Despite having been debunked, discredited, and publicly humiliated so many times that those of us without an advanced degree in mathematics have lost count, bloated carny Wolfgang Halbig is somehow still out there (as opposed to locked up in a loony bin somewhere), doing his thing, shamelessly exploiting the slaughter of twenty small children and seven adults in a sad and fruitless attempt to be finally recognized as someone important (oh, and of course raise over $100,000 in the process).
One of Wolf’s favorite methods of disseminating his barely-literate and unhinged gobbledygook is an e-mail list that he’s compiled using the (unsolicited) e-mail addresses of anyone who has ever contacted him. I know this because I inexplicably found myself included in the list after asking him – sometimes politely and other times not so much – for my $1,000. So I now have the extreme privilege of witnessing his slide into what I have to assume is dementia first-hand. And while Wolfgang spam is one of the last things I want to see upon opening my inbox, it does allow me to debunk his bullshit that much faster. Which – wouldn’t you know it – brings us to today.
Since Friday, an apparently unsupervised Halbig has managed to fire off an impressive eleven e-mails, four of which were sent on Monday alone. But while much of the material is completely unintelligible, I somehow managed to decipher the following two claims:
This mystery hole was then upgraded from a “huge hole” to a “huge sinkhole like we have in Florida” in an e-mail sent out the very next day:
And yes, he really did write “WHY DO YOU THING?” Maybe once he’s finally done “researching” Sandy Hook, he can research how to proofread an e-mail for once.
Wolf’s photo of this alleged “sinkhole” – again, truly Florida-esque in its enormity – is a still from a dashcam video, recorded by one of the responding officers as they pass Sunnyview Terrace on their way to Sandy Hook School. This video – along with a handful of others – is freely available as part of the state’s final report, so it’s a bit odd that Halbig, who must be swimming in materials obtained via his multitude of FOIA requests at this point, had to go to YouTube for it.
So is this a sinkhole? No, of course not. What kind of sinkhole is runs parallel to and underneath of a road? But if it isn’t a sinkhole, then what is it? Simple: it’s a small culvert, similar to the one seen here (which I found – unbelievably – by Googling “culvert”):
As for Halbig’s claim that the hole magically disappears “when the news shows up” – the implication seemingly being that the dashcam video must have been taken either long before or long after the footage captured by news crews (though it’s never explained why this would be necessary) – is similarly bogus. Seeing as how the culvert is visible in Google’s Street View of the area from 2008…
As well as Google Earth’s satellite imagery from 2012…
And in the infamous Channel 12 helicopter footage, taken the day of the shooting…
And then again in their Street View from 2014…
We can be absolutely certain that this “hole” – which again, is just a regular ol’ culvert – was there the entire time.
But while Halbig is technically correct when he says that there is “no sinkhole” visible during Gene Rosen’s interview with Fox News (but only because it’s a culvert, and not a sinkhole), the photo he uses to illustrate this point is – as one should expect from such a prolific liar – incredibly deceptive. The culvert is clearly visible behind Mr. Rosen throughout most of interview, but whoever took this screenshot for Wolfgang (as we know he is too technologically inept to do it himself) conveniently waited until his body was positioned directly in front of it, shielding it from the camera.
Compare Wolfgang’s still to the following, which I personally took from the same exact interview/video:
Notice that the culvert is visible, as plain as day, just off of Mr. Rosen’s right shoulder. Also take note of the time, which reads 2:32PM EST. This is important because it means that whoever captured the screenshot used in Wolf’s e-mail sat through six more minutes of this interview, until Gene stepped to his right and positioned himself in front of the culvert, before they hit “print screen”. And if you don’t believe that this was done intentionally, then I have a bridge to sell you.
Unfortunately for Halbig, no amount of dirty tricks can fully obscure the truth. Even in his deceitful screenshot, we can see yellow police tape surrounding the culvert so that no one accidentally drives into it.
So Wolfgang’s desperately searching for someone smarter “then” him, which is, to be perfectly blunt, about as low as any bar gets. Assuming I can first understand what he’s actually asking here, I may be able to help the (self-professed) “old man”.
Ignoring the rather vague claim that he has been denied “public records” (and he’s likely referring to the Super Bowl Choir “permission slips” he’s inexplicably been chasing as of late), he appears to be completely befuddled by one of five posters hanging in the school’s west hallway, opposite the entrance to the cafetorium. Specifically, Halbig doesn’t seem to understand how the posters seen in this crime scene photo can “still be” on a wall for three years (and that is assuming they were hung the same year the artwork was created). Halbig incorrectly states that they’ve been there since “at least 2008” – which would mean that they had been hanging there for four years (still not an issue to any reasonable, intelligent adult) – but this is absolutely not the case. These posters are actually the end result of logo contest which, according to this June 5th, 2009 article from the Newtown Bee, took place in the spring of 2009 (which would of course make it impossible for them to be hung anywhere in 2008):
A logo contest was held for the topic and all the entries were on display for attendees to vote on at Reed Intermediate School on May 16. The contest asked participants to create a logo that would remind people to be “Nicer In Newtown.”
Out of 65 entries, there were five winners. According to that same article, those winners were:
Katharine Humber and Michael Meyer tied in the kindergarten through fourth grade level. Other winners were Alexandra Lotko (grades five through eight), Michaela Beaudry (grades nine through twelve), and Tiffany Lotko (adult).
Katharine Humber’s entry depicted people standing around Newtown’s flagpole and helping others. Michael Meyer’s entry showed notable buildings in Newtown and the flagpole. Alexandra Lotko’s entry depicted two hands making the shape of a heart and the words “People are Nicer In Newtown.” Michaela Beaudry’s entry showed a larger chicken nuzzling beaks with a baby chick and the words, “People are Nicer In Newtown, and Ms Lotko’s entry depicted a tree going through all seasons with the flagpole and the words, “People are nicer in Newtown all season long.”
Do those five descriptions sound at all familiar to you? They should, as they describe the five posters shown hanging in the hallway; the ones Wolfgang Halbig refuses to believe could still remain three whole years later.
As for how these posters are still on the wall three years later, “adhesives” would be my first guess, though I am admittedly not entirely sure as I did not personally hang them. But if Wolfgang is ignorantly suggesting that the appearance of these posters must mean that the crime scene photos were taken in 2008 (and again, this is entirely impossible as they’re actually from 2009), he’d also have to ignore all of the items in the school – and included in these same crime scene photos – that did not come into existence until after 2008. Some of those items include a children’s book from 2012; a number of magazines from as recently as December, 2012; 2012 calendars; SMART Tables and projectors manufactured between 2008 and 2010; etc.
Furthermore, the entire premise is flat-out nonsensical. Why can’t a poster remain on a wall for three years? Halbig does not bother to explain. There’s also a “Charlotte’s Web” poster directly across the hall. Does that mean that these pictures were taken in 1952? Of course not.