superdave and cynic and cherokee are obstructing justice with cina wrong

Go down

superdave and cynic and cherokee are obstructing justice with cina wrong

Post by redpill on Sat Mar 21, 2015 8:32 pm

over at websleuths
Ransom note analysis

sd had complained to cs admin that i had been "stealing" his posts. whatever considering he cross posts both at cs and ws.

i c sd still promoting the debunked and discredited work of cina wong and gideon eptstein even though at cs i had explained to them there is zero scientific basis for their conclusions. i provided superdave in 2011 4 years ago forensic books that explain forensic handwriting, and as of 2015 he still has not studied them, but he continues to promote the debunked works of cina wong.

all i can say is that superdave and cynic are obstructing justice in their continual promotion of incorrect science.

cina wrong was never qualified. gideon epstein analysis is rejected on methodological grounds. sd is spouting total nonsense he does not understand. and its' not like i provided him resources, i did, and he refuses to study it.

the lynch mob of cynic superdave tricia griffith cherokee and at websleuths and have not taken the time to familarize themselves with the relevant forensics, even after i provided that for them, and they can only be described as an anti-science lynch mob.

the 6 handwriting experts including chet ubowski on patsy ramsey handwriting who studied the originals

9 point scale

1) Identification
2) Highly probable did write
3) Probably did write
4) Indications did write
5) No conclusion
6) Indications did not write
7) Probably did not write
Cool Highly probable did not write
9) Elimination

7 Point Scale:

1) Identification
2) Probably did write
3) Indications did write
4) No conclusion
5) Indications did not write
6) Probably did not write
7) Elimination

5 point scale

1) Identification
1.5 Highly probable did write
2) Probably did write
2.5) Indications did write
3) No conclusion
3.5) Indications did not write
4) Probably did not write
4.5) Highly probable did not write
5) Elimination

falls under probably did not write to highly probable did not write

which provides no scientific basis for concluding that patsy wrote the ransom note. there is absolutely no way gideon epstein, who only had to work on unknown generation copies, could provide 1- identification when the 6 who studied the originals concluded highly probable did not write.

If you only knew the POWER of the Daubert side

Posts : 2285
Join date : 2012-12-08

Back to top Go down

Back to top

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