I think it was cofty . . .
Think about it this way. Could an Israelite bring blood to the altar that he had collected from his herd without [killing] any beasts, or was it necessary for the animal to be killed before the blood had any sacrificial value?
An Israelite couldn't bring any dead animal to God's altar to be sacrificed, since what sacrifice is it when the thing to be killed is already dead? In fact, he could, but if the Israelite ever brought a lame, blind or sick animal to God's altar, he would certainly be called upon his doing so (Malachi 1:8), so where did you get the idea that a dead animal or its blood would have sacrificial value of any kind?
DJeggnog . . . perhaps you were still giddy from the realisation that you are so superior in intellect to everyone here . . . but if you read the above question again, you will see that you missed the point entirely . . . and failed to answer the question.
Unfortunately for you, embodied in this question is the identification of the basic flaw in the doctrines you espouse . . . thus deserving your open-minded and thoughtful consideration
Owing to the high level of intellect and thinking ability you possess . . . I will leave you to work it out for yourself. If you have a folder named "humility" in that high performance hard drive of yours . . . then I encourage you to open it soon.
As for me . . . I will pray earnestly for the speedy arrival of your "eureka" moment.
Luvonyall