Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

by **Jill Havern** 26.06.15 8:24

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by HKP 26.06.15 8:35

@Bluebag; this does not prove the McCann. html was not in existence on 30/04

by Guest 26.06.15 9:10

HKP wrote:@Bluebag; this does not prove the McCann. html was not in existence on 30/04

It proves that WBM was in error.

Or do you disagree?

by HKP 26.06.15 9:41

@Bluebag. It possibly proves there was some sort of error on that particular page. It does not prove there was some sort of error on the McCann. html page. Do you agree?

by Guest 26.06.15 10:00

HKP wrote:@Bluebag. It possibly proves there was some sort of error on that particular page. It does not prove there was some sort of error on the McCann. html page. Do you agree?

Oh.. hang on...

People were saying the WBM never makes mistakes... legal... business.... blah.. blah..

So now you must know it does - unless you like calling black white.

So we have one anachronistic page that is a 100% error... but you want to say that the other directly related anachronistic page is not an error...

Whatever.

by **PeterMac** 26.06.15 10:21

Is it not very odd that an error occurs uniquely and only and exclusively and sui generis on a page associated with the McCanns ?
Or do we now accept that in our Universe this is what happens.

by sallypelt 26.06.15 10:37

PeterMac wrote:Is it not very odd that an error occurs uniquely and only and exclusively and sui generis on a page associated with the McCanns ?
Or do we now accept that in our Universe this is what happens.

PM, how cynical of you titter

Of course it's a coincidence that the dogs, who are more accurate than a calculator, gave "false readings" in the McCann's apartment and the underground parking site in PdL
The inconsistencies in the ummm, uhh, you know, we uhh, statements are figments of our imagination.
Gerry having his "wallet stolen" but he can't quite remember where. Here is a quote from the provided link:

"Gerry McCann admitted having credit cards, saying they went missing after his wallet was stolen. He gave two different places where his wallet was stolen: Waterloo Station - or ‘near Downing Street’."

I won't list the other "concidences" as they have been debated over and over and ovzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzz

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Doug D 26.06.15 10:49

Sorry BB, but it proves nothing.

It shows a WBM capture page of 30^th April 2007 with a couple of news items dated October 2007 that have been retrieved into the page.

Clearly this cannot be ‘correct’ as such, but without getting inside WBM’s computer, I don’t think we will ever know quite how it has created this ‘retrieved’ page, although people have come up with various suggestions, using bits of coding that have been accessed.

Nobody has yet come up with a robust and convincing argument or explanation either way as to why and how this has happened, whether it is a ‘glitch’ in the capturing system, the retrieval system, or just ‘how WBM does it’.

The responses seen from WBM themselves do not make sense.

The arguments that a seemingly ‘orphan’ page cannot be captured have been shown to be incorrect, although quite how and when the following page was captured we just do not know for certain:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

What we do know about this is that WBM archived this with a date stamp of 30^th April 2007 at 11.58.03 and has now tried to wriggle out of this with unconvincing excuses and nonsensical explanations.

Your opinion that the first page is an error and therefore the second page, time stamped the same is therefore also an error is fine and may well end up to be the accepted case, but at this moment in time is far from the ‘fact’ that you keep espousing.

‘Stevo’ does not seem to have given up on it, although suggests that we will never get to the bottom of it.

It will be interesting to hear from him when he does get round to posting on here.

by Syn 26.06.15 10:49

More evidence of this simply being a wayback screwup. Non McCann related Press Release dated 18/06/07 in an April 30th 2007 archive.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] from here https://archive.is/www.ceop.gov.uk

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by HKP 26.06.15 11:32

Do we have a list of everything that is in the 30/04 11:58:03 index?

by Guest 26.06.15 12:24

PeterMac wrote:Is it not very odd that an error occurs uniquely and only and exclusively and sui generis on a page associated with the McCanns ?
Or do we now accept that in our Universe this is what happens.

We have no idea of the scale of the problem.

You can't say "only".

Steve Marsden spotted this one because he was looking at CEOP web pages and noticed the anomaly.

by Guest 26.06.15 12:27

Doug D wrote:‘Stevo’ does not seem to have given up on it, although suggests that we will never get to the bottom of it.

It will be interesting to hear from him when he does get round to posting on here.

Steve said it was "probably a mistake" in about his third post in the Facebook thread.

And this DOES prove the WBM was in error even though people were insisting WBM couldn't possibly make errors.

How hard is it for people to admit even that?

But it's a provable fact not an opinion.

by HKP 26.06.15 14:05

@bluebag. So you're now backing up your claim with Stevo's "probably a mistake" statement. Didn't you claim to probably be the most experienced IT person on this forum, only to be corrected. Probables are not definitive enough, Carlesberg probably make exceedingly good cakes, or is that Mr Kipling?

by Guest 26.06.15 14:21

HKP wrote:@bluebag. So you're now backing up your claim with Stevo's "probably a mistake" statement. Didn't you claim to probably be the most experienced IT person on this forum, only to be corrected. Probables are not definitive enough, Carlesberg probably make exceedingly good cakes, or is that Mr Kipling?

???

No.

How desperate are you?

If anyone here has more than 34 years writing software and dealing with computer problems on a daily basis for a full time living on this forum I tip my hat to them.

by HKP 26.06.15 14:32

@bluebag. There's certainly someone desperate on this thread and it's not me. Please tip your hat to macdonut who called you out at 9.58 am yesterday.

Anyways anything more to add than it's a fact and Stevo probably thinks the same?

by Guest 26.06.15 14:42

HKP wrote:@bluebag. There's certainly someone desperate on this thread and it's not me. Please tip your hat to macdonut who called you out at 9.58 am yesterday.

Anyways anything more to add than it's a fact and Stevo probably thinks the same?

Which thread was that?

This will be interesting.

Yes and I'm afraid you saying I was using Steve Marsdens "It's probably a mistake" as some kind of proof is you clutching at straws.

The facts speak for themselves on their own.

I was just pointing you at the Facebook tread which I think most people haven't bothered to read.

by Mike 26.06.15 14:44

BlueBag wrote:
HKP wrote:@bluebag. There's certainly someone desperate on this thread and it's not me. Please tip your hat to macdonut who called you out at 9.58 am yesterday.

Anyways anything more to add than it's a fact and Stevo probably thinks the same?
Which thread was that?

This will be interesting.

Yes and I'm afraid you saying I was using Steve Marsdens "It's probably a mistake" as some kind of proof is you clutching at straws.

The facts speak for themselves on their own.

I was just pointing you at the Facebook tread which I think most people haven't bothered to read.

macdonut wrote:
BlueBag wrote:Wow... I think we have our own Madeleine "no planes".

I've contained myself for a few days but enough is enough, I can't let this ride.

It is a FACT the WBM was in error over an October 2007 page appearing under April 30th 2007.

Don't ask me ask Steve Marsden.

FACT.

F.. A.. C.. T...

Check his Facebook thread.

F.. A.. C.. T...

WBM was IN ERROR.

No one can possibly argue that the WBM is not on error, it's was there for all to see from the horses mouth.

No one.

And that absolutely puts the other data with the same time stamp in doubt.

Absolutely without a shadow of a doubt.. it is doubtful data.. more.. it is almost certainly in error for the same reason.

If you want to carry on making this forum look irrational and illogical then carry on, someone somewhere will use it against us I'm sure.

Any BS about comparing "apples" and "oranges" is just that.

This is apples and apples off the same 20070430 115803 tree.

I feel really strongly about this because I am probably the most experienced IT person on this forum.

Anyone been programming and working as an IT consultant since 1981?

I am a java programming expert (among many other branches of IT expertise) and I don't say that lightly.

As it happens, you're NOT the most experienced IT person on this forum. However, I'm not sure what the relevance of that is.

I do agree with you that this is almost certainly a mistake in the archiving on the Wayback Machine. My experience and the fact that there are a number of anomolies (like October news on a May Archive) shows that it's not infallible.

However, this is far too important a point, with wide reaching consequences, to just let drop because it looks like an error. I fully support TB and others as they push the point with the web archive and we need to get an explanation for why this happened that's acceptable to all.

I would only say though that, in my opinion, this WILL turn out to be an error and we should just be careful about jumping to any conclusions or stating anything as fact until we do know what happened.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Guest 26.06.15 14:48

I tip my hat to macdonut if he has been at it longer than 34 years (they were dark days in a galaxy far away).

But hey.... look!!!!

macdonut agrees with me (in the main) based on his experience.

Which I knew anyway because macdonut said the same on page 2 of the original thread.

by HKP 26.06.15 14:50

@bluebag. You made the claim on the original thread which was then countered as stated. I'm not the one using capital letters to write facts and just pointing to Stevo's page. Have a look for his "I've been using Wayback for years" statement. Your constant mantra of 'it's a fact' with little substance is boring, I'm ducking out until some interesting info. is posted.

by Guest 26.06.15 14:52

HKP wrote:@bluebag. You made the claim on the original thread which was then countered as stated. I'm not the one using capital letters to write facts and just pointing to Stevo's page. Have a look for his "I've been using Wayback for years" statement. Your constant mantra of 'it's a fact' with little substance is boring, I'm ducking out until some interesting info. is posted.

The claim that I am probably the most experienced it person on the forum?

That's some claim I made.

Score one to you.. maybe... oh wait...

And it is a fact the WBM was in error.

Look at the screen shot in the first post of this thread.

Cheers.

by Guest 26.06.15 14:54

Get'emGonçalo wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

The wayback machine was screwed for this page.

This is a fact.

by Guest 26.06.15 14:55

HKP wrote:@bluebag. You made the claim on the original thread which was then countered as stated. I'm not the one using capital letters to write facts and just pointing to Stevo's page. Have a look for his "I've been using Wayback for years" statement. Your constant mantra of 'it's a fact' with little substance is boring, I'm ducking out until some interesting info. is posted.

Do you agree with macdonut that "this WILL turn out to be an error"?

by NickE 26.06.15 15:16

BlueBag wrote:
HKP wrote:@Bluebag; this does not prove the McCann. html was not in existence on 30/04
It proves that WBM was in error.

Or do you disagree?

Error or not, don´t we have the answer in this file, "$Usnjrnl" on their server?

by HKP 26.06.15 15:25

@bluebag. I don't know if this WILL turn out to be an error, I don't work for Archive.org, you should maybe have a look at the way that the Wayback recreates the pages it displays, there's plenty there to discuss.

@NickE. Can you expand on that please.

by HKP 26.06.15 15:33

@bluebag. You never answered my question; do you agree that the McCann.html could have been in existence 30/04 despite the question mark over the main Ceop page?

by Skyrocket1 26.06.15 16:02

NickE

The answer is probably there - but what's the chances archive.org will open it up for scrutiny to the general populace?

BlueBag

Don't want to get in the middle of yours and HKP's mano a mano but I thought you were an expert?

by Guest 26.06.15 16:06

HKP wrote:@bluebag. You never answered my question; do you agree that the McCann.html could have been in existence 30/04 despite the question mark over the main Ceop page?

With the related evidence alongside it of the October page I would day no, my experience tells me that the WBM machine had an error that affected all the pages time stamped 20070430 115803.

The alternative is that a process running on or after 23rd October decided to put the October page in an already existing folder WITH THAT TIME STAMP and it ignored timestamps before and after. I don't see the program logic that would do that.

I also alongside all this I don't believe CEOP would have had a Find Madeleine poster made before 11:58:03 on April 30th 2007.

Madeleine was photographed by the pool in the afternoon of the day before.

For something to happened involving blood and cadaverine and then CEOP having a poster ready for 11:58:03 next day beggars belief.

Also the phone records do not support anything for those hours either.

The bigger picture just does not support the idea.

by NickE 26.06.15 16:10

HKP wrote:@bluebag. I don't know if this WILL turn out to be an error, I don't work for Archive.org, you should maybe have a look at the way that the Wayback recreates the pages it displays, there's plenty there to discuss.

@NickE. Can you expand on that please.

What is the $UsnJrnl File?

According to the book [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], the change journal “is a file that records when changes are made to files and directories”. The change journal is located at $Extend\$UsnJrnl and the actual journal entries are stored in the $UsnJrnl:$J alternate data stream. The book details the information contained in each entry:

     - Time of change
     - Reason for the change
     - File/directory’s name
     - File/directory’s attributes
     - File/directory’s MFT record number
     - File record number of the file’s parent directory
     - Security ID
     - Update Sequence Number of the record
     - Information about the source of the change

by Guest 26.06.15 16:12

Skyrocket1 wrote:BlueBag
Don't want to get in the middle of yours and HKP's mano a mano but I thought you were an expert?

I am 34 years experienced with the many and varied problems that computers generate on a whole host of computer applications - I wrote a lot of them myself.

I have also written a web page scraper in my time for three different applications (ahem.. One being the Racing Post and the other The Tote for a glorious horse racing system that didn't make me any money... the other was for information from banking web pages).

I do know what I'm talking about and I recognise the symptoms here.

"Computer filed something with wrong date problem".

by HKP 26.06.15 16:30

@NickE. Thanks, that would certainly add to the debate (no doubt start another one!)

@Bluebag. If thats your considered opinion then fine, mines is that there is no evidence that mccann.html was not in existence on or prior to 30/04 (it was only ‘found‘ by Wayback 30/04). The Ceop home page I have little interest in

Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

What is the $UsnJrnl File?

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

Latest topics