Xena wrote:I made the mistake of cruising the Luci forum...oops:) So for any lurkers following the link on that hilarious thread regarding Bob Collins and his attempts to pass off babble as IT facts, please read here for my comments in the following linked thread:
2 posts found on this [url=http://www.realityuncovered.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=27&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15]page
1 post on this page
Topics addressed include: Interpreting email headers; the purpose of the records and apparent server name resolution; what part is the true record and what part can be amended by a users email software, or the mail server itself...ooh let's say for example yahoo and the way it appears to show a yahoo name next to a qwest IP. You'll also find a link to an idiots guide to reading email headers which will back up my comments and prove them to be (dare I say it?) Factual. Well blow me, if that isn't something people can say often without requesting a huge leap of faith.
If after reading all the available factual information, there are still people who are prepared to run back to Collin's for further clarification and koolaid..... then there isn't any hope and you may as well put your hand up for the part of the donkey in their next production.
MOD edit - made links stand out
Hello Mr. Collins,
Re your recent email to Victor’s list and the following comments attributed to you on the Open Minds forum:“If wizardofzin has the same IP address then it must also share like MSN & Yahoo the same Qwest Mail Server. As I said before those IPs belong to Qwest so you can't trace any further back than Qwest. So identical IP addresses to the Qwest Server prove nothing since you can't go back to the source of the email. Yes, I have lots of emails from McGovern, Doty and Gene Lakes.......Included some of those in the 2nd Edition of the EfD book.....Robert C”
http://lucianarchy.proboards21.com/inde ... 1150244906
That is entirely incorrect; of course you can go back to the source of the email! The IP address is assigned to the user, either on a short/mid term temporary basis or in the case of “static” IP’s, permanently. Other IP addresses are added to the header of the email during its course through the Internet on the way to the recipient.
For your information, MSN and Yahoo have their own servers and have no need whatsoever to share with other ISP’s!
I have to ask why you are acting as a knowledgeable source on networking, when the opposite is clearly the case.
Zep Tepi wrote:I have to ask why you are acting as a knowledgeable source on networking, when the opposite is clearly the case.
ScaRZ wrote:Did you put this site up also?
http://www.projectserpo.org/ - That link is a compilation of posts from many users on the above top secret forum regarding project Serpo. The thread was originally put up for discussion and then turned into 5000 replies on 1 thread all of which was dedicated to proving/debunking and discussing the validitity of Serpo....
Xena wrote:On the subject of cults in the making is this the appropriate thread to discuss the activities of Rick Doty, Bob Collins and Kit Green in regards to propagating and "authenticating" the Dan Burisch hoax? No worries if not, I've been meaning to start a thread,
So ask me a question? I archived the relevant webpages and emails, as there is a history of erasing activities from these characters.
So go on.....ask me.... I dare ya.
Springer wrote:We had it redirecting directly to the "BehindSerpo" expose Zep was doing on the hoaxers. Then the "expose" stopped so we decided to make it a compilation of a short overview and links to RealityUncovered and the mondo thread on ATS.
There isn't much point in redirecting traffic to 2week old content (the expose). If you all decide to restart the expose we can figure out what to do with that domain, I'm not opposed to donating to RealityUncovered.com if it will be used for the greater good.
ryguy wrote:Zep Tepi wrote:I have to ask why you are acting as a knowledgeable source on networking, when the opposite is clearly the case.
OUCH!! Nice one Zep.......LOL Let's see if Mr. Collins is really being straight and can give an intelligent answer.
The only IP address in the headers is the Qwest one. The trace stops at the Qwest IP addresses. Only with a small ISP can you trace to the origin. Yes there is an IP address assigned to the user but that doesn't show up on the header, only the Qwest one which is the one you quote all the time.
I’m sorry Robert but you are wrong.
Let’s take the original “Request Anonymous” email as an example. You will see that in total there are 5 different IP addresses, not 1 as you claim.
Received: from smtpin-3305.bay.webtv.net (126.96.36.199) by storefull-3236.bay.webtv.net with
WTV-SMTP; Tue, 1 Nov 2005 10:44:03 -0800
from webmail-outgoing.us4.outblaze.com (webmail-outgoing.us4.outblaze.com
[188.8.131.52]) by smtpin-3305.bay.webtv.net (WebTV_Postfix+sws) with ESMTP id
ABDEFE2DC for <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Tue, 1 Nov 2005 10:44:02 -0800 (PST)
from unknown (unknown [192.168.9.180]) by webmail-outgoing.us4.outblaze.com
(Postfix) with QMQP id 501411800218 for <email@example.com>; Tue, 1 Nov 2005
18:44:02 +0000 (GMT)
X-OB-Received: from unknown (184.108.40.206) by wfilter.us4.outblaze.com; 1 Nov 2005 18:44:01 -0000
Received: by ws7-5.us4.outblaze.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 25DC9C612E; Tue, 1 Nov 2005
18:44:01 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [220.127.116.11] by ws7-5.us4.outblaze.com with http for firstname.lastname@example.org;
Tue, 01 Nov 2005 13:44:01 -0500
X- Originating- Ip: 18.104.22.168
X- Originating-Server: ws7-5.us4.outblaze.com
The last “Received” line contains the IP address of the USER this email was received from. It is simply not true to state “Only with a small ISP can you trace to the origin”. My speciality is IT, more specifically networking & security. I assure you I do know what I am talking about and I would urge you to get independent verification before you state such things, it doesn’t do much for your credibility.
There are a number of posts on the Reality Uncovered that deal with this specific subject. There are a number of people contributing who know exactly what they are talking about. I would also be happy to provide a number of links that will explain this in more detail, should you so require.
Riiiight..... I was gonna ask you all - the only people who know more than you aren't talking.Shawnna wrote:Anyone want to venture a guess as to what he means by "at least one of the major players is sailing under false colors"?
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 4 guests