Poll

Peer Reviewed Research suggests that Scent Dogs of all types have a maximunm combined accuracy of about 90%

I Understand and Accept this
3 (50%)
I believe Scent Dogs are more accurate than this
1 (16.7%)
I am not sure
1 (16.7%)
I don't believe Scent Dogs generally are that accurate
1 (16.7%)

Total Members Voted: 6

Voting closed: July 24, 2018, 11:14:43 AM

Author Topic: Poll - Scent Dogs Accuracy  (Read 237543 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Aiofe

  • Guest
Re: Poll - Scent Dogs Accuracy
« Reply #195 on: November 04, 2013, 10:10:32 AM »
Report me as you like it.
Your insistence in pretending that Mr Grime (and his supervisor, Prof Harrison) didn't allow Eddie the time to eventually react similarly in the other places is false. There is an obvious reason why Eddie spent less time in the other places. You know it, it has been pointed to you many times, but you deliberately choose to ignore it because your objective is to discredit, finally, the NPIA and the PJ which trusted them.

It is difficult to assess the apartments search as the video is discontinuous, but the garage search of the cars shows definite bias towards extra time and extra recalls to what was known to be the McCann's car.

Offline Benice

Re: Poll - Scent Dogs Accuracy
« Reply #196 on: November 04, 2013, 10:20:44 AM »
Report me as you like it.
Your insistence in pretending that Mr Grime (and his supervisor, Prof Harrison) didn't allow Eddie the time to eventually react similarly in the other places is false. There is an obvious reason why Eddie spent less time in the other places. You know it, it has been pointed to you many times, but you deliberately choose to ignore it because your objective is to discredit, finally, the NPIA and the PJ which trusted them.

To begin with I have not insisted on anything.  That's a lie.  I have never even mentioned Prof. Harrison in any of my posts.        The records show that more time was spent on ''McCann related'' items than on others.   I have every right to have an opinion based on that fact.

As my main reason for being here is to dispel and rebutt myths and disinformation - you could not be more wrong in your assessment of my intentions.

Unless you can provide evidence that my purpose here is to create and spread myths then I suggest you stop  repeatedly making false allegations against another poster i.e. me.     It's abuse and is against the rules.













The notion that innocence prevails over guilt – when there is no evidence to the contrary – is what separates civilization from barbarism.    Unfortunately, there are remains of barbarism among us.    Until very recently, it headed the PJ in Portimão. I hope he was the last one.
                                               Henrique Monteiro, chief editor, Expresso, Portugal

Aiofe

  • Guest
Re: Poll - Scent Dogs Accuracy
« Reply #197 on: November 04, 2013, 10:26:21 AM »
Eddie alerts to dried blood from a living person- do you agree?

Still waiting

Aiofe

  • Guest
Re: Poll - Scent Dogs Accuracy
« Reply #198 on: November 04, 2013, 10:26:49 AM »
No, he never said that- you need to listen or read it!

As you suggest that Mr Grime is the source for this, you will have no problem providing the link for the reference- we await your production of it.....

Still waiting....

AnneGuedes

  • Guest
Re: Poll - Scent Dogs Accuracy
« Reply #199 on: November 04, 2013, 10:33:09 AM »
To begin with I have not insisted on anything.  That's a lie.  I have never even mentioned Prof. Harrison in any of my posts.        The records show that more time was spent on ''McCann related'' items than on others.   I have every right to have an opinion based on that fact.

You take care not to mention Mark Harrison, because 1) he's a professor and 2) he is an MBE.
But as Prof Harrison MBE supervised the dog operation, he was there, you attack him indirectly with your supposed "opinion", that, I maintain it, in this case is a myth.
As long as you'll spread that discrediting myth about differences of time that have a logic and reasonable explanation you don't ignore, I'll denounce it as a deliberate attempt to cheat posters.

Aiofe

  • Guest
Re: Poll - Scent Dogs Accuracy
« Reply #200 on: November 04, 2013, 10:36:14 AM »
You take care not to mention Mark Harrison, because 1) he's a professor and 2) he is an MBE.
But as Prof Harrison MBE supervised the dog operation, he was there, you attack him indirectly with your supposed "opinion", that, I maintain it, in this case is a myth.
As long as you'll spread that discrediting myth about differences of time that have a logic and reasonable explanation you don't ignore, I'll denounce it as a deliberate attempt to cheat posters.


The garage video is extremely clear about the time and recall bias shown.

Offline Angelo222

Re: Poll - Scent Dogs Accuracy
« Reply #201 on: November 04, 2013, 11:50:07 AM »
Report me as you like it.
Your insistence in pretending that Mr Grime (and his supervisor, Prof Harrison) didn't allow Eddie the time to eventually react similarly in the other places is false. There is an obvious reason why Eddie spent less time in the other places. You know it, it has been pointed to you many times, but you deliberately choose to ignore it because your objective is to discredit, finally, the NPIA and the PJ which trusted them.

I saw the video too Anne.  Grime might as well have put a marker on that Scenic, the poor dog was exasperated at being called back so many times.  The entire operation was an exercise in futility IMO.

As for the car itself, what a cock up!!  The police driver was unprotected and they drove it to the underground car park.  A rental car which  hundreds of people have previously used and they expected to find something unique to the McCanns??
« Last Edit: November 04, 2013, 11:55:20 AM by Angelo222 »
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

AnneGuedes

  • Guest
Re: Poll - Scent Dogs Accuracy
« Reply #202 on: November 04, 2013, 12:05:22 PM »
I saw the video too Anne.  Grime might as well have put a marker on that Scenic, the poor dog was exasperated at being called back so many times.  The entire operation was an exercise in futility IMO.

As for the car itself, what a cock up!!  The police driver was unprotected and they drove it to the underground car park.  A rental car which  hundreds of people have previously used and they expected to find something unique to the McCanns??
The rental car was new, only one user before IIRC.
But that's not the topic. Neither you nor me are handlers, so we can't interpret correctly what we see on those videos, we have no choice but to believe what the handler and his supervisor said or to disbelieve. I'm happy with the credits of Mr Grime and Prof Harrison, the AG was too.
Nevertheless, not to confirm but to understand, I read a lot on this subject (I can send you links if you wish so) and especially on the physiology of dog's nose and on the notion of scent cone.

Aiofe

  • Guest
Re: Poll - Scent Dogs Accuracy
« Reply #203 on: November 04, 2013, 12:14:15 PM »
The rental car was new, only one user before IIRC.
But that's not the topic. Neither you nor me are handlers, so we can't interpret correctly what we see on those videos, we have no choice but to believe what the handler and his supervisor said or to disbelieve. I'm happy with the credits of Mr Grime and Prof Harrison, the AG was too.
Nevertheless, not to confirm but to understand, I read a lot on this subject (I can send you links if you wish so) and especially on the physiology of dog's nose and on the notion of scent cone.

It is certainly possible to see repeated recalls to the McCann's car as biased. And no supporting forensics were found! Still waiting for your cites.

Offline Cudge

Re: Poll - Scent Dogs Accuracy
« Reply #204 on: November 04, 2013, 01:22:52 PM »
You take care not to mention Mark Harrison, because 1) he's a professor and 2) he is an MBE.
But as Prof Harrison MBE supervised the dog operation, he was there, you attack him indirectly with your supposed "opinion", that, I maintain it, in this case is a myth.
As long as you'll spread that discrediting myth about differences of time that have a logic and reasonable explanation you don't ignore, I'll denounce it as a deliberate attempt to cheat posters.

2)" he is an MBE."   I did not realise that being a Member of the British Empire gave you any more credibility in a field than not being a member of the British Empire

MBE's are awarded as follows:-

This is awarded for a significant achievement or outstanding service to the community. An MBE is also awarded for local ‘hands-on’ service which stands out as an example to other people.


Lollipop Ladies have been awarded MBE's it does not mean we should defer to their knowledge on Rioad Traffic Management 

Cariad

  • Guest
Re: Poll - Scent Dogs Accuracy
« Reply #205 on: November 04, 2013, 08:39:32 PM »
Ok, a couple of points that haven't been made:

This wasn't an experiment, it was a live exercise. If it was an experiment it would have been useless for all the reasons stated. I.e spending more time in one area than others.

My biggest problem with scent dogs was handler bias. I'm aware of teh clever hans effect. I've posted an experiment with corpse scent on carpets previously which was blinded and there was still an 80-90% success rate.

On first watching the garage video I dismissed it as a clear example of handler bias. I then watched Mr Grimes do exactly the same in the apartment with one of the single beds. He called Eddie back repeatedly, over and over again, both on the bed and under the bed. Eddie never signalled at the bed. If the dog was going to be badgered in to giving a  false positive, he'd had been forgiven for doing so at that bed.

Mr Grimes makes a lot of money from having accurate Cadaver dogs. He will lose work if his dogs provide false signals. He knows his dogs. If he thought that encouraging his dog back to one place repeatedly would cause the dog to give a false signal, he wouldn't do it. A false positive would lose him work, no bark wouldn't.


 

Aiofe

  • Guest
Re: Poll - Scent Dogs Accuracy
« Reply #206 on: November 04, 2013, 08:41:11 PM »
Ok, a couple of points that haven't been made:

This wasn't an experiment, it was a live exercise. If it was an experiment it would have been useless for all the reasons stated. I.e spending more time in one area than others.

My biggest problem with scent dogs was handler bias. I'm aware of teh clever hans effect. I've posted an experiment with corpse scent on carpets previously which was blinded and there was still an 80-90% success rate.

On first watching the garage video I dismissed it as a clear example of handler bias. I then watched Mr Grimes do exactly the same in the apartment with one of the single beds. He called Eddie back repeatedly, over and over again, both on the bed and under the bed. Eddie never signalled at the bed. If the dog was going to be badgered in to giving a  false positive, he'd had been forgiven for doing so at that bed.

Mr Grimes makes a lot of money from having accurate Cadaver dogs. He will lose work if his dogs provide false signals. He knows his dogs. If he thought that encouraging his dog back to one place repeatedly would cause the dog to give a false signal, he wouldn't do it. A false positive would lose him work, no bark wouldn't.


 

You understand neither dogs nor the Clever Hans effect.

If a handler repeatedly calls a dog back- maybe ten times!- then that is handler bias.

Cariad

  • Guest
Re: Poll - Scent Dogs Accuracy
« Reply #207 on: November 04, 2013, 09:00:48 PM »
You understand neither dogs nor the Clever Hans effect.

If a handler repeatedly calls a dog back- maybe ten times!- then that is handler bias.

Don't tell me what I do or do not understand.

AnneGuedes

  • Guest
Re: Poll - Scent Dogs Accuracy
« Reply #208 on: November 04, 2013, 09:17:10 PM »
2)" he is an MBE." 
I reckon you conveniently dropped the "professor" part ! Are your lollipop ladies professors ?
« Last Edit: November 04, 2013, 09:26:52 PM by AnneGuedes »

AnneGuedes

  • Guest
Re: Poll - Scent Dogs Accuracy
« Reply #209 on: November 04, 2013, 09:25:56 PM »
Don't tell me what I do or do not understand.
Mr Aiofe is on my ignore list, for insisting in ignorance, but when someone answers him, I see.
The Clever Hans effect has nothing to do here, what handlers are aware of is something else, called the Rosenthal effect. It is the unconscious tendency for results to conform experimenter's expectations. Prof Harrison and Mr Grime had nothing to gain with alerts of the dogs. In itself the lack of alert would have been much more informative.