Lets turn this on its head, Carew.
What do you think Eddie was alterting to in the Scenic, and what are your reasons?
Let`s leave it the original way up, instead.
Have a bash at a few cites to explain the original post........otherwise you could be adding to this little niggle I have about cherry-picking propaganda going on.
"Well, having passed the buck from posters on to scientific studies, reports and Mr Grime himself, perhaps you could point out where those expert works have addressed themselves specifically to points made about this case rather than simply applied in a cherry-picked disparate way by posters?
Where for instance does the report covering mop-related residual cross contamination from decayed but survived particles of blood, toenails saliva etc., explain the absence of alerts in the 5A bathroom, despite Eddie being called / encouraged back and around with a certain amount of "tapping" at certain areas, too?
How do the Clever Hans / handler cuing studies explain that?
Does Mr Grime in his report, put it down to Eddie not being in "work-mode" at the time?
Did the dog "unlearn" certain behaviours to suit those occasions when an alert to a multitude of contaminant triggers would make no sense to posters?
Did handler cuing influence the alert to a boys t-shirt or does the cherry picking choose another convenient scientific study because handler expectation doesn`t cover that one?
Where does MG or any expert state that an alert by Eddie to a key fob rules out any possibility that there was any other cadaver contaminant source ever present in the hire car ?
A source can be found to quote away any point and sounds impressive but when applied to a whole case it can fall apart.
It can work for propaganda purposes, though. "
