So if the abduction occurred at 9.15pm lets look at the movements.

[Mr Gray]

I think its fair to say there is no science behind the dogs.
if you google "dna" or "fingerprints" you will get literally hundreds of thousands of scientific articles to support them.
re the dogs and cadaver scent, probably little or nothing in any reputable scirntific journal. The dogs are used to find physical evidence, they didn't find any. if the dogs responses are so reliable why are SY saying Maddie may still be alive.

[AnneGuedes]

Thank you for your acknowledgement that I did not lie.

Kate McCann posted the results of their research.   She had no reason to believe that it could be incorrect.  To say she lied is unfair.

The whole subject of Sniffer dog is not the exact science some sceptics try to present it as.   There are varying opinions about it.    Also just like humans some dogs are better at their job than others and some handlers are better at their job than others.  They are not infallible.    Tests have confirmed that to be a fact.

His reports inspired me respect for Prof Harrison, I must say, and this is why I think Eddie's alerts are at least intelligence.
I totally refute your defence of Mrs McCann. Having had a scientific formation she's not expected to state what isn't true (you admit it) but serves extremely well her agenda. The fact she doesn't cite her source speaks volumes.

[faithlilly]

I think its fair to say there is no science behind the dogs.
if you google "dna" or "fingerprints" you will get literally hundreds of thousands of scientific articles to support them.
re the dogs and cadaver scent, probably little or nothing in any reputable scirntific journal. The dogs are used to find physical evidence, they didn't find any. if the dogs responses are so reliable why are SY saying Maddie may still be alive.

And if the cadaver dogs are so unreliable why have we seen the perpetrator in murder cases where the dogs have alerted but no body been found declared guilty in  case upon case ?

[sadie]

And if the cadaver dogs are so unreliable why have we seen the perpetrator in murder cases where the dogs have alerted but no body been found declared guilty in  case upon case ?

Well some countries are bad on Justice, but good on fitting people up, aren't they?

[Rachel Granada]

And if the cadaver dogs are so unreliable why have we seen the perpetrator in murder cases where the dogs have alerted but no body been found declared guilty in  case upon case ?

I'm not sure people are saying that they're unreliable per se, it's just that there was nothing found to back them up.  I think that in the D'Andre Lane case there was other evidence too? 

[stephen25000]

Well some countries are bad on Justice, but good on fitting people up, aren't they?

So you include the UK on that list ?

[Redblossom]

I think its fair to say there is no science behind the dogs.
if you google "dna" or "fingerprints" you will get literally hundreds of thousands of scientific articles to support them.
re the dogs and cadaver scent, probably little or nothing in any reputable scirntific journal. The dogs are used to find physical evidence, they didn't find any. if the dogs responses are so reliable why are SY saying Maddie may still be alive.

DNA and fingerprints have been around for donkeys years, cadaver dogs have not. There are scientific papers in *reputable* journals and there are other studies by police dog divisions which show their reliability in detecting remnant scent. Cadaver dogs are not * just*used to find physical remains. They are also used to find remnant scent. If what you say were true they would never have been  deployed by Harrison in PDL in the first place.

Science in a general cant back up cadaver dog alerts as there is no instrument or test to do so, thats why the  dogs acute natural abilities are used.

The dog alert did not prove in any way that Madeleines body was in that apartment. It is a circumstantial possibility. That is why SY have said there is no* clear definitive proof*  she is dead, ie via the dog indication or a body being found, so obviously he is going to say there is a possibility she is alive.

[Mr Gray]

And if the cadaver dogs are so unreliable why have we seen the perpetrator in murder cases where the dogs have alerted but no body been found declared guilty in  case upon case ?

quite simply because there has been other , more reliable evidence to prove the case.

[Mr Gray]

DNA and fingerprints have been around for donkeys years, cadaver dogs have not. There are scientific papers in *reputable* journals and there are other studies by police dog divisions which show their reliability in detecting remnant scent. Cadaver dogs are not * just*used to find physical remains. They are also used to find remnant scent. If what you say were true they would never have been  deployed by Harrison in PDL in the first place.

Science in a general cant back up cadaver dog alerts as there is no instrument or test to do so, thats why the  dogs acute natural abilities are used.

The dog alert did not prove in any way that Madeleines body was in that apartment. It is a circumstantial possibility. That is why SY have said there is no* clear definitive proof*  she is dead, ie via the dog indication or a body being found, so obviously he is going to say there is a possibility she is alive.

that is absolutely correct but so many posters believe that the dogs reactions are proof.

[AnneGuedes]

Eddie's alerts don't prove Madeleine's body had stayed in the G5A, just show that a body had been there, particularly in the corner of the south bedroom, on the balcony and (slight alert only) in the flowerbed (behind the sofa could have been blood detected by Keela ?).

[sadie]

Eddie's alerts don't prove Madeleine's body had stayed in the G5A, just show that a body had been there, particularly in the corner of the south bedroom, on the balcony and (slight alert only) in the flowerbed (behind the sofa could have been blood detected by Keela ?).

To be any real likelyhood that a daed body had been in that apartment, then only Eddie should have alerted and Keela not alerted at the same spot.   If both dogs alerted it was not a dead body at all, but some dried blood residue from a cut or graze.   We know that one of the peeps who rented the apartment after Madeleine was abducted, cut himself very badly shaving.  that he walked around as he was bleeding.

I think my understanding is right, but pls tell me if I have it wrong.

[stephen25000]

To be any real likelyhood that a daed body had been in that apartment, then only Eddie should have alerted and Keela not alerted at the same spot.   If both dogs alerted it was not a dead body at all, but some dried blood residue from a cut or graze.   We know that one of the peeps who rented the apartment after Madeleine was abducted, cut himself very badly shaving.  that he walked around as he was bleeding.

I think my understanding is right, but pls tell me if I have it wrong.

What abduction ?

You stated it as fact again.

It isn't.

[sadie]

What abduction ?

You stated it as fact again.

It isn't.

Sorry, but I have worked out things that you dont know about.   

I will leave it at that

[stephen25000]

Sorry, but I have worked out things that you dont know about.   

I will leave it at that

Of course you have. >@@(*&)

[insider]

Sorry, but I have worked out things that you dont know about.   

I will leave it at that

So have I Sadie and it ain't looking good.  A question for you?   Why did Gerry McCann feel it necessary to revisit the apartment just minutes after Matthew had already done a listening test?