The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi!

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.


Jill Havern
Forum owner

Garth's Theory

Page 2 of 7 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Garth's Theory

Post by Guest on 05.06.11 9:42

@Garth wrote:
"but I know the McCanns are innocent and the people on here are wrong".

You don't know, you believe. Now, for the abduction explanation please..

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Theories - that word again

Post by Marian on 05.06.11 9:48

Sorry if I'm missing the point (wouldn't be the first time) but hasn't Garth made it crystal clear that he supports the McCanns' version of events regarding the abduction (and of course he is entitled to do so) so why does he need to provide his explanation when we already know what he thinks?

Marian

Posts : 1147
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2010-12-19
Location : England

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Garth's Theory

Post by Guest on 05.06.11 9:57

Marian, Garth has been asked to show evidence to support his convictions. Just as we all have and still doing to support why we do not believe the abduction. It's that simple. Just as a defence lawyer would have to do in court.

The ball is in Garth's court.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Garth's Theory

Post by Garth on 05.06.11 10:02

I have been asked to show 'evidence'? Have I?
 
Like Marian has simply explained, I follow the abduction thoughts. I don't have proof that cannot be contended on this forum, and neither do you.
 
So its pointless.
 
However, this forum is about questioning certain aspects of this case that to them doesnt make any sense.
 
I tend to play 'devils advocate' here and challenge you as to why alternatives are not possible.
 
Its as simple as that!

Garth
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Garth's Theory

Post by Guest on 05.06.11 10:06

@Me wrote:
Please note this thread IS NOT a discussion on the McCann's guilt nor a thread about their inconsistiencies. This is simply a thread for Garth to put forward how an abduction happened given the info we know and for us to pick holes question him on it.

So Garth, are you saying that you have nothing whatsoever to support your theory then?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Garth's Theory

Post by Garth on 05.06.11 10:10

I've just answered you in my last post.

Garth
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Garth's Theory

Post by Guest on 05.06.11 10:13

That's a no then.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Garth's Theory

Post by ufercoffy on 05.06.11 10:14

lol!

Might aswell lock the thread then big grin

____________________
Whose cadaver scent and bodily fluid was found in the McCann's apartment and hire car if not Madeleine's?  Shocked

ufercoffy

Posts : 1641
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2010-01-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Garth's Theory

Post by Guest on 05.06.11 10:17

Is it any wonder that most people do not believe there was an abduction, when those few that do refuse cannot give even one dencent piece of credible evidence to support their convictions.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Round and round we go

Post by Guest on 05.06.11 10:20

Sadly for Garth there are many of us who do not share his blind faith in the McCanns but perhaps he will now respect our opinions a little more though.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Garth's Theory

Post by Garth on 05.06.11 10:27

Stella, your irritating little emoticons that you add after your goading posts do nothing but show you up for what you really are.
 
Jean
 
Blind faith in what?
 
 

Garth
Guest


Back to top Go down

Observations

Post by Guest on 05.06.11 10:36

I really don't think that Garth can complain about other people goading him when he has in the recent past given veiled threats of what he would do if he met someone face to face. Blind faith in the McCanns is what I said - does that need any more explanation as Garth said that he believes in them in his heart of hearts.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Garth's Theory

Post by Garth on 05.06.11 10:40

Ah I see, so does that mean it would be fair for me to suggest that you have 'blind faith' in your idol Goncalo Amaral?

Garth
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Garth's Theory

Post by Guest on 05.06.11 10:40

@Garth wrote:Stella, your irritating little emoticons that you add after your goading posts do nothing but show you up for what you really are.

I'm sorry you find the emoticons irritating Garth. There are many things on here I also find really irritating, but I choose not to comment on, as this is a free world and we are all different and entitled to our own opinions.

What is truly irritating is, when given the chance to show us why we are wrong and you are right, you bury your head in the sand. I think thats what they now call the ostrich effect.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Garth's Theory

Post by Guest on 05.06.11 10:46

@Garth wrote:Ah I see, so does that mean it would be fair for me to suggest that you have 'blind faith' in your idol Goncalo Amaral?

This thread is not about Jean or Goncalo Amaral. It is about you giving your reasons as why we should be convinced that there was an abduction. So far you have given us nothing to go on.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Garth's Theory

Post by Garth on 05.06.11 10:56

You're supposed to be a 'moderator'. It may do you well (and show this board has some integrity), if you'd do exactly that, 'moderate', instead of coming down to an infantile level. That way, posters like myself may feel there would be an 'even handed' opportunity to put forward an argument.
 
If its a honest debate you want here, to discuss 'ALL' thoughts and to keep an open mind then you're going the wrong way about it.
 
I don't visit pro's forums that much because its pointless and boring, every one agreeing on the same idea. But the same could be said for this forum.
r
Maybe I should open up my own forum so people can debate openly and honestly with being subject to ridicule.  

Garth
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Garth's Theory

Post by Me on 05.06.11 11:02

Going to be tied up today, to use Garth's phrase "having a social life", however we can all see the paucity of his arguments yet again.

The emperor clearly has no clothes!

I will reply in more detail when i have finished "having a social life".

Just want Garth to know there's nothing personal and i quite enjoy our little debates. However he has to put forward his theories and back it up with evidence in order for us to take him seriously.

In the words of Arnold "i'll be back".

Me

Posts : 683
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2011-05-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Garth's Theory

Post by IAmNotMerylStreep on 05.06.11 11:03

@Garth wrote:Maybe I should open up my own forum so people can debate openly and honestly with being subject to ridicule.  

Fantastic idea!

byebye

IAmNotMerylStreep

Posts : 194
Reputation : 27
Join date : 2011-05-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Garth's Theory

Post by Me on 05.06.11 11:04

@Garth wrote:Maybe I should open up my own forum so people can debate openly and honestly with being subject to ridicule.

And who's the one who throws out the most ridicule on this forum Garth?

That's been your modus operandi as far as i can see since i joined.

Right off now we'll speak again soon.

Me

Posts : 683
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2011-05-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Garth's Theory

Post by IAmNotMerylStreep on 05.06.11 11:08

I can just imagine the first thread on Garth's new forum.

The Abduction theory

Garth: I know the McCanns are innocent and Madeleine was abducted. Discuss.

RBxHN: I agree. Shall we go to the pub to get pissed now?

IAmNotMerylStreep

Posts : 194
Reputation : 27
Join date : 2011-05-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Garth's Theory

Post by Guest on 05.06.11 11:12

@Garth wrote:
If its a honest debate you want here, to discuss 'ALL' thoughts and to keep an open mind then you're going the wrong way about it.

My mind is open. I'm up for 'ALL' of your thoughts as well. So please tell us on what basis YOU believe there was an abduction and we can start the debate.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Garth's Theory

Post by Garth on 05.06.11 11:13

One subtle difference clunk, I'm not a moderator. When an even hand is given then an even argument will form.
 
And you HAVE  become very personal and hence my challenge to you..........

Garth
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Garth's Theory

Post by Guest on 05.06.11 11:20

@Garth wrote:One subtle difference clunk, I'm not a moderator. When an even hand is given then an even argument will form.

And you HAVE become very personal and hence my challenge to you..........

Garth, this is not personal, it's an adult forum fgs. This is a thread to try to understand why you believe there was an abduction. If you are not up to explaining this, just say so. It's not a problem. We cannot find one piece of hard evidence to support the abduction theory either. But at least we can admit to that. Can you?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Garth's Theory

Post by Garth on 05.06.11 11:20

Stella luvvy, you've had my thoughts regarding the Smith sighting.
 
You've had my thoughts regarding your quiz as to why the abductor was walking in a different direction.
 
You've had my thoughts regarding the shutters and the claim' they were jemmied'.
 
You've had my thoughts on the dogs.
 
What is it you're unsure of now?
 
 

Garth
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Garth's Theory

Post by Upsy Daisy on 05.06.11 11:24

Garth...why is it that you never quite get to the point of ANSWERING the question and challenge put to you. You are being asked to put forth your reasons for believing in the abduction theory and your evidence to back it up. You just keep answering the questions at hand with ..other questions..... and skirting the issue. Everyone I believe, so far, has been very forthcoming with giving their 'evidences' of what is available from the files, the LEGAL files. All you have come up with is more or less, 'Kate's book says so'. That's not evidence. That's her side of the story. She is giving out information that she refused to even discuss in a police interview, so therefore not being cross-examined or questioned about it. OF course, the McCann's will do anything in their power to protect themselves, however if there is absolutey any way whatsoever that there could have been an abduction and that small helpless child was in fact taken away, THE POLICE WOULD HAVE SAID SO !!

____________________
Grammatical Error of The Day : It's should 'have', NOT should 'of'......

Upsy Daisy

Posts : 437
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-04-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 7 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum