Amaral and the dogs

[stephen25000]

Even for you that is a very strange post to make. Evidence is the basis of any justice system ... with the obvious exception of kangaroo courts on the internet.

Quite simply put ... there was no meaningful evidence uncovered by the dogs.

Yet you persist in posting on this thread............................

You won't change my mind as to what the dogs indicated.

[Brietta]

Yet you persist in posting on this thread............................

You won't change my mind as to what the dogs indicated.

Not trying to change your mind, however even you must concede there is no way of knowing what it was the dog alerted to for the simple reason there was no evidence what it might have been.

Nor having watched Eddie at work can any reliance be given to his responses during his time in Praia da Luz.

[Alfred R Jones]

You are missing my point again. If people use an objective factual basis for criticism I don't have a problem with that. Most of the criticism of Grime and the dogs is opinion-based. Use objective facts for criticism, not your own opinions and I will debate using objective facts. Opinion is subjective so it's not relevant.

OK - what independent testing of their abilities were Eddie and Keela subjected to?  We know Grime's opinion of their abilities but where is the objective truth (ie: like a 3rd party report) about them?

[Jean-Pierre]

Yet you persist in posting on this thread............................

You won't change my mind as to what the dogs indicated.

OK Stephen. 

What exactly did the dogs indicate?

And what evidence is there for this?

[Mr Gray]

so what evidence did the dogs find...nothing

what do the alerts tell us...nothing

that's it

[Mr Gray]

You are missing my point again. If people use an objective factual basis for criticism I don't have a problem with that. Most of the criticism of Grime and the dogs is opinion-based. Use objective facts for criticism, not your own opinions and I will debate using objective facts. Opinion is subjective so it's not relevant.

you talk about using objective facts but you posted yesterday that Grime said the dogs alerted to cadaver odour which is untrue

[Alfred R Jones]

Grime gave his opinion, he didn't state a fact.  As an expert his opinion may carry more weight than most, but it is still only an opinion, and it was expressed with all sorts of caveats.   An expert opinion isn't always correct anyway, which is why, in healthcare for example,  a second opinion is often recommended and sought by patients. 

[G-Unit]

you talk about using objective facts but you posted yesterday that Grime said the dogs alerted to cadaver odour which is untrue

I posted information from Grime's report, which I provided a link to. Are you calling him a liar?

[Mr Gray]

I posted information from Grime's report, which I provided a link to. Are you calling him a liar?

don't be silly..Grime never claimed the dogs alerted to cadaver odour...you did. you then started giving YOUR opinion about what he meant...so don't lecture anyone on giving their opinion

[G-Unit]

Grime gave his opinion, he didn't state a fact.  As an expert his opinion may carry more weight than most, but it is still only an opinion, and it was expressed with all sorts of caveats.   An expert opinion isn't always correct anyway, which is why, in healthcare for example,  a second opinion is often recommended and sought by patients.

The factual part is that I never gave my opinion, I gave his, with a link to show where I got it.

[Alfred R Jones]

The factual part is that I never gave my opinion, I gave his, with a link to show where I got it.

???  So you have no opinion on Grime or his opinion?  LOL.

[Mr Gray]

The factual part is that I never gave my opinion, I gave his, with a link to show where I got it.

You didn't give a true acount of what Grime said
You missed out the word suggestive
You then gave your opinion of what Grime meant by suggestive
Those are the facts

[G-Unit]

You didn't give a true acount of what Grime said
You missed out the word suggestive
You then gave your opinion of what Grime meant by suggestive
Those are the facts

Short term memory loss?

« on: September 10, 2015, 01:39:57 PM »
Quote from: davel on September 10, 2015, 10:35:18 AM
Grime never said that...you are perpetuating lies.  Your's...and the whole sceptic case is based on a lie

I'm getting somewhat fed up of being called a liar. the next person to do so will be reported.

My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD's alert indications is that it is
suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm

[Mr Gray]

You have read about other dogs and other experts, but two dogs and one expert were involved in this case.The handler had trained and used Eddie for years, so in my opinion he is the only expert who can comment on the dog's capabilities. Eddie alerted in two ways. When he barked with his head in the air he was alerting to a scent he had been trained to find, but the source of the scent wasn't there. This is what he did in the bedroom. When he barked at a certain spot, the source of the scent was still there. That's what he did behind the sofa, as Keela confirmed.

Grimes opinion was that Eddie alerted to cadaver scent contamination in the bedroom. Not blood, toenails, dead pigs or fertilizer, he alerted to the smell of a dead human being. I will take the word of the man who had the dog since he was a puppy, who trained him and used him for eight years over any other opinions relating to other dogs and other circumstances.

The dogs don't 'think' by the way, their response is a Pavlovian response, a simple cause and effect operation. They smell something, they alert. After eight years of deployment Eddie wouldn't have been used if he was unreliable. He wouldn't have still been working if he alerted to all sorts of random substances.

there you are,,,the memory loss is yours as expected

[G-Unit]

there you are,,,the memory loss is yours as expected

Same difference.