Masonic Ritual Murders! Not!

Appeal to misleading authority	This entire paper is based on movies and books written by others. The author's main source is one Stephen Knight who wrote "Jack the Ripper: The Final Solution". This book is a legitimate source because there was a movie based off of it. The entire paper is based off of this book and the movies that preceded it. Uri Dowbenko relies strictly on this one authority to base his theory.          He also uses movies as evidence. Obviously if it happened in a movie then it must be true. Of course if movies portray the masons as evil and cruel people then they must have had a hand in the ripper murders. Also if the royals can’t afford another scandal then of course they did it.
Bandwagon	So Uri Dowbenko is a major bandwagoner! He basically read this book and then watched this movie, loved the idea, decided they were right and he was going to write an article about it! He has no legitimate proof to support his argument. It is not even his own argument. There is no original thought in the article. He only uses hasty generalizations made by others to make it appear as if he has a case, which he does not!
Hasty Generalization	So Uri states that sense the Ripper case could not be solved it must have been a cover up and since it was a cover up then it must have been the royals! This is a load of trash. Just because the cops either were not smart enough or didn’t care enough about five dead hookers to catch the killer does not mean that it was a cover up and a royal one at that
Appeal to Ignorance	He also goes on to explain how these crimes were covered up but he has no facts to basis his assumptions on. He simply just starts rambling off explanations.