Re: Dumbledore may be an idiot -



Sirius Kase wrote:
On Jan 25, 1:09 am, drusilla <gammanormids*eraseth...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Here in Minnesota escribió:

Jean Lamb wrote:
-snip-*

I see 2 problems with judgment of DD here.

1. I don't see where Harry was malnourished. It's possible to be
quite fat and malnourished and quite skinny and not be
malnourished. I remember reading where Harry was denied ice cream
and candy but I missed the part where he was denied vegetables
and such. {I also assume there was more chance of lead paint in
Dudley's bedroom and Duds would be more likely to eat it].
--He was shorter and smaller than he should have been.
-snip-

How do we know how tall and big he *should* have been?Because there
is some average sizes and weights children are supposed to
have at certain age? Of course, genetics are also involved, but in
Harry's case, we know James was tall.

We don't know how tall James was before 5th year. It was the summer
before 5th year that Harry had his growth spurt. When Harry sees
James in Snape's pensieve they appear to be about the same height.

My 2 brothers always ate more than me as kids... you might guess than I'm
the shortest... I ended up the tallest.

My best friend I grew up with in Chicago was about the same height as me.
When he visited me in Minnesota about a couple years later I was a few
inches taller. When I saw him in Chicago years later he was quite a bit
taller than me.

I could give other examples and you could say... "you can't prove anything
by individual cases"... which is true... including that Harry was
malnourished because he was shorter than his dad [which we don't even know
if he was by Harry's 5th year].

You might want to give it up. Yes; Harry didn't get to eat everything and
all he may have wanted, but there is no evident that he was malnourished.


.