Let_Forever_Be,
As Borat might remark: Niice Yees.
Occams Razor should suggest that you are on the wrong path, you are multiplying objects beyond necessity so to justify your theory.
I can explain the asphyxiation without invoking an EA Device. Mr Ockham's principle of parsimony suggests you should start with a minimal theory and move forward from there.
Not really.
Event 1: Asphyxiation
Event 2: Genital Trauma
There is no causal relationship between these two events, both occur independently from each other. So the only correlation is the one that fits with your theory.
The EA theory is less probable because in the first place you do not have an EA Device, and secondly because all the other events can be explained using simpler ideas.
That is applying Occam's Razor and some common sense the EA theory is highly improbable, not impossible, otherwise it would not be a runner.
.
Thanks for the occoms razor references. I'm not sure if you were trying to make a point or to bolster some sense of 'intelligenista' by referencing good ol' occoms razor. But I digress.
I did ask you how a head blow relates to genital molestation better than than an EA device does since you said the EA device is less probable. It's simply absurd imo to say that a head-wound is more probable as the first cause of death and precedes the neck-trauma when it's an objective fact that JonBenet died and was molested before she died. She was also found with a garrotte on her neck and the coroner did state that the neck-trauma was
a cause of death. He was unable to say if it came before the head-blow however.
So, how eactly is the EA device less probable?
The bare facts
1.JonBenet died
2. She suffered chronic and acute sexual molestation
3.She had 8 1/2 skull fracture
4. Brain had MILD swelling
5.Only 7ccs of blood recovered from brain (1 1/2 teaspoons).
6.She was found with garrotte on her neck.
7.She had petechial hemorrhages
So,apply your beloved occoms theory then:
A head-blow was inflicted onto JonBenet by unknown person for unknown reason with unknown motive. This blow, powerful enough to cause an 8 1/2 inch fracture, mysteriously caused little brain swelling and little blood. The garrotte found around her neck, although visible to those of us with eyesight (sorry Stevie Wonder) was not actually a garrotte. It was staging. But to cause the petechial hemorrhages JonBenet must have been strangled. And strangled quickly after she was hit on head so as to kill her BEFORE her brain swelled. Oh, and all that somehow relates to the objective fact that she was molested just before she died.
Yep, I don't think you are applying occoms theory are scientifically as you profess UKGuy.
Here's occoms theory applied to my theory (thank you Mr Wecht):
A sex-game was being performed. It went wrong. Rope on her neck caused vagal reflex which caused heart to stop. Once heart stopped, blood flow in body significantly reduced. Perpetrator, who was also molesting her as is recorded as an objective fact, tried to resuscitate her. It failed. They hit her head after the neack-trauma to simulate intruder attack and to try to deflect from their own perversion performed on the girl. The garrotte caused the petechial hemorrhages. And the fact the vagal reflex happened before the head injury explains the little brain swelling and the lack of blood. The motive is already established -- a sex-game gone wrong. The genital molestation testifies to this. So to does the EA device.
Your theory requires mental leaps. We don't have a motive for hitting her head. We have to explain why, in this case, that the brain displayed such uncommon brain swelling and blood volume.Then, to explain the petechial hemorrhages, we have to infer some other thing was used to strangle her, and that the garrote, actually present on her body, was just staging.
I think Wecht's theory satisfies mr Occom's theory better than yours does.And I'll certainly be discounting your claim the garrotte was not an EA device.