I never read the book…can’t hardly stand to read them anymore. You got this!

Yes, mention that Earl Van Best was 9 stone wet through, the marriage certificate was signed by the vicar and the science behind finding names in the ciphers is flawed, especially when you choose to use initials when the name doesn’t fit.

It’s to bad you have to waste more time debunking yet another bogus Zodiac claim. One point you can make is this: Zodiac researchers disagree on many things, but Earl Van Best is universally rejected as a valid Zodiac suspect.

Unfortunately, type "Zodiac Killer" into Google, and one can see how far the media has run away with this story.

This Guy’s 15 minutes just does not end. I think it’s because that’s the difference between a self published book, and a book published by a major publisher.

Anyone else find it disturbing that when you search for the zodiac a picture of Stewart’s father shows up?
EDIT: I didn’t see the previous post.
This guy is like the modern day Graysmith.

This Guy’s 15 minutes just does not end. I think it’s because that’s the difference between a self published book, and a book published by a major publisher.

It’s not the time that is important, it’s the value of the time. And whether it’s a self published book or a book published by a major publisher, the reader always has a choice. This book probably tells you more about the reader than the author and how easy it is to feed on a thirst for answers. The clue is probably in ‘major publisher’, HarperCollins want sensationalism, something they believe will sell and sensationalism very rarely equals truth.
Albert Einstein said "Put your hand on a hot stove for a minute and it seems like an hour. Sit with a pretty girl for an hour, and it seems like a minute". The ‘Most Dangerous Animal of All’ is the former and the only thing that gets burnt is your pocket.

This Guy’s 15 minutes just does not end. I think it’s because that’s the difference between a self published book, and a book published by a major publisher.

It’s not the time that is important, it’s the value of the time. And whether it’s a self published book or a book published by a major publisher, the reader always has a choice. This book probably tells you more about the reader than the author and how easy it is to feed on a thirst for answers. The clue is probably in ‘major publisher’, HarperCollins want sensationalism, something they believe will sell and sensationalism very rarely equals truth.
Albert Einstein said "Put your hand on a hot stove for a minute and it seems like an hour. Sit with a pretty girl for an hour, and it seems like a minute". The ‘Most Dangerous Animal of All’ is the former and the only thing that gets burnt is your pocket.

The Bigger the Lie, the more people believe it. This Guy, because of having a major publishing company & representation, has been able to get on Tv & radio all across the country. That’s why when you search Zodiac Killer, so many of Earl’s pics pop up. He’s been on tons of shows including networks like CNN. Here’s the issue, most people that read his Book, are not as well versed in the Zodiac case, and don’t know most of what we know. To the Zodiac Novice, his BS sounds plausible and believable. That’s why so his 15 minutes is still going. In a way, I am glad for it because it keeps the case out there in the spotlight, but on the other hand, people think this Guy has solved the case. We know it’s not the truth. I hope it’s not true that there is a movie in the works about the book.

I don’t know Gary Stewart personally, but it is equally important to separate the man from the myth. We judge him on his claims, he may be a very personable guy who just has an overarching belief that he has stumbled upon the Zodiac Killer. He is not that different, book aside, to many Zodiac researchers and forum posters who get a suspect or theory in their mind and run away with it, blinkered by the insatiable desire to fit circumstantial evidence into their charge, rather than looking for the reasons that don’t fit first, which is obviously much less rewarding. It reminds me of bad policing, when they nab a suspect and go at it like a dog with a bone, reluctant to release their suspect after all the time they have invested in him. If you visit this in reverse, then usually you save yourself a lot of time. Robert Graysmith was the perfect example, along with Tom Voigt, regarding Arthur Leigh Allen. Graysmith was undaunted by DNA and clung on by his fingernails, Tom on the other hand got his next fix, by relentlessly pursuing Richard Gaikowski, a man nobody can 100% say for sure was even in the same country during the Lake Herman Road murders. Put all your effort into confirming his timeline first, then go from there. It saves the egg on the face 10 years down the line. But hopefully then, after two wasted blinkered investigations you don’t make the same mistake a third time. Attaching oneself to a belief is like belonging to something, an innate human desire, but unfortunately it doesn’t make it the truth.

I will certainly call attention to this video;
https://diva.sfsu.edu/collections/sfbatv/bundles/208846

Does this look anything at all like the stocky, barrel chested,bulky, fat, or overweight Zodiac as described by Mageau, Hartnell, or Fouke? Certainly not.

I will certainly call attention to this video;
https://diva.sfsu.edu/collections/sfbatv/bundles/208846

Does this look anything at all like the stocky, barrel chested,bulky, fat, or overweight Zodiac as described by Mageau, Hartnell, or Fouke? Certainly not.

Not unless he had on four sets of clothing like Mageau.

One thought which popped up just now, reading this thread, is that you could make a point of mentioning the many other “theorists” and authors who have published works identifying Z in the past. The list is pretty long – and mentioning this would serve an educational purpose, at least in theory.

Part of the problem is that people who don’t know anything about the case – or its suspects and “suspects” – are drawn to it through the likes of Graysmith and now Stewart. If they knew that offering up your dad as Z is practically old hat by now, they might think differently about Stewart’s book.

I was interviewed by Ratter.com about the Stewart Book, and I think the piece will run tomorrow.

I think the worst thing is the code thing, because it’s so easy. People don’t know anything about ciphers so if you come up with a solution that gives some shifts and a number sequence, people will assume that it is correct and you know what you are talking about. And if you try to explain to them why it’s wrong, that won’t make any sense to them either. The simplest explanation is usually best… but in this case connect the dots only seems simpler than probability, when it really isn’t.

I think the worst thing is the code thing, because it’s so easy. People don’t know anything about ciphers so if you come up with a solution that gives some shifts and a number sequence, people will assume that it is correct and you know what you are talking about. And if you try to explain to them why it’s wrong, that won’t make any sense to them either. The simplest explanation is usually best… but in this case connect the dots only seems simpler than probability, when it really isn’t.

Yeah, and somewhere along the line they usually say something like: "It’s just as valid as any other solution…"