Author Topic: Wandering Off Topic  (Read 2268447 times)

0 Members and 14 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #18105 on: April 07, 2026, 06:47:09 PM »

Honestly, I'd be absolutely ashamed & embarrassed by myself if I couldn't counter a simple argument & had to run to AI for help. Apparently there's no depths to which VS isn't willing to plunge in her unwavering support of the McCanns. Dear God.
Christian Brueckner Fan Club

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #18106 on: April 07, 2026, 06:52:11 PM »

I think I'd be too ashamed to post here anymore if I felt I had to ask AI for help. It really is shameless.
Christian Brueckner Fan Club

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #18107 on: April 07, 2026, 10:32:56 PM »
Cognitive dissonance

When someone is faced with information that contradicts their belief, they experience discomfort. There are two ways to resolve it:
   ?   adjust their belief (hard)
   ?   reject or attack the source (easy)

Unfortunately, many choose the second?especially in emotionally charged topics.
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Joe Blogs

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #18108 on: April 07, 2026, 10:50:44 PM »
Cognitive dissonance

When someone is faced with information that contradicts their belief, they experience discomfort. There are two ways to resolve it:
   ?   adjust their belief (hard)
   ?   reject or attack the source (easy)

Unfortunately, many choose the second?especially in emotionally charged topics.
Personally, I am in limbo at the moment, Vertigo! My mind just isn't pointing me in any definitive direction at the moment.

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #18109 on: April 08, 2026, 04:39:17 AM »
Personally, I am in limbo at the moment, Vertigo! My mind just isn't pointing me in any definitive direction at the moment.

Do you think it's likely Brueckner did it when there are no sightings of Brueckner & no evidence at all he ever set foot in 5a, & instead, there's a sighting of Gerry abducting a stiff Maddie? Does that make sense to You?
Christian Brueckner Fan Club

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #18110 on: April 08, 2026, 04:58:34 AM »
Cognitive dissonance

When someone is faced with information that contradicts their belief, they experience discomfort. There are two ways to resolve it:
   ?   adjust their belief (hard)
   ?   reject or attack the source (easy)

Unfortunately, many choose the second?especially in emotionally charged topics.

I attacked you because you couldn't make a simple argument for yourself, instead running to AI for help. You couldn't make Brueckner fit where the sighting of Gerry goes & also make it fit in with the McCanns own testimony. Not without AI assistance. Whereas I have no difficulty making coincidental button trousers man fit where the sighting of him was, carrying his immobile daughter off into the night never to be seen again.
Christian Brueckner Fan Club

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #18111 on: April 08, 2026, 07:46:39 AM »
Personally, I am in limbo at the moment, Vertigo! My mind just isn't pointing me in any definitive direction at the moment.
No worries, though I am surprised if you?re still entertaining the possibility that Gerry was Smithman.  There is a branch of McCann scepticism which has made peace with the idea of that Smithman was not Gerry, however this has led them down another ludicrous path of convoluted conspiracy.  The simplest solutions to a mystery such as this are usually the correct ones imo, ones that don?t involve highly improbable actions, don?t involve ignoring all but the most unreliable of witnesses, don?t involve complicated plots between friends and acquaintances.

 IMO, abducted by a stranger fits that brief.  There were a couple of clear windows of opportunity for one to strike - after Gerry?s check, or after Matt?s check.  The apartment was unlocked by the patio door, however an opportunist thief with a lock kit (CB had one, it was found amongst his possessions) may not have known that at the time and could also have entered by the front door.  He may have been disturbed on first attempt (perhaps shortly after the McCanns left for dinner) which might explain the moving door. Perhaps he hid outside in the bushes waiting until Gerry had left before returning inside, opened the window for a quicker getaway in case needed or to hear approaching passersby.  He then removed Madeleine from her bed sometime after 9.10pm and left via the front door, and probably left the area by car or van. 

It?s one plausible scenario which fits the known facts.  I?m not dogmatically wedded to it however.  The abduction could possibly have happened half an hour later, following more or less the same sequence.  Moving internal door earlier could have been caused by a child getting out of bed and wandering into the living area, air movement in the apartment caused by opening the patio door, or maybe Gerry misremembering how the door was left in the first place. 

All the above obviously ripe for sneering ridicule from some quarters I know, but I believe the above scenarios are more plausible than the others we are constantly and aggressively being told occurred.
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #18112 on: April 08, 2026, 09:27:59 AM »
No worries, though I am surprised if you?re still entertaining the possibility that Gerry was Smithman.  There is a branch of McCann scepticism which has made peace with the idea of that Smithman was not Gerry, however this has led them down another ludicrous path of convoluted conspiracy.  The simplest solutions to a mystery such as this are usually the correct ones imo, ones that don?t involve highly improbable actions, don?t involve ignoring all but the most unreliable of witnesses, don?t involve complicated plots between friends and acquaintances.

 IMO, abducted by a stranger fits that brief.  There were a couple of clear windows of opportunity for one to strike - after Gerry?s check, or after Matt?s check.  The apartment was unlocked by the patio door, however an opportunist thief with a lock kit (CB had one, it was found amongst his possessions) may not have known that at the time and could also have entered by the front door.  He may have been disturbed on first attempt (perhaps shortly after the McCanns left for dinner) which might explain the moving door. Perhaps he hid outside in the bushes waiting until Gerry had left before returning inside, opened the window for a quicker getaway in case needed or to hear approaching passersby.  He then removed Madeleine from her bed sometime after 9.10pm and left via the front door, and probably left the area by car or van. 

It?s one plausible scenario which fits the known facts.  I?m not dogmatically wedded to it however.  The abduction could possibly have happened half an hour later, following more or less the same sequence.  Moving internal door earlier could have been caused by a child getting out of bed and wandering into the living area, air movement in the apartment caused by opening the patio door, or maybe Gerry misremembering how the door was left in the first place. 

All the above obviously ripe for sneering ridicule from some quarters I know, but I believe the above scenarios are more plausible than the others we are constantly and aggressively being told occurred.

SY clearly didn't regard the Smiths as unreliable witnesses. But you must do so to ignore the obvious.
Christian Brueckner Fan Club

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #18113 on: April 08, 2026, 09:29:11 AM »

I see we've got the imaginary getaway vehicle out again. For which there's no evidence at all.
Christian Brueckner Fan Club

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #18114 on: April 08, 2026, 09:53:55 AM »

I actually re-watched SY's Crimewatch episode just the other day & the curious thing about it was, there was no reconstruction at all of Maddie being bundled into any waiting getaway vehicle. Instead, they seemed to focus on the fact that Madeleine, dressed in the wrong pyjamas, was seen being carried away on foot & past the Smiths.
Christian Brueckner Fan Club

Offline Lace

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #18115 on: April 08, 2026, 10:29:00 AM »
There are two mugshots on line one is of Breaukner at 19 the other is of Breaukner in 2006.  If you look at the one on the right its the image of the thinner picture of the man the Smiths saw.  If someone can get them up on here it would be great.

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #18116 on: April 08, 2026, 10:29:47 AM »

The Smith sighting. It just gets completely left out of any logical & plausible abduction thesis presented by Mccann believers, doesn't it. Supporters are happy to just imagine in getaway vehicles to avoid the obvious instead. It's very difficult for McCann supporters to present their logical plausible abduction thesis & include the most likely sighting of Madeleine, isn't it. This is self evident.
Christian Brueckner Fan Club

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #18117 on: April 08, 2026, 10:31:12 AM »
There are two mugshots on line one is of Breaukner at 19 the other is of Breaukner in 2006.  If you look at the one on the right its the image of the thinner picture of the man the Smiths saw.  If someone can get them up on here it would be great.

That's interesting. So you think Brueckner could have been Smithman?  Can you explain why he changed Madeleine's pyjamas at all?
Christian Brueckner Fan Club

Offline Lace

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #18118 on: April 08, 2026, 10:35:53 AM »

Offline Lace

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #18119 on: April 08, 2026, 10:37:27 AM »
They are saying page not found shame.