"Charity collectors" data

[mercury]

not personal as I would not expect any sceptic to agree....but it is stating the obvious....supporters will agree...sceptics wont...and if we had 500 posts debatating it nothing would change

How is it obvious? You were asked a question about the causal link...you have given no causal link and, again, qualified or quantified or set any meaningful numerical or time parameters on your blanket "its obvious"
Not very scientific or logical is it? And what you expect of sceptics and supporters is not the subject and neither can you assume to think you know what they think in every given matter, there,thats the end of it

[Mr Gray]

How is it obvious? You were asked a question about the causal link...you have given no causal link and, again, qualified or quantified or set any meaningful numerical or time parameters on your blanket "its obvious"
Not very scientific or logical is it? And what you expect of sceptics and supporters is not the subject and neither can you assume to think you know what they think in every given matter, there,thats the end of it

amaral claimed the dog alerts proved maddie died in the apartment.....he was wrong...they proved nothing.....that has convinced many people the mccanns are guilty of a cover up . It is a simple as that. it is only your bias and your lack of understanding of the alerts that is stopping you seeing the truth

[stephen25000]

amaral claimed the dog alerts proved maddie died in the apartment.....he was wrong...they proved nothing.....that has convinced many people the mccanns are guilty of a cover up . It is a simple as that. it is only your bias and your lack of understanding of the alerts that is stopping you seeing the truth

You on the other hand do not have a clue as to whether the mccanns have told the truth in this case.

That is your belief and your bias.

Their accounts lack consistency from the start.

e.g. Why at the start did they first state the apartment was locked, which then became unlocked ?

So which is the truth ?

Similarly, why did they lock the apartment during the daytime, then in their second version of events leave it unlocked at night ?

Very little of the mccanns behaviour demonstrates either logic, let alone good childcare. IMO of course.

[Mr Gray]

You on the other hand do not have a clue as to whether the mccanns have told the truth in this case.

That is your belief and your bias.

Their accounts lack consistency from the start.

e.g. Why at the start did they first state the apartment was locked, which then became unlocked ?

So which is the truth ?

Similarly, why did they lock the apartment during the daytime, then in their second version of events leave it unlocked at night ?

Very little of the mccanns behaviour demonstrates either logic, let alone good childcare. IMO of course.

I have more than a clue so you are wrong once again. SY declared the mccanns not suspects and therefore believed they were telling the truth. That is evidence they are telling the truth from the poeple who really count...your post is your opinion and therefore of no importance

[stephen25000]

I have more than a clue so you are wrong once again. SY declared the mccanns not suspects and therefore believed they were telling the truth. That is evidence they are telling the truth from the poeple who really count...your post is your opinion and therefore of no importance

SY have failed to find anything.

The investigation is on it's last legs with just about enough money to pay for the 4 remaining peoples salaries and nothing else.

A thorough investigation would have examined all scenarios, and that would have included re-questioning of the main parties involved.

SY have never indicated they questioned these people and simply read their previous statements.

As I predicted from the onset, the investigation would go nowhere.

[Mr Gray]

SY have failed to find anything.

The investigation is on it's last legs with just about enough money to pay for the 4 remaining peoples salaries and nothing else.

A thorough investigation would have examined all scenarios, and that would have included re-questioning of the main parties involved.

SY have never indicated they questioned these people and simply read their previous statements.

As I predicted from the onset, the investigation would go nowhere.

more rambling with no substance...same over and over again

[stephen25000]

more rambling with no substance...same over and over again

Not rambling.

Merely the facts.

[G-Unit]

not personal as I would not expect any sceptic to agree....but it is stating the obvious....supporters will agree...sceptics wont...and if we had 500 posts debatating it nothing would change

People who belong to the sects who predict the world will end on a particular date all agree with each other. Does that make them right? I think it just makes them equally deluded.

Using any academic (particularly scientific) standards your apparent lack of any evidence to support it makes your x caused y statement merely unverifiable opinion.

No-one knows why the Portuguese people seem to have rejected the McCann's version of events, just as no-one knows why many UK people agree with them. I expect the causes are many and varied.

[Mr Gray]

People who belong to the sects who predict the world will end on a particular date all agree with each other. Does that make them right? I think it just makes them equally deluded.

Using any academic (particularly scientific) standards your apparent lack of any evidence to support it makes your x caused y statement merely unverifiable opinion.

No-one knows why the Portuguese people seem to have rejected the McCann's version of events, just as no-one knows why many UK people agree with them. I expect the causes are many and varied.

you are in no position to lecture me on academic standards...your problem is that you do not understand what evidence is and how to assess it. It is quite obvious now...based on all the  evidence...that the McCanns are not involved. You only had to look on amarals gofundme page to see how many people accepted amarals views on the dogs...if you cannot see how he has influenced people then that is your failing

[Benice]

SY have failed to find anything.

The investigation is on it's last legs with just about enough money to pay for the 4 remaining peoples salaries and nothing else.

A thorough investigation would have examined all scenarios, and that would have included re-questioning of the main parties involved.

SY have never indicated they questioned these people and simply read their previous statements.

As I predicted from the onset, the investigation would go nowhere.

Why would you expect SY to inform the public about who they interviewed during this investigation -   when you know they specifically stated that they would not be giving a running commentary to the public?

For instance  - it's obvious that SY must have interviewed the parents of the UK children who were assaulted in their own bedrooms in Portugal at some time during the investigation.

Why would SY just go by the summarised statements of witnesses - when they can talk to those witnesses in person and get the full picture - rather than the shortened version?

A great deal of  time is spent on here discussing, debating and querying those statements - because that's all we have.        Anyone who thinks  SY would spend their time doing the same  - when they could actually speak to the witnesses themselves if they needed clarification - or if they had questions to ask which may not already have been asked -  is being unrealistic IMO.

   

[stephen25000]

Why would you expect SY to inform the public about who they interviewed during this investigation -   when you know they specifically stated that they would not be giving a running commentary to the public?

For instance  - it's obvious that SY must have interviewed the parents of the UK children who were assaulted in their own bedrooms in Portugal at some time during the investigation.

Why would SY just go by the summarised statements of witnesses - when they can talk to those witnesses in person and get the full picture - rather than the shortened version?

A great deal of  time is spent on here discussing, debating and querying those statements - because that's all we have.        Anyone who thinks  SY would spend their time doing the same  - when they could actually speak to the witnesses themselves if they needed clarification - or if they had questions to ask which may not already have been asked -  is being unrealistic IMO.

   

So when did SY or the Portuguese in their 'current investigation' interview the mccanns and associates, who are key witnesses.

Other people have been interviewed or re-interviewed and their names have been plastered across the media.

In actuality, it is abundantly clear the mccanns and co., have not been re-questioned.

[G-Unit]

you are in no position to lecture me on academic standards...your problem is that you do not understand what evidence is and how to assess it. It is quite obvious now...based on all the  evidence...that the McCanns are not involved. You only had to look on amarals gofundme page to see how many people accepted amarals views on the dogs...if you cannot see how he has influenced people then that is your failing

How do you know I'm in no position to lecture you on academic standards? Is that another unsubstantiated claim?

It was you who claimed there is a causal link between Amaral's activities and the opinions of the Portuguese people in respect of the McCanns. It's also you who can't demonstrate the truth of the claim.

Whatever was said on the gofundme page wasn't said by Portuguese people, so not admissible in support of the assertion we're discussing.

[Mr Gray]

How do you know I'm in no position to lecture you on academic standards? Is that another unsubstantiated claim?

It was you who claimed there is a causal link between Amaral's activities and the opinions of the Portuguese people in respect of the McCanns. It's also you who can't demonstrate the truth of the claim.

Whatever was said on the gofundme page wasn't said by Portuguese people, so not admissible in support of the assertion we're discussing.

I can tell from your posts. Anyone who thinks that the twice translated non verbatim statements are accurate does not understand how to assess evidence

[Mr Gray]

How do you know I'm in no position to lecture you on academic standards? Is that another unsubstantiated claim?

It was you who claimed there is a causal link between Amaral's activities and the opinions of the Portuguese people in respect of the McCanns. It's also you who can't demonstrate the truth of the claim.

Whatever was said on the gofundme page wasn't said by Portuguese people, so not admissible in support of the assertion we're discussing.

I can see where your confusion is....do you think I am claiming amarals false claims are the sole reason for the view of the portuguese people...I haven't said that...but they certainly are part of the reason...

[Eleanor]

No one knows if The McCanns have been requestioned.  And we have no right to know.

Sorry.  Off Topic.  But I am getting rather fed up with assertions that we have no proof of.