"Live Strong in Character - Don't Leave Your Family"



Bill Z. wrote:
>
> Because multiple genes may be involved? Or the genes encode the rates
> for various processes but the outcome is still somewhat nondeterministic?
> I'll leave the details to Kyle, but you don't have to assume a "genetic
> mistake" that arises via some mutation to explain that.
>

I don't get Kunich's posts because I have him killfiled, but to answer
the questions of an unsophisticate with an explanation that is
necessarily sophisticated is not a productive use of my time.
 
Kyle Legate <[email protected]> writes:

> Bill Z. wrote:
> > Because multiple genes may be involved? Or the genes encode the
> > rates
> > for various processes but the outcome is still somewhat nondeterministic?
> > I'll leave the details to Kyle, but you don't have to assume a "genetic
> > mistake" that arises via some mutation to explain that.
> >

> I don't get Kunich's posts because I have him killfiled, but to answer
> the questions of an unsophisticate with an explanation that is
> necessarily sophisticated is not a productive use of my time.


I don't blame you. He seems to be assuming that all birth defects
are genetic in nature.



--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
"Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> "Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> >
>> > I've ~ don't tell
>> > people whether to use a helmet or not, viewing it as a personal
>> > decision.

>>
>> Anyone who believes this raise their hand.

>
> What I actually posted was:
>
> I've actively opposed mandatory helmet laws, and don't tell
> people whether to use a helmet or not, viewing it as a
> personal decision.
>
> Why he felt compelled to snip it mid sentence is not clear.
>
> If our proven liar Tom Kunich wants to claim otherwise, perhaps he can
> deign to produce a message ID to back up his statement. Or perhaps he
> wants to pretend that writing to my elected representative and
> providing reasons not to pass a mandatory helmet law somehow does not
> qualify as opposing such legislation.


I didn't think that you were sophisticated enough to understand the Engish
language. And gee, I was right still again.
 
"Kyle Legate" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I don't get Kunich's posts because I have him killfiled,


But you seem to answer anyway. Anyone here surprised that Kyle answers posts
he doesn't get? I for one can think of many things that Kyle doesn't get but
we won't get into that.
 
"Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> I don't blame you. He seems to be assuming that all birth defects
> are genetic in nature.


The fact that SOME are caused by mutagens doesn't seem to ring a bell with
you or Kyle. But frankly I don't care. It's no surprise that you think that
helmets are effective with the scientific understanding you've expressed
here.
 
"Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:

> "Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:
> >
> >> "Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> news:[email protected]...
> >> >
> >> > I've ~ don't tell
> >> > people whether to use a helmet or not, viewing it as a personal
> >> > decision.
> >>
> >> Anyone who believes this raise their hand.

> >
> > What I actually posted was:
> >
> > I've actively opposed mandatory helmet laws, and don't tell
> > people whether to use a helmet or not, viewing it as a
> > personal decision.
> >
> > Why he felt compelled to snip it mid sentence is not clear.
> >
> > If our proven liar Tom Kunich wants to claim otherwise, perhaps he can
> > deign to produce a message ID to back up his statement. Or perhaps he
> > wants to pretend that writing to my elected representative and
> > providing reasons not to pass a mandatory helmet law somehow does not
> > qualify as opposing such legislation.

>
> I didn't think that you were sophisticated enough to understand the Engish
> language. And gee, I was right still again.


You snipped text midsentence for no good reason, turning a coherent
sentence into a nongramatical one. And of course Kunich is cannot
produce a message ID to back up his insinuations. What else is new?

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
"Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:

> "Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > I don't blame you. He seems to be assuming that all birth defects
> > are genetic in nature.

>
> The fact that SOME are caused by mutagens doesn't seem to ring a bell with
> you or Kyle. But frankly I don't care. It's no surprise that you think that
> helmets are effective with the scientific understanding you've expressed
> here.


You started to talk about genetics, and when it was shown that you
didn't know what you were talking about, you raised birth defects
as a counter example, and I pointed out that birth defects are not
necessarily caused by genes.

You have, however, illustrated the same sort of poor reasoning that
you use in your anti-helmet rants.


--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
Tom Kunich wrote:
> "Kyle Legate" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...


>> I don't get Kunich's posts because I have him killfiled,


> But you seem to answer anyway. Anyone here surprised that Kyle
> answers posts he doesn't get?


Did he answer your post? When's the last time he did directly answer one,
indicating non-plonkitude? Why did you bother to answer his non-answer?

Why am I asking these questions?

No idea... bs
 
Bill Sornson wrote:
> Why am I asking these questions?
>
> No idea... bs



I'll bite.......WHY?

Maggie

May you always have what you want, and if you can't have what you want,
may you always be happy with what you have.
 
Bill Sornson wrote:
> Tom Kunich wrote:
>
>>"Kyle Legate" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...

>
>
>>>I don't get Kunich's posts because I have him killfiled,

>
>
>>But you seem to answer anyway. Anyone here surprised that Kyle
>>answers posts he doesn't get?

>
>
> Did he answer your post? When's the last time he did directly answer one,
> indicating non-plonkitude? Why did you bother to answer his non-answer?
>
> Why am I asking these questions?
>

I guess you're asking these questions so that I can see Kunich's idiotic
reply to my last post. As usual, he's too stupid to realize that
although most of usenet has him killfiled, they still see his drivel
when it is quoted in replies from people who haven't gotten around to
plonking him yet.
 

Similar threads

B
Replies
13
Views
428
Road Cycling
Alex Rodriguez
A