I'm a Science Lord, a practitioner of the Daubert side of the Forensics intruder theory

View previous topic View next topic Go down

I'm a Science Lord, a practitioner of the Daubert side of the Forensics intruder theory

Post by redpill on Wed Oct 11, 2017 11:02 am

i'm writing this on Wed Oct 11, 2017

of the literally tens of thousands of posters on Unsolved Murder of JonBenet Ramsey on various forums ffj ws topix reddit

i'm the only one to suggest there is only one way to decide between inside job, one of the Ramsey's, or an intruder

that one way is *drums rolls*

science.

yes science. textbook science. the science that is taught at high school and universities. science as in isaac newton f=ma and einstein e=mc2

that science. or in this case, forensic science. science as it is applied to crime scenes.

scientific reasoning, scientific methodology, scientific knowledge, as it applies to Unsolved Murder of JonBenet Ramsey

since i use science, i call myself a Science Lord,

science as is applied to crimes and murders such as the jonbenet is called forensics

when it comes to forensics  i use real genuine textbook science, the kind that is

standard university forensic taught and actual genuine scientific research and scientific

thinking and reasoning to arrive that an intruder is the best scientific explanation for

the forensic evidence found in the Jonbenet crime scene.

forensics includes expert witness testimony

there is a way to evaluate what a scientific expert witness is, and that is the daubert standard

The Daubert standard provides a rule of evidence regarding the admissibility of expert witnesses' testimony

   The Court defined "scientific methodology" as the process of formulating hypotheses and then conducting experiments to prove or falsify the hypothesis, and provided a set of illustrative factors (i.e., not a "test") in determining whether these criteria are met:

       Whether the theory or technique employed by the expert is generally accepted in the scientific community;
       Whether it has been subjected to peer review and publication;
       Whether it can be and has been tested;
       Whether the known or potential rate of error is acceptable; and
       Whether the research was conducted independent of the particular litigation or dependent on an intention to provide the proposed testimony.[4]

this is of course far beyond the comprehension of any RDI.

the daubert standard in forensics is what i call the Daubert side of the Forensics

I'm a Science Lord, a practitioner of the Daubert side of the Forensics

daubert side of the forensics is a pathway to many intruder truths the RDI would consider to be unnatural.

when it comes to daubert, standard textbook science textbooks on handwriting





not stuff rdi posters make up to show patsy wrote the ransom note, but using scientific expert witness testimony.

rdi make stuff up or use fringe experts. science lord, a practitioner of the daubert side of the forensics knows who is actually qualified under daubert to comment on whether patsy handwriting is a match to the ransom note

rdi don't bc they are ignorants

rdi also claim well there is a lot of ransom speak in patsy and john statements that mirror ransom note like the word hence so it's a linguistics match

science lord, a practitioner of the daubert side of the forensics




uses real scientific textbooks

daubert also applies to using scientific textbooks relevant in the matter to evaluate DNA and fiber and shoe print



when you read rdi posters claiming the dna doesn't prove anything, its clear they have zero scientific background in forensic crime scene reconstruction.

there are plenty of other crimes that were solved with dna found on clothing or in cars and vehicles. and this dna should also be understood in context of the hi-tech shoe print, multiple unsourced fibers hair tape ligature, and the expert witness testimony on the ransom note, those that qualifiy under Daubert standard.

daubert side of the forensics leads to intruder theorists

that is, using scientific textbook science on the forenic evidence found on the Jonbenet crime scene leads to only 1 scientific conclusion

the best scientific explanation as to what happened to Jonbenet is that she was murdered by an intruder.
a strictly scientific explanation of the crime scene forensic evidence and expert witness testimony leads to the conclusion that Jonbenet was murdered by an intruder.

What a Face  What a Face  What a Face

as a science lord i am a master of  daubert side of the forensics

as a sleuth lord, i propose this intruder could be Mr. Cruel, or OCCK, under the scenario of a complete stranger intruder unknown to the Ramseys, in a pedophile sexually motivated attack.

_________________
If you only knew the POWER of the Daubert side
avatar
redpill

Posts : 1728
Join date : 2012-12-08

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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