Please add Myth number 3: Madeleine's DNA was found in the Scenic....

[Luz]

Back on topic.

Was Madeleine's hair found in the Scenic?

No:


There were more than two hundred hairs, down or fragments of hair and down. The majority appeared to be different from the blonde reference hairs recovered from SJM2, 4 and 5. Furthermore, no blonde hair consistent with that seen in photographs of Madeleine McCann was found.

Approximately 15 hairs, down or fragments were blonde and fair, presenting a similarity with the reference material. All were of
insufficient length to make a solid [definitive] comparison. Furthermore, they are too short to do mitocondrial DNA tests. Folicle root material is insufficient for standard DNA tests.

Four hairs - one from 7B and three from 7C - were sent for Low Copy Number DNA testing. The results of those tests will be presented by my colleague John Lowe.

Conclusion

In the objects recovered from the Scenic, there were around 15 blonde/fair hairs similar to the reference hairs from SJM2, 4 and 5. However, as it was not possible to do solid [definitive] or significant [forensically meaningful] tests it is not possible for me to determine if, or not, these could have been from Madeleine McCann.


http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic10-10.html

You do need to re-read the files - the appearance and coloring of the hair was consistent with Madeleine McCann's, however the best laboratory in the world was unable to even determine if the hair was from a dead or alive person, when all it takes is a very simple look at a microscope.

Look, we know what FSS stands for nowadays, a Fraud. So you better find other excuses.

[Luz]

Mr. Lowe sold himself short.

Mr. Lowe understands Forensics and DNA.  You obviously don't.

Yes, I believe he does. But even if I am not a scientist as the Portuguese president of the Legal Medicine Institute is, I understand enough to see the obvious. And the obvious is that what was provided by the reports is "CRAP".

[Eleanor]

Back on topic.

Was Madeleine's hair found in the Scenic?

No:


There were more than two hundred hairs, down or fragments of hair and down. The majority appeared to be different from the blonde reference hairs recovered from SJM2, 4 and 5. Furthermore, no blonde hair consistent with that seen in photographs of Madeleine McCann was found.

Approximately 15 hairs, down or fragments were blonde and fair, presenting a similarity with the reference material. All were of
insufficient length to make a solid [definitive] comparison. Furthermore, they are too short to do mitocondrial DNA tests. Folicle root material is insufficient for standard DNA tests.

Four hairs - one from 7B and three from 7C - were sent for Low Copy Number DNA testing. The results of those tests will be presented by my colleague John Lowe.

Conclusion

In the objects recovered from the Scenic, there were around 15 blonde/fair hairs similar to the reference hairs from SJM2, 4 and 5. However, as it was not possible to do solid [definitive] or significant [forensically meaningful] tests it is not possible for me to determine if, or not, these could have been from Madeleine McCann.


http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic10-10.html

You do need to re-read the files - the appearance and coloring of the hair was consistent with Madeleine McCann's, however the best laboratory in the world was unable to even determine if the hair was from a dead or alive person, when all it takes is a very simple look at a microscope.

Look, we know what FSS stands for nowadays, a Fraud. So you better find other excuses.

The hairs found in The Scenic were short, and almost certainly from haircuts received by the twins shortly before.

[gilet]

Mr. Lowe sold himself short.

Mr. Lowe understands Forensics and DNA.  You obviously don't.

Yes, I believe he does. But even if I am not a scientist as the Portuguese president of the Legal Medicine Institute is, I understand enough to see the obvious. And the obvious is that what was provided by the reports is "CRAP".

So your definitive evidence for this is? Or is it just presumption and biased opinion?

Personally I prefer to take the report of John Lowe, the reputable scientist who handled the forensic material (which you did not, but still see fit to pronounce on) and his remarks rather than your less than polite and rather unsupported statements that Lowe sold himself short and his report is to quote you, "CRAP".

I wonder who others who genuinely seek the truth will choose to trust, you or the respected scientist who actually dealt with the material and who provided a full and detailed report into his tests?

[debunker]

Was cadaver odor detected in the Scenic?

NO.

BOth Eddie and Keela reacted. Blood was found in the car ( Gerry's). So no detection of cadaver odor.

How can you know, with certainty, that  Eddie the cadaver dog was not alerting to cadaver odor ?

If there was both blood and  cadaver odor, then both dogs would alert,  wouldn't they  ? 


( genuine question,  because I'm not sure of the answer )

WE do not know there was no cadaver odor, but we have no more reason to believe c weaver odor was there AFTER the dogs went in than BEFORE.

Let us simplify.

WE have two detecting machines, one called an Edifier can detect either poisons or sugar. The other called a Keelifier detects only sugar.

WE have a series of boxes about which we know nothing of the contents. We use the machines to detect their contents.

BOx 1  both E and K react. So it contains sugar only (within the accuracy of the detectors)
BOx 2  e reacts but k does not- we can expect that it contains poison (within the accuracy of the detectors)
Box3   k reacts and e does not-   this is logically impossible (within the accuracy of the detectors)
BOx 4  neither react no sugar, no poison.(within the accuracy of the detectors)

[debunker]

Back on topic.

Was Madeleine's hair found in the Scenic?

No:


There were more than two hundred hairs, down or fragments of hair and down. The majority appeared to be different from the blonde reference hairs recovered from SJM2, 4 and 5. Furthermore, no blonde hair consistent with that seen in photographs of Madeleine McCann was found.


Approximately 15 hairs, down or fragments were blonde and fair, presenting a similarity with the reference material. All were of
insufficient length to make a solid [definitive] comparison. Furthermore, they are too short to do mitocondrial DNA tests. Folicle root material is insufficient for standard DNA tests.



Four hairs - one from 7B and three from 7C - were sent for Low Copy Number DNA testing. The results of those tests will be presented by my colleague John Lowe.

Conclusion



In the objects recovered from the Scenic, there were around 15 blonde/fair hairs similar to the reference hairs from SJM2, 4 and 5. However, as it was not possible to do solid [definitive] or significant [forensically meaningful] tests it is not possible for me to determine if, or not, these could have been from Madeleine McCann.




http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic10-10.html

You do need to re-read the files - the appearance and coloring of the hair was consistent with Madeleine McCann's, however the best laboratory in the world was unable to even determine if the hair was from a dead or alive person, when all it takes is a very simple look at a microscope.


Look, we know what FSS stands for nowadays, a Fraud. So you better find other excuses.

SO you are unable to backup your assertion that the two reports were contradictory.

[debunker]

Back on topic.

Was Madeleine's hair found in the Scenic?

No:


There were more than two hundred hairs, down or fragments of hair and down. The majority appeared to be different from the blonde reference hairs recovered from SJM2, 4 and 5. Furthermore, no blonde hair consistent with that seen in photographs of Madeleine McCann was found.


Approximately 15 hairs, down or fragments were blonde and fair, presenting a similarity with the reference material. All were of
insufficient length to make a solid [definitive] comparison. Furthermore, they are too short to do mitocondrial DNA tests. Folicle root material is insufficient for standard DNA tests.



Four hairs - one from 7B and three from 7C - were sent for Low Copy Number DNA testing. The results of those tests will be presented by my colleague John Lowe.

Conclusion

In the objects recovered from the Scenic, there were around 15 blonde/fair hairs similar to the reference hairs from SJM2, 4 and 5. However, as it was not possible to do solid [definitive] or significant [forensically meaningful] tests it is not possible for me to determine if, or not, these could have been from Madeleine McCann.


http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic10-10.html

You do need to re-read the files - the appearance and coloring of the hair was consistent with Madeleine McCann's, however the best laboratory in the world was unable to even determine if the hair was from a dead or alive person, when all it takes is a very simple look at a microscope.

Look, we know what FSS stands for nowadays, a Fraud. So you better find other excuses.

THat is directly from the files. No match found.

[gilet]

Back on topic.

Was Madeleine's hair found in the Scenic?

No:


There were more than two hundred hairs, down or fragments of hair and down. The majority appeared to be different from the blonde reference hairs recovered from SJM2, 4 and 5. Furthermore, no blonde hair consistent with that seen in photographs of Madeleine McCann was found.


Approximately 15 hairs, down or fragments were blonde and fair, presenting a similarity with the reference material. All were of
insufficient length to make a solid [definitive] comparison. Furthermore, they are too short to do mitocondrial DNA tests. Folicle root material is insufficient for standard DNA tests.



Four hairs - one from 7B and three from 7C - were sent for Low Copy Number DNA testing. The results of those tests will be presented by my colleague John Lowe.

Conclusion

In the objects recovered from the Scenic, there were around 15 blonde/fair hairs similar to the reference hairs from SJM2, 4 and 5. However, as it was not possible to do solid [definitive] or significant [forensically meaningful] tests it is not possible for me to determine if, or not, these could have been from Madeleine McCann.


http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic10-10.html

You do need to re-read the files - the appearance and coloring of the hair was consistent with Madeleine McCann's, however the best laboratory in the world was unable to even determine if the hair was from a dead or alive person, when all it takes is a very simple look at a microscope.

Look, we know what FSS stands for nowadays, a Fraud. So you better find other excuses.

THat is directly from the files. No match found.

It appears that non-scientist Luz is claiming that scientist John Lowe does not know how to handle a microscope. Like Hideho in another context she is telling us that she knows better than the actual experts who handled the material and have genuine experience to base their comments on.

It is difficult to refrain from making such ad hominem comments as this because the whole thrust of Luz's argument is about herself knowing better than Lowe and there is no evidence for her claims in her posts which can be discussed.

[icabodcrane]

Was cadaver odor detected in the Scenic?

NO.

BOth Eddie and Keela reacted. Blood was found in the car ( Gerry's). So no detection of cadaver odor.

How can you know, with certainty, that  Eddie the cadaver dog was not alerting to cadaver odor ?

If there was both blood and  cadaver odor, then both dogs would alert,  wouldn't they  ? 


( genuine question,  because I'm not sure of the answer )

WE do not know there was no cadaver odor, but we have no more reason to believe c weaver odor was there AFTER the dogs went in than BEFORE.

Let us simplify.

WE have two detecting machines, one called an Edifier can detect either poisons or sugar. The other called a Keelifier detects only sugar.

WE have a series of boxes about which we know nothing of the contents. We use the machines to detect their contents.

BOx 1  both E and K react. So it contains sugar only (within the accuracy of the detectors)
BOx 2  e reacts but k does not- we can expect that it contains poison (within the accuracy of the detectors)
Box3   k reacts and e does not-   this is logically impossible (within the accuracy of the detectors)
BOx 4  neither react no sugar, no poison.(within the accuracy of the detectors)

Thank you for the simplification ...   but an even  simpler   'yes or no'  answer would be welcome

If both  blood and cadavour odor were present   ...  would both dogs alert ?

[gilet]

Was cadaver odor detected in the Scenic?

NO.

BOth Eddie and Keela reacted. Blood was found in the car ( Gerry's). So no detection of cadaver odor.

How can you know, with certainty, that  Eddie the cadaver dog was not alerting to cadaver odor ?

If there was both blood and  cadaver odor, then both dogs would alert,  wouldn't they  ? 


( genuine question,  because I'm not sure of the answer )

WE do not know there was no cadaver odor, but we have no more reason to believe c weaver odor was there AFTER the dogs went in than BEFORE.

Let us simplify.

WE have two detecting machines, one called an Edifier can detect either poisons or sugar. The other called a Keelifier detects only sugar.

WE have a series of boxes about which we know nothing of the contents. We use the machines to detect their contents.

BOx 1  both E and K react. So it contains sugar only (within the accuracy of the detectors)
BOx 2  e reacts but k does not- we can expect that it contains poison (within the accuracy of the detectors)
Box3   k reacts and e does not-   this is logically impossible (within the accuracy of the detectors)
BOx 4  neither react no sugar, no poison.(within the accuracy of the detectors)

Thank you for the simplification ...   but an even  simpler   'yes or no'  answer would be welcome

If both  blood and cadavour odor were present   ...  would both dogs alert ?

My answer to that would be yes they would both alert.

But it would not be possible to determine what Eddie had alerted to unless a cadaver or part cadaver was found because he may have simply alerted to blood like Keela.

[debunker]

@Gilet

COrrect