Is there now grudging but growing acceptance that the McCanns didn't do it?

[Mr Gray]

Can you define "stranger"?

someone not known to the family

[Robittybob1]

someone not known to the family

Well I haven't seen enough evidence to make it so distant from the family.  Would that then exclude all the other OC clients there that week?  They might have known the McCanns a little, so are they still strangers?

[Mr Gray]

Well I haven't seen enough evidence to make it so distant from the family.  Would that then exclude all the other OC clients there that week?  They might have known the McCanns a little, so are they still strangers?

i think most understand what is meant by stranger abduction

[G-Unit]

you obviously dont read the posts properly. AFAIAC stranger abduction is by far and a way the most probable solution based on the available evidence....thats what the available evidence supports but some are too blind to see

Some were unable to support their beliefs when we had a thread to examine the 'evidence' of abduction. Probably because there isn't any.

[Robittybob1]

i think most understand what is meant by stranger abduction

Stranger abduction is easily defined when the two groups do not know each other.  The opposite extreme is the family and the immediate T7 group.  But it is that group that is partially associated e.g. the OC residents  and staff there that week that could have seen Madeleine while swimming or yachting or playing tennis or at meal times.  Are these strictly strangers?  If you include all people other than the T9 as strangers so beit.

[Robittybob1]

the term stranger abduction is understood by anyone with average intelligence.......do you not understand it

I want you define what group the OC clients are in?

[Mr Gray]

I want you define what group the OC clients are in?

I find a lot of your posts more than a bit silly
No offence of course
This is one of them

[Robittybob1]

I find a lot of your posts more than a bit silly
No offence of course
This is one of them

No offence taken.
I'll point out one family the Carpenters, are they "strangers" or not?  That should be an easy question for you.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/STEPHEN-CARPENTER.htm

[slartibartfast]

I've noticed a willingness on the part of "sceptics" to explore other scenarios such as kidnap by the Mafia, Gerry being spotted in Lagos on the phone saying "please don't hurt her", woke and wandered etc, all scenarios which mean that cherished tropes such as "death in the apartment", "cadaver dog alerts" and Smithman being "you know who" have to be discarded (or put on the backburner anyway). 

Is it finally dawning on the doubters?

No, I think supporters have finally started reading what the sceptics post rather than arguing against a strawman of their own devising.

[Alfie]

No, I think supporters have finally started reading what the sceptics post rather than arguing against a strawman of their own devising.

I think that's just a meaningless insult.  It's not supporters who push forward alternative theories on this forum such as woke and wandered or kidnapped by the mafia, yet these are both theories treated as credible by "sceptics" who have vigorously supported the dog alerts and Smithman being "you know who".  We have recently discussed the possibility that Gerry was seen in Lagos on the phone saying "please don't hurt her" and there appeared to be a willingness on the part of some sceptics to believe it actually was him.  Bizarre, as these are the same people who are also staunch defenders of the dog alerts.

[carlymichelle]

  sorry  someone has no sense of humor  off topic but i cant   see  the like button anymore?

[G-Unit]

I think that's just a meaningless insult.  It's not supporters who push forward alternative theories on this forum such as woke and wandered or kidnapped by the mafia, yet these are both theories treated as credible by "sceptics" who have vigorously supported the dog alerts and Smithman being "you know who".  We have recently discussed the possibility that Gerry was seen in Lagos on the phone saying "please don't hurt her" and there appeared to be a willingness on the part of some sceptics to believe it actually was him.  Bizarre, as these are the same people who are also staunch defenders of the dog alerts.

What I see happening on here is supporters going to extraordinary lengths to reject anything except abduction by a stranger. As a result others spend time pointing out that there are other possibilities. That doesn't mean they are committed to any of those possibilities, it just means they are open minded.

[G-Unit]

sorry  someone has no sense of humor  off topic but i cant   see  the like button anymore?

I can.

[carlymichelle]

i can now my internet  was playing   up we have been having storms 

[Alfie]

What I see happening on here is supporters going to extraordinary lengths to reject anything except abduction by a stranger. As a result others spend time pointing out that there are other possibilities. That doesn't mean they are committed to any of those possibilities, it just means they are open minded.

Well I happen to believe Madeleine was abducted by a stranger which should in theory make me a supporter of the idea that Gerry was seen in Lagos begging someone not to hurt Madeleine.  You seem to think that idea is credible but I don't - because I am able to process the information and reject it on the basis that it simply doesn't fit with all the known facts.  You however try to make it fit with the known facts. Rejecting it doesn't make me close minded, it means I can process the information logically.  There is no merit in entertaining every single cockamamie theory just because there is an inkling of a suggestion of evidence to support it.  IMO.