Now tell me again where it says that those genes are KNOWN to function in regulation of aggressive behaviour, because I read it as exactly the opposite.
Hope this helps,
FDC
Pitbull attack
- Thread starter The Joker
- Start date
Now tell me again where it says that those genes are KNOWN to function in regulation of aggressive behaviour, because I read it as exactly the opposite.
Hope this helps,
FDC
:facepalm:
your argument is like watching a replay of a guy clearly fumbling a ball. but standing in front of him is another player so you cant clearly see the ball come out.
its pretty obvious that its a fumble and almost everyone else agrees because it is so obvious, but you are that guy who is playing the "inconclusive" card and rolling with it.
you are biased because you like the breed. almost everyone who has posted in this thread has disagreed with you but of course, everyone else is wrong and fatdaddy is right as usual! seriously, almost every single person who has weighed in their opinion in this thread is of the opinion that aggression is in the genetics.
so lol, ok then, whatever you say. you have an opinion, and everyone else has theirs. your opinion isnt fact, youve done no scientific research and neither have I. I have posted countless things backing up my belief that aggression is in part due to genetics though. all of them are written by people far more qualified than you or myself.
I know you like to think you are Ceasar Milan or something, but the fact is you know absolutely nothing about the original story here in the thread. You jump to the immediate conclusion that hey it must have been the owners fault because omg I love pitbulls and mind wouldnt harm a fly! You are biased because you are fond of the breed. Nothing wrong with that but you arent an expert by any means.
if you some day decide to study the genetics in dogs and write about your findings and your evidence, I'll be more than happy to revisit your stance. until then though, I'm on the other side but good luck with your play.
Why you wouldn't read it anyway and you wouldn't know what the fuck you were reading either. None of the studies you posted backs up anything you said. Every single sentence speaks to exactly what I have been saying, but you're too fucking stubborn to admit it. Read the articles, and tell me where a single one doesn't classify aggression as a behaviour. Find me one. I don't care if people disagree with me, it doesn't mean I am wrong. What a ridiculous statement to make. It's science, not a democracy. Mine is not an opinion. What I stated is what is currently known to be true, as evidenced by the posts you made. Did you see the part about different types of aggression yet, or have you still not read it?
I never said anything about Cesar Millan, that was just your attempt at an insult because your argument has failed. You, my friend, will choose to remain ignorant because you want to remain that way. You don't want to like the breeds, so just don't like them. Who cares. But to act as if you have some knowledge on the subject, only to be called on it and then start calling names and being a dick because of it, is juvenile.
I know enough on the subject to read what the fuck I post before I post it, I know that. The proof that I am correct is in your cited posts. Sorry if your feelings are hurt.
Hope this helps,
FDC
Airportis,
Did you read the part of your post that I put in bold that specifically states what I am saying? Did you really not read that or even worse, just choose to ignore it? Let me help.
Although the UBE2V2 and ZNF227 genes have no known function in regulation of aggressive behaviour,
Can you understand what they are saying? Do you see where they refer to aggression as behaviour as well?
Are you starting to understand how to read this yet?
Did you read the part of your post that I put in bold that specifically states what I am saying? Did you really not read that or even worse, just choose to ignore it? Let me help.
Although the UBE2V2 and ZNF227 genes have no known function in regulation of aggressive behaviour,
Can you understand what they are saying? Do you see where they refer to aggression as behaviour as well?
Are you starting to understand how to read this yet?
Riiiiiiiiiight. So the article you posted in your defense specifically states you are 100% wrong, and I am the one not listening. It wouldn't surprise me if you really did have your hands in your ears and your eyes closed.
Hope this helps,
FDC
But it's just one big coincidence, really.
What the fuck does this have to do with anything? It's not even cited as to where it comes from and there are a helluva lot more than four categories of Pit Bulls as reported for attacks.
A boxer mix that has a big head will be classified as a Pit Bull at the shelter. A Catahoula mix will be reported as a pit.
Who gets more cavities saint, whites or blacks? You usually only complain about welfare mothers and their kids with their Jordans so it must just be a coincidence huh?
When you reference a study, be sure to reference where you got it from, okay?
Hope this helps,
FDC
I suppose if you can't argue the point at hand you resort to completely unrelated shit like the whites/blacks comment.
Dog Attack Deaths and Maimings, U.S. & Canada,
September 1982 to December 31, 2013
By compiling U.S. and Canadian press accounts between 1982 and 2013, Merritt Clifton, editor of Animal People, shows the breeds most responsible for serious injury and death.
Take a look, I think they ruled out any mixed breed.
Obviously it's a flawed study because it relies on press accounts only, and I'm sure in your brain the entire press has it "out for pitbulls", but you cannot deny the overwhelming numbers.
I'm also sorry you weren't hugged more as a child. It's quite obvious that you've got some personal issues based on your approach to disagreements here.
Another person trying to post something to prove their point that didn't even read it.
They included mixed breeds, hence the Pit mix and Wolf Hybrid categories listed on the document. Also, you're exactly right, these are attacks reported by the media. Nobody ever assured the breed of the dog when they took the story from whomever reported the attack. Press accounts are press accounts. They aren't always accurate. Not only that, we are talking about genetics right now, try to keep up.
Hope this helps,
FDC
Yes, the "Angry Poodle" line, while truly unfettered hilarity ensues each and every time I hear it, has already been suggested.
True Poodles are actually an anxious breed that are not particularly good around other dogs and children. Not the worst but not the best either. What I am trying to say is, I don't think they have much of a sense of humor.
Hope this helps,
FDC
