Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB

[G-Unit]

Whst eas the point of the video then?  Just 90 minutes of two people bitching about how they find the McCanns odd?  How very valuable I’m sure.

According to the presenters they were asked to review the Netflix documentary about the case and to try and decide what they think happened. They couldn't decide what happened, and they clearly couldn't dismiss the possibility that there was parental involvement.

I didn't see any 'bitching', what I saw was people attempting to understand the parent's attitudes and behaviours and finding it impossible. It interested me because I have faced exactly the same difficulties. Like the presenters I can't decide what happened, I can't say who is guilty, but I can say that I found the parents 'odd', as you put it.

[Brietta]

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2335.0

That is inappropriate and just will not do.

Please have the courtesy to indicate precisely where I can read a cite for your post ... "which, as Michael Wright said, had a specific purpose;
it "wasn't just to say that Madeleine should be looked for and she was alive. Channel 4 didn't conclude so. The point was to challenge the thesis of the book." In my opinion therefore that documentary was made to present a particular theory about the case as opposed to the contents of TTOTL.

Thanks in advance.

[Vertigo Swirl]

According to the presenters they were asked to review the Netflix documentary about the case and to try and decide what they think happened. They couldn't decide what happened, and they clearly couldn't dismiss the possibility that there was parental involvement.

I didn't see any 'bitching', what I saw was people attempting to understand the parent's attitudes and behaviours and finding it impossible. It interested me because I have faced exactly the same difficulties. Like the presenters I can't decide what happened, I can't say who is guilty, but I can say that I found the parents 'odd', as you put it.

Asked by whom?  These men’s specialist subjects would appear to be football, boxing and gambling.  Why would anyone want to know their views on the McCann case?   Does anyone really care what they think?  Do you think their opinion is more valid than, say, Hans Christian Wolters or Caitlin Moran’s or Andy Redwood’s or Lorraine Kelly’s or Summers and Swann or mine etc?

[Robittybob1]

According to the presenters they were asked to review the Netflix documentary about the case and to try and decide what they think happened. They couldn't decide what happened, and they clearly couldn't dismiss the possibility that there was parental involvement.

I didn't see any 'bitching', what I saw was people attempting to understand the parent's attitudes and behaviours and finding it impossible. It interested me because I have faced exactly the same difficulties. Like the presenters I can't decide what happened, I can't say who is guilty, but I can say that I found the parents 'odd', as you put it.

Fair enough.

[Robittybob1]

Asked by whom?  These men’s specialist subjects would appear to be football, boxing and gambling.  Why would anyone want to know their views on the McCann case?   Does anyone really care what they think?  Do you think their opinion is more valid than, say, Hans Christian Wolters or Caitlin Moran’s or Andy Redwood’s or Lorraine Kelly’s or Summers and Swann or mine etc?

You omitted to list my own opinion.

[G-Unit]

Asked by whom?  These men’s specialist subjects would appear to be football, boxing and gambling.  Why would anyone want to know their views on the McCann case?   Does anyone really care what they think?  Do you think their opinion is more valid than, say, Hans Christian Wolters or Caitlin Moran’s or Andy Redwood’s or Lorraine Kelly’s or Summers and Swann or mine etc?

Validity is subjective, not objective, just as opinions are imo. We choose which we value.

[Robittybob1]

Validity is subjective, not objective, just as opinions are imo. We choose which we value.

I hope validity is more objective as compared to someone's personal opinion.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Validity is subjective, not objective, just as opinions are imo. We choose which we value.

Why would you consider these men’s opinions more valid than someone who has investigated the case in s professional capacity for years?  Would it be because their opinions chime somewhat with yours?  IMO these men are playing to the gallery and giving people like you exactly what they want to hear, and in so doing are getting rich off the clicks. 

[Myster]

Incredible to think that countless clueless noobs in the comments section are happily venting their spleen on the McCanns.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Incredible to think that countless clueless noobs in the comments section are happily venting their spleen on the McCanns.

McCann bashing has been a profitable cottage industry for years as there is clearly an audience for it (as the comments section shows).

[G-Unit]

That is inappropriate and just will not do.

Please have the courtesy to indicate precisely where I can read a cite for your post ... "which, as Michael Wright said, had a specific purpose;
it "wasn't just to say that Madeleine should be looked for and she was alive. Channel 4 didn't conclude so. The point was to challenge the thesis of the book." In my opinion therefore that documentary was made to present a particular theory about the case as opposed to the contents of TTOTL.

Thanks in advance.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2335.msg76470#msg76470

[Mr Gray]

Validity is subjective, not objective, just as opinions are imo. We choose which we value.

I simply cannot ignore such a patently incorrect and misguidede post.

Validity is predominately  objective because its based on evidence not opinion.

These two podcasters present their opinions but to assess validity we should look at what evidence they base their opinions on. Ive watched a few snippets and noted these points they use as evidence for their opinions.

The children may have been sedated with calpol....calpol is not a sedative so...Garbage

Whilst others searched kate refused to answer questions...Garbage

The smell of a rotting corpse was detected in the hire car....Garbage.


theres a phrase GIGO...garbage in...garbage out

Their opinions are therefore garbage. that is not  asubjective opinion...its an objective opinion based on evidence

I have to qualify my post with ...all my opinion...I actually think its fact.

[Vertigo Swirl]

“Everyones been asking us to do a documentary review”. LOL.  Who’s everyone?  I don’t remember asking them to do one.

I just wonder if Costa Coffee are happy to have their product placement in such a crap video or if they actually paid for the privilege and if so how much.

[G-Unit]

I hope validity is more objective as compared to someone's personal opinion.

Validity is the quality of being logically or factually sound. You now need to explain how one person's opinion about the McCanns is more logically or factually sound than another person's.

[Mr Gray]

Validity is the quality of being logically or factually sound. You now need to explain how one person's opinion about the McCanns is more logically or factually sound than another person's.

I've explained it. It's factually sound when it's based on facts and hard evidence... It really is that simple..