Poll - Scent Dogs Accuracy

[Redblossom]

Sorry debunker you cant have it both ways, keela reacts to blood, you accept she did on the key fob but in your mind the boot was full of stuff so she may not have done, LOL, wonder what amount of detritous stuff was behind the sofa too, hello? And how do you know the gkove pocket was not fulk of cra p too???

i wonder who it really is that makes it up as they go along here, mr grime or all the dogs snapping at his heels and having hernias cos they are getting NOWHERE
 


Nite now skeep tight

What I have written is accurate.

Are you drunk?

prove the fss found gerrys blood then come back nite now x

[debunker]

Sorry debunker you cant have it both ways, keela reacts to blood, you accept she did on the key fob but in your mind the boot was full of stuff so she may not have done, LOL, wonder what amount of detritous stuff was behind the sofa too, hello? And how do you know the gkove pocket was not fulk of cra p too???

i wonder who it really is that makes it up as they go along here, mr grime or all the dogs snapping at his heels and having hernias cos they are getting NOWHERE
 


Nite now skeep tight

What I have written is accurate.

Are you drunk?

prove the fss found gerrys blood then come back nite now x

You have a choice:

You can hold that a reaction from Keela means that there is blood there

Or you can maintain that there was no blood in the car despite Keela's reaction.

Me, I'll stick with the facts. Blood with a 90% probability.

[Redblossom]

Problem is you take one keela alert as definifely true and gerrys blood but ignore the other alert by keela in the flat as not madeleine's  and not blood thats why i said cant have it both ways

[Chinagirl]

Debating with Redblossom is like trying to nail jelly to a wall - utterly futile exercise and best not attempted.

[debunker]

Problem is you take one keela alert as definifely true and gerrys blood but ignore the other alert by keela in the flat as not madeleine's  and not blood thats why i said cant have it both ways

How can me saying that Keela is 90% accurate be changed in your mind to saying that blood was definitely there. Do you not understand probabilities?

You cannot have it both ways, which is what you are trying to do.

[debunker]

Debating with Redblossom is like trying to nail jelly to a wall - utterly futile exercise and best not attempted.

It does seem that they are just arguing for the sake of it rather than trying to find out what can be said truthfully.

[Redblossom]

DB you misinderstood what I was asking, try again, I was not arguing about blood, keela or the places it was found

These quotes from the FSS report are to do with the material found behind the sofa in the case of Madeleines DNA mentioned and the material found on the key card of the car mentioning Gerry Mccann's DNA

Both relate to blood presumably as they were taken from where the blood dog alerted, but anyway

My point was that you and others talk about Gerrys blood being found as a fact but simutaneously saying Madeleine's was not found. So the question is how can you say that based on the report? What is the difference between the two quotes?

--------
One
An incomplete DNA result was obtained from cellular material on the swab (286A/2007 CRL 3a). The swab contained very little information and showed low level indications of DNA from more than one person. However, all of the confirmed DNA components within this result match the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Madeline McCann. LCN DNA profiling is highly sensitive; it is not possible attribute this DNA profile to a particular body fluid.

Two
A low level incomplete DNA profile which matched the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Gerald McCann was obtained from cellular material on the key card (286C/2007-CRL(12)). This sample has not been sent for further testing using LCN DNA profiling tests.

[debunker]

DB you misinderstood what I was asking, try again, I was not arguing about blood, keela or the places it was found

These quotes from the FSS report are to do with the material found behind the sofa in the case of Madeleines DNA mentioned and the material found on the key card of the car mentioning Gerry Mccann's DNA

Both relate to blood presumably as they were taken from where the blood dog alerted, but anyway

My point was that you and others talk about Gerrys blood being found as a fact but simutaneously saying Madeleine's was not found. So the question is how can you say that based on the report? What is the difference between the two quotes?

--------

An incomplete DNA result was obtained from cellular material on the swab (286A/2007 CRL 3a). The swab contained very little information and showed low level indications of DNA from more than one person. However, all of the confirmed DNA components within this result match the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Madeline McCann. LCN DNA profiling is highly sensitive; it is not possible attribute this DNA profile to a particular body fluid.

A low level incomplete DNA profile which matched the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Gerald McCann was obtained from cellular material on the key card (286C/2007-CRL(12)). This sample has not been sent for further testing using LCN DNA profiling tests.

One was a sample from a single person and all of the markers were identified as Gerry.

The other was a random agglomeration of three to five different people's DNA which did not allow any information about which marker came from which of the 3-5 people, thus making it possible that ANY such selection of 3-5 people's DNA would include many of Madeleine's markers. Then you factor in that the contributors could include Kate and Gerry who between them share all of Madeleine's markers, and Amelia and Sean who share 25% each of Madeleine's marker. The sample is necessarily without any probative value.

[Redblossom]

DB

How were all the markers identified as Gerrys if it was an incomplete dna profile?

re swab 3a this is NOT the sample from the car that was from 3-5 people, it was a swab from the living room, granted it said from more than one person, my point was how do you say corresponding and confirmed markers match in one case must mean one thing,  and corresponding and confirmed markers just cannot mean another

[debunker]

DB

How were all the markers identified as Gerrys if it was an incomplete dna profile?

re swab 3a this is NOT the sample from the car that was from 3-5 people, it was a swab from the living room, granted it said from more than one person, my point was how do you say corresponding and confirmed markers match in one case must mean one thing,  and corresponding and confirmed markers just cannot mean another

Your answer is here



http://www.mccannfiles.com/id268.html




An incomplete DNA result was obtained through LCN from cellular material present in the swab (286A/2007 CRL 3A). The low-level DNA result showed very meagre information indicating more than one person. Departing from the principle that all confirmed DNA components within the scope of this result originated from a single source, then these pointed to corresponding components in the profile of Madeleine McCann; however, if the DNA within the scope of this result originated from more than one person then the result could be explained as being DNA originating from Kate Healy and Gerald McCann, for example. DNA profiles established through LCN are extremely sensitive; it is not possible to attribute this DNA profile to a particular body fluid. nor to determine how or when that DNA was transferred to that area.

[Redblossom]

Whats the difference between an incomplete dna result and an incomplete dna profile vis a vis those two specific examples

And how does  one prove it was gerrys blood whilst the other proves nothing

[debunker]

Whats the difference between an incomplete dna result and an incomplete dna profile vis a vis those two specific examples

It is quite clear. One is possibly mixed but has few non-target markers. Given that we know that someone with those markers was in the room and there are most of their markers present it becomes likely that the target was the source.

Both 3a and 3b are specific enough for them to be said to be probably from the target.

[Redblossom]

Whats the difference between an incomplete dna result and an incomplete dna profile vis a vis those two specific examples

It is quite clear. One is possibly mixed but has few non-target markers. Given that we know that someone with those markers was in the room and there are most of their markers present it becomes likely that the target was the source.

Both 3a and 3b are specific enough for them to be said to be probably from the target.

Am I watching dr who or something? Sample 3b has nothing todo wih this another goalpost changing sigh. Get back in your  tardis
 

 

[debunker]

I am totally confused now.

The Key Fob result was not mixed, but incomplete:

"An incomplete, low-level DNA profile that matched corresponding components in the profile of Gerald McCann was obtained from cellular material present on the card key? (286C/2007-CRL (12)). I guess this is the fob of the car-keys"

http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic10.html

Please try to clarify exactly which two results you are referring to.
 

[Redblossom]

My post at 8.39pm yesterday detailed the two results, the first was from the living room the second was from the key fob

My question was how one can discount the first result could have possibly come from Madeleine but say the second definitely came from Gerry. But never mind, its moot and laboured.