Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Polybius

310K a year -- not bad!

I stand corrected.

I guess we need another radiologist to regard your work. At least I didn't debate your conclusion (/wimp out)

But all the testimony I saw said that her brain was pretty much non-existent -- I would have to go back and look at the rest of the testimony and evidence to see when and where your brain shots were taken and why they came to a different conclusion.


116 posted on 07/04/2006 6:37:56 AM PDT by freedumb2003 (Let them die of thirst in the dark.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies ]


To: freedumb2003
310K a year -- not bad! I stand corrected. I guess we need another radiologist to regard your work. At least I didn't debate your conclusion (/wimp out) But all the testimony I saw said that her brain was pretty much non-existent -- I would have to go back and look at the rest of the testimony and evidence to see when and where your brain shots were taken and why they came to a different conclusion.

Remember, these are not "my brain shots" or "their brain shots". These were two specific CT slices picked out by the media, put side by side, and then released to the public as "evidence".

My point was not to make a conclusion about Schiavo one way or the other. Like everybody else in the general public, I know only what has been released to the media and then filtered and had a spin put on it by the media and therefore I do not know 99.9% of the facts. My opinion as far as the entire case is that I do not have enough information to arrive at a meaningful opinion.

Comparing two specific CT slices, however, is part of my medical specialty and I analyze literally thousands of CT slices every day I go to work.

So, my comments dealt solely with the deceit of comparing those two specific CT slices with each other since one is taken at a level where you normally see only a small amount of CSF and the other is taken at a level where you normally seen a great deal more CSF.

My point was that those two particular CT slices, that I have seen released by the press as "evidence", resort to trickery to exagerate a point.

It is analogous to setting up a camera with a 50 mm fixed lens on a tripod on the goal line of a football field, taking a photo of Willie standing at the 10 yard line and Joe standing at the 30 yard line and then using the measurements of the height of the bodies on the final print to say that Willie is much taller than Joe.

Willie could indeed be taller than Joe......by a lot.

The point, however, is that when someone resorts to image trickery to make one point, your B.S. meter starts to go off about everything else they claim to be true.

134 posted on 07/04/2006 9:59:09 AM PDT by Polybius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson