I'm getting reports that Madeleine is alive.

[Mr Gray]

The chances of wing Lotto are virtually zero too, but someone wins now and then.   If a winner turns up they aren't just dismissed by someone saying "you most probably didn't win".

OK in this thread the most unlikely girl has been nominated as possibly being Madeleine.  About as unlikely as winning the Lotto even in my books.
But since she is nameless, of no known abode, the right age, size and colour we can't quite say "no" as it is possible to change eye colour and hide a coloboma defect behind contact lenses.

so where do you go from here ...youve identified a girl who is most unlikely to be MM....do you send the details to SY now

[Mr Gray]

When did you stop looking for Madeleine McCann?

Most of us never started...we had more sense

[Vertigo Swirl]

When did you stop looking for Madeleine McCann?

Long before you even started.

[Robittybob1]

so where do you go from here ...youve identified a girl who is most unlikely to be MM....do you send the details to SY now

That is a possibility as it would only be a 5-minute job for SY to work out who she is.

Long before you even started.

We get News in NZ.  I've been interested in the McCann case from the beginning.

Most of us never started...we had more sense

Do you even bother to check your Lotto tickets?

[Robittybob1]

so where do you go from here ...youve identified a girl who is most unlikely to be MM....do you send the details to SY now

I'm certainly going to communicate with BF and see if he can become more certain of his facts.  I think even he has doubts about the information he received.
I'll PM him and tell him to read this thread.

Done.

[Mr Gray]

I'm certainly going to communicate with BF and see if he can become more certain of his facts.  I think even he has doubts about the information he received.

have you read his FB posts...have you read his theories...hes a total fantasist yet you have faith in him

[Robittybob1]

have you read his FB posts...have you read his theories...hes a total fantasist yet you have faith in him

It is only you who claims I have faith in him.

[Mr Gray]

It is only you who claims I have faith in him.

Then why are you even considering this photo

[sadie]

I find your post misguided and offensive.  You have several times referred to my supposed blind faith in Wolters.  You could not be further from the truth and the fact you cannot see that is bizarre to me.
I've outliined several times why I think Wolters does have this evidence and it's got nothing to do with blind faith. 

I also think you are wrong about the McCanns who I'm sure, realise Maddie is probably dead... Its the only sensible option... Not definite but by far the most likely.

Dear Davel. 
Please calm down.  I am sorry that you find anything I have said offensive and if it indeed was, then I apologise. 

I have heard you say your bit, the same stuff repeatedly, probably well over a hundred times.  As I think HCW has got it wrong, surely I am allowed to express my thoughts very very occasionally.  I have been very restrained in holding back, as I have, out of respect for you. 

I am basing my thoughts on the fact that I believe that I have seen a living Madeleine, aged about 8(ish) on video.  And I think that OG have taken up much of my hypotheses.  I also notice that SY will NOT talk about Madeleine being dead; they refer to her as a missing child IIRC .  Additionally Kate and Gerry do not appear to believe that Madeleine is likely dead.  Maybe they have seen the video and like me think it is Madeleine?  Surely I am allowed to say these things.

 

As regards blind faith I see that in rob and yourself who are prepared to take seriously  the rubbish rob is posting. I think it's ridiculous  you have more faith in robs latest thread yet dismiss Wolters.

Many of the threads that Rob has initiated have been very enlightening and the one especially has produced very strong pointers, some of which I have informed SY of.   I think that he has got it wrong about the latest young lady being Madeleine, in fact since she has been identified, we know he has.   But Rob is trying really hard to crack this case and IMO it is wrong to discourage him.  There are a number of things that he has highlighted thanks to the groups (both sides) willingness to join in contributing.   He is to be congratulated; research is really hard and often tedious work.

You too, Dave, are to be congratulated about all your hard word and impressive information that you have added to the forum.   I just wish that the two of you could stop (sometimes deliberately) aggravating each other.  It is such a turn off to the rest of us … and you are equally to blame IMO

I'm not working with anyone to solve the case... We simply dont have enough information.
Rather than criticise me you might want to look at how insulting rob has been to me over the past two years... Then you accuse me of being suckered for some reasons.
You and rob have blind faith in sceptics yet there is no record of them solving... Or helping to solve any case ever

First of  all, let's make it clear … I DO NOT Have faith in any sceptics, although I read what they have to say.  Way back at the beginning of June, right at the beginning, I publicly stated that I thought that CB was being made a scapegoat, but not by the Mccanns..

-  They, the sceptics, said by The Mccanns (such nonsense !)

-  I said by the masterminds of Madeleines (and other childrens) abduction.  I said that IMO, they were scapegoating CB in order that the world would think her dead.
   
-  With her supposedly dead, and legally pronounced as such, the searching for her would cease.
 
-  They, the masterminds of this massive organisation could then relax safe in the knowledge that NO Police Forces would be looking for (a very much alive) Madeleine

-  They would be safe and holding Madeleine without fear, from then onwards.


I repeat that I DO NOT have any faith in what sceptics have to say about the case.  But I do think for myself, in great depth, to form opinions based upon my considerable research.   These do not always follow the current swell of opinion of our Supporter side

I'm going to stick with the evidence and at the moment  that points to murder...

So be it, but please take care.

[Robittybob1]

Then why are you even considering this photo

Because I can't rule it out.

[sadie]

Have deleted this post because the post it refers to has been deleted. 

This post no longer makes sense as it was based upon the deleted post.

[Mr Gray]

Dear Davel. 
Please calm down.  I am sorry that you find anything I have said offensive and if it indeed was, then I apologise. 

I have heard you say your bit, the same stuff repeatedly, probably well over a hundred times.  As I think HCW has got it wrong, surely I am allowed to express my thoughts very very occasionally.  I have been very restrained in holding back, as I have, out of respect for you. 

I am basing my thoughts on the fact that I believe that I have seen a living Madeleine, aged about 8(ish) on video.  And I think that OG have taken up much of my hypotheses.  I also notice that SY will NOT talk about Madeleine being dead; they refer to her as a missing child IIRC .  Additionally Kate and Gerry do not appear to believe that Madeleine is likely dead.  Maybe they have seen the video and like me think it is Madeleine?  Surely I am allowed to say these things.

 

Many of the threads that Rob has initiated have been very enlightening and the one especially has produced very strong pointers, some of which I have informed SY of.   I think that he has got it wrong about the latest young lady being Madeleine, in fact since she has been identified, we know he has.   But Rob is trying really hard to crack this case and IMO it is wrong to discourage him.  There are a number of things that he has highlighted thanks to the groups (both sides) willingness to join in contributing.   He is to be congratulated; research is really hard and often tedious work.

You too, Dave, are to be congratulated about all your hard word and impressive information that you have added to the forum.   I just wish that the two of you could stop (sometimes deliberately) aggravating each other.  It is such a turn off to the rest of us … and you are equally to blame IMO



First of  all, let's make it clear … I DO NOT Have faith in any sceptics, although I read what they have to say.  Way back at the beginning of June, right at the beginning, I publicly stated that I thought that CB was being made a scapegoat, but not by the Mccanns..

-  They, the sceptics, said by The Mccanns (such nonsense !)

-  I said by the masterminds of Madeleines (and other childrens) abduction.  I said that IMO, they were scapegoating CB in order that the world would think her dead.
   
-  With her supposedly dead, and legally pronounced as such, the searching for her would cease.
 
-  They, the masterminds of this massive organisation could then relax safe in the knowledge that NO Police Forces would be looking for (a very much alive) Madeleine

-  They would be safe and holding Madeleine without fear, from then onwards.


I repeat that I DO NOT have any faith in what sceptics have to say about the case.  But I do think for myself, in great depth, to form opinions based upon my considerable research.   These do not always follow the current swell of opinion of our Supporter side


So be it, but please take care.

You are welcome to express your thought but when those thoughts accuse me of blindly believing HCW i find that offensive.  Comparing me to thos ewho blindly beleive amaral is also offensive. What I see is rob blindly believing anyone contacting his FB page and you blindly supporting him. ive never heard so much rubbish as has been posted on Robs last 3 or 4 threads.

Have you listened to what Simon Foy of SY has  said about Wolters claims. have you listened to any of Wolters live broadcasts.

Ive listened to your theories for years and said nothing even though I find the idea of maddie being kidnapped to breed totally ridiculous.

As ive said...beleive what you wish ...but dont accuse me of blindly beleiving anything...and please dont accuse me of being closed minded. Both those terms are offensive and imo plain daft.

Like Simon Foy of SY ...and for similar reasons to Simon Foy...I think Wolters has something of significance.

At least Angelo was very impressed with your critcism of me...Faith basically sniggering.

Having said all that I shall continue to follow the real evidence which is that Maddie is almost certainly dead

[Mr Gray]

This is totally unfair, Davel.  Made up in your mind.   I don't even know who the bloke, * Bernhard Fischer *, is.

Please amend your comment

Bernard Fischer is the person who sent rob the photo...the one you suggested rob should send to SY. You actually said that it was my idea to send it to SY...which of course it wasnt

[Mr Gray]

Because I can't rule it out.

thats because you are a poor detective...there are millions and millions of photos of girls on the net that cant be ruled out....its being ruled in thats important

[Mr Gray]

 

Many of the threads that Rob has initiated have been very enlightening and the one especially has produced very strong pointers, some of which I have informed SY of.   I think that he has got it wrong about the latest young lady being Madeleine, in fact since she has been identified, we know he has.   But Rob is trying really hard to crack this case and IMO it is wrong to discourage him.  There are a number of things that he has highlighted thanks to the groups (both sides) willingness to join in contributing.   He is to be congratulated; research is really hard and often tedious work.

I dont think rob has produced anything of interest in his recent threads and I think you are wasting SYs time