Do the sceptics simply misunderstand the evidence

[Wonderfulspam]

You can infer what you want... But the experts don't agree with you

I don't need them to.

[Carana]

I don't see that is a fact and I don't see on what basis you make that claim as certain

It can be taken as a fact that Eddie did alert, can't it? However, what to is less than limpid...

[Wonderfulspam]

It can be taken as a fact that Eddie did alert, can't it? However, what to is less than limpid...

Of course it can.

A cadaver dog alerted, so it did, it really did happen, that is a fact.

[Mr Gray]

It can be taken as a fact that Eddie did alert, can't it? However, what to is less than limpid...

Initially he didn't.... Until being repeatedly called back... That sounds most unconvincing....

[Alice Purjorick]

Which substances was he referring to when he mentioned that he was alerting to those within his "training parameters". No one seems to have questioned that...

What exactly was included or excluded from those "training parameters"?

I thought we'd done dog threads to death... and I'm not sure what there could be to say that hasn't been raised on literally dozens of threads before now.

We have but try:
"Were it North Korea we would all be having a barbecue by now; Airedale leg with kimchi anyone"?

[Carana]

We have but try:
"Were it North Korea we would all be having a barbecue by now; Airedale leg with kimchi anyone"?

I think I might pass on that invitation today, but thanks all the same, Alice... lol

[Wonderfulspam]

Initially he didn't.... Until being repeatedly called back... That sounds most unconvincing....

You appear to be inferring something from the alerts. I thought we weren't supposed to do that.

[Mr Gray]

You appear to be inferring something from the alerts. I thought we weren't supposed to do that.

I'm not inferring anything... You ate using the alerts as evidence to support your belief in the McCann's guilt but the experts are clear they have no evidential  value... So you prove my point

[Wonderfulspam]

I'm not inferring anything... You ate using the alerts as evidence to support your belief in the McCann's guilt but the experts are clear they have no evidential  value... So you prove my point

No, I'm using the fact a dog alerted.

I can't just ignore that fact, I'm not the police.

[Mr Gray]

No, I'm using the fact a dog alerted.

I can't just ignore that fact, I'm not the police.

You are, using the alert as, evidence... It isn't... That's, what you don't understand

[Wonderfulspam]

You are, using the alert as, evidence... It isn't... That's, what you don't understand

It's not evidence, it's an indication.

I don't ignore indicators when I'm driving, & I'm not about to start.

[Mr Gray]

It's not evidence, it's an indication.

I don't ignore indicators when I'm driving, & I'm not about to start.

You confirm you don't understand  the, evidence

[Wonderfulspam]

You confirm you don't understand  the, evidence

What evidence?

I'm often informed there isn't any.

[Robittybob1]

You confirm you don't understand  the, evidence

Now you got us all confused.

[G-Unit]

I'm singling out sceptics who mistakenly think inferences can be drawn  from the, alerts... According to expert ..opinion.. They cannot
We've had posters here claim they are circumstantial  evidence... They are not IMO

Would you be willing to share your view on the alerts... I somehow doubt it

I find the idea of evidence interesting. As I understand it evidence comes in many forms. According to Wikipedia there is;

Digital evidence
Personal experience
Scientific evidence
Testimonial
Physical evidence
Trace evidence
Relationship evidence

There is strong evidence and weak evidence. Strong evidence can prove an assertion, weak evident can support it but doesn't prove it.

I think that alerts could be used as part of body of circumstantial evidence as they were in the Prout case.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence#Types_of_evidence