Author Topic: Sceptics beliefs ?  (Read 28435 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Brietta

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #1215 on: April 17, 2019, 02:38:31 PM »
95% reliability of evidence of something.  But evidence of what?

Did you watch the Netflix episode featuring Martin Grime?
The remit of Operation Grange is to investigate ...  "(as if the abduction occurred in the UK)"

Offline Davel

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #1216 on: April 17, 2019, 02:46:30 PM »
Therefore in this particular case, as no human remains were located, the only
alert indications that may become corroborated are those that the CSI dog ...

Grime is quite clear that the cadaver alerts can only be corroborated by human remains
mods can delete posts but...
The moving finger writes and having writ moves on...
nor all thy piety nor wit can lure me back to alter but  a line..nor all thy tears wash away  a word of it

Offline Angelo222

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #1217 on: April 17, 2019, 02:48:37 PM »
Because the expert says they have no evidential value and Harrison says no inference can be drawn from them

If I recall correctly the word used was reliability and not value.  There is a subtle difference between evidential value and evidential reliability.
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Offline Davel

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #1218 on: April 17, 2019, 02:54:24 PM »
If I recall correctly the word used was reliability and not value.  There is a subtle difference between evidential value and evidential reliability.

I do recall correctly.... There were statements by grime and Harrison..... Each used a different word... One value.... And one reliability
mods can delete posts but...
The moving finger writes and having writ moves on...
nor all thy piety nor wit can lure me back to alter but  a line..nor all thy tears wash away  a word of it

Offline Davel

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #1219 on: April 17, 2019, 03:00:57 PM »
performance of the dogs (see appendix 4). However, it must be stated any such indications without any physical evidence to support them can not have any evidential value, being unconfirmed indications. Additionally I consider no inference can be drawn as to whether a human cadaver has previously been in any location without other supporting physical evidence.


That's Harrison's report.... No evidential value without supporting physical evidence....
mods can delete posts but...
The moving finger writes and having writ moves on...
nor all thy piety nor wit can lure me back to alter but  a line..nor all thy tears wash away  a word of it

Offline G-Unit

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #1220 on: April 17, 2019, 03:17:37 PM »
I have firm opinions based on what some might refer to as 'research' ... and I am not so ashamed of my opinions that I fear to voice them.

You have admitted that McCann sceptics exist in your posts.

You have posted that some of these sceptics have formed themselves into groups to express and promote their scepticism of the McCanns.

You don't seem to be able to bring yourself to admit that either as individuals or groups these sceptics hold certain beliefs the similarity of which is apparent to most observers.

The thread topic is 'sceptic beliefs' of which there is a myriad of research material to chose from: fora ~ newspaper comment sections ~ social media ~ ebooks ~ podcasts and videos; which makes it a valid topic for discussion.

I am interested in what motivates sceptics ... quite obviously you are not ... but I would appreciate it if you would refrain from ad homs directed at me ... telling me what I do and do not believe ... or forecasting that I "will not believe" you.

Your 'question' is unanswerable since you are very careful not to express your opinion ... therefore without you telling the forum what you do or don't believe ( which is what I asked for clarification) please don't invite presumptive and speculative answers referring to you personally at which I have no doubt you may take offence.

I've noticed both your firm opinions and your willingness to shre them. Why anyone might fear sharing their opinions I can't imagine. Do you know any such people?

I have used the word sceptic because it's in general use and I can't think of another we would all recognise. I don't agree that they hold shared beliefs which observers can identify, however. Some may, but certainly not all.

You may think you can see enough evidence of shared beliefs to justify discussing 'sceptics beliefs' but I don't. I don't think they're similar enough to be discussed as a group.

I didn't tell you what you believe, you told me. Given what you said you believe and given that you had already rejected my assurance that I didn't beieve what you said sceptics do believe, it was reasonable in my opinion to assume you would continie to disbelieve me. If you are willing to accept that I'm telling the truth then say so and I will apologise ummediately for misjudging you.

As I'm not a supporter I have no choice but to assume anything said about 'sceptics' includes me. Yherefore I respond and will continue to respond when people make statements about sceptics. It's quite easy to stop me by adding 'some' to the word sceptic. I won't always assume I'm included then.  8**8:/:
« Last Edit: April 17, 2019, 03:29:43 PM by G-Unit »
Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything

Offline G-Unit

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #1221 on: April 17, 2019, 03:35:13 PM »
Because the expert says they have no evidential value and Harrison says no inference can be drawn from them

As I understand it these experts don't decide which evidence will be used in a case. 
Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #1222 on: April 17, 2019, 04:01:30 PM »
Ive yet to come accross a sceptic who acccepts that the, alerts have no evidential value... That's my personal experience...

I'm a sceptic & I'm aware the dog alerts aren't evidence.
They aren't evidence that Maddie died in the apartment.
But I'm yet to see any proof that she didn't.
"I bet the parents dunnit" (Me)

Offline Davel

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #1223 on: April 17, 2019, 04:05:39 PM »
I'm a sceptic & I'm aware the dog alerts aren't evidence.
They aren't evidence that Maddie died in the apartment.
But I'm yet to see any proof that she didn't.

Maddie may have died in the apartment... She may not... We simply don't know
mods can delete posts but...
The moving finger writes and having writ moves on...
nor all thy piety nor wit can lure me back to alter but  a line..nor all thy tears wash away  a word of it

Offline Davel

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #1224 on: April 17, 2019, 04:07:06 PM »
As I understand it these experts don't decide which evidence will be used in a case.

Can you see any judge allowing the alerts as evidence when the expert responsible for the evidence has stated it has no evidential reliability
mods can delete posts but...
The moving finger writes and having writ moves on...
nor all thy piety nor wit can lure me back to alter but  a line..nor all thy tears wash away  a word of it

Offline Brietta

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #1225 on: April 17, 2019, 04:14:49 PM »
I've noticed both your firm opinions and your willingness to shre them. Why anyone might fear sharing their opinions I can't imagine. Do you know any such people?

I have used the word sceptic because it's in general use and I can't think of another we would all recognise. I don't agree that they hold shared beliefs which observers can identify, however. Some may, but certainly not all.

You may think you can see enough evidence of shared beliefs to justify discussing 'sceptics beliefs' but I don't. I don't think they're similar enough to be discussed as a group.

I didn't tell you what you believe, you told me. Given what you said you believe and given that you had already rejected my assurance that I didn't beieve what you said sceptics do believe, it was reasonable in my opinion to assume you would continie to disbelieve me. If you are willing to accept that I'm telling the truth then say so and I will apologise ummediately for misjudging you.

As I'm not a supporter I have no choice but to assume anything said about 'sceptics' includes me. Yherefore I respond and will continue to respond when people make statements about sceptics. It's quite easy to stop me by adding 'some' to the word sceptic. I won't always assume I'm included then.  8**8:/:

Just a reminder ... the thread topic is 'Sceptic beliefs?' ... that and the OP gives plenty of room for discussion in the abstract about any aspect whatsoever of what the forum has decided are called "sceptics" and what they wish to publish and promulgate on the internet.

I think sometimes you tend to get caught up in the personae for arguments sake ... which deflects from the intention of this thread and quite often some others.
So I won't be discussing me or discussing you ... particularly when there is such a fruitful harvest of sceptic beliefs out there to peruse and post about.
The remit of Operation Grange is to investigate ...  "(as if the abduction occurred in the UK)"

Offline Lace

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #1226 on: April 17, 2019, 04:15:13 PM »
The guilt has to be qualified? LOL ask the supporters to qualify their belief.

The parents are guilty of leaving their children alone every night to go and drink, socialise, and eat.  This is not a belief this is an actual fact.

The mother claims she put the children to bed and in particular recalls Madeleine was snuggled UNDER the covers as it was a cold night. The father claims He last saw Madeleine alive in bed on top of the covers where he left her as it was a Warm night

The mother claims the curtains were blowing as it was a windy night The searchers never claimed that to be the case.

This is not a belief this is FACT.


The parents both claimed a door had been moved -which was the main reason MBM was allegedly abducted.

We cannot establish how wide the door was open/closed. how would Gerry on his visit know the door was moved AND as Gerry did look in he could only see Madeleine- which means the door was only ajar/slightly open. So, was it really moved on his visit?

Door was more open on Kates visit, why would it be more open if an abductor came and went out of a window?

These are written facts -not beliefs- by people who see these FACTS do not suggest an abduction in the way it was described by the mother.

So to sum up:   As I wasn't there. I have no idea what happened to Madeleine Beth McCann, I BELIEVE she was a victim of some horrific crime- I don't know what that crime was- as the police have failed to ascertain it I do not pretend to know.

The circumstantial evidence could include the dogs to enforce a particular theory. The supporters point blank refuse to believe that the theory of walk and wandered is plausible- even though it is more believable that the whooshing curtain, jemmied shutters version.

Can you give me a link to where Gerry said Madeleine was on top of the covers because it was a warm night please.

I believe Gerry was explaining how Madeleine was lying in the bed rather than whether the cover was over her or not.


There were gusts of wind,  not continually windy.


Offline Brietta

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #1227 on: April 17, 2019, 04:29:01 PM »
I'm a sceptic & I'm aware the dog alerts aren't evidence.
They aren't evidence that Maddie died in the apartment.
But I'm yet to see any proof that she didn't.

I think it is usual to find evidence that there has been an occurrence before deciding that there was one.  Amaral did it in reverse.  He decided a drugged Madeleine had fallen off the sofa and had died as a result ... then he set about finding the evidence to prove it ... and there was none.

Yet even today sceptics adhere to his original flawed thesis ... and the OP asks why would they do that in the face of two active police investigations which started off in 2013 looking for an abductor which continues into the here and now of 2019?
I think that is a valid question to ask which I think you do try to answer in your own way.
The remit of Operation Grange is to investigate ...  "(as if the abduction occurred in the UK)"

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #1228 on: April 17, 2019, 04:34:01 PM »
Can you give me a link to where Gerry said Madeleine was on top of the covers because it was a warm night please.

I believe Gerry was explaining how Madeleine was lying in the bed rather than whether the cover was over her or not.


There were gusts of wind,  not continually windy.




"States that his daughter slept without the covers, as was normal, due to the heat, with the bed sheets folded towards the foot of the bed."

(GM statement May 10th)


"So, I actually came in and Madeleine was just at the top of the bed here, where I'd left her lying, and the covers were folded down and she had her cuddle cat and blanket, were just by her head."

(GM Madeleine Was Here)
"I bet the parents dunnit" (Me)

Offline Brietta

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #1229 on: April 17, 2019, 04:42:29 PM »

"States that his daughter slept without the covers, as was normal, due to the heat, with the bed sheets folded towards the foot of the bed."

(GM statement May 10th)


"So, I actually came in and Madeleine was just at the top of the bed here, where I'd left her lying, and the covers were folded down and she had her cuddle cat and blanket, were just by her head."

(GM Madeleine Was Here)

Without covers ... ?
The covers were folded down ...? same difference as far as I can see.  The child was sleeping without covers because they were folded down.
The remit of Operation Grange is to investigate ...  "(as if the abduction occurred in the UK)"