No hun...in the beginning of fertilization---what may or may not become a fetus then baby is nothing more than a collection of cells with no heart, no brain, and no human shape. It doesn't think or feel. It has no concept of its existence...it simply has the potential to become which btw is the case with the egg that is released and dies off during a womans monthly--just a potential that isn't there yet or often ever.
I must get my head examined for stepping into this conversation, but I’ll take care of that later.
As most readers know, a female egg by itself is basically sitting around not doing anything other than getting old relatively quickly in the grand scheme of things. An egg cannot produce life on its own, not even the special ones. Now, in enters a sperm that is able to fertilize one of these lazy eggs and a successful union (no, not the unfortunate ones that attempt development within a fallopian tube) creates the zygote.
Sidenote- I will not be taking any questions from the audience that begin with the overly used, yet societal perception, that…. But, but, a zygote cannot immediately exit out the body and become human to survive on its own! It can’t live without further development so that means it’s not “real life”! Of course it can’t. There, that should take care of any of those types of questions. Thank you.
Did you read the article? It was quoting some evolution scientists that now realize their error on this. It just doesn't work. The studies you read were incorrectly evaluated. They don't fit.
"New research" by a wacky Creationist chemistry professor/Bergman at Northwest State Community College.
Who can only be found on creationist websites, and wrote a book trying to make Darwin a Nazi.
GTFO.
`
"New research" by a wacky Creationist chemistry professor/Bergman at Northwest State COMMUNITY college.
Who can only be found creationist websites and wrote a book trying to make Darwin a Nazi.
GTFO.
`
Gerald R. "Jerry" Bergman, a young-earth creationist affiliated with the Institute for Creation Research, appears on Creation Ministries International's list of scientists alive today who accept the biblical account of creation. He has a doctorate in human biology (1992) from Columbia Pacific...
A history of Orwellian debate tactics and quote-mining
One of Bergman’s favorite tactics is to redefine words. For instance, Bergman claims that he has scientifically proven that there is no such thing as vestigial organs, therefore evolution is false. He accomplished this by redefining “vestigial” to mean “having no function at all”; thus, all he had to do was to demonstrate that alleged vestigial organs did or potentially did anything whatsoever.[8] Of course, this is not the definition of “vestigial”...
Bergman has predictably enough argued that evolution leads to Hitler.[9] In fact, one of his primary debate tactics is character-assassination of Darwin[10].According to Bergman, “Charles Darwin’s major goal in developing his theory was religious, he wanted to “Murder” god (his words).”
........
He considers himself one of the victims of persecution by "Darwinists", after he was denied tenure and dismissed from Bowling Green State University in 1978 “solely because of my beliefs and publications in the area of creationism”. He attempted, unsuccessfully, to take the university to court over religious discrimination. (It should be added that, in a signed letter published in David Duke's National Association of White People newsletter, he stated that “reverse racial discrimination was clearly part of the decision,” so even according to himself it cannot have been solely because of his religious beliefs.[12]) According to the courts, however, Bergman was terminated because of ethics, namely that he claimed to have credentials in psychology when, in fact, he “had no psychological credentials.”[13]
...."""
Gerald R. "Jerry" Bergman, a young-earth creationist affiliated with the Institute for Creation Research, appears on Creation Ministries International's list of scientists alive today who accept the biblical account of creation. He has a doctorate in human biology (1992) from Columbia Pacific...
A history of Orwellian debate tactics and quote-mining
One of Bergman’s favorite tactics is to redefine words. For instance, Bergman claims that he has scientifically proven that there is no such thing as vestigial organs, therefore evolution is false. He accomplished this by redefining “vestigial” to mean “having no function at all”; thus, all he had to do was to demonstrate that alleged vestigial organs did or potentially did anything whatsoever.[8] Of course, this is not the definition of “vestigial”...
Bergman has predictably enough argued that evolution leads to Hitler.[9] In fact, one of his primary debate tactics is character-assassination of Darwin[10].According to Bergman, “Charles Darwin’s major goal in developing his theory was religious, he wanted to “Murder” god (his words).”
........
He considers himself one of the victims of persecution by "Darwinists", after he was denied tenure and dismissed from Bowling Green State University in 1978 “solely because of my beliefs and publications in the area of creationism”. He attempted, unsuccessfully, to take the university to court over religious discrimination. (It should be added that, in a signed letter published in David Duke's National Association of White People newsletter, he stated that “reverse racial discrimination was clearly part of the decision,” so even according to himself it cannot have been solely because of his religious beliefs.[12]) According to the courts, however, Bergman was terminated because of ethics, namely that he claimed to have credentials in psychology when, in fact, he “had no psychological credentials.”[13]
...."""
From the dictionary: Vestigial - Biology, )of an organ or part of the body) degenerate, rudimentary, or atrophied, having become functionless in the course of evolution.
So, it looks like Bergman's definition is correct as it becomes functionless.
Darwin certainly did want to dethrone God and the Bible. Do you have anything to refute this?
The last paragraph is what you claim about creationists, character assassinations. None of the reason for dismissal had anything to do with his actual work except his lack of credentials and that is why he was released. But, nothing to do with the work on Chromosomes. Nice attempt at trying to distract from the truth. The ape chromosomes don't connect.
I have the scientists on my side. The real scientists that can see the truth. The truth shall set you free...By the way, what is your education experience to call people names and attempt character assassinations?
From the dictionary: Vestigial - Biology, )of an organ or part of the body) degenerate, rudimentary, or atrophied, having become functionless in the course of evolution.
So, it looks like Bergman's definition is correct as it becomes functionless.
Darwin certainly did want to dethrone God and the Bible. Do you have anything to refute this?
The last paragraph is what you claim about creationists, character assassinations. None of the reason for dismissal had anything to do with his actual work except his lack of credentials and that is why he was released. But, nothing to do with the work on Chromosomes. Nice attempt at trying to distract from the truth. The ape chromosomes don't connect.
I have the scientists on my side. The real scientists that can see the truth. The truth shall set you free...By the way, what is your education experience to call people names and attempt character assassinations?
I have the scientists on my side. The real scientists that can see the truth. The truth shall set you free...By the way, what is your education experience to call people names and attempt character assassinations?
I was referencing to "Fort Fun Indiana" and "Abu Afak". If you think you belong in their club, go for it.
What I was saying is that at least I provide some clues on my experience and background. Many others here don't do that, hence their posts tend to be unfounded and conjectural at best. Total fabrications and distortions most often.
If the Old Testament (and Torah) book of Genesis*, specifically Chapter One, Verses 1-6, have any truth in the content, then the "non human male"s a.k.a. "Sons of the Gods"(Annunaki) whom mated with the "daughters of man" likely also had 23 chromosomes in their sperm in order to produce the hybrid/mix-breeds known as "men of renown".
Jesus likely was a similar product and had 23 chromos in the sperm that made him.** Which would have been essential were he to have had offspring, as some historians have claimed.
* Genesis being based upon the records and writings of the Sumer-Akkad-Babylon (SAB) culture/civilization which the Hebrews learned during their time of captivity in Babylon. The Hebrews/Jews having plagiarized such when they began to put the Old Testament into written form. According to SAB history-records, when the Annunaki made(created) humans, part of the process included Annunaki sperm so humans are about half "Alien"~non-terrestrial(NT)/Extra-terrestrial(ET). Or so it might seem.
** ~ Actually gets a bit more complicated. 23 chromosomes in the egg, and 23 in the sperm would suggest we are half from mother and half from father. Enter the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) which is passed along the female line, mother to daughter ~~~, and we might be 1/3 from father and 2/3 from mother.
A clue of this can be found in the "Epic of Gilgamesh" where he claims to be 2/3 divine since his mother was a Goddess (female Annunaki = "X" and mtDNA)), and his father a human male.
~~~~~~~~~
See this thread for other details; The Geminga Scenario
I was referencing to "Fort Fun Indiana" and "Abu Afak". If you think you belong in their club, go for it.
What I was saying is that at least I provide some clues on my experience and background. Many others here don't do that, hence their posts tend to be unfounded and conjectural at best. Total fabrications and distortions most often.
That's for sure. But, since people don't, then we don't have to go there. We can simply discuss each idea we are discussing without claiming they are fabricating and distorting. It's simply a matter of learning from each other.
