overlapping, cycles: the Mythological Cycle, the Ulster Cycle, the Fenian Cycle and the Historical Cycle. There are also a number of extant mythological texts that do not fit into any of the cycles. Additionally, there are a large number of recorded folk tales that, while not strictly mythological, feature personages from one or more of these four cycles... "[3]

It then talks about the main sources for Irish mythology.

"The three main manuscript sources for Irish mythology are the late 11th/early 12th century Lebor na hUidre which is in the library of the Royal Irish Academy, the early 12th century Book of Leinster in the Library of Trinity College, Dublin, and the Rawlinson manuscript B 502 (Rawl.), housed in the Bodleian Library at Oxford University. Despite the dates of these sources, most of the material they contain predates their composition. The earliest of the prose can be dated on linguistic grounds to the 8th century, and some of the verse may be as old as the 6th century... "[3]

What that all means, to us anyway, is that those are the books we have to get and read to verify the Irish mythology connections. We like reading the original literature on anything we research. We believe, the original source is always the best source.

Anyway, during Samhain,


3,000 years
Celtic tribes

Rocky green fields
Northern France

At the mercy of the elements
celts asked to
last day of the harvest
first day
Souls roamed the Earth
Samhain nights
parade outskirts of village
leave offerings
attempt to keep the dead in their graves

the best night of the year to predict the future
since the Earth gave so much of itself
     to them, it only polite to offer
     something back
mysterious celtic mounds were called fairy mounds
romans hamona a festival to honor her
     conquered northern europe bringing the
     festival with it
At the dawn of the millenium was dominated by
that was soon to change

Constantine 4th century
vision on the battlefield and converted to 
council of Nicea

leaving fruits including apples out for 
this is in fact where the tradition of bobbing
     for apples originated

early christians attacked pagan beliefs which 
     they saw as align with the forces of evil 
     which were opposed to the forces of good

Pope gregory I 600 AD
turning them away from their paganism beliefs 
     was not an easy task
the pagan practices were grafted onto the
     practices of the church
Nov 1 All Saints Day
Oct 31, All Hallows Eve morphed into Halloween
     een being a bastardization of Eve

10th century
one step further
Nov 2 All Souls Day

Cats, bats, owls (familiars) were the spiritual 
     forms of witches

worst of paganism was witchcraft
1400s witches were hunted down and punished

1486 Pope Innocent 8th wrote a book which
     proved a direct link between witches and
     the devil

St Joan of Ark was also burned at the stake as
     a witch

Guy Falke's day 1605
blow up the House of Lords

Mexico's day of the dead celebration
tell stories of the dead at gravesites

1517 catholic Church was undergoing immense

Puritans in America were bitterly opposed to
     Halloween. Too pagan

Early 1800s play parties

halloween got its biggest boost when Irish 
     began swelling the shores of America

Late 19th century

pumpkins were easier to carve than the turnip
     was in Ireland

WWI broke out in 1919
newspapers began focusing on real news of 
     substance rather than just for 

1,000 windows broken in Queens on Halloween
Halloween pranks kill 3

Anoka, Minnesota Halloween capital of the world
first social halloween event

Collages of junk on people's houses
tp a house

WWII second world war broke out
giving out candy was frowned upon
in many places, Halloween was canceled

after the war
this new geeration embraced halloween
you could only win prizes from a local radio
     station if you were home by 30 minutes
     after the halloween party ended

groups of contemporary covens (pagans)
Halloween is one of their more important

If you cut an apple in half you can a 
     representation of the 5-point star

sacred symbol of the harvest is the apple

Children began trick or treating and going to
     halloween parties

1970s, 80s
thousands of buildings were set a fire
orgy of arson
devil's night

rumours of razor blades and poisons in candy 
     and fruit
some razor blades were found but no one ever 
children were poisoned, but not by strangers, 
     but members of their own family

Safety became a byword of Halloween
popular culture (Hollywood) didn't help
     dispel those fears

lately it's becoming more and more of an adult
haunted houses

2.5 billion dollars
2nd only to Christmas



[1] DVD: Haunted History of Halloween, The



2014: SEP

          2014-SEP-26 [FRI]   21:40 (PMT)                 Table Of Contents

Legal Weed
Buying Legal Weed
2014-09-26 09:40 PM (PMT)

This is Dave and I'm taking over this blog for this one piece. I'm someone, who you could say was, "knowledgeable" about pot and have recently purchased some... legally. I'm 58 now and remember first smoking it when I was 18. It changed my life. I was in the Air Force, straight laced and wanted to help end the drug scourge. It's dirty tentacles led everywhere and destroyed everything in it's way. I was seriously against drugs. They were destroying America. At that point in my life, that was the bottom line for me.

Then, one day I had a few two many beers and smoked my first joint.

And like I said, it changed my life.

But, the drug itself didn't change me as much as that it made me realize that the government was lying. And, what else was the government lying about? At the time, we had just ended the Vietnam War, and my realization that the government could lie to us, it made me stop and think about and look more closely at the war itself, a lot closer than I would have otherwise, but what I found out about that is for another blog post, not this one.

I've made many mistakes in my life, but pot was not one of them. The one major thing that pot made me want to do, more than anything, was made me want to write. To be perfectly honest, I am writing this very paragraph high. I once wrote a thesis for a college English course concerning the legalization of pot (marijuana), and why it should be, while I was high, and used an old fashioned typewriter to type it out in one sitting, handed it in to the instructo, and despite the fact that I was not only graded on thesis structure, logic, grammar, and punctuation, I still got an "A" for a paper I composed on the spot, and typed while high, and that wasn't the only thesis I did like that. We had to do one for every week we were in class, more than a dozen papers, but I still ended up with a "4.0" in that class. Don't tell me pot makes you stupid.

Pot is not the evil stepsister of heroin, like many people try to make it out to be by making it a Schedule 1 drug (as bad as heroin and worse than cocaine), and I have yet to meet anyone who thinks or acts like pot is some kind of evil drug that will make you go psychotic and become violent. I've never seen that, or ever heard of that happening... ever.

Plus, the gateway drug in my life was not marijuana, but instead, it was beer.

I figured I had to write all that before getting to the main point of this whole piece, buying legal weed.

But one more thing, money. Before I left the East Coast to live out here, I told my sister, "Pot was gonna be legal within twenty years." That was back in 1990. I was off by 2 years. Hopefully, my sister remembers me saying this.

Anyway, the thing I based that on was the same idea behind why alcohol was legalized again, they needed the tax money. Smart money-minded people would eventually realize the money angle to legalizing pot. It finally happened and now other states were beginning to see the kind of money that can be made from legal weed, whether it be medicinal or recreational, but legalizing recreational weed is the first step in the final step to total legalization.

The problem where I live (here in Seattle) is that after 56% of voters voted yes to pass Initiative 502 (making recreational weed legal) it took longer for the laws to be written compared to Colorado (the other state that legalized weed at the same time), and the licensing process to spit out good licenses, than it really should have, but Washington wanted to do it right and their idea of right was to first have everybody pay into a lottery, and after the lottery selected the winners, they would then have to survive a serious review of their case, before they'd be given the go ahead to grow weed.

At least, that's how I saw it.

The distribution stores had to go through the same lottery and same rigorous scrutiny, which included a security procedure review, and let's see that lease sonny, and also make sure your not selling near where kids can get ahold of the stuff, near a school or bus stop. Despite all that, they could still start operating immediately on the first date they were allowed to open. But before they could start selling anything, the growers still had to grow it.

But they couldn't start growing it until they first got approval to grow it, or in short, they had get a license first before they could start growing it.

The growers couldn't just put a seed in the ground the next day, and then have a load of weed to sell the day after. It takes anywhere from three to four months to grow some good weed and at least another two to three weeks to cure it and than another couple weeks to package and distribute it to the stores to sell. We're talking about four to five months or maybe longer to get the product ready to sell.

The growers weren't given a go-ahead to start growing all at once. They had to wait until the license they won through the lottery was approved. You had to basicly prove two things. No kids could get access to the growing facility, or anyone else (except employees) could get at the pot, and that it could be tracked and audited throughout the whole growing and selling process.

I'm not exactly sure what the tracking process entails, but I get the impression that it also included introducing some kind of biochemical marker into the plant somehow (by water maybe) so the original grower can always be identified.

Or, something like that.

Anyway, the growers license lottery was held before the sellers was, about a month before I think, but after the growers lottery was held, only one farm was approved, and it took weeks after the lottery for them to finally get that one approved, so it could begin growing.

All the other lottery winners were still waiting to get approval, and it wasn't like they were approving a whole bunch of licenses all at once, every day. It looked like they were approving maybe one license a week, and sometimes more than a week to get one license approved, and I also think it took almost a month (or maybe more, or a little less) for the second grow license to be approved.

After the first license to grow was approved, it was obvious after a couple weeks and no second farm had been approved yet, that it became the unanswered question in the room. How was this one farm suppose to supply all of Washington? I think it took almost a month (or maybe more) to get the next license to grow approved. You could see disaster written all over this.

A few weeks before the stores were going to open in July, a biochemist, who was a required step in the disribution process, roughly said that only one farm had offered product for inspection. Time was getting short for other farms to have product ready by opening day. He didn't go so far as to say it was going to be a disaster, but I could see it coming. I can sometimes be overly dramatic, but fortunately I was wrong this time.

But, a disaster of sorts did happen though, the first month or so, stores ran out quickly, and that made prices high, supply and demand equal price was at work big time here. And after the first batch ran out, it took another two to three weeks before a new supply would become available again.

Growers weren't the only ones having problems. Store licensing was taking a long time also. I think that when stores were allowed to open in July, that there were only two, three, or four stores (in the whole state) ready to sell anything anyway. Which, in a way, might have been a good thing, because the supply was limited to begin with and more stores meant less for each store to sell. It's like having two cases of beer, the only beer that can be legally sold in the state, and divide that beer amongst four stores rather than a couple hundred stores. If you divided the two cases of beer amongst 200 stores, each store would end up with a shot glass (or two) of beer to sell. That would run out real quick. Real quick.

Now imagine four stores selling a half case of beer a piece. If you went to one of the four stores early enough, chances were good you'd get some beer, but if you had to decide which of two-hundred stores would still have a some of that shot left to sell when you got there. That's why having four stores selling a small amount of product is better than two-hundred trying to sell that same small amount of product, but I also heard rumours that some of the medical marijuana stores were selling it to you even if you didn't have a medical card, and they were regulated differently than recreational pot so they had a different source for their product, so it wasn't really as bad a disaster as I had envisioned it would be.

Forgetting that for the moment, basicly, you had four stores to take your chance on (rather than two-hundred) and that would make it more probable (if you lived near one of those four stores, otherwise you were simply out of luck and had to continue depending on your black market supply) you'd be able to get some of that green stuff. Two hundred store trying to sell two cases of beer, would mean any store you went to, even if you had to wait in line, it would be one hell of a crap shoot that you would end up getting some. I know, crappy logic, but that's how my mind works.

I've been watching and researching the Washington way of doing pot right, and so I knew the supply was going to be slow at first, so I didn't even bother trying to get any. I knew it would sell out quick.

That's why I waited until now to check things out. More growers have been licensed and thus more of a supply starting to come it.

But, today was not my first visit to the store. Earlier this week, was my first visit. At that time, the only thing they had was prerolled pot. I bought a couple of those. 2 grams for $45 (all tax already calculated). I brought those bad boys home and when I first pulled them out of the stapled paper bag, I looked at the numbers labeled to the bag they came in.

But first, one other thing that growers had to do before being allowed to distribute their product, they first had to have it checked (approved) by a biochemist designated by the state and that is where, I think, the values on the label come from.

Anyway, here they are. Cannabinoid Totals are "8.29%" with THC-acid being "7.28%" and THC-dcrb being "0.67%".

This afternoon (SEP-27-2014 13:48), in the "USA Today", I found the following article about buying pot in Washington State:


Marijuana legal but often scarce in Washington state - WA  USA
8:54 p.m. EDT September 26, 2014
Trevor Hughes, USATODAY

"SEATTLE - A little more than two months after Washington launched recreational marijuana sales, you'd be hard pressed to stumble upon any pot shops in the state's biggest city: Until this weekend, only one marijuana store was open in Seattle, and getting there required a trek through industrial developments far from downtown... "

This morning, I got up and watched some Saturday morning cartoons, had a coffee, a cigarette and a toke. Now I'm ready to get back to work, which was when I found the above piece.

Anyway Tuesday, I bought a couple prerolled joints, 2 grams apiece, for $45 each, $90 all together. I just walked in, no waiting. That would be different Friday when they had some actual flower to sell. But today, I just walked in and got carded. That's the first thing that happens when you walk in, before you get to even see any product, is they ask to see your ID.

It was a small store, not much bigger than 20 feet by 20 feet, and you could see everything once you walked in the door, but you couldn't buy anything until the guy at the door got to check your ID, to be sure I was over 21. I'm 58, so you got to know that was a legal requirement. Check ID, regardless of how old the person looks.

Once I got to one of the three counters, you could see what exactly they were selling. They also sold papers, screens, and if I remember correctly, bongs also. I'm not sure about that, just an impression I got. I was more interested in what they had to sell, pot wise, and all they had was shake and prerollies, and like I said earlier, I bought two of the rollies. I think, maybe at the time, they had a half-dozen left, or something like that and about the same amount of shake, a half a dozen or so, maybe less.

The minute I saw the rollies, I knew they were filled with pot that had been ground down to a shake like substance. I didn't like that too much, but since that's all they had, I paid my money and got out of there. One thing that I did like was the price that was marked was the price that you paid. Taxes were already included in the marked price. It's a small thing, but I like it when you already know what you'll be paying before you get to the checkout, then they add those pesky taxes. It was a nice touch.

I got home and opened up the little paper bag they had stapled shut with my two little goodies inside. I looked at the receipt. The product itself cost $82.12, and the tax was $7.88, total price $90.

I put that down and opened one of the bags. Nice reusable, reclosable plastic bags too, rip off the top, and you still have one of those plastic zippers to close the top again, keeping everything inside fresh and potent. After opening one of the plastic bags, I pulled out the rollie. It was fat on one end tapering to a skinny end with a thin cardboard piece you can use to smoke the joint through. I first tried smoking it the way it was, but found that wasn't very easy. Pulling all that smoke through all those ground up leaves was quite the task. So, I cut the joint in two at about an inch off from the thin end and opened up the fat part, section by section, and put the powder in my pipe and smoked it that way. I did the same thing with the second joint also.

I gave the ends away so I didn't get to see how they smoked, but probably no different than smoking them through a pipe really, in my opinion.

The first toke out of the pipe was nice, not great, but nice. The second was a little better, but the stuff burned real fast. I got high off it, there was no question about that, but I was still disappointed. For $90, I thought I would have gotten a better high than this.

Then, on Thursday, I went to the store's website and saw that some flowers would be available the next day, Friday (SEP-26-2014). I decided to try again then. The store didn't open until noon, so it wasn't like I had to get up early in order to get there on time.

I was still an hour late. There was a line, but it wasn't nearly as long as I thought it would be. I was in line for less than an hour. When I got towards the front of the line, I noticed the ID guy was doing his thing outside, before anyone was even allowed in the store.

Once I got inside, I noticed that he was only letting in as many people as there were checkout counters, which was also where you could see, in glass cases, what they had to sell. Since there were three counters, three groups of people were let in at a time. Since I was alone, I had a counter all to myself. I looked for the supply of flowers, which were displayed at the very top of the case. One set was labeled "Indica" and the other was labeled "Sativa".

The "Indica" strain gives you more of a body high, while the "Sativa" strain gives you more of a head high, and that's what I wanted, so I bought the "Sativa" strain, which was spelled "Conex" or "Conix", or so I thought at the time any way.

Once I got home and looked at the box the pot came in, it didn't have the name of the pot on the box anywhere that I could see. It had the grower's name (farm) printed on the front, and on the back, the license and UBI number, the webpage of the grower, and a couple warnings, "This product has intoxicating effects and may be habit forming", and "This product is unlawful outside Washington state." And finally, on a small white label on the back, upside-down, in small letters and numbers, the chemical and lot numbers, and at the top was the "Strain: Cinex Sativa: 80%". Then under that, Net Weight: 4 grams, 1.05% THC, folowed underneath by, 17.49% THC-A, 0.51% CBD, Total: 19.40%, Harvested 9/10/2014, followed by the lot number.

The pot was in a sealed piece of plastic that wasn't as reusable as the bags the rollies came in. But, in it were some six medium size buds, and a couple smaller ones, but it looked like four grams. The buds themselves looked good. Real good as a matter of fact. I opened the package and put a piece in my pipe and smoked it, and honest to God, the first thing I thought was, "Now that's what I'm talking about!" It had a nice taste and that green hit was nice to my head also. Way better than that rollie pot. Way better.

It still wasn't worth $90 though. That's the most I have ever paid for that amount of pot, so it was a bit of a shock, but I remember in the 70s when pot became hard to find and finally coming back costing way more than the ten dollars a lid (ounce) it cost when I was buying it. It jumped, if I remember correctly to $40 an ounce, and today we jumped to paying $40 for just a little over three grams of pot (Known as an eight), and now here comes legal pot costing $90 for four grams. That's a big jump, in my opinion.

Let's compare it this way. A $10 lid (ounce) back in the 70s, before legal pot, worked it's way (over 40 years) to finally costing roughly around $300 to buy. Now, with legal pot, that same ounce now cost $630. The first jump is bad enough, but literally doubling the cost in one year is a big jump, in my opinion. Not as bad as when it first jumped from $10 to $40, but still bad enough. As an aside, though the price jumped, the pot did indeed get better. You literally weren't buying the same shit that you paid $10 for. The $10 shit then eventually and stereotypically became known as "Mexican" pot and still is as far as I can tell. The price never went down again, but the quality kept getting better, so people didn't mind paying the higher price as much.

Today though, in my opinion, the higher price hasn't produced better pot. It just cost more, but I believe the prices are going to change soon, and get lower sooner than later.

Because I believe that as more growers get involved, and more stores start selling and as the supply becomes more plentiful, prices will fall. That's the way economics works. Competition tends to drive prices down, and then there's the rule of supply and demand. High demand and low supply drives prices higher. You've seen that happen with gas prices, production falls, prices go up, and when production increases, prices begin to drop again, but that's all just my theory and my opinion. It'll still be interesting to see what really happens though.

I do remember saying once that "I don't care if they tax the shit out of it, as long as they made it legal," but $90 for four grams of pot (a seventh) still does seem a bit steep. But, still not as bad as I thought it would get. I was envisioning paying $100 for one gram. Wow, so $90 for four grams doesn't seem so bad in comparison to that, in my opinion.


Second marijuana shop opens in Seattle - WA  USA
Published: Sep 30, 2014 at 3:44 PM PDT
By Denise Whitaker
"SEATTLE -- It's time for another pot shop to open in Seattle... "

2014: AUG

          2014-AUG-03 [SUN]   11:27 (PMT)                 Table Of Contents

Introduction to Biological Psychology Textbook
Why We Get Angry
2014-08-03 11:27 AM (PMT)

Something makes you angry. You then instantly decide between the fight or flight instinct and choose to fight. This is your classic psychological scenario, except that "fight or flight" is mostly associated with the emotion fear, rather than with anger, but Dave believes that fear and anger are one and the same emotion and are only labeled as one or the other because of the circumstances surrounding them.

Let's forget fear for the minute. Anger is one of those emotions that most of us have experienced at one time or another, and is easy to blame for bad behavior. But, what is it really?

Anger is a pretty universal feeling. When you show anyone a picture of someone who is angry, everyone knows what it means. That person is angry. This is where the similarities end, because no one really knows how anyone else feels when they are angry, all you really know is how you feel. How each of us deals with this feeling is important, because that says a lot about what you know about anger.

While looking up the word "angry" in the index of the book pictured above:

Brain And Behavior: An Introduction To Biological Psychology

we were referred to another index listing, "aggression". The fact that a book on biopsychology combines anger with aggression also says a lot about how the science of psychology currently views anger. It is either a form of or a catalyst for aggression, or maybe both.

I know I can get angry at times, but Dave says he feels angry all the time, and describes it like a minor headache that is always there, until he blows his stack or just screams at someone or throws things, but he says he has an interesting theory about it. Actually, he has two interesting theories about anger. The first is that aggression (and thus anger) is mostly genetic and organic in nature, and the second is that too much aggression might be responsible for some of the lack of empathy in a sociopath.

Sometime soon, we'll do a separate blog post on the second one (lack of empathy in sociopaths), but let's look at the first one now. I know that the theory that aggression is mostly genetic and organic in nature seems obvious and simple and already a part of someone else's theory that's already out there somewhere, but Dave's theory goes beyond that. It goes beyond being a theory that aggression is genetic to assuming it's an actual fact, and then he asked the next obvious question. What can you do about it, if it's genetic?

His theory suggest that if aggression really is a genetic trait, then when we feel anger, it is not really a response to anything in particular. You are just angry, and you literally decide what you are angry about. In short, you are angry first, then you decide why.

Some schools of psychology believe that emotion comes before you decide what caused the emotion. That's possibly true with anger, but when you like something, you aren't necessarily deciding after what exactly you are liking. Or maybe they come at the same time, but never before. I personally don't know whether emotion comes before deciding why you are feeling that emotion, but Dave seems to believe it does, at least as far as his anger is concerned.

Let's put that question aside for a minute, and just look at Dave's evidence for aggression being a genetic trait. The evidence isn't absolute by any definition, but it still offers enough evidence to make it possible that some aggression is genetic in nature. Dave can't say absolutely whether all anger (aggression) is genetic or not. He doesn't have enough evidence to say that yet. All he knows for sure is that there is just way too much evidence to ignore the possibility that his anger might be genetically hardwired into his brain, a kind of genetically engineered background noise that he is almost always feeling, almost all the time.

We actually did another blog entry on this particular evidence a little while ago...

FROM OUR BLOG: 2011-MAR-28 [MON] 08:32 PM

"NOVA: Dogs Decoded"
Studio: PBS
DVD Release Date: November 9, 2010

Nova has a winner here.

Aggression genetics was one of the subjects brought up by this interesting Science Report from Nova. Starting in 1959, Soviet scientist started setting up genetic research project around the country. One of these projects was performed in Siberia. There, it was the goal to remove and breed around 1 percent of silver fox (foxes are closely related to wolves) pups that were not only fearless of human contact, but also not so agressive as the other pups.

Within 3 generations, almost all the aggresive behavior began to disappear.

This is strong evidence favoring the theory that aggression is mostly genetic in nature.

RELATED WEBPAGES (for more info)


Farm Fox Experiment:

Archived Copy of "Farm Fox" Article:

Those last two "RELATED WEBPAGES" are where you can find the original paper written on the research. We have an archived copy on our website in case the original disappears.

It describes the research in greater detail.

The "Farm Fox" experiment was originally based on a hypothesis by Dmitry K. Belyaev.

Like anthropologist Darcy Morey, geneticist Dmitry K. Belyaev...


" ...believed that the pattern changes observed in domestic animals resulted from genetic changes that occurred in the course of selection. Belvaev believed, tamability must have determined how well an animal would adalpt to life among human being. Because behavior is rooted in biology, selecting for tameness and against aggression means selecting for physiological changes in the systems that govern the body's hormones and neurocheincals... "


" ...Belyaev designed a selective-breeding program to reproduce a single major factor, strong selection pressure for tamability. He chose as his experimental model a species taxanomically close to the dog but never before domesticated: Vulpes vulpes, the silver fox... "

The paper itself is more concerned with the changes in appearance than anything else, but the paper itself wasn't what originally caught Dave's attention. That happened while he watched the "NOVA: Dogs Decoded" DVD and actually saw the dogs that were the result of breeding untamable foxes together. That's what really caught Dave's attention.

To Dave, it was like they were just wired up with aggression, like they were vibrating with it. I know it sounds like Dave's imagination is running away with him, but while the camera crew was filming them, you could hear the low undertone of "grrrs" almost throughout the whole filming process of the aggressives. That's a fact, I saw the video myself and Dave's right, it sounded like "grrr" (or maybe just "rrr", but either would be correct) to me also. It was really creepy.

Anyway, that's when Dave started thinking about how that would feel to be that pissed off like that all the time, and while he thought about that, one of the foxes tried to bite the person that was explaining the scene to the camera. Dave didn't even notice. He was so deep in thought.

Dave doesn't know how or why, but that's when everything started clicking together in his head. If you were genetically predisposed to feel aggression all the time, how would that feel? That would feel like you were angry all the time, just like he was. Always angry and pissed off. But, the next revelation was what really floored him and helped to change his life so it was easier to deal with all this anger in his head.

If this anger is genetic, then he is only just angry, and not really angry at anything specific. He's just angry, like those foxes he saw on the Nova special. Sure, you could explain that the untamed foxes had an object for their aggression, or so they thought, but why weren't like that? Dave believes it's because the tame foxes didn't feel the aggressive vibes that the untamed foxes were feeling. That same genetically engineered background noise that Dave understood all too well, anger.

Now the major problem for Dave was that once he realized being genetically predisposed to anger was possible, but also probable, he then also had to realize that many of his reasons (maybe all of them) for being angry were no longer valid.

He then had to analyze his thoughts to see if that was possible. That was one of the ways he used to verify the veracity of his anger theory. The problem was that it was easier said then done. But by using rigid logic, he realized that the offenses he was angry about were so minor, the amount of anger it generated was way out of whack with the severity of the offense itself. It didn't make sense that the why (the offense) was generating that much anger.

Since Dave was always feeling anger, the why (the offense) seemed to be the result of the anger rather than the other way around. It was only an excuse to get angry. An excuse that he never thought about too much, because he thought he had a reason for his anger. It was that damn job, the world, friends, co-workers, etc. etc., when really he was just angry and those feelings of anger were just that, feelings with no reason for them.

As an aside, there are also people who will decide to be angry at someone, a family member, friend, girlfriend, boyfriend, money problems etc. etc. And rather than (or maybe in addition to also) showing anger towards person they decided was the cause of their anger, they will take it out on other people, peeople who work for them, strangers on the bus etc. etc. This is known as "transference" of one emotion onto someone other than the person who is the cause of it. In my opinion, it happens much more frequently than most people are aware, but it really has nothing to do with Dave's theory. It's just an aside I threw in there to show I understood what Dave was talking about.

Dave agrees that this idea that the cause of your anger is really just an excuse to fell anger, justified anger is really a tough idea to wrap your mind around, but once he did, he began seeing his anger in a different way and actually started treating people better. He believes in being allowed to rant and rave for no reason every once in a while. A minute to release some anger vibes.

Dave now always made sure the person he was yelling at knew he wasn't mad at them or really yelling at them. He was just mad and using them as a way to release those nasty anger vibes. I've been told that this is one of the reasons people play sports, although they use different words other than "nasty anger vibes", something more along the lines of "pent up aggression". That sounds like "nasty anger vibes" to me, but that's just my opinion.

Dave believes that most people need to "think" they always have to have a reason for their anger, and what they're angry about is not open for discussion. I'm angry at you for leaving the toilet seat up.

Sometimes, Dave admits, the reason for the anger can really be justified. It's the real anger, the one that isn't there all the time like his genetic predisposition for anger is, it's the real deal, according to Dave any way.

Dave has also examined the whys (the offense that is the cause) of his anger that were more real than just leaving the toilet seat up. Relationships are a real big time source for real anger, and money problems and even sexual needs also. They are sometimes so real that they are very difficult to examine with rigid logic. For some of these, Dave has never really gotten to the source of what he calls his "real" anger. It's mostly just a vague feeling of a truth that Dave really doesn't want to explore too closely. He says he feels a lot of fear towards doing that. For now, that's as far as he's gotten.

Dave also feels like it was something primal. Something you feel in your gut but can't express in words. Like his subconscious mind knows something about him that will just simply blow his mind with the pure excitement of it, but at the same time it must protect him from anything that will hurt him psychologically, so it can only give him glimpses of it, and sometimes those glimpses are weird feelings or thoughts, like go next door and shoot my dipshit neighbor in the head and rape his wife. It's not something you could ever do, but the idea still just sometimes pops in his head for no good reason and most times vanishes just as quickly. He can't control what he thinks about and sometimes weird ideas find their way into his head.

Although I don't agree with the shooting in the head part or definitely the rape part, but sometimes when I'm walking on freeway overpasses, I get this quick feeling to just jump over the barrier and onto the highway below, just to see what it felt like, and then the feeling would be gone. I have had those and other similar weird thoughts before also, so I can maybe wrap my mind around that part of his theory a little but, but just a little bit.

Forgetting about "real" anger for the minute, Dave believes that this other background genetic noise (this angry feeling he always has) can be dealt with easy enough. Of course some genetic background noises are harder to deal with than others. Some are so devastating to the person, that they become "real" to him or her that it literally warps their perception of things, and it becomes scary when that person needs or wants to hide this anger from others who are close to them, or decides that killing people is ok.

Dave's anger has never been that devastating to him. He has experienced a warped perspective though. He remembers his reasoning behind many of the things or people he blamed his anger on, and many of them were because he thought his thoughts were more important than anyone elses. He still thinks that way, but now he at least lets other people give their opinions, and he actually listens to them and tries to evaluate what they say fairly. He tries to look at both sides and tries to put himself in their shoes. He thanks me for that, because I inspired in him the desire to look at both sides, be skeptical of both his side at the same time you are looking at the other side skeptically. At least that's what he keeps telling me any way.

He still hasn't gotten past telling people he wasn't mad at them and he still gets angry while he's yelling at people, And when he does it to me, the idea that he's not really yelling at me, he's just yelling, actually helps. He appreciates that I let him do that to me. "See, you really are an inspiration to me," he would say again.

So before I float away in my new big head, I'd like to add that I've also found myself examining my anger a little, as a result of some of our debates, and I've found that there might be some truth to what Dave has been saying. It's not that improbable, in my opinion.

2014: JUL

          2014-JUL-13 [SUN]   13:56 (PMT)                 Table Of Contents

Serial Killer Encyclopedia
Serial Killers and
the Ghosts They Create [UPDATES]
2014-07-13 13:56 PM (PMT)
Let's assume for the moment that ghosts are real, and if they are real, then how come serial killers haven't created more of them than they already have?

This question came up because of an article we saw last Thursday (JUL-10-2014) concerning a woman in Missouri who recently found out the house she was renting was haunted by, alleged serial killer, Maury Travis' victims:

     Woman shocked to learn her house was once serial killer’s torture chamber - MO  USA

Being a skeptic, I can't say definitely, one way or the other, whether ghosts actually are real or not, but Dave does think they are and also believes that they are proof that there is an afterlife.

And regardless of my skepticism, I still think it would be kind of cool if movies like "Ghost" really were true. I know it's just a romantic notion and not proof of anything, but that doesn't stop me from wanting it to be true anyway. But that also doesn't stop me from wanting better proof either.

From all the evidence that I've seen, there's definitely something unexplained going on, but are these ghosts (or whatever they are) really from the after life?

Unfortunately, most of the proof, being eyewitness in nature, is anecdotal at best, or lies at worst. Even the best photographs I've ever seen were hazy at best and some have even been debunked as manipulated photo images and not real pictures of real ghosts, but the ones that are hard to explain show something unexplained was indeed going on.

Some people believe that eyewitness accounts of ghosts are all just a result of some form of mass or self hallucination or something similar. It's pretty much accepted by the scientific community that mass or self hallucinations are possible, and because of this some use it as a way to explain some (if not all) ghost sightings. It's even used to explain some (if not all) UFO and Bigfoot sightings.

And even though Dave is a firm believer that ghosts are real, we still both agree that some kind of self hallucination could be true for some of these sightings, but not for every single one of them. It's easier for me to wrap my mind around the idea that some of these sightings are real, rather than that every one of them is a result of some kind of psychological hallucinaton by millions of people. Maybe it's just confirmation bias, but I've never been a big fan of a theory being debunked just because one possible explanation has been found. Sure, the less probable explanation is still less probable (or more improbable), but even the most improbable hand in poker, the Royal Flush (Ace of Spades high), must've been dealt at least once or twice in the history of poker.

I've even theorized that some of them (if not many or all of them) are a result of some kind of (as yet, unknown) disturbance in our physical reality at the subatomic (quantum) level; and if the quantum theory, string theory, postulating that all subatomic particles are really just compacted energy waves is really true, then my following theory (postulating what ghosts are) has some validity.

My theory is that for some (as yet, unknown) reason, subatomic particles can act together like some kind of simple videorecorder and when events happen that are so emotionally charged, like someone dying a horrible death, that they can become imprinted on that subatomic structure, and when the conditions are right, that subatomic recording can be activated to play over and over again until either the conditions become unfavorable for playing again, or its subatomic batteries run out.

And with that said, let's assume (for the sake of the arguement) that ghosts are real, per my theory, and because of this, ghost don't need to be dead people walking around in the spirit world, they can just be apparitions or subatomic residue left over from an emotionally charged event.

It's been my impression, and Dave's too, that while researching the subject of ghosts, that many of the stories behind many of the ghost sightings indeed do center around some kind of horrible (emotionally charged) death or even more than one horrible death in one place, and we don't see why the victims of serial killers shouldn't have their own fair share of haunted places (subatomic residue) also.

Like I said, this is just a theory, but let's assume (again, for the sake of arguement) that it's not impossible that the victims of serial killers can create enough of an emotional charge, as they died, to be recorded on the subatomic level, and thus becoming ghosts (subatomic residue). In the world of Unexplained Phenomena, places where ghosts are created or seen are usually considered haunted places, so the places where serial killers create ghosts would be considered haunted places also.

If you're with me so far, it should naturally follow that serial killers are creating a lot of ghosts, and as a result, a lot of haunted places, but why aren't there more of them than there already are?

The question now becomes, how many serial ghost should there be and how many of them are known now? This is where it gets complicated.

I know this sounds like a stupid question, but let's look at the numbers for a minute, and see what exactly we're dealing with here. Let's start with the number of serial killers in the last hundred years. That number should be equal to the number of places where they killed their victims, and most of these places (if my theory is correct) should be haunted by the victims of all these serial killers, and thus, the number of serial killers in the last hundred years would be equal to the number of haunted places created by them.

Dave thought about it for a second and came up with a number. He believed that there should be at least one-thousand haunted serial killer places in the world. When I first heard this number, I thought that it must be wrong. That's a lot of haunted places, but then when I checked up on the number of known and alleged serial killers there have been in the last one-hundred years, that number didn't seem so far-fetched after all.

Depending on where you go to get your information, the number of serial killers that have worked their horrible trade somewhere in the world in the last one-hundred years is anywhere from 300 to 2,000. If you consider the possibility that the number 2,000 could be right, than Dave's guesstimate of one-thousand was an under-estimate rather than an over-estimate.

In one of our serial killer encyclopedias (not the one pictured at the beginning of this blog post), with a much more comprehensive list of serial killers; it list in Appendix A, well over 1,000 (1,500+) known and unknown serial killers in the world, in the last hundred years, and that number doesn't even include team killers (Appendix B, 2 or more serial killers working together) which is over 200, and with over 300 unresolved cases in Appendix C, almost another two-hundred to five-hundred serial killers to the list of over 1,000. This makes the number of serial killers in the last hundred years to be, in our opinion, well over one-thousand, and pretty close to two-thousand.[1]

Using the number one-thousand, we don't believe (for various reasons) that number of haunted serial killer places can all be found, but that is our theoretical beginning point for the number of places that have made haunted by serial killers. What can jigger the numbers themselves is that serial killers will kill in one place and leave the body in another and if the serial killer can't place where the murder occurred (for example, if they are killed in a moving car or one that is parked and the serial killer can't remember where exactly that was), all that can narrow down the number of haunted places that are findable.

So, in order to be generous and taking into account that one-thousand is a pretty "unbelievable" number to begin with, let's instead go with 10% of one-thousand and say there are at least one-hundred places that serial killers from all over the world have made haunted in the last hundred years. We'll start with that number and if we can find more, that'll just be icing on the cake, in our opinion.

Of course the next obvious step was to get a list together of all the known haunted serial killer places to date, which we will update with new listings as we find the time to search for them.

With each finding, we'll be adding fire to the arguement that the victims of serial killers do become ghosts (subatomic residue) and haunt the places they are killed, which brings up a couple questions, and even more, for example, what about the bodies, and what if someone is killed in a moving or parked vehicle, is the disturbance at the subatomic level restricted to inside the car or can it extend to the area the car is parked, or to the body itself? Of course, it would be difficult to disturb the subatomic level of one specific place in a moving vehicle, or would it? All good questions but these are all for another blog post or two or even three, and not for this one.

Anyway, the first one (#001, below) that we used to start our list off with is the one we mentioned at the top of this post. (The following list will not be a top-ten list, ororganized in any specific order, although someday we may make an index of them all):


005)   GACY, John Wayne - IL  USA
ADDED: 2014-OCT-03 [FRI]   19:24 (PMT)
     Haunted Crime Scenes, Chap 13 - IL  USA

This 20 chapter article talks about various haunted places based on crimes, including Elizabeth Borden and John Wayne Gacy Jr., but it also includes the Amityville and Winchester House, but probably one of the most interesting points is this bit of information...


" ...In addition, they felt a heaviness in the place at 3:30 A.M., the time when, worldwide, people most often report paranormal activity... "

...which we found while reading Chapter 3 (out of the 20 online chapters of the Crime Library article title, "Haunted Crime Scenes") about the Eastern State Penitentiary which was investigated by the Atlantic Paranormal Society (T.A.P.S.) in 2004.

Even though we have never heard before that 3:30 A.M. was the time when paranormal activity is most often reported, if true, it raises the question of why this is so? This is definitely something we'll have to look into later, but for now let's look at what the article says about the Gacy house.

The house itself was destroyed in 1979.


" ...Investigators razed that earlier dwelling in their search for bodies in April, 1979. Since then, the land has sat vacant, overrun by 24-inch-tall weeds and littered with empty bottles and cans-until an earthmoving machine broke ground on Wednesday [1988-06-15], carving out a roughly rectangular hole about 8 feet deep... "

But according to our first link (Haunted Crime Scenes, Chap 13), it was reported that after the house was razed, the grass didn't grow for three consecutive summers. If true, that's very odd indeed.

See What Detectives Found In John Wayne Gacy's Crawlspace (NSFW):

004)   LALAURIE, Delphine - LA  USA
ADDED: 2014-OCT-03 [FRI]   19:24 (PMT)
     Haunted Crime Scenes, Chap 6 - LA  USA

This is another haunted serial killer place that is more than a hundred years old, but even still; we've never read anywhere (yet) that Delphine Lalaurie was ever called, or refered to, as a serial killer, but in a way that's understandable, because it's not even known for sure who the killer really was after the house caught on fire, the atrocities were discovered, and the Lalaurie's fled.

003)   MUDGETT, Herman Webster AKA H. H. Holmes (IL  USA)
ADDED: 2014-SEP-29 [TUE]   22:18 (PMT)
     Chilling tour inside serial killer H.H. Holmes' 'Murder Castle' - IL  USA

We've kind of neglected this project a little bit, getting involved in other projects that also kept us busy, but now we're back, and we found and added two more haunted houses associated with a serial killer. Of course, and even though this one happened over one-hundred years ago, we had to include someone who is considered by many, to be America's first serial killer, H. H. Holmes. Before we researched Holmes for this blog post, we also were under the impression that H. H. Holmes "Murder Castle" had been torn down and was no longer there, but apparently we were wrong.

As an aside, while researching this article, we found an article concerning a book by one of his grandsons who theorizes Holmes might have been Jack the Ripper also:

Was H.H. Holmes also Jack The Ripper?

002)   DAHMER, Jeffery (OH  USA)
ADDED: 2014-SEP-29 [TUE]   21:09 (PMT)
     In Serial Killer's Former Home, A Search For Ghosts - OH  USA

And, the second article we found was this one, the childhood home of Jeffrey Dahmer. We question this one a little, because we are not sure if he killed anyone there. But then, a little ways down, the article revealed that....


" ...Dahmer did commit his first murder here - a hitchhiker named Steven Hicks whom he lured back to the house with promises of drugs and alcohol, and then clubbed with a barbell after Hicks said he wanted to leave. Dahmer later dismembered Hicks' corpse in the house's crawlspace... "

The article goes on to conclude, that there was something funny going on, but then as the last word, makes a little joke about it, "You don't believe in ghost do you?"

001)   TRAVIS, Maury (MO  USA)
ADDED: 2014-JUL-13 [SUN]   09:06 (PMT)
     Woman shocked to learn her house was once serial killer’s torture chamber - MO  USA

The impression we got from this story (and other related ones) was that the woman was not made aware before renting the house that the previous tenant was an alleged serial killer, Maury Travis, who many believe tortured and killed many of his victims in the basement of the house; and that the original post that they were tied too, tortured and raped, and then killed, was still there.

Manhattan Haunted House Based on Real-Life Serial Killers Outrages Relatives of Victims - NY  USA
Thursday, September 27, 2012, 10:14 PM
By Tracy Connor New York Daily News
"A Manhattan haunted house based on the real-life crimes of famous serial killers is already drawing gasps of horror - from victims' advocates... "

[1] Encyclopedia Of Serial Killers, The: Second Edition

2014: JUN

2014: MAY

          2014-MAY-11 [SUN]   10:13 PST                 Table Of Contents

        NIGERIA: Boko Haram and the 276 Missing Schoolgirls [UPDATES]
         2014-05-11 10:18 AM PST

to kill, the way I enjoy killing chickens and 
rams."3 These are the words of Abubakar 
Shekau, the leader of the group known as Boko 
Haram. Many, if not most, people now consider 
this group to be a terrorist group on the same 
level as al Qaeda, and although me and Dave 
don't agree with their approach, that doesn't 
mean that some of their complaints against the Nigerian government 
aren't legit. Specifically, the inequalities in the allocation of 
funds between the Christian oil-producing south and the Muslim 
north which is very poor in comparison to the southern region.3

     This inequality is not right, and it should be changed or fixed 
somehow, but the way Boko Haram is trying to do it isn't right either, 
at least in our opinion. It's an unspoken truth though that as 
horrifying as these acts of terrorism are (which we think most people 
believe they are, regardless of what the truth really is), they do help 
to focus the world's attention on their plight or what they say the 
truth is. 

     The problem is, because these acts are so horrifying, they tend to 
divert attention away from the complaints rather than on them, and the 
overwhelming result is that rather than trying to fix the problem, the 
resulting response is usually just to kill the terrorist, and in the 
process, innocent people get killed also. Boko Haram's response is to 
then do even more killing, hoping that eventually that will help solve 
the problem. It's a vicious cycle, and we abhor both approaches, but 
it's also something that we don't have an easy solution to help fix 
either, but we also believe that at least trying to fix the underlying 
legitimate complaints should also be part of the fix rather then not a 
part of it at all.

     Beside the killing and mass kidnappings (specifically the 
kidnapping of the 276 schoolgirls from Chibok in Northern Nigeria on 
April 15, 2014), another of Boko Haram's desires, that we also disagree 
with, is their goal to turn the country into a religious state, 
especially the installation of Sharia Law as the law of the land. One 
of the biggest problems we have with this law is its treatment of women 
as property, and the added belief that women should not be educated or 
be used for anything except as a bearer of children. I don't believe, 
and neither does Dave, that women should be treated this way. It seems 
to us anyway that this is the real reason that many Islamist extremist 
like this religion, because it allows them to massage their male egos 
by keeping women dependant on them and ignorant of the other 
possibilities that life may have to offer them. They are afraid what 
will happen to them and their egotistical belief that men are superior 
to women.

     We have no real proof that this is what's really going on, but it 
just seems obvious to us from a psychological point of view. The 
subjugation of women has been a major theme throughout most of the 
history of Western Civilization, and it just makes sense that there 
would still be some (if not a lot of) people around that believe that 
this subjugation should not end. They don't like the idea that women 
should be allowed to be independant (and let's face it and also be 
brutally honest as to what's really going on here) and get to chose who 
they have sex with and probably something some men don't like (as 
witnessed by the recent shooting and stabbing rampage by Elliot Rodger 
in California on May 23, 2014). It's probably way more complicated that 
this, but to us it's where the truth more than likely begins, then not.

     Using religion as a basis for this belief is easier than 
explaining exactly why they don't like the end of this subjugation, and 
it's even better when this religion also allows them to justify another 
of their possible basic desires which is to kill people.

     This is why we believe Abubakar Shekau (and the group he leads, 
the Boko Haram) justifies the killings and mass kidnappings by 
pretending that they are commands given to him by his God. Maybe he's 
not pretending, and he really truly does believe that he (and his 
group) are following his God's work, but (to us) it would be more 
believable if he declared that the killings saddened him, but because 
the commands are from God, he reluctantly must carry them out. Plus, it 
doesn't help their cause either that they seemingly also kill those who 
are following the same God that they're following. 

     I personally believe, and Dave seems to agree with me here also,
that it just screams out that he is doing this for selfish reasons 
rather than a desire to follow any real God, because any real God that 
would order these type of killing and kidnappings is not the kind of 
God we would want to be associated with or hang out with in heaven or 
in any kind of afterlife that makes sense to us, if an afterlife even 
exist to begin with. It just seems to us that this kind of God is more 
like the devil that's depicted in Christian religions, and are one and 
the same person or entity or entities, and if that's what the 
afterlife's like, we don't want anything to do with it.

     To be perfectly honest, we can't prove what we believe about 
religion is a fact (because like we explain below, religion is more 
faith based than fact based), and maybe it's also because we're really 
sentimentalist at heart, but we just find it hard to wrap our minds 
around the idea that this is a good thing, or what a real God would be 
like or want.

     What it comes down to it (we think), is that what most people 
choose to believe about religion is either based on how they were 
raised or what they wish were true (and sometimes they are one and the 
same things), but that don't make it fact, because after all, truth is 
truth regardless of what you believe it is. Belief doesn't change the 
real facts. You can believe the world is flat, but that don't 
automatically make the world flat. 

     Religion is more of a belief based on faith rather than on any 
actual fact, proven by logic, or science. That's why it's called faith 
or belief rather than a logical conclusion, but that don't make it 
wrong, and that's why I'm not saying me or Dave are right and other 
people who believe differently are wrong, but that don't mean that 
killing people based on faith is right. It just doesn't make any sense 
to us. 

     But regardless of all that, we believe ultimately you have to go 
with what makes you feel confortable with yourself, and that is why me 
and Dave choose to believe (regardless of what's really true) that if a 
God does exist (I believe in the more tradition kind of God, while Dave 
believes God is just really gravity, but that's another whole different 
story and way beyond the original scope of this particular blog post); 
he (or she) is a benevolent God rather than an evil one that commands 
certain believers to kill and/ or hurt other believers. We just like it 
when people are nice to each other rather than mean, and like we wrote 
above, we both just have a hard time wrapping our minds around the idea 
that being mean is a good thing and what religion (or any belief 
system) should be all about.

     And, it's not like other religions or belief systems haven't 
killed for their causes either. As a matter of fact, many of the major 
wars through out history have also been justified for religious 
reasons. Most of the established religions today have a major part in 
this history also. In short, the religion of Islam is not alone in this 
regard. To us, like we wrote earlier, this is not ultimately what 
religion should be about, but that don't make it true, it's just that 
being nice is more harmonious and makes more sense than being mean to 
each other, but that's just our opinion. Seeing people be mean to each 
other makes us feel bad, and if that's what the one true religion 
really is and what the afterlife will be like, and since we can choose 
how to feel before we die (especially since afterwards we might have to 
feel bad for all of eternity), feeling good is how we want to feel now 
while we can, rather than feel bad right from the beginning. We believe 
it's better to feel good for a short time rather than never at all.

     And even though these actions by Boko Haram are horrendous, one 
thing we agree on is that they do bring attention to the plight of 
the Nigerian people (especially those Muslims who live in the north), 
and it unfortunately (and rightfully so in our opinion) doesn't 
always really help bring about any kind of the constructive changes 
that actually help anyone, because more times than not, all it ends up 
doing is hurt people and that tends to shift the focus from their cause 
(no matter how legit) to a condemnation of their actions instead and 
the real result is that people are hurt and die for nothing, except as 
a form of enjoyment for those who perpetrate these evil acts.

     Although this website is ultimately about finding the truth, it's 
also about being nice to everyone equally (and also considering 
different beliefs equally), at least at first, and thus not hurting 
anyone for no good reason, especially the innocent. Helping the 
innocent is more important to us than hurting them (or hurting anyone 
for that matter, at least not without some kind of fair and unbiased 
investigation), and one of the things that hurt people (besides 
violence and other things like that) is being forced to go missing, 
which is usually what happens when people are kidnapped and forced 
(against their will) to go missing (which seems th have happened in 
this case), and this does not make us feel good at all.

     And this is why we chose to write this article about the missing 
kidnapped girls, and not because we want to prove what the one true 
religion really is or if there is even such a thing; and even though we 
admit that why we do what we do here concerning missing persons is 
ultimately for a selfish reason, it's at least a selfish reason that we 
believe helps people rather than hurts them.

     Ultimately, history will either prove us wrong or prove us right,
and it's a gamble that we feel we have no choice but to make, because
we selfishly want to feel good and not bad, and thinking about people 
going missing against their will without trying to do something about 
it does not make us feel good. We're not saying our website will change 
the world, but it's the best we can do and to do something (no matter 
how small) is better than doing nothing at all.

     We also believe that missing persons are a symptom of a larger
psychological problem (or disorder) rather than the problem itself, and
it shouldn't be ignored just because many people (especially many of 
those in authority) believe it's not that important a problem or 
because there's no easy or cheap solution to solving it.

     Sometimes people do decide to disappear just because they believe 
it's the only choice they have when choosing between their own need to 
survive (either psychologically or physically) and another person's (or 
persons') self interest and selfish desire or need to be mean, and not 
because they are forced to for some evil outside intent or desire. Many 
people seem to believe this is the missing person's problem and not 
theirs. If people want to be stupid, why bother spending money we don't 
have to find them when in the end they'll just do it again and again 
and again? We believe this inaction is wrong and one of the many 
reasons why we created this website.

     Many of these missing person cases where someone chooses to go 
missing are not as easy to decide whether they are the onea choosing or 
someone else is forcing them for their own selfish reasons or intent, 
but we do believe that finding these missing persons so we can find out 
what the truth really is, is more important and seems more right than 
wrong to us, and also because we believe that more people go missing 
against their will (and as a result of some evil intent or desire on 
someone elses part rather than because they are trying to escape their 
past or a bad situation) than is generally believed.

     We may be wrong, but what if we're right? What if finding these
missing people does more good than harm? There's only one way to prove 
this, and that is to find them and let them tell us (and the world) 
themselves. We think this is worth all the work we put into this and 
also because of the education it affords us and everyone else, and as a 
result we believe it is worth being proven wrong and that our theories 
and beliefs are just hogwash, even if only one missing person is saved
from being hurt or killed. We know it's selfish to believe this, but we 
believe it's a good kind of selfish rather than the bad kind, and only 
those who are missing can tell us for sure and not the other way around.

     That's our story, and we're sticking to it until someone (or many 
someones) can prove to us that our theories are wrong (that missing 
persons are a symptom of a larger problem that, like the prevalence 
of serial killers and such, is more widespread than is currently 
believed to be the case) and that this work and beliefs should be 
abandoned in favor of a more passive disregard for possible human 
suffering that seems to be the exception rather than the rule. 

     The way things stand right now, this passive disregard just 
doesn't appeal to us and is just too easy a way to justify continuing 
to do nothing at all, which to us is not logical and doesn't make any 
sense at all.


BOKO HARAM 'CAPTIVES' ARRIVE AT NIGERIA REFUGEE CAMP - Nigeria 3 May 2015 Last updated at 04:22 BST "A group of nearly 300 women and girls, which the Nigerian army says were freed from Boko Haram militants earlier this week, have been taken to a refugee camp in north-eastern Nigeria... " BOKO HARAM SEIZES 25 GIRLS FROM TOWN IN NIGERIA - Nigeria Fri, Oct 24, 2014, 01:00 "Suspected Boko Haram militants kidnapped at least 25 girls in an attack on a remote town in northeastern Nigeria, witnesses said, despite talks on freeing over 200 other female hostages they seized in April... " SUSPECTED BOKO HARAM FIGHTERS MOUNT DEADLY ATTACKS AFTER NIGERIA 'CEASEFIRE' - Nigeria Maiduguir, Nigeria Sat Oct 18, 2014 1:01 pm EDT By Lanre Ola "(Reuters) - Suspected Boko Haram militants have killed dozens of people in five attacks on Nigerian villages that occurred after the government announced a ceasefire to enable 200 abducted girls to be freed, security sources and witnesses said on Saturday... " NIGERIA ANNOUNCES CEASEFIRE WITH BOKO HAREM - Nigeria Oct. 17, 2014 | 4:29 p.m. EDT By Paul D. Shinkman "Six months after almost 300 girls went missing, hope re-emerges on recovering captured girls... " NIGERIAN DEFENSE CHIEF SAYS MILITARY HAS LOCATED ABDUCTED GIRLS BUT CAN'T GO IN WITH FORCE - Nigeria Published May 26, 2014 Associated Press / "ABUJA, Nigeria - Nigeria's defense chief says the military has located nearly 300 school girls abducted by Islamic extremists but cannot use force to free them.... " BOKO HARAM: WEST AFRICAN LEADERS DECLARE 'WAR' 18/05 03:27 CET / "West African leaders have vowed to wage ‘war’ against Boko Haram at a meeting with EU and US representatives in Paris... "

FOOTNOTES (and other RELATED Material):

1West Africa leaders vow to wage 'total war' on Boko Haram 2U.S. Officials Question Ability of Nigeria to Rescue Hostages 3Boko Haram leader: Is there a method to his madness? 4Abducted Nigerian girls likely split up into smaller groups, officials say 5Nigeria’s Boko Haram smearing the image of Islam: Saudi Grand Mufti 6Everything You Need to Know About Boko Haram, the Group Kidnapping Nigerian Girls 7A mother’s anti-war editorial on #BringBackOurGirls 8Video Rant, Then Deadly Rampage in California Town

2014: APR

          2014-APR-06 [SUN]   14:07 PST                 Table Of Contents

        Did Aliens Hijack Malaysian Flight MH370? [UPDATES]
         2014-04-06 02:07 PM PST

UFO Book
     When Dave first asked me this, I was able to 
keep a straight face and not bust out laughing 
for a second or two, but then I just couldn't 
help myself, "Aliens? Really Dave," is what I 
finally said when I stopped, but I could tell he 
was asking me a serious question and wanted a 
serious answer in response, or at least, a 
serious opinion of what I thought of the idea. 

     It really shouldn't have surprised me that 
he would ask that. After all, most of this website is based on these 
wild ideas of his, and this one was no more crazier than any of the 
other things he believed. Bigfoot, ancient astronauts and time warps 
are fun and interesting to think about and debate, but are they really 
real, and what's the point of discussing them if you can't prove what 
you're saying or believing? But, that never stopped us before, and it 
would probably never stop us in the future either.

     As a result, we've had many discussions about this and many other 
of his wild ideas before, and if you've read enough of this website, 
you'll know where I stand on most of these wild theories of his. There 
is very little evidence to support any of them, but does that make them 
impossible? My short answer was no. Mostly because, my philosophy is 
that nothing is impossible, just not always probable, and this one was 
way too improbable to be even remotely possible, in my opinion, but 
that doesn't make them any less interesting to debate.

     To begin with, I believe that UFOs are real because there are just 
way too many sightings of flying objects in the sky that have never 
been satisfactorily explained, or unidentified, to not at least believe 
that there isn't something weird going on in our skies that we don't 
know about, but does that prove they're intelligently controlled, or 
from another planet? In my mind it doesn't. It's an intriguing idea, 
but very little evidence to support it, which I personally wish there 
was. It would be nice to know we have neighbors out there, but I just 
don't see any good evidence to support that idea.

     You can read more about our discussions on this subject here:

     Which brings us back to the original question, did aliens really 
hijack Malaysian flight MH370? I can't see it, but Dave has some 
interesting ideas to support his belief, but unfortunately for him, the 
latest breaking news doesn't help to prove his theory either:

     FROM: /
"PERTH, Australia - The head of the multinational search for the missing Malaysia airlines jet said Sunday that two electronic pulses reportedly picked up by a Chinese ship were an encouraging sign but stressed they are not yet verified... "
So, instead of answering him straight out, I asked him a question back, "Why would aliens do that, hijack a plane and then just drop it in the ocean?" "I don't know," he had said, "but nothing else makes any sense either. It's just as probable as anything else. What do you think happened if it wasn't aliens or a time warp that had opened up, swallowed the plane, and then closed up again, and now it's either hundreds of years in the past or future." "How exactly would that work, this time warp thing I mean?" This was before China had picked up a suspicious pulse a couple days ago that had "black box" written all over it, so he went on and on about the Philadelphia Experiment, and also the two mysterious ocean areas, the Bermuda and Dragon Triangles, that have swallowed up many other planes in the past, or so he believed. None of these events have been proven either, but at least the Dragon's Triangle, which is in the Pacific Ocean, was closer to where the Malaysian plane disappeared than the Bermuda Triangle is, which is in the Atlantic Ocean. Basicly he was using unproven theories to prove another unproven theory, and I reminded him of this, but like all our other discussions, this didn't slow him down at all, "I know I don't have any proof that any of those other things happened either, but they do share the same kind of weirdness factor that the other disappearances also have. I know you don't think aliens driving around in hopped up space vehicles are probable, but how probable is it that a plane would disappear like this one did to begin with?" He had a point there and that was one thing I couldn't effectively argue against, because this disappearance was definitely weird, and the probabilities of something this weird happening were pretty low also, but aliens!? "Adding low probabilites together don't make them more probable Dave, you know that. Something improbable happening is improbable enough, but two improbable things happening are even more improbable. It's like Poker... " "Yeah yeah, I know. One hand with a royal flush is improbable enough, but two of them at the same time in the same game are simply astronomical, and virtually impossible, but no matter how improbable or how astronomically improbable, they were still possible." "You've learned your lesson well, Grasshopper," I said and we both laughed. Anyway, besides one of the latest news reports changing what the final words were from the plane originally, there was the fact that someone, or something had turned the plane's transponders off, supposedly so the plane couldn't be tracked; and then turning the plane around 180 degrees and flying 700 miles into one of the most desolate areas in the world, never mind the Indian Ocean; and then disappearing all together. The changing of the final words didn't phase me. It was a minor thing in my mind, but Dave jumped on it like a rabid rabbit and concluded the first report was the real report and was changed because it sounded like someone unfamiliar with radio communication, like maybe an alien, had made that final shout out, and the governments didn't want anyone to know that, so they fixed their mistake by changing the report. He hadn't convinced me and probably never will, but all these little things were starting to add up, then the news came a couple days ago that the Chinese had maybe found a pulse that maybe might have come from the plane's "black box". That kind of put a damper on his whole alien theory, but to date, all we have is a possible location, but finding the plane is becoming harder as I write, because the black box only has a battery life of about thirty day, which is due to occur in the next few days. Even if we find the plane, what may never be explained is why the plane was flown 700 miles from it's last location and dumped in the ocean. It's a mind boggling problem, but aliens orchestrating the whole thing just because they could, doesn't make any sense either. I would rather believe that terrorist hijacked the plane, but got lost in the ocean and ran out of fuel before they could get where they were going. That's way more probable than aliens or time warps swallowing up the plane. Hopefully, the plane will be found soon and also the answers to many of the world's questions. All I can say until then is what I told Dave, "We'll just have to wait, see what happens, and see who's actually right here. I vote for me." Dave grudgingly agreed my theory about terrorist was more probable than aliens being involved, but he was still hopeful that in the end, he would be proven right. Personally, I'm not holding my breath, but at the same time, it would be nice if he was right and his aliens did really make the plane disappear, while at the same time saving all those people and made them appear again on the White House lawn; if only for the sake of all the missing, their families, and loved ones. But like I said, I'm not holding my breath in the hopes that this will happen. It's just too damn improbable, but it would still be nice none the less.


THE DEADLY CARGO INSIDE MH370: EXPLODING BATTERIES EXPLAIN THE MYSTERY 10.15.15 1:13 AM ET / "Why have both the Federal Aviation Administration and Boeing suddenly both gone public in issuing warnings about the 'immediate and urgent risk' (quoting the FAA) of allowing consignments of lithium-ion batteries to be shipped in the cargo of passenger-carrying flights... " MH370 SEARCH STUMBLES UPON MYSTERY SHIPWRECK Last Updated May 13, 2015 9:32 AM EDT CBS/AP May 13, 2015, 5:43 AM / "SYDNEY -- Search crews hunting for Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 in the desolate ocean waters off western Australia have discovered an old shipwreck, officials said Wednesday... " WHY PLANES VANISH: NOVA DOCUMENTARY EXPLORES... MISSING MALAYSIA BOEING-777 10/08/2014 @ 8:50AM By John Goglia "Tonight at 9 pm Eastern time, NOVA presents a documentary by Emmy Award winning producer and journalist Miles O'Brien exploring how the Malaysia Airlines flight 370 could have vanished on what should have been a routine red-eye flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing on March 8, 2014. The documentary can be viewed on PBS stations... " FAILED PHONE CALL IS NEWEST FLIGHT 370 CLUE John Bacon, USA TODAY 1:36 p.m. EDT August 28, 2014 / "A new clue has brought a bit of hope to the search for Malaysia Airlines' doomed Flight 370... " WHY DIDN'T FLIGHT 370'S EMERGENCY BEACON WORK? Updated 12:08 AM EDT, Fri April 25, 2014 By Mike M. Ahlers, CNN / "(CNN) -- It is one of the most enduring mysteries of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, and for the families, it's a reason for hope... " ROBOTS SEARCH SEA BED FOR MH370 Updated: April 14, 2014 00:31 IST / "To sink underwater by the height of Britain’s tallest tower would still only cover 7 per cent of the descent to the floor of the Indian Ocean, 4,500 metres down, where the black boxes from Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 are presumed to lie... " LONG SEARCH FOR MISSING JET LOOMS AS PINGS GO SILENT Published April 12, 2014 Associated Press / "PERTH, Australia - After a week of optimism over four underwater signals believed to be coming from the missing Malaysian plane, the sea has gone quiet and Australia's leader is warning that the massive search will likely be long... " MISSING PLANE MH370: ABBOTT SAYS SIGNAL 'RAPIDLY FADING' 12 April 2014 Last updated at 05:37 ET "Signals in remote seas thought to be from the missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 are "rapidly fading" and finding the jet will be a 'massive, massive task', Australia's PM says... " MALAYSIA AIRLINES FLIGHT 370 SEARCHERS HEAR... PING FROM INDIAN OCEAN Last Updated Apr 10, 2014 2:07 PM EDT April 10, 2014, 2:07 PM / "PERTH, Australia -- An Australian aircraft Thursday detected what may be the fifth signal coming from a man-made device deep in the Indian Ocean, adding to hopes that searchers will soon pinpoint the object's location and send down a robotic vehicle to confirm if it is a black box from the missing Malaysian jet... " ONE OF THE NAVY'S BEST TOOLS DEPLOYED IN FLIGHT 370 SEARCH April 9, 2014, 11:46 AM / "The search for missing Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 is back in high gear as an Australian ship is trying to pinpoint two new signals in the southern Indian Ocean. Officials say the pings could be from airliner black boxes... " MALAYSIA AIRLINES FLIGHT 370: 2 NEW SIGNALS IN SEARCH AREA BUOYS HOPE Updated 12:29 AM EDT, Wed April 9, 2014 By Ed Payne and Greg Botelho, CNN "(CNN) -- In a sea of uncertainty, two pieces of good news surfaced Wednesday... " MALAYSIA AIRLINES FLIGHT 370: NO NEW "BLACK BOX"-LIKE SOUNDS HEARD Last Updated Apr 8, 2014 11:32 AM EDT / "PERTH, Australia -- Search crews hunting for the missing Malaysia Airlines jet have failed to relocate faint sounds heard deep below the southern Indian Ocean that officials said were consistent with a plane's black boxes, the head of the search operation said Tuesday... " MORE PINGS RAISE MORE QUESTIONS ABOUT MISSING PLANE Updated 12:47 PM EDT, Mon April 7, 2014 By Tom Cohen, CNN "(CNN) -- Almost a month after Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 disappeared, searchers say pulse signals detected in the Indian Ocean provide the best hope so far for finding it... "

          2014-APR-01 [TUE]   17:18 PST                 Table Of Contents

Who Is AmyStrange?
2014-04-01 05:18 PM PST

     The first question most people have is, what is this "AmyStrange" 
website all about? The second is, who is AmyStrange? There should be a 
picture of her on the left...   MORE

2014: MAR

We're still working on our new research project:

2014: FEB

We're still working on our new research project:

2014: JAN

We're still working on our new research project:

2013 <<<< 2014 >>>> 2015

©Copyrighted by Dave Ayotte & Caty Bergman
LAST UPDATED: Monday,  November 2, 2015