Summers & Swan - A new book - Looking For Madeleine

[Montclair]

IMO the main reason the book didn't go down well with some sceptics is because it didn't confirm any of the myths, lies and disinformation invented over the years -  which they so desperately wish were true - and which they need to be true to confirm their own beliefs.

 

The book probably didn't sell well because it had nothing new and was mostly a rehash of what the McCanns want people to read.

[faithlilly]

If monstering was too good for it then what would you have done to it?  Book  Bonfires?  authors arrested for sedition?

It's a turn of phrase Alfie.

[Alfred R Jones]

IMO the main reason the book didn't go down well with some sceptics is because it didn't confirm any of the myths, lies and disinformation invented over the years -  which they so desperately wish were true - and which they need to be true to confirm their own beliefs.

 

The sceptics obviously feel their campaign has been terribly undermined and threatened by the book, hence the need to rubbish it at every available opportunity.

[Alfred R Jones]

It's a turn of phrase Alfie.

I know that, however you obviously feel the book wasn't rubbished nearly enough and must be puzzled and perplexed by the fact that it has been published in paperback form, which would never have happened if the publishers felt there was no market for it.  And to pre-empt you - no publisher would ever agree to production of a paperback on the writers' terms.

[faithlilly]

The book probably didn't sell well because it had nothing new and was mostly a rehash of what the McCanns want people to read.

Indeed Montclair. The bald truth is that the only book that could be published in the UK without attracting the kind of litigation Amaral has suffered  is the book the authors have written.

[stephen25000]

Indeed Montclair. The bald truth is that the only book that could be published in the UK without attracting the kind of litigation Amaral has suffered  is the book the authors have written.

and let's not forget the ludicrous assertion that S and S did not write the book with the full cooperation of the mccanns.

 

[faithlilly]

The sceptics obviously feel their campaign has been terribly undermined and threatened by the book, hence the need to rubbish it at every available opportunity.

Or perhaps they simply think it is a badly researched book by a previously credible author.

That Summers has chosen to use most of the new chapters in his book to bemoan the critical mauling his book has received ( I believe Patricia Cornwell did the same when Ripperologists, who actually had an indepth knowledge of the case tore her book Jack the Ripper Case Closed to pieces ) will in time stand as the unedifying swansong of a once respected journalist

[faithlilly]

and let's not forget the ludicrous assertion that S and S did not write the book with the full cooperation of the mccanns.

 

Or anyone else connected to the case  it would seem Stephen.

[Benice]

The book probably didn't sell well because it had nothing new and was mostly a rehash of what the McCanns want people to read.

I have no idea how many books have been sold.   I do know there were sceptics who did not want people to read the book and so took deliberate action intended to suppress sales.    These are the same people who regularly claim to support free speech.   In light of their behaviour towards S&S -  they obviously don't do 'irony'. 



 

[Alfred R Jones]

Or perhaps they simply think it is a badly researched book by a previously credible author.

That Summers has chosen to use most of the new chapters in his book to bemoan the critical mauling his book has received ( I believe Patricia Cornwell did the same when Ripperologists, who actually had an indepth knowledge of the case tore her book Jack the Ripper Case Closed to pieces ) will in time stand as the unedifying swansong of a once respected journalist

the book is not badly researched, it simply doesn't say the things you want it to say. 

[stephen25000]

I have no idea how many books have been sold.   I do know there were sceptics who did not want people to read the book and so took deliberate action intended to suppress sales.    These are the same people who regularly claim to support free speech.   In light of their behaviour towards S&S -  they obviously don't do 'irony'.

and what about people such as yourself, who would like to hide away any theory other than abduction from the public arena ?

Mind you, it's too late for that one.

As to the 'behaviour towards S and S',

PULL THE OTHER ONE.

The books lack of sales says everything.

[faithlilly]

the book is not badly researched, it simply doesn't say the things you want it to say.

The book is shockingly researched. The fact that it doesn't have one original interview with any witness says it all really. Of course as it is on ongoing investigation the authors' hands where somewhat tied but that being the case it was a tad disingenuous to make the claims for the book which they did.

[Benice]

and what about people such as yourself, who would like to hide away any theory other than abduction from the public arena ?

Mind you, it's too late for that one.

As to the 'behaviour towards S and S',

PULL THE OTHER ONE.

The books lack of sales says everything.

Nothing would please me more than to read a credible alternative theory to abduction.   The fact that in 8 years  there has never been one which doesn't crash and burn under scrutiny should tell you something.

What's your theory Stephen - you must have one?   Perhaps you would like to discuss it on a more appropriate thread.

I'm assuming from your comment that you know what the current book sale figures are.  Care to share?

[stephen25000]

Nothing would please me more than to read a credible alternative theory to abduction.   The fact that in 8 years  there has never been one which doesn't crash and burn under scrutiny should tell you something.

What's your theory Stephen - you must have one?   Perhaps you would like to discuss it on a more appropriate thread.

I'm assuming from your comment that you know what the current book sale figures are.  Care to share?

Another credible theory.

There are two at least.

Now briefly remind me of what credible and quantitative evidence exists for abduction.

As to the lack of sales, pray tell me , where is the book in the sales charts ?

It's never been in the top 100 or 200..

So is it a best seller benice ?

[Benice]

and let's not forget the ludicrous assertion that S and S did not write the book with the full cooperation of the mccanns.

 

LOL -  It's so easy to be a sceptic.   Any 'assertion'  which suits is claimed to be the indisputable truth.      Any 'assertion' which does NOT suit - is simply dismissed as a lie.     Easy peasy to convince yourself of anything if you are one of the sceptics who go by that ludicrous 'rule of thumb'.   

IMO your post is libellous - unless you have evidence to back your 'assertion' up?