Barnfish wrote:
Leaving no stone unturned does not mean going to the nth degree to satisfy the whim of every crackpot, amateur, internet sleuth. I would be inclined to ignore clairvoyants and Miss Marples sleuths and concentrate on proper investigation.
But this guy is not an internet sleuth, this is where you're altering perspectives Barnfish.
I'm not proposing any internet 'Miss Marple' investigations, I'm proposing that the McCanns should look for their 'missing daughter' when someone has discovered a possibility with some 'inconclusive evidence'.
I mean If I came out and said 'I think I know where she is' I'd expect them to listen/look at my evidence and not dismiss it.
So it's got nothing to do with 'internet sleuths' or other accusations that you make when you are faced with a bit of information that is not comfortable to deal with.
Look at it without being judgemental of the folk that are pointing it out.
A toddler goes missing.
A person say's he's scanned a recently dug/laid driveway in the area and he think's she's there.
The parents dismiss this and are not interested in looking.
I point out this behaviour by the parents, other posters also, and instead of coming out with a reasonable answer you decide to start using terms such as 'internet sleuth' 'Miss Marple' etc....
Because there is no reason for them not to look, unless of course
1) They know she's there.
2) They know she's not there.
Either way they must know where she is then?
Otherwise they'd go look at what this man has discovered and at least check it out themselves.