The Enfield Poltergeist: Extracted Posts

[stu neville]

The fundamental problem you have on here, Mr Certain, is that your own attitude is drastically undermining your credibility. I have lost count of the sheer number of posters who have implied - subtly or overtly - to have inside, unpublished information or experience of a case, informed us that this gives them an unparalleled advantage over the rest of us when it comes to pronouncing with authority upon a topic, but then retreating to a position of "But I'm not telling you" without any further exposition.

Purely friendly advice - posturing neither helps nor convinces anyone. Drop the superiority, engage with the thread - and that way progress is achieved. And that, my good man, is based upon nearly a decade and a half of doing this.

 

[Roland Deschain]

Yes

I would like to hear more. If your still willing to type up your knowledge / impressions of that period it would be great.

 

[Rerenny]

It seems as if something unpleasant was happening hereabouts recently (there's a Stu reprimand above. Scary!) However, I have a long lasting interest in the Enfield happenings and I'd like for us to regroup and think about questions such as: what do you think was going on? A teenage girl with issues, or something else? Even if it was "just" a pubescent girl creating the polt, why are young girls able to do that? Are all polts a manifestation of wild hormones? If so, why is not every house with a 13 year old girl in it suffering from a polt infestation?

Many questions, but I am deeply interested in ghosts and polts and want to know more and more about them. If anyone has had personal experience of a polt or ghost, I'd love to hear it. I don't want to hear pompous allusions, just the facts as they stand in your experience.

Obviously here, let's just think about Enfield. But I think there is a need, now and again, to get back to the basics: why are there ghosts/ghost stories (real life stories, not M.R. James!) and what are they representing?

 

[PeteByrdie]

I've sometimes wondered whether, in our tribal past, manifestations of this kind might have singled young people out for shaman school. Perhaps, instead of resisting these events, we should nurture them and raise a new generation of Hermione Grangers and Harry Potters.

 

[Ulalume]

Well, some of the data in this paper posted here came from the Enfield case.
http://forum.forteantimes.com/index...operties-of-unexplained-rapping-sounds.59407/

It didn't get a lot of interest here (or anywhere else, which Guy Lyon Playfair complained about) but I found it very interesting. According to this research by members of the SPR, it shows that recorded polt raps at Enfield were different than normal ones, comfirming what some at the scene had said (IIRC) that the raps seemed to come from within the materials, not from outside of them.

 

[Rerenny]

Well, some of the data in this paper posted here came from the Enfield case.
http://forum.forteantimes.com/index...operties-of-unexplained-rapping-sounds.59407/

This is exactly what I look for. It does seem as if something unique or odd was happening at Enfield. But what?

I am rather infuriated that science can get funding to stitch an ear onto a rodent's back but not for seriously looking into apparent hauntings. I'm pretty sure that if we got to the bottom of what causes a haunting, whether it be a reverant or a fundamental expression of humanity, that it will be of more use to the human race than transplanting ears onto mice.

 

[Frideswide]

more use to the human race than transplanting ears onto mice.

unless you have lost an ear and need to have a new one "grown" ?

 

[Stuart Certain]

The fundamental problem you have on here, Mr Certain, is that your own attitude is drastically undermining your credibility. I have lost count of the sheer number of posters who have implied - subtly or overtly - to have inside, unpublished information or experience of a case, informed us that this gives them an unparalleled advantage over the rest of us when it comes to pronouncing with authority upon a topic, but then retreating to a position of "But I'm not telling you" without any further exposition.

Purely friendly advice - posturing neither helps nor convinces anyone. Drop the superiority, engage with the thread - and that way progress is achieved. And that, my good man, is based upon nearly a decade and a half of doing this.

The fundamental problem I have on here, Mr Stuneville, has been the attitude of one or two observers/commentators on this issue. Alternate Shouting and the Impatient tapping of the fingers, is not conducive to reasoned debate.
There is nothing wrong with my attitude. Credibility can only be ascertained once all the details are known; we are far from that. If it appears that I am portraying authority over these matters, then that is unfortunate. I don't claim authority. What I claim is: knowledge. In a sense, that puts me in a superior position; yet I would never claim to be superior to anyone. I have not retreated - to any position. My position is stable and remains the same. The issue here is one of sensitivities. Surely, you can accept that? Let me spell it out: (1) The sensitivities of the Hodgson family. (2) The issue of the 'Investigators', especially Guy Playfair. (There's a misnomer if ever there was one.) (3) My own sensitivities. I break this down for you, so that you can fully understand. (a) My own background. (b) Public perception of myself. (c) What happened to me, consequently. Then there is the added issue of potential legal challenges to myself, upon the grounds of slander and/or defamation of character. So you see, Mr Stuneville, this is not as simplistic a matter as you imply. I do not owe you or anyone else on this forum; Anything.

 

[stu neville]

The fundamental problem I have on here, Mr Stuneville, has been the attitude of one or two observers/commentators on this issue. Alternate Shouting and the Impatient tapping of the fingers, is not conducive to reasoned debate.
There is nothing wrong with my attitude.

I continue to disagree.

..I would never claim to be superior to anyone.. Let me spell it out... I break this down for you, so that you can fully understand.

Condescension does not get you far on here. Condescension toward me even less so.

I do not owe you or anyone else on this forum; Anything.

Then please don't let us detain you. Should you wish to engage and share said knowledge then please feel free and welcome. If you do not, I suggest you take your knowledge elsewhere. We see this kind of conduct too often on here to indulge it.

 

[Stuart Certain]

Stuneville,
It's quite obvious that you are of the lynch mob. I don't see much laughing in the face of Hubris!
I have to ask: Has anyone got at you?
I believe so. That would explain your unreasonable attitude over this.
Not once have you offered words of support over my situation. Instead, you join the braying of the hounds.
This is not surprising really. I half expected this. You can join the list of others who have sought to close me down.
I feel sorry for those that have genuine interest in this subject; for now the truth will have to wait.
The 'authorities' have had me under observation for years, (from early in the case, they knew about me) concerning these matters. They don't want the real story known. SPR was leant upon to keep this under wraps. Not for any benefit towards the 'girls.' Rather, the information I have is deemed: Not Conducive to the Public Good.
Soon after the 'Case,' ended, a meeting between the police and SPR resulted in Special Branch being given responsibility over these matters. They and/or variants of such, have dogged me ever since. Their fingerprints are everywhere, over this. Example: 'Sherbetbizzarre' = SB = Special Branch.
Yes, they have operatives in various guises across all aspects of Paranormal Activity, to observe and mislead the general public. The truth is a closely guarded secret.
Notice Sherbetbizzarre's quick exit, when I turned the tables on him?
All that remains now, is for you to label me as Paranoid/Deluded and their job is done.
I do not intend to vacate this forum just yet. If you choose to actually bar me - well, nuff said

 

[Frideswide]

It quite obvious that you are of the lynch mob. I don't see much laughing in the face of Hubris!
I have to ask: Has anyone got at you?
I believe so. That would explain your unreasonable attitude over this.
Not once have you offered words of support over my situation. Instead, you join the braying of the hounds.
This is not surprising really. I half expected this. You can join the list of others who have sought to close me down.
I feel sorry for those that have genuine interest in this subject; for now the truth will have to wait.
The 'authorities' have had me under observation for years, (from early in the case, they knew about me) concerning these matters. They don't want the real story known. SPR was leant upon to keep this under wraps. Not for any benefit towards the 'girls.' Rather, the information I have is deemed: Not Conducive to the Public Good.
Soon after the 'Case,' ended, a meeting between the police and SPR resulted in Special Branch being given responsibility over these matters. They and/or variants of such, have dogged me ever since. Their fingerprints are everywhere, over this. Example: 'Sherbetbizzarre' = SB = Special Branch.
Yes, they have operatives in various guises across all aspects of Paranormal Activity, to observe and mislead the general public. The truth is a closely guarded secret.
Notice Sherbetbizzarre's quick exit, when I turned the tables on him?
All that remains now, is for you to label me as Paranoid/Deluded and their job is done.
I do not intend to vacate this forum just yet. If you choose to actually bar me - well, nuff said

 

[Stuart Certain]

Thank you Frideswide

 

[David Plankton]

I do not intend to vacate this forum just yet

Well I'm pleased to hear this and I think most posters will be as well. Don't try and take anything too personally Stuart, we're all just avatars and text at the end of the day.

 

[stu neville]

Stuneville,
It's quite obvious that you are of the lynch mob. I don't see much laughing in the face of Hubris!
I have to ask: Has anyone got at you?..

Oh Christ almighty, not this again...

No. No involvement by security services, special branch, or any other such agency. Nada. We only have one standing injunction, and that that's driven by an ecclesiastical matter. And I neither approve nor have need of lynch-mobs. Never have, never will.

..I do not intend to vacate this forum just yet. If you choose to actually bar me - well, nuff said

I have no intention whatsoever of barring you. I will point out that for all of this "I won't be silenced" stuff, you haven't actually said anything. Nor do I think you're paranoid - but I do think you're taking this stuff extraordinarily personally. Believe me, if you'd seen this particular trajectory as often as I have you'd be jaded. Now, as I asked previously, if you have a light that can illuminate the darker corners, please do, but please understand that being passive-aggressive will win you no friends.

 

[Stuart Certain]

Well I'm pleased to hear this and I think most posters will be as well. Don't try and take anything too personally Stuart, we're all just avatars and text at the end of the day.

Thank you davidplankton. I guess you would know, if anything smelled '.fishy'
No offence meant.

 

[Stuart Certain]

Well, some of the data in this paper posted here came from the Enfield case.
http://forum.forteantimes.com/index...operties-of-unexplained-rapping-sounds.59407/

It didn't get a lot of interest here (or anywhere else, which Guy Lyon Playfair complained about) but I found it very interesting. According to this research by members of the SPR, it shows that recorded polt raps at Enfield were different than normal ones, comfirming what some at the scene had said (IIRC) that the raps seemed to come from within the materials, not from outside of them.

The first series of raps, not reproduced here: were in a series of four (4).
They are the beats from the '5th Symphony' of Ludwig van Beethoven - missing out the 'twiddly bits.'

 

[Rerenny]

Could we please talk about the actual case? And not just indulge in sniping and some kind of weird point scoring? Stuart Certain, Stuneville is an experienced mod and he runs this forum with great patience and care. I don't understand why you want to engage him in an argument when what we should be doing is thinking about the Enfield case and what it means to people who are interested in ghosts, in whatever form they choose to take.

I see that you have just spoken about the polt, thank you.

 

[Stuart Certain]

Could we please talk about the actual case? And not just indulge in sniping and some kind of weird point scoring? Stuart Certain, Stuneville is an experienced mod and he runs this forum with great patience and care. I don't understand why you want to engage him in an argument when what we should be doing is thinking about the Enfield case and what it means to people who are interested in ghosts, in whatever form they choose to take.

I see that you have just spoken about the polt, thank you.

EyronRen,
Please do not criticize my position.
Your support for Stuneville is touching and understandable. Your observation was not necessary.

 

[Rerenny]

My apologies for contradicting you, but I am well within my rights to criticize anything I wish to, including you and your position, whatever that is.

My observation IS necessary because it is part of what could be a debate. Though clearly not with you. Furthermore, I don't appreciate your condescension regarding my views on Stuneville.

Is was my misfortune to think that this thread was alive due to an active and interesting discussion about the polt. My mistake.

Don't waste your time having another go at me, you're ignored.

I'm taking Frideswide and Ulalume off for a picnic!

 

[sherbetbizarre]

Example: 'Sherbetbizzarre' = SB = Special Branch.

YOU'RE NICKED, SUNSHINE!

On a serious note, who was there to stop Janet speaking out in a series of interviews a few years back?

 

[Rerenny]

sherbetbizarre, as a member of Special Branch, do you have any inside info on what the terrorists are planning next? Or are you more preoccupied with hiding the truth about ghosts from us? As a lover and supporter of the police and the security services bananas I'd like to think you are concentrating on the terrorists and not hiding the truth about ghosts. Even though that is clearly much more important and I obviously have my priorities in the wrong order. It can't be helped, I was born and raised in the British Army and am therefore mightily right wing and wrong about every single thing I have ever thought about.

:BS:

 

[Frideswide]

I'm taking Frideswide and Ulalume off for a picnic!

and also @sherbetbizarre who has the deeply suspicious initials sb

 

[Frideswide]

As a lover and supporter of the police and the security services

I was chatted up by a lieutenant colonel on saturday I am disclosing this in case anyone thinks that I am hiding my links to the Dark Powers That Be for scurrilous purposes.....

 

[sherbetbizarre]

sherbetbizarre, as a member of Special Branch, do you have any inside info on what the terrorists are planning next? Or are you more preoccupied with hiding the truth about ghosts from us?

A few years back I spoke out against a stupid Amityville documentary from America, and the director threatened to send Interpol after me.

These organisations need to get their priorities straight

 

[Stuart Certain]

My apologies for contradicting you, but I am well within my rights to criticize anything I wish to, including you and your position, whatever that is.

My observation IS necessary because it is part of what could be a debate. Though clearly not with you. Furthermore, I don't appreciate your condescension regarding my views on Stuneville.

Is was my misfortune to think that this thread was alive due to an active and interesting discussion about the polt. My mistake.

Don't waste your time having another go at me, you're ignored.

I'm taking Frideswide and Ulalume off for a picnic!

Its raining. Take them to a Waffle-House instead.

 

[Stuart Certain]

YOU'RE NICKED, SUNSHINE!

On a serious note, who was there to stop Janet speaking out in a series of interviews a few years back?

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
On a serious note, who was there to stop Janet speaking out in a series of interviews a few years back?
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????


What are you suggesting? Please explain?

 

[PeteByrdie]

YOU'RE NICKED, SUNSHINE!

On a serious note, who was there to stop Janet speaking out in a series of interviews a few years back?

Wasn't that when you leant on her only to tell what you wanted her to say? You're not fooling us with all this misinformation.

:BS:

YAY! I got an excuse to use the new emoji.:glee:

 

[Stuart Certain]

Wasn't that when you leant on her only to tell what you wanted her to say? You're not fooling us with all this misinformation.

:BS:

YAY! I got an excuse to use the new emoji.:glee:

Thought you were off for a picnic?

 

[PeteByrdie]

Thought you were off for a picnic?

I wasn't invited. I think people are intimidated by my sharp wit and outgoing personality.

 

[Stuart Certain]

I wasn't invited. I think people are intimidated by my sharp wit and outgoing personality.

Ha, nice to see a sense of humour, at last!
Careful where you tread. That cow of yours has been on the go for quite a while now.