Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 3,5 (click to see context) from:
** That's not bearing false witness.
* Why would the Israelite soldiers fear Ruffles enough to flee without a second thought? Sure, she does not resemble any dog breeds that would have been found in the area at the time, and thus presumably not initially recognisable as a dog, but shouldn't the barking give it away? Not to mention her being much smaller than the soldiers, who could easily shoo her off.
** Yorkshire Terriers such as Ruffles are ''very'' divergent from the "typical" canine physiology. Dogs in the area at the time would have had somewhat of a 'wild' physiology (see the Canaan Dog, or feral street dogs from around the world for comparison). To the soldiers, she was an animal unlike any they had ever seen. Even though she barks like a dog, she looks different enough from a dog that her sight overrides any "typical behavior around dogs" response that the soldiers should express. Having no real frame of reference, the soldiers could have ascribed additional ferocious qualities to Ruffles (small animals that produce innocuous noises can be deadly too), and fled accordingly.
* Why would the Israelite soldiers fear Ruffles enough to flee without a second thought? Sure, she does not resemble any dog breeds that would have been found in the area at the time, and thus presumably not initially recognisable as a dog, but shouldn't the barking give it away? Not to mention her being much smaller than the soldiers, who could easily shoo her off.
** Yorkshire Terriers such as Ruffles are ''very'' divergent from the "typical" canine physiology. Dogs in the area at the time would have had somewhat of a 'wild' physiology (see the Canaan Dog, or feral street dogs from around the world for comparison). To the soldiers, she was an animal unlike any they had ever seen. Even though she barks like a dog, she looks different enough from a dog that her sight overrides any "typical behavior around dogs" response that the soldiers should express. Having no real frame of reference, the soldiers could have ascribed additional ferocious qualities to Ruffles (small animals that produce innocuous noises can be deadly too), and fled accordingly.
to:
** That's not bearing false witness.
* Why would the Israelite soldiers fear Ruffles enough to flee without a second thought? Sure, she does not resemble any dog breeds that would have been found in the area at the time, and thus presumably not initially recognisable as a dog, but shouldn't the barking give it away? Not to mention her being much smaller than the soldiers, who could easily shoo her off.
** Yorkshire Terriers such as Ruffles are ''very'' divergent from the "typical" canine physiology. Dogs in the area at the time would have had somewhat of a 'wild' physiology (see the Canaan Dog, or feral street dogs from around the world for comparison). To the soldiers, she was an animal unlike any they had ever seen. Even though she barks like a dog, she looks different enough from a dog that her sight overrides any "typical behavior around dogs" response that the soldiers should express. Having no real frame of reference, the soldiers could have ascribed additional ferocious qualities to Ruffles (small animals that produce innocuous noises can be deadly too), and fled accordingly.witness.
* Why would the Israelite soldiers fear Ruffles enough to flee without a second thought? Sure, she does not resemble any dog breeds that would have been found in the area at the time, and thus presumably not initially recognisable as a dog, but shouldn't the barking give it away? Not to mention her being much smaller than the soldiers, who could easily shoo her off.
** Yorkshire Terriers such as Ruffles are ''very'' divergent from the "typical" canine physiology. Dogs in the area at the time would have had somewhat of a 'wild' physiology (see the Canaan Dog, or feral street dogs from around the world for comparison). To the soldiers, she was an animal unlike any they had ever seen. Even though she barks like a dog, she looks different enough from a dog that her sight overrides any "typical behavior around dogs" response that the soldiers should express. Having no real frame of reference, the soldiers could have ascribed additional ferocious qualities to Ruffles (small animals that produce innocuous noises can be deadly too), and fled accordingly.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 5 (click to see context) from:
** Yorkshire Terriers such as Ruffles are ''very'' divergent from the "typical" canine physiology. Dogs in the area at the time would have had somewhat of a 'wild' physiology (see the Canaan Dog, or feral street dogs from around the world for comparison). To the soldiers, she was an animal unlike any they had ever seen. Even though she barks like a dog, she looks different enough from a dog that her sight overrides any "typical behavior around dogs" response that the soldiers should express. Having no real frame of reference, the soldiers could have ascribed additional ferocious qualities to Ruffles (small animals can be deadly too), and fled accordingly.
to:
** Yorkshire Terriers such as Ruffles are ''very'' divergent from the "typical" canine physiology. Dogs in the area at the time would have had somewhat of a 'wild' physiology (see the Canaan Dog, or feral street dogs from around the world for comparison). To the soldiers, she was an animal unlike any they had ever seen. Even though she barks like a dog, she looks different enough from a dog that her sight overrides any "typical behavior around dogs" response that the soldiers should express. Having no real frame of reference, the soldiers could have ascribed additional ferocious qualities to Ruffles (small animals that produce innocuous noises can be deadly too), and fled accordingly.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 5 (click to see context) from:
* Yorkshire Terriers such as Ruffles are ''very'' divergent from the "typical" canine physiology. Dogs in the area at the time would have had somewhat of a 'wild' physiology (see the Canaan Dog, or feral street dogs from around the world for comparison). To the soldiers, she was an animal unlike any they had ever seen. Even though she barks like a dog, she looks different enough from a dog that her sight overrides any "typical behavior around dogs" response that the soldiers should express. Having no real frame of reference, the soldiers could have ascribed additional ferocious qualities to Ruffles, and fled accordingly.
to:
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 3 (click to see context) from:
** That's not bearing false witness.
to:
** That's not bearing false witness.witness.
* Why would the Israelite soldiers fear Ruffles enough to flee without a second thought? Sure, she does not resemble any dog breeds that would have been found in the area at the time, and thus presumably not initially recognisable as a dog, but shouldn't the barking give it away? Not to mention her being much smaller than the soldiers, who could easily shoo her off.
* Yorkshire Terriers such as Ruffles are ''very'' divergent from the "typical" canine physiology. Dogs in the area at the time would have had somewhat of a 'wild' physiology (see the Canaan Dog, or feral street dogs from around the world for comparison). To the soldiers, she was an animal unlike any they had ever seen. Even though she barks like a dog, she looks different enough from a dog that her sight overrides any "typical behavior around dogs" response that the soldiers should express. Having no real frame of reference, the soldiers could have ascribed additional ferocious qualities to Ruffles, and fled accordingly.
* Why would the Israelite soldiers fear Ruffles enough to flee without a second thought? Sure, she does not resemble any dog breeds that would have been found in the area at the time, and thus presumably not initially recognisable as a dog, but shouldn't the barking give it away? Not to mention her being much smaller than the soldiers, who could easily shoo her off.
* Yorkshire Terriers such as Ruffles are ''very'' divergent from the "typical" canine physiology. Dogs in the area at the time would have had somewhat of a 'wild' physiology (see the Canaan Dog, or feral street dogs from around the world for comparison). To the soldiers, she was an animal unlike any they had ever seen. Even though she barks like a dog, she looks different enough from a dog that her sight overrides any "typical behavior around dogs" response that the soldiers should express. Having no real frame of reference, the soldiers could have ascribed additional ferocious qualities to Ruffles, and fled accordingly.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 2 (click to see context) from:
* In a meta example, with the CGI version being such an InNameOnly rendition of the classic 1981 anime series that completely disregards its Japanese origins[[note]]Regardless of whether or not it's a ReligiousEdutainment series.[[/note]], wouldn't that make the creation of this entire series a violation of the ninth Commandment ("You will not bear false witness against your neighbor.")? After all, the CGI show is essentially pretending as though the original anime series doesn't even exist.
to:
* In a meta example, with the CGI version being such an InNameOnly rendition of the classic 1981 anime series that completely disregards its Japanese origins[[note]]Regardless of whether or not it's a ReligiousEdutainment series.[[/note]], wouldn't that make the creation of this entire series a violation of the ninth Commandment ("You will not bear false witness against your neighbor.")? After all, the CGI show is essentially pretending as though the original anime series doesn't even exist.exist.
** That's not bearing false witness.
** That's not bearing false witness.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
!! FridgeLogic
* In a meta example, with the CGI version being such an InNameOnly rendition of the classic 1981 anime series that completely disregards its Japanese origins[[note]]Regardless of whether or not it's a ReligiousEdutainment series.[[/note]], wouldn't that make the creation of this entire series a violation of the ninth Commandment ("You will not bear false witness against your neighbor.")? After all, the CGI show is essentially pretending as though the original anime series doesn't even exist.
* In a meta example, with the CGI version being such an InNameOnly rendition of the classic 1981 anime series that completely disregards its Japanese origins[[note]]Regardless of whether or not it's a ReligiousEdutainment series.[[/note]], wouldn't that make the creation of this entire series a violation of the ninth Commandment ("You will not bear false witness against your neighbor.")? After all, the CGI show is essentially pretending as though the original anime series doesn't even exist.
