Author Topic: The dogs.....  (Read 79945 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: The dogs.....
« Reply #330 on: May 10, 2014, 10:51:27 PM »
Seriously? You want me to cite something as well known as this????? HAVE YOU LOST THE PLOT???

Here's the cite....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LJo9fGXQMI

The exact quote is at 5.38, now answer the question, what percentage of success do the dogs have if it is not 100%?

Wrong thread..it is untrue to say the dog's have never been wrong

Silkywhiskers

  • Guest
Re: The dogs.....
« Reply #331 on: May 10, 2014, 10:51:44 PM »
Seriously? You want me to cite something as well known as this????? HAVE YOU LOST THE PLOT???

Here's the cite....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LJo9fGXQMI

The exact quote is at 5.38, now answer the question, what percentage of success do the dogs have if it is not 100%?

The plot was lost a long time ago.

But don't worry!  SY are about to dig it up!  8((()*/

Offline Mr Gray

Re: The dogs.....
« Reply #332 on: May 10, 2014, 10:58:44 PM »
What percentage Davel.....go on take a pot shot if you don't know or stop bleating on with asking for cites from everybody unless you are willing to back your own arguments up. Or have you decided to scuttle off with your tail between your legs?

No  still here..but I don't think you are able to understand the principles involved...
Cariad makes a claim that the dogs have never been wrong...does she have to supply any proof?

Offline Air Con

Re: The dogs.....
« Reply #333 on: May 10, 2014, 11:02:55 PM »
no I didn't...I'm posting in English so you should be able to follow


1. read the post again
2. post on the dog thread

So you're saying you're denying saying it's not true to claim Eddie had 100% record?

Either he did or he didn't. Either you queried that claim or you didn't.

In case you're struggling with the language I'm also speaking English.

The big difference is that mine is plain English not davel speak which is convoluted obfuscation dressed up to appear as a superior intellect.

Hope this helps.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: The dogs.....
« Reply #334 on: May 10, 2014, 11:10:28 PM »
Bump...

Now that you have your cite are you going to correct your claim that the McCann's have never rubbished the dogs?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LJo9fGXQMI

That cite shoes Gerry saying that the dogs are very unreliable...do you have evidence he is wrong

Offline Air Con

Re: The dogs.....
« Reply #335 on: May 10, 2014, 11:17:41 PM »
What you are saying is that Cariad can make any claim she likes and supply NO evidence but if I make a claim I must supply evidence...you have just lost the argument

You're the one claiming the dogs aren't 100% reliable.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: The dogs.....
« Reply #336 on: May 10, 2014, 11:19:55 PM »
You're the one claiming the dogs aren't 100% reliable.

Oh Dear..look all through my posts tonight and see if I have ever claimed taht

Offline Mr Gray

Re: The dogs.....
« Reply #337 on: May 10, 2014, 11:21:52 PM »
Nope. What I'm saying is that you are disputing Cariad's claim of 100% so in those circumstances if it's not 100% then what percentage is it and please provide your EVIDENCE...that is your favourite word isn't it?

By the way, once again.........

Now that you have your cite are you going to correct your claim that the McCann's have never rubbished the dogs? 5.38 Davel....."incredibly unreliable"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LJo9fGXQMI

lets keep this very simple...does Cariad have to supply any evidence to support her claim

Silkywhiskers

  • Guest
Re: The dogs.....
« Reply #338 on: May 10, 2014, 11:22:30 PM »
I am so sick of percentages in this case.

Smithman is "only" 80% - somehow Team McCann makes 20% more meaningful than 80%.

The dogs are "only" 98% reliable - 2% again used as some sort of "proof of failure" when common sense AND THE BLOODY STATISTICS both say that anything more than 50% needs to be looked at as a positive.

It works for school exams, it works in investigations.

Let this be THE END of bickering about statistics.

SY ARE DIGGING UP PDL.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: The dogs.....
« Reply #339 on: May 10, 2014, 11:24:14 PM »
I am so sick of percentages in this case.

Smithman is "only" 80% - somehow Team McCann makes 20% more meaningful than 80%.

The dogs are "only" 98% reliable - 2% again used as some sort of "proof of failure" when common sense AND THE BLOODY STATISTICS both say that anything more than 50% needs to be looked at as a positive.

It works for school exams, it works in investigations.

Let this be THE END of bickering about statistics.

SY ARE DIGGING UP PDL.

are they ..has the digging started or are you dreaming...I believe cocktail hour starts at 7.00am in OZ

Offline Air Con

Re: The dogs.....
« Reply #340 on: May 10, 2014, 11:25:10 PM »
that's what you think I need because you cannot follow the logic

Your logic? No.

Pretty much everybody else I can see their point of view.

Silkywhiskers

  • Guest
Re: The dogs.....
« Reply #341 on: May 10, 2014, 11:37:50 PM »
well you owe me an apology but never mind... where in that post do I say that eddie doesn't have a 100% record

Davel -

I don't care.

I do care about the digs that have been announced, and are about to begin.

I care about what they signify.

If you can get your mind out of your statistics for just one second - I'm going to assume you're Aunty Trish's neighbour or something - you will see that the dig even being announced in the first place, is MOMENTOUS.

It is a sign that the 2 year review, then the 2 year Operation Grange, has all come back to the same place.

The sites identified by Amaral and his team.

The sites possibly identified by the dogs.

Which indicates, in turn, that the end result of 7 years of investigation by various bodies has found ZERO evidence of an abduction, and every sign that she did not leave PDL alive, indeed may have been hidden in plain sight.

Just as Amaral said.


Alfred R Jones

  • Guest
Re: The dogs.....
« Reply #342 on: May 10, 2014, 11:40:00 PM »
If Amaral correctly identified areas that needed searching then why weren't they?  Or were they, but just not very well?

Offline Mr Gray

Re: The dogs.....
« Reply #343 on: May 10, 2014, 11:41:48 PM »
Davel -

I don't care.

I do care about the digs that have been announced, and are about to begin.

I care about what they signify.

If you can get your mind out of your statistics for just one second - I'm going to assume you're Aunty Trish's neighbour or something - you will see that the dig even being announced in the first place, is MOMENTOUS.

It is a sign that the 2 year review, then the 2 year Operation Grange, has all come back to the same place.

The sites identified by Amaral and his team.

The sites possibly identified by the dogs.

Which indicates, in turn, that the end result of 7 years of investigation by various bodies has found ZERO evidence of an abduction, and every sign that she did not leave PDL alive, indeed may have been hidden in plain sight.

Just as Amaral said.

strange as it may seem I don't care what you think either...your ideas are so far off the mark I thought you were just having a laugh at everyone elses expense...but you are serious...incredible

Offline Mr Gray

Re: The dogs.....
« Reply #344 on: May 10, 2014, 11:52:24 PM »
Are you totally stupid or just deliberately trying to antagonise other posters????

"no...it is not true to claim Eddie has a 100% record..you are wrong"

Oh hang on I get it....if you make enough bullshit posts then the problem posts end up way back....typical Davel.

Maybe we should all just keep reposting them then?

ETA...I owe you no apology. I have proven you to be liar and you have backed it up by failing to address it. You've had the opportunity...too late now to address it. Everybody has seen you for exactly what you are.

OK...first...it seems you accept Cariad can make a claim and supply no evidence...yet you expect me to supply evidence...answer this then we can move forward
« Last Edit: May 10, 2014, 11:55:07 PM by davel »