good read overall, especially the nebraska stuff which to this day still disturbs me . . . but i think you've put a bit too much emphasis on the
mcmartin case. although i'm sure ritualistic child abuse takes place, i don't think mcmartin is a strong supporting case.
problem is you have to call 'conspiracy' on so many levels with mcmartin to support what is claimed. at some level, the school, the DA, the police,
the media, and even the neighbors, even the 'Stickel team consulting geologist', at bare minimum, all need to be involved in the conspiracy for it
to work. i just don't think it floats.
ask yourself . . .
why a series of tunnels leading to secret rooms? wouldn't it have been easier simply to construct a false-wall and thus creating a 'secret room'
in the existing building rather than by tunneling?
why a series of tunnels leading to another building? if kids were being transported off-site for ritualistic abuse, why bother tunneling to the next
lot, up into a garage, and then being whisked away in a car? why not just build an attaching garage?
and the biggest problem, really to me, how were those tunnels made and how the heck were they filled back in after the case broke?
logically, it just doesn't make sense. and the way the kids were handled after the case broke really raises some questions as to what they actually
experienced.
sadly, i don't think we'll ever know for sure what happened at mcmartin.
but i'm pretty confident the tunnels didn't exist. i was in cali at the time of mcmartin, and your link to the archaeological study was the first
i'd heard of it. but after doing some research, it seems like the study was flawed and reached unsupported conclusions.
the following site does a good job of pointing out the flaws and inconsistencies. i've not seen any comparable 'in depth' analysis of the Stickel
report, but if what IPT states is true, the Stickle research left a lot to be desired.
i'd suggest people spend an hour or so looking over the following (the links at the bottom direct you to additional areas of research regarding the
Stickel findings):
www.ipt-forensics.com...
the findings pretty much rip apart the methods and analysis used by Stickel (and thus, his conclusion that there were tunnels on site).
even the consulting geologist the team brought on board thought the evidence of tunnels was non-existent:
Dr. E. D. Michael, a consulting geologist, was retained by MTP coordinator Ted Gunderson to help the project personnel validate the presumed
existence of the parentally anticipated tunnels and secret rooms. He visited the site on several occasions as the alleged tunnels and rooms were being
unearthed. Michael examined the trenches dug by the MTP throughout the preschool site and vacant lot and concluded that, "Generally, the results of
my examinations were negative insofar as proving the existence of a tunnel."
see
www.ipt-forensics.com...
anyway, i'm not trying to toss a wet blanket on what is otherwise a decent piece of work. but extreme claims require extreme proof, which is almost
entirely absent in the mcmartin case.
something happened at the mcmartin preschool, i'm pretty certain of that, but unfortunatly, for a number
of unfortunate reasons, we'll probably never know.