7. Stephen King shot John Lennon
As everyone knows, a lone drifter named Mark David Chapman shot and killed John Lennon on December 8, 1980. Right?
WRONG, SUCKERS!
"You are so stoo-ped."
According to Steve Lightfoot, whose rambling, borderline incoherent website www.lennonmurdertruth.com doesn’t make him sound the least bit insane, Lennon was “politically assassinated” by “Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and, you’d better sit down, horror novelist Stephen King.”
Lightfoot’s proof? Well, first there are the “bold print headline government codes” appearing in Time, Newsweek, and U.S. News and World Report magazines around the time of the murder. Lightfoot points out “coded headlines” like, “Thinking About John Lennon…Johnny Comes Marching Home…Kiss, Kiss, Bang, Bang, Ouch, Ouch…The Job Richard Nixon Really Wanted…Blasting the Opposition…America Needs A Poet Laureate…Maybe…Heeding Those Subtle Signs…Magazine Maze…All the Presidents Magazines…” and says they “plug into John Lennon’s assassination with up to 70% accuracy at times.”
Where's Robert Langdon when you need him?
I know, I know, that should be enough proof for any logical human being. But wait, there’s more! How about the fact that Stephen King looks kinda sort almost like Chapman if you squint and the light’s low and you’re comparing grainy, 30 year old pictures?
On the right...Lennon and Chapman, hours before the shooting. On the left...Stephen King. Conclusion: Incontrovertable proof...that cameras in the 70's sucked.
According to Lightfoot, the caption “One Great Big Zippo Lighter,” which was a reference to Firestarter, the book King was publicizing at the time, “means fire and movement, and a man at night with a gun ablaze, crouched in a raincoat looks like a great big cigarette lighter. Subtle but dramatic codes.”
"I sense you're trying to tell me something....but what? Too subtle, my friend. Too subtle."
While dating a crazy chick just drives most men to drink and, in their darkest hours, contemplate monasticism, it led little Stevie Lightfoot straight into the arms of a dark government conspiracy: “[When] John Lennon was assassinated and I knew, instinctively, that the story about a lone drifter was government, media hogwash, that huge players were behind his murder and that America and all the people of the world had just been victimized by evil bastards. Like most of you I assumed they would not leave evidence, the government rarely does, but when there was no trial for the alleged gunman, Mark Chapman, I knew, almost for certain, that, indeed, the government killed John Lennon. He was the hottest political firebrand to threaten the establishment since Ghandi and possibly Jesus Christ, himself.” (Or, according to Lennon, bigger than Jesus Christ himself.)
"He said what? Oh, no. No he dih-ent."
So what could make an otherwise normal (up until the death of Lennon) young man go so completely ass-burgers? I think we all know, at least the guys do, but I’ll let him tell you in his own words anyway: “I met a young woman at the time who proved to be quite the traumatized liar. When we met she gave me a phony name and past and lived with me for a short time. Many melodramatic events, a breakup and over a year later I would find out her real name, past etc. This experience made me different from most of you because I was no longer naive about liars or lies. I knew, intimately, how convincing they could be.
I get the feeling that when you say "woman," this is what pops into Lightfoot's head.
Lightfoot took his findings to a priest (He probably left out the whole “Lennon is as important as Jesus Christ” part.), who “…advised me to use an alias and rubber gloves for a while.” Good lord…was he a crackpot or a cat burglar? Maybe the priest told him to find a rubber room and Lightfoot just misunderstood.
Finally, let me leave you with the one piece of genuine wisdom and insight I gleaned from Lightfoot’s website: “No wonder America is in such shambles. New York City is out of control and disconnected, living under…Yoko Ono’s evil spell.”
I can never tell if she's sining, or there's just a cat eating a baby somewhere nearby.
Amen, brother. A-freakin’-men.
6. The Phantom Time Hypothesis
The Phantom time hypothesis is the theory that there has been an intentional effort to make it appear that the period of the Early Middle Ages (614 – 911) existed when, in fact, they did not. This hypothesis was originally proposed by Heribert Illig in 1991. Illig theorized that the Early Middle Ages were “faked” using alteration, misrepresentation, and forgery of documentary and physical evidence.
LIES! ALL LIIIIIES!!!!
So what would make an otherwise intelligent person believe that, instead of 2011, we’re now living in the year 1714? OK, try to follow me here:
The Calendar we currently used is known as the Gregorian Calendar, and was introduced by Pope Gregory in 1582. The previous calendar, the Julian Calendar, was introduced by Julius Caesar, and contained a miscalculation that made the year 10.8 minutes too long (when compared to actual, or astronomical solar time). This means that, in the time between the introduction of the Julian Calendar and its replacement by the Gregorian Calendar, we should have gained 13 days that weren’t really there. Therefore, when the Gregorian Calendar was introduced, historians should have “set the clock back” by 13 days. For example, if the Gregorian Calendar was introduced on July 14, 1582 (Julian Calendar time), the first day of Gregorian time should have been set back to July 1, 1582.
Got that? Good...now explain it to me.
The snag came in when the Pope Gregory’s astronomers and mathematicians took all their astronomical readings and observations and calculations and discovered the calendar really only needed to be adjusted by 10 days. From this, Illig reasoned thusly:
A. There’s a three-day difference between the calendar time and astronomical time.
B. Gaining 10.8 minutes per year, those missing 3 days should have taken approximately 300 years to accumulate.
C. Since the three days aren’t there, that means 300 fewer years passed between Pope Gregory and Julius Caesar that previously thought.
Therefore, the entire Carolingian period, including the person of Charles the Great/Charlemagne himself, one of the most famous figures in history, is a forgery of medieval chroniclers.
Which brings us to the important question of “Why?” According to Illig, emperor Otto III decided he wanted to be “Jesus Christ’s representative on earth at the dawn of the 7th millennium (6,000 years after creation, according to estimates of the creation year, the subject of which could take up an entire post of its own. To do so, he had to be emperor in the year 1,000. Setting the year back by three centuries would have screwed the pooch on his millennial plans real good, so instead of redating the world, he just fudged a little bit.
"Hey! Everybody come look! I'm Christ's representative on Earth at the dawn of the 7th millenium! Ted, Bob, come look!"
Sounds logical, right? (The 3 day/300 year thing, not faking three centuries to line up with your own personal religious beliefs.) If only every scrap of scientific dating evidence, from radio carbon to forensic to astronomical, didn’t say Illig is full of crap, and we’re not really living in the 1700s.
Which is sad, because I’ve always wanted to be a knight.
"NOW who's takin' Brenda to prom, Doug?"
Tomorrow: White folks were created in a lab. Plus, what, other than the entire middle ages, never happened? That’s right: World War II.
REMINDER: Get the first 1 1/2 chapters of my humorous nonfiction book I, Superhero!! FREE just by writing me at [email protected] and asking for it!
This post first appeared on The Amazing Whitebread's Webulastic Logtastic, please read the originial post: here
