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 start chatting with us!

Enjoy your day,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by PeterMac on 30.11.13 11:21

If the child is alive you carry it like this



If, sadly it is not, then this is more usual

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by Hongkong Phooey on 30.11.13 11:32

So Chreche man dead child, Smithman live child? A bit of a red herring if you ask me i.e. no Chrecheman and look like live child Smithman (if true)

Hongkong Phooey

Posts : 310
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-10-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by suzyjohnson on 30.11.13 11:59

But what if the man was running?

____________________


suzyjohnson

Posts : 1004
Reputation : 132
Join date : 2013-03-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by Guest on 30.11.13 12:13

Or what if you wanted to make it look like the dead child you were carrying was alive?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by PeterMac on 30.11.13 12:42

Dee Coy wrote:Or what if you wanted to make it look like the dead child you were carrying was alive?
Or you wanted to make the story you were telling fit the story you thought you had been given by someone else . . .

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by Hongkong Phooey on 30.11.13 12:57

@PeterMac wrote:
Dee Coy wrote:Or what if you wanted to make it look like the dead child you were carrying was alive?
Or you wanted to make the story you were telling fit the story you thought you had been given by someone else . . .
Tannerman may have been based on the way Jane herself carried............ whoops! I mean the way the abductor carried her (JT radio interview)

Hongkong Phooey

Posts : 310
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-10-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Aoife Smith researches the way people carry infants

Post by Tony Bennett on 30.11.13 12:59

Martin Smith's daughter Aiofe Smith has done some valuable research on this topic:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://www.independent.ie/regionals/droghedaindependent/news/young-louth-scientists-put-projects-on-show-at-rds-27129916.html

http://www.independent.ie/regionals/droghedaindependent/news/experimenting-with-success-27130264.html 
  
Aoife Smith, Ruth McGuinness and Lisa Barry, in a project entitled 'Is There A Science Behind Baby-Holding?' explain their reasons for choosing this topic: 'We want to find out why some people hold babies and young children on the left side of their bodies and others hold the child on the right.'

Greenhills students Aoife Smith, Ruth McGuinness and Lisa Barry took second place in the Junior Group Social and Behavioural Sciences Section for their project, 'Is There a Science Behind Baby-holding?'

Aoife Smith, who was part of the winning team behind the baby holding project, said the group came up with the idea after reading an article entitled ' The Art and Science of Baby Holding'.

During the course of their investigations, which were carried out of a five month period, the girls interviewed and tested 672 people.

They carried out four experiments which investigated brain dominance, arm strength, whether people are left or right handed and whether the way people fold their arms determines which side they hold a baby on.

'It was very interesting and we found that most people's strongest arm was their left and the majority held babies in their left arm,' explained Aoife.

' We also discovered that when women fold their arms the arm that was on top was the one the used to hold the baby but with men the arm on the bottom was the one that they used.'

 

 

____________________

                            "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 -  "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13975
Reputation : 2148
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by deafoldbat on 30.11.13 14:01

Well I never, Tony - good research work! thumbsup

deafoldbat

Posts : 85
Reputation : 13
Join date : 2013-05-19
Location : Kent, UK

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by Guest on 30.11.13 14:03

Interesting, Tony. Aoife undertook that research over a year after her father's memory was apparently triggered by the way GM carried the twin from the plane. I wonder if the research was to satisfy herself that there could be unique indicators that may differentiate one carrier from another? Her summary of the results refers to generic findings. Wonder if she discovered additional nuances? 

Or not?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by Guest on 30.11.13 14:14

@PeterMac wrote:
Dee Coy wrote:Or what if you wanted to make it look like the dead child you were carrying was alive?
Or you wanted to make the story you were telling fit the story you thought you had been given by someone else . . .
Sorry, Peter, could you elaborate a bit for the dense of thinking like me? Who in your scenario is doing the 'telling of the story'? The MCs, Tanner, or the Smiths? And who had offered the story that was being fitted?

Are you of the same train of thought as Tony re the Smiths? Are the Smiths a massive red herring that could further cloud the detection of the whereabouts of Madeleine that night?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by SixMillionQuid on 30.11.13 15:27

Dee Coy wrote:
@PeterMac wrote:
Dee Coy wrote:Or what if you wanted to make it look like the dead child you were carrying was alive?
Or you wanted to make the story you were telling fit the story you thought you had been given by someone else . . .
Sorry, Peter, could you elaborate a bit for the dense of thinking like me? Who in your scenario is doing the 'telling of the story'? The MCs, Tanner, or the Smiths? And who had offered the story that was being fitted?

Are you of the same train of thought as Tony re the Smiths? Are the Smiths a massive red herring that could further cloud the detection of the whereabouts of Madeleine that night?
I've always sensed that in the early days that they anticipated her being found but not alive. They probably thought the pyjamas would be found with the tea stain on it.

SixMillionQuid

Posts : 436
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2013-10-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by Tony Bennett on 30.11.13 15:33

Dee Coy wrote:Interesting, Tony. Aoife undertook that research over a year after her father's memory was apparently triggered by the way GM carried the twin from the plane. I wonder if the research was to satisfy herself that there could be unique indicators that may differentiate one carrier from another? Her summary of the results refers to generic findings. Wonder if she discovered additional nuances? 

Or not?
In fact, this research was done by another member of the forum and was passed to me for comment.

The person who passed this to me observed:

"Maybe the subject was playing on her mind".

I think that was a perceptive and accurate observation

____________________

                            "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 -  "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13975
Reputation : 2148
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by Genbug on 30.11.13 15:45

I always carried my babies on my left. Apparently it's a natural instinct so that they can feel your heartbeat.

Genbug

Posts : 186
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-12-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by Tony Bennett on 30.11.13 15:54

@Genbug wrote:I always carried my babies on my left. Apparently it's a natural instinct so that they can feel your heartbeat.
I've done it myself many times.

I am right-handed.

As I susepct you are.

And most other people.

It is easier for a right-handed person to carry an infant on their left shoulder.

As most of us are right-handed, there was absolutely nothing about the way Smithman was supposed to be carrying his child that could make anyone think: 'That must be Gerry McCann'.

Especially as the Smiths say they didn't see his face, and it was dark and the street lighting was poor - and they only saw him for a second or two.

If there ever was a 'Smithman'

____________________

                            "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 -  "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13975
Reputation : 2148
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by TheTruthWillOut on 30.11.13 17:03

Weirdly I have always held kids on my right side even though I'm mostly right handed. I believe it is called cross dominance.

Compared to other family members (all right handed) I do a lot of things 'wrong'. Open a bottle of milk with my left hand, put my wallet in my left rear pocket and have the fork in my right hand and knife in left!

It is very interesting that this teenage girl has done a school study on this though.

TheTruthWillOut

Posts : 733
Reputation : 16
Join date : 2011-09-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by Guest on 30.11.13 17:19

I agree that the subject must've been preying on her mind. So therefore, surely the sighting was genuine? You wouldn't research extensively a subject if the event it was related to was made up, would you?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by Guest on 30.11.13 17:26

Yes, I think that the research could be based on a real event.

I do accept though that there are problems with the reliability of the Smith sighting.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by Guest on 30.11.13 17:49

For what it's worth: I am right-handed and always carry children [and dogs] on my right arm against my right shoulder, keeping them with my left arm from making unexpected movements and falling backwards.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by Tony Bennett on 30.11.13 18:01

Dee Coy wrote:I agree that the subject must've been preying on her mind. So therefore, surely the sighting was genuine? You wouldn't research extensively a subject if the event it was related to was made up, would you?
IMO it would be much more likely to prey on her mind if she'd lied about it.

Conscience

____________________

                            "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 -  "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13975
Reputation : 2148
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by Veritas on 30.11.13 18:40

If you lied you would naturallyleave your word as the final authority. No lawyers or police were threatening dawn raids for a sighting that was creative. The inform ation was always spontaneously volunteered. Far more likely would be the question in mind of just how distinctive the walk, carry or posture of GMC was... Could anything help make the identification more than 80% sure? Especially if someone has been round badgering your dad with the argument that everyone carries babies in the same way, minimising the distinctiveness. We research to vindicate or affirm ourselves. We don't waste time researching projects just to make a redundant lie... What? What did the lie gain? Did anyone go back to the police to add the research to the statements? Under pressure, far easier to say 'i' m just not sure' than keep trying to lie when you don't need to. 

Trying to see grand conspiracy in everything is just as erroneous, wicked and detractive as ignoring or covering up the genuine evidence of conspiracy. 

I've yet to see anyone credible explain why the Smith sighting is impossible and why a conspiracy is remotely plausible.

Veritas

Posts : 87
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by Guest on 30.11.13 19:15

@Veritas wrote: If you lied you would naturallyleave your word as the final authority. No lawyers or police were threatening dawn raids for a sighting that was creative. The inform ation was always spontaneously volunteered. Far more likely would be the question in mind of just how distinctive the walk, carry or posture of GMC was... Could anything help make the identification more than 80% sure? Especially if someone has been round badgering your dad with the argument that everyone carries babies in the same way, minimising the distinctiveness. We research to vindicate or affirm ourselves. We don't waste time researching projects just to make a redundant lie... What? What did the lie gain? Did anyone go back to the police to add the research to the statements? Under pressure, far easier to say 'i' m just not sure' than keep trying to lie when you don't need to. 

Trying to see grand conspiracy in everything is just as erroneous, wicked and detractive as ignoring or covering up the genuine evidence of conspiracy. 

I've yet to see anyone credible explain why the Smith sighting is impossible and why a conspiracy is remotely plausible.
Pardon?  What are you trying to say?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by MRNOODLES on 30.11.13 21:59



The reason why you carry babies in this position is simple.  Babies have built in altimeters in their heads, and when their heads get too low down. They bawl their guts out.

MRNOODLES

Posts : 637
Reputation : 200
Join date : 2013-07-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by Veritas on 30.11.13 23:34

Gollum wrote:
@Veritas wrote: If you lied you would naturallyleave your word as the final authority. No lawyers or police were threatening dawn raids for a sighting that was creative. The inform ation was always spontaneously volunteered. Far more likely would be the question in mind of just how distinctive the walk, carry or posture of GMC was... Could anything help make the identification more than 80% sure? Especially if someone has been round badgering your dad with the argument that everyone carries babies in the same way, minimising the distinctiveness. We research to vindicate or affirm ourselves. We don't waste time researching projects just to make a redundant lie... What? What did the lie gain? Did anyone go back to the police to add the research to the statements? Under pressure, far easier to say 'i' m just not sure' than keep trying to lie when you don't need to. 

Trying to see grand conspiracy in everything is just as erroneous, wicked and detractive as ignoring or covering up the genuine evidence of conspiracy. 

I've yet to see anyone credible explain why the Smith sighting is impossible and why a conspiracy is remotely plausible.
Pardon?  What are you trying to say?
I'm saying that this thread has gone down the garden path of weaving a new dimension to a very frustrating but almost certainly much less complex real world case in which certain fantasists with over-active imaginations force perfectly reasonable and plausible testimonies into the realm of impossibility and then paint the multiple witnesses all sorts of shades of complicit, organised and conspiratorial. Right now we're discussing how a teenaged girl used a collaborative school project to reinforce a collossal lie as part of arguably the biggest case in the UK in the last decade. We're about three steps away from involving Sean and Amelie as co-conspirators on that fateful night and declaring that any inquisitiveness they might manifest about what happened to their sister is actually the Freudian voice of their own guilt leaking out like a backed up sewer. 

I fully understand the immense frustration of seeing the cold hard facts point in the right direction but lack the missing dot connections to close the case. Patience is the answer to that. Time reveals all kinds of things. Firing off in random impulsive directions to fill in non-existent blanks or even shoot down evidence that might support our existing conclusions because you've started to see co-conspirators round every corner is not helpful. Its what gets people sued, its what gets the campaigns for truth and justice laughed at and marginalised, its what gets all of us tarred with the same brush of sheer instability. 

I said before that I came here because somehow I associated this forum with the support for and faith in the rational and methodical approach and findings of GA's PJ team. At times I feel like I've fallen down a rabbit hole and found myself inside a movie: 'Being David Icke' or 'Shrimpton's List.'

Veritas

Posts : 87
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by Guest on 01.12.13 0:20

@Veritas wrote:
Gollum wrote:
@Veritas wrote: If you lied you would naturallyleave your word as the final authority. No lawyers or police were threatening dawn raids for a sighting that was creative. The inform ation was always spontaneously volunteered. Far more likely would be the question in mind of just how distinctive the walk, carry or posture of GMC was... Could anything help make the identification more than 80% sure? Especially if someone has been round badgering your dad with the argument that everyone carries babies in the same way, minimising the distinctiveness. We research to vindicate or affirm ourselves. We don't waste time researching projects just to make a redundant lie... What? What did the lie gain? Did anyone go back to the police to add the research to the statements? Under pressure, far easier to say 'i' m just not sure' than keep trying to lie when you don't need to. 

Trying to see grand conspiracy in everything is just as erroneous, wicked and detractive as ignoring or covering up the genuine evidence of conspiracy. 

I've yet to see anyone credible explain why the Smith sighting is impossible and why a conspiracy is remotely plausible.
Pardon?  What are you trying to say?
I'm saying that this thread has gone down the garden path of weaving a new dimension to a very frustrating but almost certainly much less complex real world case in which certain fantasists with over-active imaginations force perfectly reasonable and plausible testimonies into the realm of impossibility and then paint the multiple witnesses all sorts of shades of complicit, organised and conspiratorial. Right now we're discussing how a teenaged girl used a collaborative school project to reinforce a collossal lie as part of arguably the biggest case in the UK in the last decade. We're about three steps away from involving Sean and Amelie as co-conspirators on that fateful night and declaring that any inquisitiveness they might manifest about what happened to their sister is actually the Freudian voice of their own guilt leaking out like a backed up sewer. 

I fully understand the immense frustration of seeing the cold hard facts point in the right direction but lack the missing dot connections to close the case. Patience is the answer to that. Time reveals all kinds of things. Firing off in random impulsive directions to fill in non-existent blanks or even shoot down evidence that might support our existing conclusions because you've started to see co-conspirators round every corner is not helpful. Its what gets people sued, its what gets the campaigns for truth and justice laughed at and marginalised, its what gets all of us tarred with the same brush of sheer instability. 

I said before that I came here because somehow I associated this forum with the support for and faith in the rational and methodical approach and findings of GA's PJ team. At times I feel like I've fallen down a rabbit hole and found myself inside a movie: 'Being David Icke' or 'Shrimpton's List.'
Is that supposed to be a rational explanation to a simple question?  I incidentally, haven not started to see any conspirators let alone co-conspirators but that aside who has been sued as a result of offering an opinion or laughed at for the same reason?  I think you've become a bit carried away with your own ego.

I do not know for sure if the Smith sighting is for real or not but I am open to alternative views on any area of this case as I do not consider myself to be an authority, perhaps you should adopt the same principle.  If you know something about this case that is not generally known then say so rather than telling others their views are worthless.  Your rant to me suggests you have been over indulging in the amber nectar, come back when you are sober or if I'm wrong, more rational.

I apologise to the mods and admin if I've over stepped the mark but I object strongly to people who think they know better than every one else.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: How to carry a child - (shamelessly nicked from unterdenteppich)

Post by tigger on 01.12.13 7:57

@PeterMac wrote:If the child is alive you carry it like this



If, sadly it is not, then this is more usual
Exactly, which is why I think that JT transposed something she'd seen (possibly recently) to an imagined event. 

I would always leave my dominant arm free and btw I believe G carried a live child that evening, not Maddie. 

Imo the creation of eggman took place during the writing of the timelines   -  the description of eggman however?   When exactly was that created and with whose help? e.g. Those beige trousers etc. close enough to he Smithman's outfit so that should they describe him, he'd obviously also be eggman, despite the time gap, which Gerry desperately tried to close by getting JW to agree to a later time of their meeting.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 24
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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