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

by HKP 02.07.15 23:36

@Rustyyjames.
The last post was supposed to say the 'Wayback calendar' doesn't show

by Nuala 02.07.15 23:37

@ Siobhan

suddenly the accurate secret files are no longer accurate

interesting

Yes indeed.

by HKP 02.07.15 23:53

@Rustyjames
Over on the other forum Seahorse has found another site with the same timestamp try:-

w w w. codexgeo. co. uk

Acknowledgment to Seahorse.

by Nuala 03.07.15 0:18

Quoting Dr Roberts:

A 'capture' just the wrong side of 10.00 p.m. on the night of 3 May would be enough to convince me.

Indeed so. That's been obvious all along. When people are desperate for their version of events to be the version of events, regardless of the evidence to the contrary, they lose credibility.

Anyone admitting they would believe a 'capture' just the wrong side of 10pm 3rd May 2007 in order to back up their own theories isn't interested in the truth, just validation.

by **Tony Bennett** 03.07.15 0:51

Nuala wrote:Quoting Dr Roberts:

A 'capture' just the wrong side of 10.00 p.m. on the night of 3 May would be enough to convince me.

Indeed so. That's been obvious all along. When people are desperate for their version of events to be the version of events, regardless of the evidence to the contrary, they lose credibility.

Anyone admitting they would believe a 'capture' just the wrong side of 10pm 3rd May 2007 in order to back up their own theories isn't interested in the truth, just validation.

@ Nuala I think you make a perfectly valid point about the above statement by Dr Martin Roberts.

But to use the six words he uses: "would be enough to convince me" to extrapolate from those six words that Martin Roberts 'isn't interested in the truth' would IMO, based on my reading of nearly all of his articles, be quite untrue.

But perhaps you meant simply that he is not interested in the truth about the alleged 'capture'.

by HKP 03.07.15 9:03

After last nights revelation of a different data set being available I’ve had a look and can now see the differences. The link from Rustyjames takes you to an advanced search which is much more accurate. The general search that most had been using was the same as in the example of WBM’s faq’s which gave dates in whole days and the number of captures some of which are in a date range.

For example I’ll use the controversial mccann.html url

General search= range between 30/04/07 to 04/08/09  Captures = 11

Advanced search (timestamped) = 9 (for 2007 only the other 2 will be outwith that year)

20070430115803

20070513020901

20070520033832

20070522035225

20070613040605

20070706183353

20070708201551

20070713232146

20070824232043

Given that I had previously stated that there were 3015 urls from 30/04 and the advanced search has revealed 3786 I think I can explain that as well. There were 2495 unique (30/04) dates and 520 with a date range of 30/04 onwards and ‘x’ number of captures, duplicates etc. Now that we have the actual timestamped data it’s 3786 total.

Finally there was a question yesterday from  Siobahn about the validity of my stated data due to her not being able to find 10/05/07 in the data, the advanced search gives a total of 40 captures for that day, I had stated 36 and have to admit I was a lot closer than her!!!

by HKP 03.07.15 9:07

Apologies again for these font sizes!!!!!!!!

by HelenMeg 03.07.15 9:15

HKP wrote:Apologies again for these font sizes!!!!!!!!

@HKP Trying to understand the debate / discussion...but are you able to give a clue as to what you currently think based on findings so far... are you able to say whether you veer towards
the CEOP Mc Cann file being captured on the 30th April 2007 or that it was probably not...?

by Amy Dean 03.07.15 9:27

We are on page 56 now, Siobhan.

by Amy Dean 03.07.15 9:35

Apologies, I misread it.

by Nuala 03.07.15 10:26

Textusa has now posted a blog on this subject:

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

Without going in to the technicalities of this Wayback issue, she makes some excellent and very valid points as usual.

One of the most compelling is that had a top government agency been involved in the preplanned "disappearance" of MM there never would have been such an amateurish "abduction" scenario. If something happened to MM that was preplanned and involved CEOP, we never would have heard of Madeleine Beth McCann, her disappearance would have been quietly and efficiently "taken care of".

Also, everything about the "abduction" was clearly rushed: hastily scribbled timelines, shutters that weren't "jemmied", an apartment showing no sign of an intruder at all. All the hallmarks of a decision taken in haste and panic.

They are my words, not Textusa's, people can read her blog for themselves, just my quick take on some of what she's said smilie

by jeanmonroe 03.07.15 10:50

O/T.

@Nuala

Have YOU, Nuala, ever 'supported' the McCann's, at any 'time' since May 3rd 2007?

Did you 'donate' to Madeleine's Fund, LNSU.?

by Nuala 03.07.15 11:38

@ Jeanmonroe

Have YOU, Nuala, ever 'supported' the McCann's, at any 'time' since May 3rd 2007?

Nope.

Did you 'donate' to Madeleine's Fund, LNSU.?

Nope.

I have donated to GA's fund though smilie

by jeanmonroe 03.07.15 12:08

Nuala wrote:@ Jeanmonroe

Have YOU, Nuala, ever 'supported' the McCann's, at any 'time' since May 3rd 2007?

Nope.

Did you 'donate' to Madeleine's Fund, LNSU.?

Nope.

I have donated to GA's fund though

Hmmm.

6 comments to The Car Hired 5 Weeks After Madeleine’s Disappearance

Nuala
September 3rd, 2014 at 7:15 pm
"I would love to know who is protecting the McCann’s from on high and why? Even the British Prime Minister helped them not have to obey usual police investigation rules . Sinister. Would be great if a Wiki type leak occurred. The parents seem guilty as hell and I began as their supporter!"

So that's NOT you, the 'Nuala', who 'began as their (McCanns') supporter', that left that 'comment' then?

by Nuala 03.07.15 12:20

@ Jeanmonroe

So that's NOT you, the 'Nuala', who 'began as their (McCanns') supporter',

No, that's not me.

who left that 'comment' then?

No idea, and neither do I care.

by HKP 03.07.15 12:32

@Helenmeg.
I'm pretty sure that ceop was crawled on 30/04/07, it was also done on this date (30/04) in 2006 & 2008.

The data shows that mccann. html and madeleine 01 & 02 jpg were not repeated as the WBM went into overdrive, you will struggle to find any other URLs which weren't repeated I.e

Accessibility repeated 30 times
Reporting abuse repeated 29 times
Downloads repeated 41 times.

I has admin put up a screenshot of repeats a few pages back, this was using the general search so the actual numbers will be higher.

Interestingly there is one other jpg captured at that exact time and it doesn't repeat either its cheop awards.

by rustyjames 03.07.15 14:05

HKP wrote:@Rustyjames
Over on the other forum Seahorse has found another site with the same timestamp try:-

w w w. codexgeo. co. uk

Acknowledgment to Seahorse.

Hmmm 16033 hits on that site in that 11:58:03 second - very odd.

by Guest 03.07.15 14:56

jeanmonroe wrote:
Nuala wrote:@ Jeanmonroe

Have YOU, Nuala, ever 'supported' the McCann's, at any 'time' since May 3rd 2007?

Nope.

Did you 'donate' to Madeleine's Fund, LNSU.?

Nope.

I have donated to GA's fund though

Hmmm.

6 comments to The Car Hired 5 Weeks After Madeleine’s Disappearance

Nuala
September 3rd, 2014 at 7:15 pm
"I would love to know who is protecting the McCann’s from on high and why? Even the British Prime Minister helped them not have to obey usual police investigation rules . Sinister. Would be great if a Wiki type leak occurred. The parents seem guilty as hell and I began as their supporter!"

So that's NOT you, the 'Nuala', who 'began as their (McCanns') supporter', that left that 'comment' then?

jeanmonroe: where did you find the above? I've searched here but can't find it, elsewhere perhaps.

by HKP 03.07.15 16:11

@Rustyjames.
There seems to be some evidence that at that precise second (and no other)something happened but then was OK a second later, is this possible? You'd think somebody at WBM would've noticed this anomaly as it captures say a years worth in a second (doesn't mean to say that there is no true data in the capture). Alternatively if it's misdirected URLs again such a spike in volume (we don't know how many sites involved but we now have 2) should've been noticed.

by whodunit 03.07.15 17:21

Nuala wrote:Quoting Dr Roberts:

A 'capture' just the wrong side of 10.00 p.m. on the night of 3 May would be enough to convince me.

Indeed so. That's been obvious all along. When people are desperate for their version of events to be the version of events, regardless of the evidence to the contrary, they lose credibility.

Anyone admitting they would believe a 'capture' just the wrong side of 10pm 3rd May 2007 in order to back up their own theories isn't interested in the truth, just validation.

I think you have a very strange perspective on who has been discredited here and just who it is that is desperate to push their version of events regardless of evidence to the contrary.

by whodunit 03.07.15 18:01

CEOP homepage capture code May 14, 2007

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

by whodunit 03.07.15 18:08

CEOP homepage capture April 27, 2007

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

mccann.html capture dated May 13, 2007

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

by miss piggy 03.07.15 20:15

Post deleted

by rustyjames 03.07.15 20:33

HKP wrote:@Rustyjames.
There seems to be some evidence that at that precise second (and no other)something happened but then was OK a second later, is this possible? You'd think somebody at WBM would've noticed this anomaly as it captures say a years worth in a second (doesn't mean to say that there is no true data in the capture). Alternatively if it's misdirected URLs again such a spike in volume (we don't know how many sites involved but we now have 2) should've been noticed.

I don't believe that number of URLs were captured in a single second from a single site. To capture 3786 in 1 second then the average response time would be under 300 microseconds. To achieve that many you would have to have multiple servers with multiple threads all co-ordinated to go to ceop and the codexgeo site, (which has an even more extreme hit rate), at the same time. I'm certain WBM spreads the load, but I'm equally certain it doesn't work in such a co-ordinated fashion. I also highly doubt the ceop site, and even less so the codexgeo site, was sized to serve that many hits a second. There is then also the matter of the "captures" on that date containing references to news articles in the future.

I'm fairly sure it must be an indexing issue but I'm at a loss to explain what could have caused it, whether it is a fault, or maybe even a feature to place a "stake in the ground" at a point in time.

The CDX records provide a lot more detail, but they still don't show everything in the records. A key part of the index contain a link to the source .(w)arc file that contains the original data, and the offset in that file to locate the data, but the WBM API doesn't supply that information in the public API response. The content of those files I would believe a lot more trust in and I assume they must be written to sequentially.

by XXXXXXXX 03.07.15 20:58

The solution lies with the person who generated this subject i.e. Stevo.

Questions should be addressed to him and not WBM.

I believe Tony alluded to this a long time ago on the original thread.

by Syn 03.07.15 21:51

A challenge for all those who believe the CEOP captures for 20070430 are correct and that all this was part of some grand pre-meditated CEOP conspiracy...

Utilising all available tools via WBM, WBM Source Directory, good old Google and of course any other tools available to you, can you tell me what, if anything is wrong with the captures on this website please?:

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

I will respond tomorrow after those who decide to take on this challenge have responded :)

by Candy from MMM 03.07.15 22:01

Post deleted

by whodunit 03.07.15 22:16

@syn---"A challenge for all those who believe the CEOP captures for 20070430 are correct and that all this was part of some grand pre-meditated CEOP conspiracy..."

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

My argument now and has been that it appears as though CEOP was recruited into the abduction cover story, a cover story concocted to hide an unplanned 'disaster', the nature of which is suggested by the findings of the cadaver and blood dogs. the smell of bleach as reported by the GNR officer and the lack of Madeleine's dna in the apartment are both strong indicators that the apartment was so thoroughly cleaned it was actually OVER cleaned. This could not have happened on the DAY of much less the night of the abduction alarm. This 'early event' argument is not a new argument and it did not originate with me.

The prematurely launched mccann.html page at CEOP does not suggest 'grand..premeditation' but rather it strongly supports evidence which is already in the public domain, discussed here and elsewhere in great detail, that not only did something happen to Madeleine earlier in the holiday but indeed it appears that something out of the ordinary happened on or right before April 30. In other words this evidence did not appear in a vacuum, orphaned of context, no matter how many times you wave your hands and declare it so.

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

Now address the next/previous capture codes I provided up above.

by whodunit 03.07.15 22:31

Hey guests, instead of complaining about unnecessary off topic remarks, and thereby contributing to clogging up the thread with unnecessary off topic remarks, why don't you address the topic at hand? For instance, I've stated above what I think are the implications of a prematurely launched 'find Madeleine' page. What are your thoughts on that subject?

by Guest 03.07.15 22:46

Any mods around tonight?

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