Why do some people doubt the McCanns version of events?

[Vertigo Swirl]

I’m sure the horrible effects on  Mr McCann are nothing to the horrible treatment his daughter has been victim to ( if she was abducted as you believe ).

Slarti will have a name for this sort of argument I'm sure.

[G-Unit]

In your acknowledgement that you have cherry picked and lifted an out of context quote from an entirely different subject ~ Danny Collins book to be exact ~ rather reveals the paucity of your argument in a thread asking "Why do some people doubt the McCanns version of events?."

Now provide a cite showing that I am attempting to 'tar' you with 'my' brush.

Your use of the word 'shibboleth' emphasises that you are referring to a group of people with shared characteristics whom you identify as sceptics in my opinion. 

[Vertigo Swirl]

Your use of the word 'shibboleth' emphasises that you are referring to a group of people with shared characteristics whom you identify as sceptics in my opinion.

Sceptics and supporters do have shared beliefs within their individual groups, that's a fact.  I don't object to being described as a supporter, why do you consider sceptic to be so abusive?  It's not our fault if quite a few sceptics are so very vile in nature, and bring your group into disrepute.  It's something you'll have to put up with all the while you voice your scepticism online.

[faithlilly]

Do you imagine for a second that the families of missing children don't open their eyes every day of their lives and don't think what their children may have suffered?

Point scoring using that gets you exactly NIL.

I’m sure they do. It just appears that you see Madeleine’s disappearance as an event in which her parents were the primary victims and your constant cries of victimhood on their behalf imo will only make people angry rather than sympathetic towards them.

[G-Unit]

Sceptics and supporters do have shared beliefs within their individual groups, that's a fact.  I don't object to being described as a supporter, why do you consider sceptic to be so abusive?  It's not our fault if quite a few sceptics are so very vile in nature, and bring your group into disrepute.  It's something you'll have to put up with all the while you voice your scepticism online.

I am a member of no group, whatever others may think or say. Unlike Labour or Conservative Party members, who did join a group, but still hotly deny sharing the opinions of other members.

[Snowgirl]

Do you imagine for a second that the families of missing children don't open their eyes every day of their lives and don't think what their children may have suffered?

Point scoring using that gets you exactly NIL.

   In the case of  Madeleine tho  I imagine there will be accompanying guilt at not having taken enough care of her welfare  which I imagine  in turn could account for mental health issues arising, ones Gerry McCann is stating he suffers from . He is  through his own actions responsible for that in my opinion .
 Madeleine  , whatever  situation she found herself in is the victim  here .

[xtina]

The full quote being ...
Never heard of shock?  Never heard of uncontrollable bodily reaction?

Quote
Researchers say they have identified how emotional trauma - from winning the lottery to losing a close relative - can trigger a potentially lethal catastrophe in the body they call the 'broken heart syndrome'.

    ////////

They say the news or event (of a traumatic event) causes the body to produce large amounts of stress hormones including adrenaline, which narrows the main arteries which supply blood to the heart.
This paralyses the heart's main pumping chamber, causing a sudden change in rhythm similar to a heart attack.

    ////////


Dr Christoph Nienaber, director of cardiology at the university, said: 'These patients suffer under a heavy emotional load, either positive or negative. Their hearts literally break. It usually happens within minutes to an hour of hearing the news.
'The typical scenario is bad  news but there are reports of  both and we don't know what causes it most.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2218009/Why-shock-kill-good-news--Release-adrenaline-sudden-discovery-lead-heart-problems.html#ixzz4pRUtKQ9o

I would say that sort of reaction over which there is no control would be sufficient for one to 'go weak at the knees' and collapse into the 'praying arab' position used to deride Gerry McCann during what most would describe as the single most stressful event of his life.
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Going further ... why would I or any other pontificate on extreme the grief of parents who have just discovered their eldest child is missing from her bed?

Is there anything to compare it with?  I've seen no other case where the horror of such an event has either been publicised and exploited to ridicule bereaved parents as in the Amaral video.

In my opinion, it is utterly despicable and beneath contempt as are most sceptic shibboleths.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8391.msg419187#msg419187


Which your selective quote taken in context would indicate why it is exactly you apparently object to carrying such a label.  I too would hang my head in shame.

On such hatred and lack of understanding of available facts in my opinion as well as quotes taken out of context is the bulwark of the 'doubters' and 'questioners' case.

Something which I have no doubt will be further epitomised when Madeleine's father airs the horrible effects of being the father of a missing child was and is.

Well in my opinion

That same trauma can work both ways...

would have the same outcome ...if they were involved in maddie's disappearance....

[Vertigo Swirl]

I am a member of no group, whatever others may think or say. Unlike Labour or Conservative Party members, who did join a group, but still hotly deny sharing the opinions of other members.

You are, and here is an example of how you demonstrate that.  You have allies on this forum, all of whom are sceptics.  You only ever agree with sceptics.  You only ever like sceptics’ posts.  If you were truly unpartisan you would recognise when a supporter made a good point, by acknowledging it or liking it.  If however you believe no supporter on this forum ever makes a valid point in a debate then that only further reinforces your sceptic slant IMO.  Also you would chide abusive posts made to supporters as you do when it’s the other way around, rather than giving them the thumbs up as you did earlier.  If you don’t want the label “sceptic” best stop running with the pack.

[Sunny]

You are, and here is an example of how you demonstrate that.  You have allies on this forum, all of whom are sceptics.  You only ever agree with sceptics.  You only ever like sceptics’ posts.  If you were truly unpartisan you would recognise when a supporter made a good point, by acknowledging it or liking it.  If however you believe no supporter on this forum ever makes a valid point in a debate then that only further reinforces your sceptic slant IMO.  Also you would chide abusive posts made to supporters as you do when it’s the other way around, rather than giving them the thumbs up as you did earlier.  If you don’t want the label “sceptic” best stop running with the pack.

I don't consider sceptics a "group" as from what I have seen thoughts differ. As regards supporters, yes I consider them a group as I see no dissent amongst supporters though.  Perhaps we could name them a "dossier" of supporters?

[Brietta]

I’m sure they do. It just appears that you see Madeleine’s disappearance as an event in which her parents were the primary victims and your constant cries of victimhood on their behalf imo will only make people angry rather than sympathetic towards them.

So your opinion of what you allege to be the opinion of others justifies campaigns of scepticism and 'doubting'?  Is that what you are claiming?

If so ... I can see exactly why there are those who are ashamed to be identified with a hate campaign which impinges on parental efforts to find out what happened to a missing little girl.

[Vertigo Swirl]

I don't consider sceptics a "group" as from what I have seen thoughts differ. As regards supporters, yes I consider them a group as I see no dissent amongst supporters though.  Perhaps we could name them a "dossier" of supporters?

that’s not one of your better posts Sunny.

[Brietta]

I don't consider sceptics a "group" as from what I have seen thoughts differ. As regards supporters, yes I consider them a group as I see no dissent amongst supporters though.  Perhaps we could name them a "dossier" of supporters?

Not strictly correct though.
In my opinion supporters were compilers.
In my opinion making it a dossier of sceptics.

[Sunny]

Not strictly correct though.
In my opinion supporters were compilers.
In my opinion making it a dossier of sceptics.

You may be right Brietta.   

[faithlilly]

So your opinion of what you allege to be the opinion of others justifies campaigns of scepticism and 'doubting'?  Is that what you are claiming?

If so ... I can see exactly why there are those who are ashamed to be identified with a hate campaign which impinges on parental efforts to find out what happened to a missing little girl.

I’m claiming that constant painting of the parents as as much victims of this disappearance as Madeleine makes people angry. No matter what you think your opinion of the McCanns as victims is in the minority, even among members of the public who do believe there was an abduction.

Further a ‘campaign’ suggests an organised effort. You have consistently failed to prove this and you have also failed to prove that individuals being sceptical of the McCanns story has in any way ‘impinged’ on efforts to find Madeleine.

As ever ten out of ten for emotive rhetoric. Naught out of ten for evidence based claims.

[faithlilly]

I did find it interesting last week when Eleanor and Gunit were reminiscing about their origins. It was a very good natured, interesting interlude that to me proved that, if we take our opinion of this case out of the equation, we are all more the same than we are different. It was apparent though that some supporters were uneasy with this discussion. Why ?