Police asking for yet more money in McCann Investigation

Status
Not open for further replies.
ProfessionalMackem said:
According to you.

Love how you throw your favourite term about without actually providing any critical analysis of anything that the dude said. It looks like he may have padded out his CV a bit but it doesn't invalidate what he said about the mccanns.
Click to expand...

It's looks like he may have padded out his cv a bit? No, the bloke's a f***ing liar.

He's not a statement analysis expert - he has a degree in bible studies and teaches guitar. For anyone in their right mind, of course it invalidates what he has to say. There's zero chance of me even opening the link never mind providing critical analysis.

It's almost exactly the same scenario as one of the many 9/11 threads where you were banging on about nanothermite and linked to a supporting article authored by an academic and lecturer. I was daft enough to follow the link only to find that whilst the author was indeed a PHD it was in religious studies and the University that he worked for had issued a statement categorically distancing themselves from their employee's views. Further investigation revealed that the said academic had also propounded that Jesus had visited South America hundreds of years ago disguised as a spaceman.

As another poster has already shown it would have taken you all of thirty seconds to discover that Hyatt was a complete charlatan and his content would almost certainly be 24 carat bollocks, but you have proven time and time again on here that you possess no critical quality control whatsoever - and this exactly why your username is now a byword for the most gormless fruitloopery.

And 'dude'? If it was my gaff, unless you can prove you're a yank, you'd be banned for just using that expression.
 


Pancho said:
It's looks like he may have padded out his cv a bit? No, the bloke's a f***ing liar.

He's not a statement analysis expert - he has a degree in bible studies and teaches guitar. For anyone in their right mind, of course it invalidates what he has to say. There's zero chance of me even opening the link never mind providing critical analysis.

It's almost exactly the same scenario as one of the many 9/11 threads where you were banging on about nanothermite and linked to a supporting article authored by an academic and lecturer. I was daft enough to follow the link only to find that whilst the author was indeed a PHD it was in religious studies and the University that he worked for had issued a statement categorically distancing themselves from their employee's views. Further investigation revealed that the said academic had also propounded that Jesus had visited South America hundreds of years ago disguised as a spaceman.

As another poster has already shown it would have taken you all of thirty seconds to discover that Hyatt was a complete charlatan and his content would almost certainly be 24 carat bollocks, but you have proven time and time again on here that you possess no critical quality control whatsoever - and this exactly why your username is now a byword for the most gormless fruitloopery.

And 'dude'? If it was my gaff, unless you can prove you're a yank, you'd be banned for just using that expression.
Click to expand...

Again a lot of words but very little substance. Standard post from you.
Its you that has no concept of critical quality control whatsoever. Banging on about people's credentials ffs. Yes it helps but by no means is it the b all and end all. I'm glad you don't run the gaffe cos it'd be shite. First thing you'd do is close the footy forum down cos we all haven't played professional football.

I have yet to hear one thing from you naysayers about what Dr Griffins or this dude in question actually has to say on their subjects. Always trying to muddy or discredit the messenger rather than debate the message is a sure fire indicator of someone trying to debate over their intellectual level.

P.s you not counting the architects, chemists, structural engineer, scholars, pilots, emergency services etc who have come forward against the official narrative now? I guess that's indicative of anyone so blinded by their own ignorance that if something doesn't fit in with their world view that they must attribute that with the mentally ill or far fetched conspiracy nuts. It's a sad state of affairs really. Stiffles debate and reduces people questioning stuff by sticking their head above the parapet.
 
I know cases remain open but when are they usually wound down, to just a couple of detectives looking into cold case files?

About ten years?
 
ProfessionalMackem said:
Again a lot of words but very little substance. Standard post from you.
Its you that has no concept of critical quality control whatsoever. Banging on about people's credentials ffs. Yes it helps but by no means is it the b all and end all. I'm glad you don't run the gaffe cos it'd be shite. First thing you'd do is close the footy forum down cos we all haven't played professional football.

I have yet to hear one thing from you naysayers about what Dr Griffins or this dude in question actually has to say on their subjects. Always trying to muddy or discredit the messenger rather than debate the message is a sure fire indicator of someone trying to debate over their intellectual level.

P.s you not counting the architects, chemists, structural engineer, scholars, pilots, emergency services etc who have come forward against the official narrative now? I guess that's indicative of anyone so blinded by their own ignorance that if something doesn't fit in with their world view that they must attribute that with the mentally ill or far fetched conspiracy nuts. It's a sad state of affairs really. Stiffles debate and reduces people questioning stuff by sticking their head above the parapet.
Click to expand...

Of course I bang on about people's credentials. It's pretty fundamental in determining if a so-called expert does indeed have the qualifications to be taken seriously.

No to mention that lying about qualifications would be a massive red flag to any sane observer.

Your second and third paragraphs remind me of another of your breathtakingly stupid responses, this time to @HillView Aviator on one of the MH370 threads when he politely debunked yet another one of your streams of bollocks.

It was a while ago so forgive the paraphrasing " you may well be a qualified pilot but it doesn't stop you posting shite"

I'm under no illusions regarding my own intellectual level and if I've learned one thing after 14 years on here is that there are plenty far cleverer and on many subjects, far better informed than me.

I'd hate to think that I was debate stiffler, so for further reading I'd strongly recommend for you the Dunning-Kruger effect - it really does explain a lot of your input on here.
 
Horatio Pugwash said:
You'll be waiting a while then.

There are people cracking jokes about a dead child and telling us how much they "love a good McCann" thread on here.
You seem to be trying to take the moral high ground when I point out that these people enjoy this type of thread.

Aye reet


There's also a very good youtube video proving without doubt that fairies really exist for all those who believe YouTube videos
Click to expand...
Whats wrong with enjoying the thread ?
 
Pancho said:
Of course I bang on about people's credentials. It's pretty fundamental in determining if a so-called expert does indeed have the qualifications to be taken seriously.

No to mention that lying about qualifications would be a massive red flag to any sane observer.

Your second and third paragraphs remind me of another of your breathtakingly stupid responses, this time to @HillView Aviator on one of the MH370 threads when he politely debunked yet another one of your streams of bollocks.

It was a while ago so forgive the paraphrasing " you may well be a qualified pilot but it doesn't stop you posting shite"

I'm under no illusions regarding my own intellectual level and if I've learned one thing after 14 years on here is that there are plenty far cleverer and on many subjects, far better informed than me.

I'd hate to think that I was debate stiffler, so for further reading I'd strongly recommend for you the Dunning-Kruger effect - it really does explain a lot of your input on here.
Click to expand...

So in one sentence you say "just cos you're a pilot doesn't stop you chatting shit" and in another you say "It's pretty fundamental in determining if a so-called expert does indeed have the qualifications". Contradicting yourself shows you up again.

These threads always end up the same.

"I bet it's only nutters that believe that"

Actually no, quite a few people from varying sectors are agreeing.

"Aye but what the fuck do they know, they're not even in the same field"

Actually that's not was first asked and yes there are people in the field that do agree.

"Aye but just cos you're qualified in that field doesn't stop you chatting shit"

Goalposts have been moved yet again. What more do you want?

"We want peer reviewed journals so that all the science community can scrutinise the findings"

Right. There you go bout 10 of them for you to gorge on till your hearts content.

"But but but special moon water man"

Rinse repeat the modus operandi if anyone offering a alternate view. You say your not stifling debate? Funny that like we must have been debating what was actually said about the mccans in that analysis of their statements and interviews without me noticing it.


P.s you don't need to look up anything to see what your input on here has been like. Just look at this emoji
Logon or register to see this image
 
FootballFan said:
Why did Kate McCann say she believed the "abductor" had drugged the twins?

Just think about that.
Click to expand...

Because they were unresponsive and still asleep while all the commotion was going on in same room? Enough for the police to become concerned that the "abductor" could have drugged the twins. So the police asking for drug tests on the twins (as some knock out medicine are controlled and can be followed up) was a valid line of enquiry.

Why did the mccans refuse a drugs test on the twins until months after? If they really wanted to find the bairn?

Throughout this whole ordeal. One thing is plain to see. The mccanns are more bothered about self preservation than actually finding their daughter. Their actions and words tell us that much.
 
ProfessionalMackem said:
So in one sentence you say "just cos you're a pilot doesn't stop you chatting shit" and in another you say "It's pretty fundamental in determining if a so-called expert does indeed have the qualifications". Contradicting yourself shows you up again.

These threads always end up the same.

"I bet it's only nutters that believe that"

Actually no, quite a few people from varying sectors are agreeing.

"Aye but what the fuck do they know, they're not even in the same field"

Actually that's not was first asked and yes there are people in the field that do agree.

"Aye but just cos you're qualified in that field doesn't stop you chatting shit"

Goalposts have been moved yet again. What more do you want?

"We want peer reviewed journals so that all the science community can scrutinise the findings"

Right. There you go bout 10 of them for you to gorge on till your hearts content.

"But but but special moon water man"

Rinse repeat the modus operandi if anyone offering a alternate view. You say your not stifling debate? Funny that like we must have been debating what was actually said about the mccans in that analysis of their statements and interviews without me noticing it.


P.s you don't need to look up anything to see what your input on here has been like. Just look at this emoji
Logon or register to see this image
Click to expand...

It's not contradictory at all.

If someone is going to contribute to an aircraft crash thread I'd like to know if he's a qualified commercial pilot, as is @HillView Aviator, or a bible teacher masquerading as an expert crash investigator.

You seem to be incapable of making that distinction and you summarily dismissed a qualified pilot's view when it didn't concur with your own, almost certainly less informed opinion.

If you want debate about McCann statement analysis then post a link to a proper expert and not some random guitar teacher with a penchant for fibbing.

By the way my last paragraph was tongue in cheek. I was just riffling on your spelling.

And the emoji - very classy.
 
What if Aliens abducted Maddie? I'm not being silly I've openly admitted I believe in aliens visiting Earth on many occasions on this board and I've heard that aliens do abduct people, I just want to explore all possibilities.
 
niceonemarra said:
What if Aliens abducted Maddie? I'm not being silly I've openly admitted I believe in aliens visiting Earth on many occasions on this board and I've heard that aliens do abduct people, I just want to explore all possibilities.
Click to expand...
I asked that same question of Heeeeed in an earlier thread, which I felt reasonable as he's a UFOer. He got a bit radgy with me, iirc.
 
Pancho said:
It's not contradictory at all.

If someone is going to contribute to an aircraft crash thread I'd like to know if he's a qualified commercial pilot, as is @HillView Aviator, or a bible teacher masquerading as an expert crash investigator.

You seem to be incapable of making that distinction and you summarily dismissed a qualified pilot's view when it didn't concur with your own, almost certainly less informed opinion.

If you want debate about McCann statement analysis then post a link to a proper expert and not some random guitar teacher with a penchant for fibbing.

By the way my last paragraph was tongue in cheek. I was just riffling on your spelling.

And the emoji - very classy.
Click to expand...

Are you blocking people's opinion and debate on the pure football forum because posters haven't played the game?

You seem to be confused with judicial guilt/innocence and personal/opinionated guilt/innocence. The man is only giving his opinion and not up in a court of law. He puts plenty of disclaimers up to keep the sharks at bay.

You have every right to deem what he has to say as negligible without seeing it. However you then can't have a go at me for disagreeing with you and calling it closed minded and bigoted. Why not see what he has to say and then make your conclusions into his character. His cv might be inflated but he obviously has some knowledge in the area and articulates his points very well. You don't have to believe everything he says or put your hat on him to take a few pertinent points made about the mccanns behaviour and wording.

Bold bit. You leaping to a canny few assumptions and lies there like. I didn't dismiss hill view opinions in favour of a bible basher at all. I simply chose to believe my opinions more. Opinions formed from talking and reading around the subject. No disrespect to the poster you keep tagging. But I don't know him. I know a mate and a cousin who are pilots. They might not share the views I do. But do agree with some of the irregularities about that day. I have watched hours and hours of testimonies of pilots who talk about their opinions. Only then can I form a opinion or a conclusion.

Again. What shite are we reduced to talking about? It must have been your aim to derail the thread. Which was going along nicely.
 
AlpineExile said:
I asked that same question of Heeeeed in an earlier thread, which I felt reasonable as he's a UFOer. He got a bit radgy with me, iirc.
Click to expand...
He got a lot of abuse on here so was always a bit defensive but yeah he was always a bit over defensive.

What is Peter Hyatt's favourite piece of drum equipment? The Hi-Hat.

Whats the difference between Peter Hyatt and Steven Hawking? Peter Hyatt is still alive and hasnt been replaced by a puppet.

Pancho said:
Further investigation revealed that the said academic had also propounded that Jesus had visited South America hundreds of years ago disguised as a spaceman.
Click to expand...
I've never heard that one before its a corker.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pancho said:
It's looks like he may have padded out his cv a bit? No, the bloke's a f***ing liar.

He's not a statement analysis expert - he has a degree in bible studies and teaches guitar. For anyone in their right mind, of course it invalidates what he has to say. There's zero chance of me even opening the link never mind providing critical analysis.

It's almost exactly the same scenario as one of the many 9/11 threads where you were banging on about nanothermite and linked to a supporting article authored by an academic and lecturer. I was daft enough to follow the link only to find that whilst the author was indeed a PHD it was in religious studies and the University that he worked for had issued a statement categorically distancing themselves from their employee's views. Further investigation revealed that the said academic had also propounded that Jesus had visited South America hundreds of years ago disguised as a spaceman.

As another poster has already shown it would have taken you all of thirty seconds to discover that Hyatt was a complete charlatan and his content would almost certainly be 24 carat bollocks, but you have proven time and time again on here that you possess no critical quality control whatsoever - and this exactly why your username is now a byword for the most gormless fruitloopery.

And 'dude'? If it was my gaff, unless you can prove you're a yank, you'd be banned for just using that expression.
Click to expand...

Quality post.
 
ProfessionalMackem said:
Because they were unresponsive and still asleep while all the commotion was going on in same room? Enough for the police to become concerned that the "abductor" could have drugged the twins. So the police asking for drug tests on the twins (as some knock out medicine are controlled and can be followed up) was a valid line of enquiry.

Why did the mccans refuse a drugs test on the twins until months after? If they really wanted to find the bairn?

Throughout this whole ordeal. One thing is plain to see. The mccanns are more bothered about self preservation than actually finding their daughter. Their actions and words tell us that much.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

How plausible is it that an intruder entered the apartment without leaving a trace, drugged all 3 children with some mystery chemical that leaves no trace or scent in the room, and makes away down the road with Maddie?

If they thought this was what happened then why not agree to a drug test there and then? Surely if they found the drug they could find who had access to that drug and get closer to a result?

It doesn't add up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top