Hmmm ... I wouldn't dream of offending you by "suggesting" anything at all pertaining to your posts ... which really rather detracts from broadening the discussion which is a pity.
Right lets get back on track with Mr Amaral and Eddie.
I think we can both agree that Eddie barked ... is that correct?
I have read and understood what Mr Grime had to say about that ... have you?
I have read up on VOCs ... have you?
Will have to leave it there for the moment ... perhaps in the interests of accuracy and to dismiss the chance of "suggestion" getting in the way ... you might like to continue stulted discussion based on question and answer such as the three above and I'll get back to you later.
Why are sceptics incapable of discussion without taking personal slight? That was rhetorical.
Hmmmmm......It was irrelevant in my view , not offensive.
How about sticking to the point as an idea to "keep on track?"
The point was that the EVRD
doesn`t seem to alert non-stop as he would were the alerts triggered by residual scents from the many aforementioned substances which would probably be present at most sites under investigation..........including those investigated by Eddie.
You seem, in the clip below to regard the ever growing list of substances to which residual scents the EVRD alerts, as "too many distractions"
"I think you are misunderstanding the role of the dogs as just one very valuable tool in the box of tools available to investigators ... or is it your suggestion that if you or a loved one is lying under a collapsed building it would be pointless to send the dogs in to find you because there are too many distractions around?"
So what stops the on duty dog alerting immediately and continuously to residual scents from any or many of the substances on an ever growing list of "distractions" which will be present at most sites ?