"no evidence of an intruder" vs science and same scientific standards

Wed May 01, 2019



websleuth forumsforjustice reddit are all echo chambers that are variations of

"no evidence of an intruder"


this is a test.

you'll hear RDI posters on various forums claim "no evidence of an intruder" you can't show any evidence of an intruder, there's no evidence of an intruder, some variation of this claim.



this is a test,

this is an autopsy photo of JonBenet Ramsey



under neath 1 finger nail, is an unknown male DNA profile.

is this evidence of an intruder.

well according to RDI

"no evidence of an intruder"

you can't prove an intruder left that DNA there, it could come from anywhere, therefore

so a DNA profile from under Jonbenet's finger nail is no evidence of an intruder



this is a test,

RDI claims that an unknown male DNA profile under victim's fingernail is not evidence of an intruder, it's not sourced so it is not evidence an intruder committed this crime

that finger actually belonged to

Jessie Blodgett, 19, was killed July 15,  2013  was a student at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.  



another picture of her hand



found strangled in her own bed while her parents were away from the home, though they were considered suspects, the DNA profile under her fingernail didn't match them, and ruled them out.

that DNA profile found actually did match her killer who was a home invading home intruder.

so what is a scientific objective reason that this DNA profile under Jessie Blodgett, 19 fingernail is evidence of an intruder and was proven as such and led to a conviction,

but unknown male DNA profile under Jonbenet's fingernail which eliminated the family is

"no evidence of an intruder"

RDI failed the test.

when presented with comparable evidence in other crime scenes involving shoe prints, DNA handwriting, linguistics fiber and other trace evidence, evidence of an intruder,

RDI fails.

RDI are scientifically incompetent.

you've been redpilled.