I knew as soon as I left it out, someone would cry.
"Consistent" and "marginally consistent" are both ...wait for it ... subsets of "consistent".
So to say that serino said his injuries consistent with his story, is accurate.
That truly made me just laugh out loud a good one.
[qimg]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y221/who007/lol-1.gif[/qimg] [qimg]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y221/who007/lol-1.gif[/qimg] [qimg]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y221/who007/lol-1.gif[/qimg]
OK...out for now...thanks for the laugh. lololol
Laugh all you like, and use as many animated smilies as you like... doing so won't budge the truth of what TheL8Elvis said one inch.
The word "marginally" here is basically interchangeably with the word "somewhat" or perhaps "fairly" if someone says "yea his wounds are somewhat consistent with what he describes" or "yea his wounds are fairly consistent with what he describes" nobody would deny that the person is definitely implying that they, personally would have expected the wounds to be more dramatic... no doubt, Serino is saying that.
However, he's STILL saying that they are consistent with what George described.
To put it another way, when someone describes the events George describes, there's a range of wounds you'd expect them to come out of that with. Everyone here who is anti-GZ has planted their flag firmly in the upper end of that range because it enables them to scoff more, and dismiss GZ as a liar more, and mock what he had done to him that night by Trayvon.
But there is also a lower end of that same range of wounds you'd expect from what he describes. That appears to be where the wounds he did receive could accurately be placed. I wouldn't' say the absolute bottom of that range, but closer to it than the top, certainly. His wounds were in the lower end of the range you'd expect, from what he describes. BUT STILL WITHIN THAT RANGE. As the police detective, Serino, stated when he used the words "marginally consistent."
So again, laugh all you like, but TheL8Elvis is 100% correct when he says that Serino said the wounds were consistent with what GZ described.
I can have a friend come up to me and tell me about this nasty wipe out he had while he was riding his mountain bike, and then ask him to show me the wound, and if he shows me some elbow and knee scrapes which don't look THAT bad, I might think to myself or even say to him "I would've expected worse" without that entailing that I think he didn't experience the wipe out he describes. Because I understand, as anyone does, that something like a bike wipe out is a very fluid, hectic thing with physical objects in motion at high speed and it's very unpredictable. I could even believe that my friend was playing up what happened and how bad the wipe out was a bit for effect, or to impress upon me how great his peril was... without that implying that I think he's lying outright. I could still believe that what happened is roughly what he describes, but that maybe he put a little bit of dramatic flourish on how he describes it.
What's the alternative to what TheL8Elvis said, btw? He said "marginally consistent" still falls under the heading of "consistent" so the only alternative I know of is that it doesn't fall under it... is that what you're arguing? You basically MUST be arguing that to dismissively laugh at him.
In that case, what does "marginally" do to the word "consistent" if it doesn't do what we've said? Which is that it acts as a qualifier.
If you're saying it doesn't act as a qualifier, then you must be saying it acts to completely negate the word "consistent" ? If that's not what you're arguing, then tell me so. Because laughing it off, as you've done, seems to imply that pretty strongly. And if that is what you're implying, you really could not be more wrong. Maybe we should warm up some laughing smilies to direct at you?
