In context of this discussion, the definition I'm talking about are 'higher forms' of life, not the kind that makes a single celled organism 'alive' because it has DNA and can reproduce.
And its not an opinion if we are using my context, there are no 'higher functions' in a blob of cells at conception. That comes later. Far later. Now, where that is, i agree is opinion, and it is long before birth.
The debate is political, not scientific. Some medical opinions:
"Development of the embryo begins at Stage 1 when a sperm fertilizes an oocyte and together they form a zygote." [England, Marjorie A. Life Before Birth. 2nd ed. England: Mosby-Wolfe, 1996, p.31]
"Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception). "Fertilization is a sequence of events that begins with the contact of a sperm (spermatozoon) with a secondary oocyte (ovum) and ends with the fusion of their pronuclei (the haploid nuclei of the sperm and ovum) and the mingling of their chromosomes to form a new cell. This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being." [Moore, Keith L. Essentials of Human Embryology. Toronto: B.C. Decker Inc, 1988, p.2]
"Embryo: the developing organism from the time of fertilization until significant differentiation has occurred, when the organism becomes known as a fetus." [Cloning Human Beings. Report and Recommendations of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission. Rockville, MD: GPO, 1997, Appendix-2.]
"Embryo: An organism in the earliest stage of development; in a man, from the time of conception to the end of the second month in the uterus." [Dox, Ida G. et al. The Harper Collins Illustrated Medical Dictionary. New York: Harper Perennial, 1993, p. 146]
"Embryo: The early developing fertilized egg that is growing into another individual of the species. In man the term 'embryo' is usually restricted to the period of development from fertilization until the end of the eighth week of pregnancy." [Walters, William and Singer, Peter (eds.). Test-Tube Babies. Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1982, p. 160]
"The development of a human being begins with fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote." [Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology. 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975, p. 3]
"Embryo: The developing individual between the union of the germ cells and the completion of the organs which characterize its body when it becomes a separate organism.... At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun.... The term embryo covers the several stages of early development from conception to the ninth or tenth week of life." [Considine, Douglas (ed.). Van Nostrand's Scientific Encyclopedia. 5th edition. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1976, p. 943]
"I would say that among most scientists, the word 'embryo' includes the time from after fertilization..." [Dr. John Eppig, Senior Staff Scientist, Jackson Laboratory (Bar Harbor, Maine) and Member of the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel -- Panel Transcript, February 2, 1994, p. 31]
"The development of a human begins with fertilization, a process by which the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote." [Sadler, T.W. Langman's Medical Embryology. 7th edition. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins 1995, p. 3]
"The question came up of what is an embryo, when does an embryo exist, when does it occur. I think, as you know, that in development, life is a continuum.... But I think one of the useful definitions that has come out, especially from Germany, has been the stage at which these two nuclei [from sperm and egg] come together and the membranes between the two break down." [Jonathan Van Blerkom of University of Colorado, expert witness on human embryology before the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel -- Panel Transcript, February 2, 1994, p. 63]
"Zygote. This cell, formed by the union of an ovum and a sperm (Gr. zyg tos, yoked together), represents the beginning of a human being. The common expression 'fertilized ovum' refers to the zygote." [Moore, Keith L. and Persaud, T.V.N. Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects. 4th edition. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1993, p. 1]
"The chromosomes of the oocyte and sperm are...respectively enclosed within female and male pronuclei. These pronuclei fuse with each other to produce the single, diploid, 2N nucleus of the fertilized zygote. This moment of zygote formation may be taken as the beginning or zero time point of embryonic development." [Larsen, William J. Human Embryology. 2nd edition. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1997, p. 17]
"Although life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed.... The combination of 23 chromosomes present in each pronucleus results in 46 chromosomes in the zygote. Thus the diploid number is restored and the embryonic genome is formed. The embryo now exists as a genetic unity." [O'Rahilly, Ronan and M�ller, Fabiola. Human Embryology & Teratology. 2nd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1996, pp. 8, 29. This textbook lists "pre-embryo" among "discarded and replaced terms" in modern embryology, describing it as "ill-defined and inaccurate" (p. 12}]
"Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote)... The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual." [Carlson, Bruce M. Patten's Foundations of Embryology. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3]
"[A]nimal biologists use the term embryo to describe the single cell stage, the two-cell stage, and all subsequent stages up until a time when recognizable humanlike limbs and facial features begin to appear between six to eight weeks after fertilization.... "[A] number of specialists working in the field of human reproduction have suggested that we stop using the word embryo to describe the developing entity that exists for the first two weeks after fertilization. In its place, they proposed the term pre-embryo.... "I'll let you in on a secret. The term pre-embryo has been embraced wholeheartedly by IVF practitioners for reasons that are political, not scientific. The new term is used to provide the illusion that there is something profoundly different between what we nonmedical biologists still call a six-day-old embryo and what we and everyone else call a sixteen-day-old embryo. "The term pre-embryo is useful in the political arena -- where decisions are made about whether to allow early embryo (now called pre-embryo) experimentation -- as well as in the confines of a doctor's office, where it can be used to allay moral concerns that might be expressed by IVF patients. 'Don't worry,' a doctor might say, 'it's only pre-embryos that we're manipulating or freezing. They won't turn into real human embryos until after we've put them back into your body.'" [Silver, Lee M. Remaking Eden: Cloning and Beyond in a Brave New World. New York: Avon Books, 1997, p. 39]
[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 07-04-2014).]
To you perhaps. To me its simple biology. There is no baby at conception. Just a blob of dna. Nothing to 'kill'.
Now, 5 months later ( just a round number, i dont think it should be based on actual time since everything matures at differnet rates ) it is a baby. Just not day one.
To you perhaps. To me its simple biology. There is no baby at conception. Just a blob of dna. Nothing to 'kill'.
Now, 5 months later ( just a round number, i dont think it should be based on actual time since everything matures at differnet rates ) it is a baby. Just not day one.
Your view of biology differs from those schooled in medicine, yet you have a problem with others making what you consider a religious/non-scientific decision? Whatever.
FYI, this is what that "blob" looks like after only 10 weeks. Looks like more than a blob of DNA at that point.
Babies born just past 5 months (23 weeks) can survive, so they're "alive" long before then.
[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 07-04-2014).]
Your view of biology differs from those schooled in medicine, yet you have a problem with others making what you consider a religious/non-scientific decision? Whatever.
The ONLY thing that matters to me is what i think. That should have been made clear years ago around here
And 5 months was just a random number i puled out, to demonstrate that i did believe that at some point they are 'legit' life before normal birth of 9 months and that birth is not required before they are counted. Don't take that as some sort of magical 'line' drawn in the sand as that was not the intent.
( all i'm trying to say is that i disagree its at time of conception, its later )
[This message has been edited by User00013170 (edited 07-04-2014).]
FYI, this is what that "blob" looks like after only 10 weeks. Looks like more than a blob of DNA at that point.
Ever been to the science and industry museum in Chicago? They have a entire series of those. From the 'blob' to just before birth. ( or at least did ).. It used to be near the super sized heart you could walk thru.
I also had an IQ of just above 170 when i was 12. But the statement i made was that since then it has not changed due to a *discussion*, not that i have never changed my opinion at all. The qualifier is 'discussion'. ( i learned early on that most people are morons, and begun to discount what they had to say back then as useless sound waves )
Next question?
( i also learned not to trust people. But i wont go into that )
[This message has been edited by User00013170 (edited 07-05-2014).]
I just love when people try to use their supposed IQ number as justification. Like as if we should bow down to them and their great knowledge. IQ doesn't mean anything. It is just a test that measures potential. It is what you do with what you are given that counts. There are so many supposedly brilliant people who believe in foolishness like communism, socialism and anthropogenic global warming.
I just love when people try to use their supposed IQ number as justification. Like as if we should bow down to them and their great knowledge. IQ doesn't mean anything. It is just a test that measures potential. It is what you do with what you are given that counts. There are so many supposedly brilliant people who believe in foolishness like communism, socialism and anthropogenic global warming.
Clearly you aren't smart enough to see the point i was making. Thanks for proving my point
( and IQ isn't knowledge.. Knowledge isn't wisdom, Wisdom isn't truth, Truth isn't beauty, Beauty isn't love, Love isn't music, Music is best! )
[This message has been edited by User00013170 (edited 07-05-2014).]
I didnt say it wasn't before birth, i said it wasn't at conception. It does become 'alive' somewhere after conception. ( but not days or a few weeks.. )
Hmmmm, if it isn't alive at conception, how does it get to be a baby delivered approximately nine months later?
As I said before you are full of yourself. And that my boy is a real problem for you. You will not be taken seriously since you obviously don't have the brains to put forth any kind of argumentation with logic. You resort to trying to impress people with how smart you by stating what you think your IQ is. Well, guess what. You aren't fooling anyone you are a fool. Yep, I can see you clearly now. Wearing your fools hat and trying to make yourself feel good about your status as the court jester.
Think about how silly that statement is for a moment if you will... Do you honestly think that i care? If you take my view of the vast majority of humanity, why would i give a damn what they think?
( and i did say majority, not all.. )
[This message has been edited by User00013170 (edited 07-05-2014).]
Originally posted by MadMark: You resort to trying to impress people with how smart you by stating what you think your IQ is
And actually i wasn't, you need to read what i said in the proper context of the discussion and then think about what i was saying. Its not that hard, really. ( and you got it wrong. )
[This message has been edited by User00013170 (edited 07-05-2014).]
Hmmmm, if it isn't alive at conception, how does it get to be a baby delivered approximately nine months later?
Oh, I believe it is. I think people find justification in what they want to do with an attempt to compromise, hours day weeks........... even months if you can believe it.
Imagine if and when somebody proves it. Clinics and hospitals will be compared to the death camps in murder tolls. Oh, but they are unaware and can't feel anything bla bla bla sure, just believe what's easy and saves you time or money and relieves you of responsibility.
What pisses me off is matter what somebody believes about "the fetus" pregnancy IS AVOIDABLE..... I know it a strange concept and hard to believe.
Oh, I believe it is. I think people find justification in what they want to do with an attempt to compromise, hours day weeks........... even months if you can believe it.
Imagine if and when somebody proves it. Clinics and hospitals will be compared to the death camps in murder tolls. Oh, but they are unaware and can't feel anything bla bla bla sure, just believe what's easy and saves you time or money and relieves you of responsibility.
What pisses me off is matter what somebody believes about "the fetus" pregnancy IS AVOIDABLE..... I know it a strange concept and hard to believe.
We have been on opposite sides of many discussions, I knew we could not be on opposite sides on every one. On this one we seem to agree
Think about how silly that statement is for a moment if you will... Do you honestly think that i care? If you take my view of the vast majority of humanity, why would i give a damn what they think?
Often times, that is the case. I dont think i have changed my opinion on any significant subject due to a discussion since i was 12.
quote
Originally posted by User00013170:
I also had an IQ of just above 170 when i was 12.
I'm seeing a correlation here, do you? The recommendation is to not tell your child what his/her IQ is... because when you do, it becomes "a thing" for them. The simple knowledge of that number becomes a detriment to the individual because they fall back on that ill-placed confidence rather than actually use the capacity that they were born with.
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: I'm seeing a correlation here, do you? The recommendation is to not tell your child what his/her IQ is... because when you do, it becomes "a thing" for them. The simple knowledge of that number becomes a detriment to the individual because they fall back on that ill-placed confidence rather than actually use the capacity that they were born with.
Depends on the child and their upbringing i guess. I also grew up in a household that valued independent thinking and despised conformity, so that factored into things as well.
For what its worth, I wasn't trying to imply that i stopped ignoring most people "because i knew".. it was a byproduct of being smarter than most and recognizing it early on that 'people are dumb', and that i wasn't just some 'dumb kid' ( in response to the 'immature kid' accusation earlier. I wasn't.. ). Back then i would use my gifts to help others.. Now days, not so much as i dont have the energy ( or desire ) for that. I tried to do my part for humanity, but in the end it was a lot like pissing in a river. ( yes, i'm a patti smith fan too )
BTW, your statement makes humanity fresh water and you piss
Or i piss on humanity. And it had nothing to do with 'ungrateful humanity' it had all to do with a wasted effort. Much like saving 1 animal from the shelter doesn't make a dent in the actual problem. It may have been the right thing to do, and you made a difference in its life, but your efforts are diluted by the larger problem to the point it isn't even a ripple.
[This message has been edited by User00013170 (edited 07-06-2014).]
Based on your statements on this forum, I almost agree with you that that's what you may be.
If that is supposed to be an insult, it failed miserably. I already admitted that my 'rescuing' strays, so to speak, has had no effect on the bigger picture.
"If you can't feed a hundred people, then feed just one." - Mother Teresa. I don't think she claimed to have an IQ higher than Steven Hawking, yet she understood that while you can't help everyone you can help someone.
"If you can't feed a hundred people, then feed just one." - Mother Teresa. I don't think she claimed to have an IQ higher than Steven Hawking, yet she understood that while you can't help everyone you can help someone.
Yes, that is why i helped individuals. But over time i saw how ineffective it was in the large scheme of things, so it wasn't worth continuing. She had the fear of reprisal after she dies to continue to 'be good'. I dont have that handicap.
In one study, researchers found that 94 percent of college professors think their work is superior to their peers'. These fellows fail to realize that intelligence doesn't always translate to real-world ability, and thus they tend to overestimate the quality of their work.
And what I'm saying here is, your extra high intelligence bragging doesn't take into account that it is very likely that there are other people in this room with a higher intelligence. They were however more likely to have been raised to not brag.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
And by this I mean that you are not better than everyone else. You are likely very average, and even below average when compared to some other people. Not everything goes off of a simple IQ test.
And what I'm saying here is, your extra high intelligence bragging doesn't take into account that it is very likely that there are other people in this room with a higher intelligence. They were however more likely to have been raised to not brag.
Brad
Never said ( or intended to imply ) i was the smartest person here. What i said is i think most people are **** morons. And i treat them as such, as they deserve. Zero respect or patience. They really only have one purpose to exist. ( well, eventually 2 )
And i will say it again: Most != All
[This message has been edited by User00013170 (edited 07-06-2014).]
And what I'm saying here is, your extra high intelligence bragging doesn't take into account that it is very likely that there are other people in this room with a higher intelligence. They were however more likely to have been raised to not brag.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
And by this I mean that you are not better than everyone else. You are likely very average, and even below average when compared to some other people. Not everything goes off of a simple IQ test.
Brad
Good points, but you're not looking at it from his point of view:
quote
Originally posted by User00013170: The ONLY thing that matters to me is what i think.
