Has Martin Smith Changed his Opinion ?

[Mr Gray]

What a curious phenomenon, do extrapolate on this theory of yours

you are a prime example.....recently you referred to the alerts as not being evidential evidence...where did you get that from....the alerts are evidence of nothing....

[mercury]

Its akin to sayng all labour supporters as opposed to tory or lib dem supporters are uneducated, have low iqs, are ignorant etc etc, ie total and utter  nonsense
Feel free to interchange parties, just an example

[mercury]

you are a prime example.....recently you referred to the alerts as not being evidential evidence...where did you get that from....the alerts are evidence of nothing....

Lol at prime example

Your sentence makes no sense btw

[Mr Gray]

Lol at prime example

Your sentence makes no sense btw

my sentence makes perfect sense...it is your comprehension that is at fault

[mercury]

my sentence makes perfect sense...it is your comprehension that is at fault

There you go again nsulting others, go reread your post

[Mr Gray]

There you go again nsulting others, go reread your post

my post makes perfect sense...the problem is with you and you comprehension

[mercury]

my post makes perfect sense...the problem is with you and you comprehension

If you say so

>>>>>>>> your post

you are a prime example.....recently you referred to the alerts as not being evidential evidence...where did you get that from....the alerts are evidence of nothing....


Anyway we dont  really want to do the 301st dog thread do we? So best leave it there

[Mr Gray]

If you say so

>>>>>>>> your post

you are a prime example.....recently you referred to the alerts as not being evidential evidence...where did you get that from....the alerts are evidence of nothing....


Anyway we dont  really want to do the 301st dog thread do we? So best leave it there

I say so

[mercury]

I say so

Whch usually means unadulterated biased childish abusive rubbish, oh well, nothng to see here folks, move on >>>>

[Mr Gray]

Whch usually means unadulterated biased childish abusive rubbish, oh well, nothng to see here folks, move on >>>>

which would describe your comment that my sentence made no sense

[mercury]

which would describe your comment that my sentence made no sense

Pathetic

The dog alerts are at least evidence of a cadaver dog alerting to what he has been trained  to alert to, ie scent of decomposing bodies,  do I have to hone it down more for you to understand? No? Good.

[Mr Gray]

Pathetic

The dog alerts are at least evidence of a cadaver dog alerting to what he has been trained  to alert to, ie scent of decomposing bodies,  do I have to hone it down more for you to understand? No? Good.

#
which part of no evidential reliability do you not understand...as I have said you are a prime example of a sceptic who does not understand the evidence..the dog alerts to blood too by the way

[Mr Gray]

as I was saying before being distracted...smiths supposed ID of Gerry is extremely weak due to the lighting and the fact he did not see the mans face...it is not important if he has changed his mind or not

[mercury]

#
which part of no evidential reliability do you not understand...as I have said you are a prime example of a sceptic who does not understand the evidence..the dog alerts to blood too by the way

Reread your original post to me on evidential reliability and evidence

[ferryman]

Until the man is identified mr smiths 60-80% sure stands...and thats the end of it..no evidence or proof that he ever changed hs mind

No, it doesn't.

Unless you think Martin Smith would have produced an efit of a man he was 60 to 80% sure was Gerry.

Which is absurd ....