Advanced search  
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Musings on the nature of evidence  (Read 20423 times)

Tim Collins

  • T4
  • ****
  • Posts: 316
Re: Musings on the nature of evidence
« Reply #15 on: June 12, 2013, 10:22:41 AM »

Funny it only works one way, Clue lead's to Evidence, But Evidence don't require a Clue

But evidence can be a clue. I would suggest a clue is something (perhaps even intangible) that must be pursued and evidence is something (necessarily quantifiable?) to be examined. In the end they are two different things that together can lead to a conclusion.
Logged

Don Dollinger

  • T3
  • ***
  • Posts: 239
Re: Musings on the nature of evidence
« Reply #16 on: June 18, 2013, 12:16:06 PM »

Quote
But evidence can be a clue. I would suggest a clue is something (perhaps even intangible) that must be pursued and evidence is something (necessarily quantifiable?) to be examined. In the end they are two different things that together can lead to a conclusion.

Exactly!  There is a hit and run accident and there is a nearly whole busted turn signal lens on the ground.  This is evidence of where the accident happened and a clue as to the make and model of the car involved.  Find the car with a broken signal light with parts of the turn signal light still attached that matchs the lens you have evidence that it is the car involved and a clue as to the driver involved in the accident (registered owner, family member or friend that borrowed it on the date in question. etc), and on, and on, and on. 

LTM,

Don
Logged

Dave Potratz

  • T2
  • **
  • Posts: 75
Re: Musings on the nature of evidence
« Reply #17 on: June 19, 2013, 09:56:38 AM »

I'm thinking that: a Clue is to a Hypothesis as Evidence is to a Theory.

I.E. Clues are pursued in order to support ones Hypothesis. Evidence is pursued in order to develop or support ones Theory.

Not that they are equivalent, mind you.

That's my 2.5 cents*

dp

*inflation
Logged

Bill Lloyd

  • T3
  • ***
  • Posts: 105
Re: Musings on the nature of evidence
« Reply #18 on: June 26, 2013, 09:50:00 AM »


At the end of the day, it seems to me that Tim has a theory, no more - as does TIGHAR - and now like a church trying to split before a civil court, we go to see who has the stronger faith in the eyes of the law.  It does not seem like a tenable claim; the defense itself appears to be, to me - a non-professional, of course - that the complaint is based on no more than a different theory and has no hard evidence of its own that I can see to back the claim.


Good assessment. That would be the argument in a Rule12b motion to dismiss.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
 

Copyright 2024 by TIGHAR, a non-profit foundation. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be reproduced by xerographic, photographic, digital or any other means for any purpose. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be stored in a retrieval system, copied, transmitted or transferred in any form or by any means, whether electronic, mechanical, digital, photographic, magnetic or otherwise, for any purpose without the express, written permission of TIGHAR. All rights reserved.

Contact us at: info@tighar.org • Phone: 610-467-1937 • Membership formwebmaster@tighar.org

Powered by MySQL SMF 2.0.18 | SMF © 2021, Simple Machines Powered by PHP