the_classicist

Joined

• started 62 topics
• posted 2,005 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by the_classicist

• 
  112

  Stem Cell Research article

  by DevonMcBride in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  in today's wall street journal there was an excellent article about stem cell research.

  the united states used to be number 1 in science research.

  we are now number 2 and continually on the decline even more.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  the_classicist

  an EGG, at conception, IS a cell with 46 chromosomes. so we ARE talking about the same thing. cells with 46 chromosomes. all cells in the human body have the complete genetic code for that human (46 chromosomes). a liver cell has the entire code, but only a certain part of the code has been executed. just admit it, and move on already. sheesh. you're being illogical with your refusal to define technically the difference between clump of cells that have divided from one, and an embryo.

  An egg can grow into a human being. A liver cell cannot, nor can a stem cell. Comparing the two is a false analogy.
• 
  14

  Periodic Conspiracy ?

  by ArtfulDodger in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  it would appear that even the world of chemistry has been tainted by the hands of the jw's .

  did you know that element 104 is rutherfordium .

  and that number 105 is dubnium ?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  the_classicist

  I think you may be on to something Midwich.
• 
  112

  Stem Cell Research article

  by DevonMcBride in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  in today's wall street journal there was an excellent article about stem cell research.

  the united states used to be number 1 in science research.

  we are now number 2 and continually on the decline even more.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  the_classicist

  I was editing my post while you were writing yours. Doh!

  D'oh, indeed!

  Being human IS irrational. Humans are NOT logical. Your stand Class is the epitome of illogical thinking. Yet you somehow have deluded yourself into thinking your stance is the more logical solution and the rest of us are all irrational. Why can't you admit you are being illogical and making an emotional, hence irrational moral judgement call? Be honest for crying out loud.

  Hey, I'm debating with people who act like rational naturalists and with people who yell out names as children (not you). My position is logical, but it assumes that human life begins at conception. Now, given relativist philosophy, this becomes not illogical, but another value judgement among many, which are all more valid than mine (for example, when I express my opinion, it becomes "shoving it down people's throats"). An embryo is the simplest form of life that will grow into a complete human being, I make the conclusion that it is a human life because of that: both potential and existing. To take away that life is to do so unjustly as you become God by saying who can live and who cannot. I don't see what's so illogical about that argument, unless you wish to elucidate further.
• 
  112

  Stem Cell Research article

  by DevonMcBride in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  in today's wall street journal there was an excellent article about stem cell research.

  the united states used to be number 1 in science research.

  we are now number 2 and continually on the decline even more.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  the_classicist

  Strawman.

  Then I would say your analogy is false in the first place for you are equating the killing of a human life for your own medical purposes with eating a wild boar, unless you weren't trying to make the analogy in the first place. If you think that morals are relative, you should then know that the realtivist morality is philosophically and logically unsustainable. So if the eating of animals is wrong, it should always be wrong. That assumes you have a logical reason why eating animals is wrong, besides emotional reasons.
• 
  112

  Stem Cell Research article

  by DevonMcBride in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  in today's wall street journal there was an excellent article about stem cell research.

  the united states used to be number 1 in science research.

  we are now number 2 and continually on the decline even more.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  the_classicist

  About my vegetarianism.....if I'm on a deserted island w/ a wild boar as the only food soure.....I win. I'm building a fire and having a pig BBQ....or a pig picken as they say in da South. Ideology is easily supported in the abstract. Harder to do so in the here and now.
  
  
  
  

  Would you kill and eat your husband or another human to stay alive on that deserted island?
• 
  112

  Stem Cell Research article

  by DevonMcBride in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  in today's wall street journal there was an excellent article about stem cell research.

  the united states used to be number 1 in science research.

  we are now number 2 and continually on the decline even more.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  the_classicist

  Oh bullshit. It's called 'Survival' and humans have been doing whatever they need to do to survive for thousands of years. I agree with EvilForce: if it's me or a clump of cells that hasn't formed in to anything yet, and it'll save my life---I win.

  Classicist, if you don't think that Stem Cell Research is good, then no one's forcing you to use it; it's your choice. But don't condemn everyone else for not seeing it your way. When all the bleeding hearts such as yourself have taken care of all the emotionally, mentally and physically shattered children of this world who were born to people who should have never had kids, then you can whine about saving cells........or bacteria.

  Wow, an argument from selfishness and an ad hominem attack all in one. You're certainly an irrational piece of work, Mary.

  IVF is not done for the procurment of embryo's to be destroyed. ; Show me where they are developing embryos for mere scientific research. ; They are talking about using cells that will not divide into a blastocyst. ; They are talking about using embies that will not make it. ; NEVER EVER HAVE I SEEN ANYTHING ABOUT USING IVF FOR THE PURPOSE OF CELL DIVISION ONLY. ; Parents must donate or the clinic must donate with parental consent. ;

  First part, embryos are used from IVF for research purposes with the owner's consent: http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/basics3.asp. Right now, creating embryos for research purposes is illegal in the USA, but not in other countries where they are doing this. The fact that we are creating human life knowing that they "will not make it" is in and of itself unethical and that statement covers the rest of your rant. Mind you, ethics is always a few years behind medical research and peoples' selfish wishes.

  An embryo is a human life; it has the full ability to become a fully-formed human. Please tell me how it is not a human life, rationally and you certainly aren't making a valid argument by saying that they aren't viable most of the time. They aren't viable because they are created artifically. It reminds me of WWI, throwing a bunch of soldiers toward the enemy trench in hoping a few would get through to their target. Both cases are a waste of life. If in nature, when two people mate and nuclear fusion does not take place, then a new life is not created and it is still an ovum with some genetic material floating around in the cytoplasm that will be eaten up by DNA polymerase and that ovum will be ejected out of the human body. But scientists, in the IVF clinic, can make sure that fusion takes place, thereby creating a human life; otherwise, if no fusion takes place, then a human life is not created and the ovum will stay a single celled orgainism, as an ovum can not replicate by mitosis like other cells as it's genetic code is incomplete.
• 
  51

  What are you listening to right now....

  by desbah in

  1. social
  2. entertainment

  for me i got into nirvanva again...listening to "lithium" chills me out

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  the_classicist

  Bob Dylan, Tangled Up in Blue
• 
  112

  Stem Cell Research article

  by DevonMcBride in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  in today's wall street journal there was an excellent article about stem cell research.

  the united states used to be number 1 in science research.

  we are now number 2 and continually on the decline even more.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  the_classicist

  Wait, I can think of specific cases of exaggerations: global warming. Truth is, they don't know what's going to happen, but many scientists represent their hypotheses as fact in public in order to gain popularity and power behind their cause.
• 
  112

  Stem Cell Research article

  by DevonMcBride in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  in today's wall street journal there was an excellent article about stem cell research.

  the united states used to be number 1 in science research.

  we are now number 2 and continually on the decline even more.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  the_classicist

  both cells have 46 chromosomes. so no, it's not what you call it. it's not a fallacy. it's not a red herring. it's not a false analogy. we are talking about the same thing. a cell with 46 chromnosomes. thank you very much.

  Strawman. I indicated an embryo with 46 chromosome that can be come a fully-formed human.
• 
  112

  Stem Cell Research article

  by DevonMcBride in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  in today's wall street journal there was an excellent article about stem cell research.

  the united states used to be number 1 in science research.

  we are now number 2 and continually on the decline even more.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  the_classicist

  your religious assertions are implicit.

  i saw you talk a bit about zygotes, but you did not expound. i saw you talk a bit about 48 chromosome ape DNA, but not about any human DNA.

  I also see how you use one mistake to attack another position, which isn't very logical or rational.

  since you do not see the whole process as a computer executing it's code, then i ask, where do you draw the line? when does a clump of cells becomne an embryo? when it starts to morpologically look like a baby? is that all you go on? so what the difference between a clump of cells that looks a little like a baby, and a clump of cells that looks a little little like a baby? how do you know?

  At the moment of conception it has the ability to become a fully-formed human being, which is where you draw the line.

  oh i see. science phobia. i would like to see a source for this assertion too, thanks.

  And people call me naive. No, I can't bring any specific cases right now, but I've heard it from my old Biology professor (who's a microbiologist).