• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

George Zimmerman

Junebug said:
If, as GZ claims, TM attacked him, was beating his head against the sidewalk, saw his gun and, while reaching for it announced "you're going to die tonight," then yes, he did deserve to die, at least under the law of self defense. If TM was high on lean, or was a regular user, that fact makes the above scenario more likely.
Click to expand...

Just like so many black kids drink lean, so Trayvon must have. Maybe he was looking for white women too. After all if we let black people live in white neighborhoods that's what they will do.
 
Junebug said:
Holy non-sequitur Batman. I don't even know what you are talking about. In any event, if you understand it so well, how about do us all a favor and publish your cure. We're all on pins and needles.
Click to expand...

What I was talking about was how Moon said you playing loose with the facts went to the credibility of your argument. I felt the need to point out I had not considered that, mainly because none of your arguments start off with any credibility and then I provided the final straw that broke the proverbial camel's back.

Now onto the more asinine portion of your post. Understanding the etiology of a disease/infection does not mean one can or has readily identified a cure. Things like TB, Malaria, HIV, etc. are examples of diseases in which we have a pretty good understanding for how the condition is contracted/developed just not so much luck on finding a cure yet. Cancer is the same. Make no mistake, I think everybody claiming to have a Biology degree should understand how cancer develops because to not understand it means you do not understand how a cell functions. Knowing how a cell functions is sort of a requisite for studying how a cell functions, which is of course a major part of studying life. In any case, I will use the simplest possible terms to describe the development of cancer so as to not confuse you. Over the course of time, a combination of genetic mutations (often inherited and acquired) result in a cell which becomes hyperproliferative and generally unresponsive to normal signaling mechanisms meant to limit growth especially after genetic mutations. Pathways hit can include cell cycle regulation genes, proteins involved in DNA damage recognition/repair, and genes involved in apoptosis. The result is a cell, or a cluster of cells in the case of a tumor, which have lost their ability to have their proliferation regulated by the normal signals which govern homeostatic functioning. That, sir, is how cancer develops. The details and genes hit vary depending on the actual type of cancer but that is the general pattern. Needless to say, the general mechanisms by which cancer develops are known. The trick comes in finding ways to manipulate these pathways without causing more harm to the non-cancerous tissue of the host. You will recall, cancer cells arise from our own cells so it can prove difficult to target tumors for a myriad of reasons.
 
BigTreeDeac said:
What I was talking about was how Moon said you playing loose with the facts went to the credibility of your argument. I felt the need to point out I had not considered that, mainly because none of your arguments start off with any credibility and then I provided the final straw that broke the proverbial camel's back.

Now onto the more asinine portion of your post. Understanding the etiology of a disease/infection does not mean one can or has readily identified a cure. Things like TB, Malaria, HIV, etc. are examples of diseases in which we have a pretty good understanding for how the condition is contracted/developed just not so much luck on finding a cure yet. Cancer is the same. Make no mistake, I think everybody claiming to have a Biology degree should understand how cancer develops because to not understand it means you do not understand how a cell functions. Knowing how a cell functions is sort of a requisite for studying how a cell functions, which is of course a major part of studying life. In any case, I will use the simplest possible terms to describe the development of cancer so as to not confuse you. Over the course of time, a combination of genetic mutations (often inherited and acquired) result in a cell which becomes hyperproliferative and generally unresponsive to normal signaling mechanisms meant to limit growth especially after genetic mutations. Pathways hit can include cell cycle regulation genes, proteins involved in DNA damage recognition/repair, and genes involved in apoptosis. The result is a cell, or a cluster of cells in the case of a tumor, which have lost their ability to have their proliferation regulated by the normal signals which govern homeostatic functioning. That, sir, is how cancer develops. The details and genes hit vary depending on the actual type of cancer but that is the general pattern. Needless to say, the general mechanisms by which cancer develops are known. The trick comes in finding ways to manipulate these pathways without causing more harm to the non-cancerous tissue of the host. You will recall, cancer cells arise from our own cells so it can prove difficult to target tumors for a myriad of reasons.
Click to expand...

Stated more simply, too, though that was a tremendous overview, the "cure for cancer" is quite a misnomer given the umbrella terminology for cancer. Though we have a very good understanding of cancer, and oncogenetics are paving the way towards more pharmaceutical treatments, there will never be such a thing as an overarching cure.

From a person who has even the remotest understanding of general biology, the post was truly asinine.
 
RJKarl said:
Just like so many black kids drink lean, so Trayvon must have. Maybe he was looking for white women too. After all if we let black people live in white neighborhoods that's what they will do.
Click to expand...

DeaconCav06 said:
Dammit RJ. We were this close to passing the motion.
Click to expand...

I forgive him if for no other reason than he broke out the "Where're the white women?" imagery.

Blazing-Saddles-7.6.10.jpg
 
RJKarl said:
Just like so many black kids drink lean, so Trayvon must have. Maybe he was looking for white women too. After all if we let black people live in white neighborhoods that's what they will do.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because that's obviously the sum total of the argument--he was a black kid;ergo, he must be drinking lean.

:rolleyes:
 
TownieDeac said:
Stated more simply, too, though that was a tremendous overview, the "cure for cancer" is quite a misnomer given the umbrella terminology for cancer. Though we have a very good understanding of cancer, and oncogenetics are paving the way towards more pharmaceutical treatments, there will never be such a thing as an overarching cure.

From a person who has even the remotest understanding of general biology, the post was truly asinine.
Click to expand...

Also, highly relevant on a thread about George Zimmerman.
 
Junebug said:
Also, highly relevant on a thread about George Zimmerman.
Click to expand...

Aren't you the one arguing that TM's past behavior justifies making assumptions about his behavior that night?

I'd say your inability to tell the truth in the past influences the validity of how people view your current arguments in the same way.

Thus by your standards, it's relevant.
 
ONW said:
Aren't you the one arguing that TM's past behavior justifies making assumptions about his behavior that night?

I'd say your inability to tell the truth in the past influences the validity of how people view your current arguments in the same way.

Thus by your standards, it's relevant.
Click to expand...

WTF are you even talking about "inability to tell the truth"?
 
You've never even entertained the possibility that GZ was lying about Trayvon starting the fight.

Of, GZ would never lie in your mind. All he did was lie to the entire nation on Hannity. He rehearsed his lies and then told them with a straight face. But that wouldn't come into your thought pattern.
 
RJKarl said:
You've never even entertained the possibility that GZ was lying about Trayvon starting the fight.

Of, GZ would never lie in your mind. All he did was lie to the entire nation on Hannity. He rehearsed his lies and then told them with a straight face. But that wouldn't come into your thought pattern.
Click to expand...

Sure I've entertained it. But the evidence--particularly the next-day video of GZ and his "thank god" response when police tried to trick him by (falsely) telling him the event was recorded--convinced me otherwise.
 
Junebug said:
Sure I've entertained it. But the evidence--particularly the next-day video of GZ and his "thank god" response when police tried to trick him by (falsely) telling him the event was recorded--convinced me otherwise.
Click to expand...

The only "evidence" was that was losing the fight. There's no proof that he didn't start it. It's more logical that he put his hands on Trayvon first.

You've also never blamed GZ for anything. Trayvon would be alive if GZ followed the rules. This is indisputable.
 
From my limited grasp of the facts, I think the jury made the right call.

Doesn't mean GZ acted rightly or justifiably in the grand scheme of things. We have an imperfect legal system. Pretty sure there will never be a perfect one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top