Statistically...what are the chances that Maddie was abducted..

[Mr Gray]

Good observation....*snortle*

 

so you don't understand English either

[slartibartfast]

that the question...
the question isn't what were the chances of Maddie being abducted...if you understand probability theory then you will understand the difference

I understand your hair splitting. After the event, evidence will skew the probabilities.  Things such as the Window and associated forensic evidence, sightings and the dogs would adjust the odds.

[Estuarine]

Is English not your first language

No

[Mr Gray]

I understand your hair splitting. After the event, evidence will skew the probabilities.  Things such as the Window and associated forensic evidence, sightings and the dogs would adjust the odds.

 thank god someone can understand English...Im afraid estuarine and red don't
  For est and red...there is a difference between was and were

[Mr Gray]

No

 then I apologise for being rude to you...I suspected it wasn't when you made the comment

[jassi]

I understand your hair splitting. After the event, evidence will skew the probabilities.  Things such as the Window and associated forensic evidence, sightings and the dogs would adjust the odds.

Would  the statistics not have been based only on children who had gone missing ?
As there is is credible proven  evidence, there will be no skewing of those stats.

[Mr Gray]

Would  the statistics not have been based only on children who had gone missing ?
As there is is credible proven  evidence, there will be no skewing of those stats.

 I think you are tying yourself in "nots"

[slartibartfast]

Would  the statistics not have been based only on children who had gone missing ?
As there is is credible proven  evidence, there will be no skewing of those stats.

Yes, it is the only sensible approach with the lack of hard evidence.

[Redblossom]

I agree.    'Rare' does not equate to 'never' - which IMO is being claimed by some people

Statistics would have to show that stranger abduction has never happened for that to be the case.

Who  is claiming there is no such thing as stranger abduction?


 >@@(*&)

[slartibartfast]

Would  the statistics not have been based only on children who had gone missing ?
As there is is credible proven  evidence, there will be no skewing of those stats.

Sorry, do you mean that the evidence is that she is missing?

[jassi]

I think you are tying yourself in "nots"

Yes, I missed a crucial 'not'  out - but too late to alter now. People will understand - I hope 

[ferryman]

That is a poor exampe to use, the girl was found by searchers within 24 hours IIRC and returned to her mother.....no one would have suspected her in this case....no grounds for it...before or after man was caught

We are debating whether it is reasonable to suspect the parents on the basis of statistics.

It isn't.

[jassi]

Sorry, do you mean that the evidence is that she is missing?

No , I missed a 'not- out of sentence  - I meant  no credible evidence

[slartibartfast]

We are debating whether it is reasonable to suspect the parents on the basis of statistics.

It isn't.

It is reasonable to treat them as persons of interest.

[Estuarine]

then I apologise for being rude to you...I suspected it wasn't when you made the comment

Don't worry about it sunshine. I'm only here for the craic.