Talk:David Farrant

I haven't deleted it yet, but using "http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/User:Mustex/David_Farrant" as a reference for a claim is a bit weird. Is there a reference at that page that supports the claim? If so, it should be used here. If not... well, find one... 22:31, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * hm, that's weird, that page was actually where I was storing my references, possibly a mistake on my part (copies the wrong thing out of habit of copying ISPs), give me a few minutes.--Mustex (talk) 00:50, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Fixed, sorry about that. Hoping David Farrant takes notice of this page like Sean Manchester did.  Be interesting to compare reactions.--Mustex (talk) 00:52, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank, no problem, I guess it was a "place holder"? 08:01, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Highgate vampire panic
Although I can make an educated guess, this page tells me nothing about what it was. It's just this cryptic reference that apparently the reader should already know about. Perhaps the author (who seems to know) could expand a bit? --Kels (talk) 05:44, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Reiteration of what Kels said, two months on now. Same goes for Seán Manchester article.  What is the Highgate vampire panic?  ThunderkatzHo! 23:14, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Awesome, Google search of "Highgate vampire panic" turns up Sean Manchester and David Farrant on RationalWiki. Although the storehouse of knowledge has an article under just "Highgate Vampire," hope that helps a bit :) -- EWildman (talk) 08:36, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

A GREAT LEADER SPEAKS
For Mustex,

My dear Sir, I feel it is my religious duty to correct something you stated on your David Farrant page; i.e. ... '''David Farrant serially starts occult or Satanic circles and puts in particular effort to recruit young women. All of legal age, of course: "They are all over 18 and we don’t initiate them if we believe they are just coming along for the sex."[6]'''

I find this most disconcerting as I am not a 'fake bishop' (like certain others who you will be aware of) but a serious psychic investigator who looks into all of Life's Mysteries and matters Esoteric. I am certainly not a Satanist and, in any event, sex as practised in Magic is a 'non-profit' making exercise.

Under the circumstances, you may wish to correct your entry and make an appointment with my Office and I can arrange for you to see me in order that you can repent and make a full confession.

Most honourably yours,

Fr. (David) Farrant

As a guy who knows nothing about this guy...
The intro does little to help me. What "panic"? What "rivalry"? Why is it remarkable that dude doesn't believe in vampires? Nailed a retread to my feet and prayed for better weather. 19:24, 21 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Added a section for ya. - Leuders (talk) 19:47, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * It's a start. How about something like: " David Farrant is a (insert nationality here) (insert his job/relevant hobby/something here) who (insert reason why he's worth an article here)." I'd do it, if I could find the relevant info myslef. Nailed a retread to my feet and prayed for better weather. 19:53, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Howzat? - Leuders (talk) 20:07, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Shiny! Nailed a retread to my feet and prayed for better weather. 20:09, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Vampires in Highgate
Is this the real reason for ? 171.33.222.26 (talk) 19:29, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Concerning My Supposed Feud with the Totally Modest "Great Leader"
I know this is a satirical site, etc., etc., but I wanted to take the opportunity to refute a few things said about me here.

"He's accused Farrant of depicting him as a pig in The Adventures of Bishop Bonkers comics."

I probably have, but I've amended that to mean that David is responsible for distributing the comics of "Cousin Hoggy", which were incorporated in The Adventures of Bishop Bonkers, published through Farrant's vanity press, British Psychic and Occult Society (BPOS). Naturally, Farrant is depicted favourably in them. Meanwhile, "Cousin Hoggy" is depicted as a porcine Manchester sockpuppet. It's the sockpuppet bit I find most offensive.

The creator of the comics bills himself "Cecil Lamont Dwiggins" - clearly not his real name. I've been told he's a friend of Farrant's, though - but since I can't confirm his identity 100%, I won't mention it here. But I do suspect he's the same guy responsible for the bulk of this article's content, too.

"Caricatures of Hogg also appear in Farrant's satirical YouTube videos. In one video, "Hoggy" travels from Australia to England to question Farrant, who promptly shoots him dead. In another, the deceased "Hoggy" is discovered haunting Farrant, who orders him captured in a 'ghost trap' and given to aliens for sexual experimentation."

These videos followed shortly after my queries to Farrant regarding sources for his claim that Highgate Cemetery was haunted by a psychic entity of some persuasion since the 19th century - indeed, Farrant insists Stoker was inspired by it. His rationale? In Dracula (1897), Lucy Westenra haunts a cemetery commonly identified as Highgate Cemetery, even isn't actually called that in the book. Ladies and gents, I give you your psychic investigator. His "response" was to make a drunken video on himself featuring a guy in a pig mask getting probed. Draw your own conclusions.

"The unfortunately-named Hogg is also subjected to the online condemnation and weird photoshop stylings of bishop Sean Manchester who (typically speaking in the third person) complains that Hogg is "doing precisely what Mr Farrant wants, i.e. violating Bishop Manchester.""

There's nothing unfortunate about my surname...but that's subjective, of course. But yes, Manchester's certainly got it in for me. Both of them have a bit of a "with us or against us" mentality, which short circuits their brains into thinking if you don't pick their side - or worse, question them about their claims - you must be batting for one team over the other. Therefore, I've variously been lumped in with Manchester by David and his cronies; or lumped in with Farrant by Manchester and his sockpuppets. I "choose" neither side. What's in the choice between the lesser of two snakeoil salesmen? That said, Manchester's behaviour against me has been far nastier than Farrant's.

"Manchester or one of his Internet aliases also expresses his contempt for Hogg via a blog entitled "Hoggwatch"."

The blog was definitely created by Manchester. It was originally published under his alias, Vebjørn Hästehufvud, but now operates under his other alias, "B.O.S." Same IPs for all.

"In 2013, Hogg demanded that Farrant contribute money to Highgate cemetery's upkeep and maintenance, saying that Farrant was responsible for the 1970s press hysteria that led to a wave of vandalism."

Not true. You'll see from reading through the comments I made to the article cited. But for the record, I suggested Farrant donate something to the cemetery's upkeep or do some volunteer work at the cemetery. And why not? He still profiteers off the case that drew increased vandalism in the wake of popularising the vampire theory and other antics, ensuring he got the press attention he craved - and continued to do so even after the cemetery workers spoke out against it. I also suggested the same thing about Manchester. And, of course, the media has its part to take in the blame, too. But they wouldn't've had anything to work with, if they weren't being "fed", if you catch me.

I've probably bored you all to tears, but I hope that clears a few things up. Cheers.

Addendum:

Here's a couple of quotes you'll probably enjoy from the "Great Leader", too. Firstly, on repeatedly denying he believes in vampires, yet representing himself as a believer to the press:

"The worst I did was to go along with another person's innane wild assertions about a 'blood-sucking vampire', but again, this was only because this was the 'angle' the Press and television wanted at the time - 'vampires' apparently selling more newspapers or attracting more interested audiences for TV."

And on talking about the Highgate Vampire, after just giving a talk about it (which was followed by another one, soon after):

"I delivered my Talk at 5pm, which I understand was recorded. Unfortunately, the Highgate ‘vampire’ case being so complicated time seemed to slip by so quickly, and there was only time left for two questions at the end . . ."

And:

"Its just that so many people seem to forget that the BPOS has been involved with multitudinous cases of unexplained phenomena over the years, all over the UK; so why is it people keep wanting to ‘dig that case up’ (excuse the pun, but it was deliberate!)"

And those comments were made sometime after he tried blaming me for public interest in the case. See: http://dawwih.blogspot.com.au/2013/09/vampire.html I'd love to take the credit, but it's clearly the most interesting part of his "career" - kind of ironic, considering that "career" wouldn't exist if Manchester hadn't changed David's ghost - and the ghosts David and Manchester's friends wrote about in their own letters to the Ham & High, without, of course, disclosing their relationship to them - into a vampire. So, in a way, Manchester and Farrant owe their Z-grade celebrity to each other. It's a shame the two former friends spend so much time duking it out. On the plus side, all the dirt they dish on each other helps unravel the thing.