Supporting Canibalism???

[garyd]

Well this thread has now gone completely to the dogs old Rocks is hear with his usual rehash of the usual lying leftist talking points.

You cannot duplicate what makes you you by cloning you. Every human being is far more than just 15 bucks worth of chemicals and a some water. You cannot duplicate your life experiences for some one else, your memory isn't good enough and given what your's have produced who would want them?

Sorry crap wears out. Cancer, for the most, part is simply proof of the fact that this applies to things biological as well as things mechanical. None of us will ever live forever. And frankly that is a good thing. I done three score years here so far. I don't know how much more of this horse crap I can tolerate

 

[LiveUninhibited]

Well this thread has now gone completely to the dogs old Rocks is hear with his usual rehash of the usual lying leftist talking points.

You cannot duplicate what makes you you by cloning you. Every human being is far more than just 15 bucks worth of chemicals and a some water. You cannot duplicate your life experiences for some one else, your memory isn't good enough and given what your's have produced who would want them?

Sorry crap wears out. Cancer, for the most, part is simply proof of the fact that this applies to things biological as well as things mechanical. None of us will ever live forever. And frankly that is a good thing. I done three score years here so far. I don't know how much more of this horse crap I can tolerate

Rocks is right that the conservative quarrel should be with fertility clinics, not using those embryos instead of throwing them away.

Now if we're talking about immortality, it would indeed be impossible unless consciousness can be transmitted. Even if you could enhance the body with technology to make it able to repair itself indefinitely, you're eventually going to get destroyed by a freak accident of some kind. None of us living forever would be a good thing only if you believe there is life after death. I don't know how you can be so sure of that. So religion makes what should be our biggest concern now that we are on the verge of doing something about it seem irrelevant.

Abortion is another strange issue. Before the fetal brain is sufficiently developed there is no individual, or even pain as perception of it requires sufficient development of the brain. So it perplexes me they are against early abortions at least.

 

[xotoxi]

These are humans:

"Hi naked man and lady."

"Don't mind me. I'm just a dirty old man that likes to sail my dinghy past nudist beaches. Would you mind humoring me and engaging in a little hanky panky? I haven't gotten any since Gertrude passed."

 

[Cecilie1200]

Cannibalism as a practice makes perfect sense for humans who live in a protein-deprived environment. If you manage to defeat the mob in the next valley then you get to keep them as slaves, wives and, well, food. There's a bit of ritualism involved of course, humans are like that, so there's all this talk about eating the heroic enemy and ingesting his courage and the rest of it. That's all well and good but you're really eating Long Pork.

Now for those who can't distinguish between an embryonic stem cell and a human let me help out.

This is a human -

Oh heck, sorry.

These are humans:

These are human embryonic stem cells:

Okay, any questions?

That's like saying it's okay to rip out people's spines for transplant because a spine isn't an entire human being, and never mind that you have to kill the human to get his spine. What the hell is your point?

You have to destroy a human embryo to get embryonic stem cells from it, and while a stem cell isn't a human, an embryo is. And don't give me any of that illogical twaddle about how it can't be a human because it doesn't look like one. It looks like every human on Earth looked at that point in his or her life.

So for those who can't distinguish between a straw man and the ACTUAL issue in a debate . . .

 

[Cecilie1200]

so don't use the treatments they develop.

the idea that only adult stem cells show promise is bizarre.... and is religious right propaganda.

I'm amazed that anyone even knew what the OP was about.

"Current clinical applications of adult stem cells are abundant! They include treatments for the following: corneal restoration, brain tumors, breast cancer, ovarian cancer, liver disease, leukemia, lupus, arthritis, and heart disease. Thousands of patients are treated and cured using adult stem cells. Alternative sources for adult stem cells include: placenta, cord blood, bone marrow organ donors, and possibly fat cells."
Ten Problems with Embryonic Stem Cell Research

Please provide a similar list of successes based on embryonic stem cell, or if this is not possible, simply shout three times:
" I ALWAYS MOUTH WHATEVER LIBERAL BABBLE I CAN FIND."

That will be all.

brought to you by the Institute for Creation Research.... their mission:

ICR equips believers with evidence of the Bible's accuracy and authority through scientific research, educational programs, and media presentations, all conducted within a thoroughly biblical framework.

Discover ICR

Thanks for proving my point.

Only if your point was that you can mindlessly snipe at the source of facts you can't refute, while never producing even the tiniest sliver of any sort of fact yourself. But hey, that's ALWAYS your point, isn't it?

For the mentally challenged in the room - and I do mean you, Jillian - saying, "That source is religious" does NOT constitute a refutation of what they said, and it SURE the hell doesn't constitute proof of YOUR statement.

Thanks for proving HIS point that all you do is mouth babbling leftist talking points.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Gosh, Obama is in favor of using embryos for scientific research that might lead to the ability to cure Parkinsons, and maybe repair nerve damage, so that paraplegics can walk again.

The moral thing to do, of course, is to throw the embryos away, maybe just flush them.

How immoral of him.

Obviously, the moral thing to do is lie your ass off in every sentence you utter, since that's what you did.

ESCR is, by and large, NOT conducted on embryos that would have existed anyway. The in vitro industry doesn't produce enough waste and donated embryos to cover that. ESCR uses embryos created specifically to experiment on.

And we've been hearing that "might cure Parkinson's and repair nerve damage" canard for years, without a single iota of proof that it can do either, so spare us the faux moral outrage on behalf of cures that amount to nothing but your own fevered wet dreams.

 

[eots]

In spite of breaking it down to its smallest parts I don't know what else one can call the consumption of humans. Do you?

Now we as a nation are supposed to financially support this.

It is said it is for the advancement of science. Bah humbug! It is for the advancement of particular scientists. Adult stem cells have been making remarkable progress and one does not have to sacrifice another to do it. To the extent that we publicly finance scientific endeavors shouldn't we direct our debt laden dollars to successful and ethical research?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeDLzTObXFY]YouTube - King Missile - Eating People[/ame]



spoken)
I think it's all right to eat other people, as long as they've been properly canned. So in the future, when we think we're eating soy, but it turns out we're actually eating people, well - I'll be okay with that, Charlton Heston, I'll be able to live with that. As long as the people are packaged under sanitary conditions.

I'm a vegetarian now, but I'm willing to make an exception in the event I'm presented with people. Because I've always been fairly standoffish; I have this tendency not to get to know people very well. And I don't think there is any better way to get to know humanity than to ingest it.

(sung)
Eating people, holding hands
Eating hands, holding people
Eating feet, and eating legs

Eating people, holding hands
Eating hands, holding people
Eating feet, eating legs
Eating heads, eating necks

(spoken)
Now, I'm not saying I wanna eat people. I've heard they taste like pork, and I've never been a big fan of pork. I'm saying, if someone is gonna go through all the trouble of preparing it for me, and tricking me into eating it by telling me it's an incredible soy substitute with a lot more nutrients, let's say, and so I ate it, and it turned out to be quite delicious, and then I found out that it was somebody, maybe even somebody I knew - then I'm not gonna be all that upset. I mean, yeah, maybe I'll be upset that the person is dead. I mean, if it was somebody I liked.

But I think it would make sense - if I ate something and liked it, and then found out that the something I ate and liked was a part of a person who I'd liked as a person, before I had eaten them - I think I'd be all right with that. I think that would be fine. I think that might even be a good thing.

 

[Cecilie1200]

This is not a left vs right kind of issue, but an ideology vs science sort of issue.

That is, unless you categorize Nancy Reagan as a "liberal."

Nancy Reagan praises Obama for overturning Bush's policy on stem cells

LOS ANGELES, March 9 (Xinhua) -- Nancy Reagan, widow of late U.S. President Ronald Reagan, said on Monday that scientists would move forward in stem cell research thanks to President Barack Obama's decision to overturn the 8-year-old policy that limited federal funding for such research.

When did YOU start categorizing Nancy Reagan as a guru of science and touchstone of reality? Would that be before or after your ilk made political hay out of her using an astrologer to arrange the President's schedule?

Oh, but now that she's mouthing the words you want to hear, she's suddenly an unassailable, unimpeachable source who should be unquestioningly believed.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Well this thread has now gone completely to the dogs old Rocks is hear with his usual rehash of the usual lying leftist talking points.

You cannot duplicate what makes you you by cloning you. Every human being is far more than just 15 bucks worth of chemicals and a some water. You cannot duplicate your life experiences for some one else, your memory isn't good enough and given what your's have produced who would want them?

Sorry crap wears out. Cancer, for the most, part is simply proof of the fact that this applies to things biological as well as things mechanical. None of us will ever live forever. And frankly that is a good thing. I done three score years here so far. I don't know how much more of this horse crap I can tolerate

Rocks is right that the conservative quarrel should be with fertility clinics, not using those embryos instead of throwing them away.

Now if we're talking about immortality, it would indeed be impossible unless consciousness can be transmitted. Even if you could enhance the body with technology to make it able to repair itself indefinitely, you're eventually going to get destroyed by a freak accident of some kind. None of us living forever would be a good thing only if you believe there is life after death. I don't know how you can be so sure of that. So religion makes what should be our biggest concern now that we are on the verge of doing something about it seem irrelevant.

Abortion is another strange issue. Before the fetal brain is sufficiently developed there is no individual, or even pain as perception of it requires sufficient development of the brain. So it perplexes me they are against early abortions at least.

Conservatives should quarrel with whomever they damned well WANT to quarrel with, without the "benefit" of leftist dimwits helpfully trying to define conservatism for them. That's like a virgin trying to instruct on being a hooker.

And I'm really tired of 1) the lie that all ESCR embryos come from fertility clinics. They don't, and 2) the lie that conservatives have no moral qualms about fertility clinics and their practices.

 

[Skeptik]

Gosh, Obama is in favor of using embryos for scientific research that might lead to the ability to cure Parkinsons, and maybe repair nerve damage, so that paraplegics can walk again.

The moral thing to do, of course, is to throw the embryos away, maybe just flush them.

How immoral of him.

Obviously, the moral thing to do is lie your ass off in every sentence you utter, since that's what you did.

ESCR is, by and large, NOT conducted on embryos that would have existed anyway. The in vitro industry doesn't produce enough waste and donated embryos to cover that. ESCR uses embryos created specifically to experiment on.

And we've been hearing that "might cure Parkinson's and repair nerve damage" canard for years, without a single iota of proof that it can do either, so spare us the faux moral outrage on behalf of cures that amount to nothing but your own fevered wet dreams.

You did not, of course, add a link or any other evidence to support your claim. Here is a link to mine:

To the delight of patients’ groups and scientists, the order will allow research on hundreds of stem cell lines already in existence, as well as ones yet to be created, typically from embryos left over from fertility treatments that would otherwise be discarded.

And yes, stem cell research has the potential for finding a cure for Parkinsons, for Alzhimers, for spinal cord injuries, for a whole host of medical problems. Did you think cures would be found overnight?

Now, your forthcoming apology for having accused me of "lying my ass off" is accepted.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Gosh, Obama is in favor of using embryos for scientific research that might lead to the ability to cure Parkinsons, and maybe repair nerve damage, so that paraplegics can walk again.

The moral thing to do, of course, is to throw the embryos away, maybe just flush them.

How immoral of him.

Obviously, the moral thing to do is lie your ass off in every sentence you utter, since that's what you did.

ESCR is, by and large, NOT conducted on embryos that would have existed anyway. The in vitro industry doesn't produce enough waste and donated embryos to cover that. ESCR uses embryos created specifically to experiment on.

And we've been hearing that "might cure Parkinson's and repair nerve damage" canard for years, without a single iota of proof that it can do either, so spare us the faux moral outrage on behalf of cures that amount to nothing but your own fevered wet dreams.

You did not, of course, add a link or any other evidence to support your claim. Here is a link to mine:

To the delight of patients’ groups and scientists, the order will allow research on hundreds of stem cell lines already in existence, as well as ones yet to be created, typically from embryos left over from fertility treatments that would otherwise be discarded.

First of all, your link doesn't work. BIG shock. Second of all, dumbass, look at your own quote: "TYPICALLY from embryos left over from fertility treatments". Gosh, that would mean they don't all come from there, wouldn't it? It's called "reading English", ass clown. Try it sometime.

As for providing links, I'm amused by your assumption that because I don't provide a link every time I point out that a dumbass like you is lying, that must mean I don't have one. What it actually means is that there isn't enough time in my day for that many links. So many lying morons, so few hours to slap them down.

RAND: How Many Frozen Human Embryos Are Available for Research?

As you can see, although there ARE many embryos created and frozen in fertility clinics, only a very small percentage are made available for research. The sort of research necessary to find cures from ESCR, if such cures can be found, would require far more stem cell lines than the embryos available from fertility clinics would provide. The need for many more stem cell lines, in fact, was the major objection to President Bush's restriction of federal funding for ESCR to only those lines already isolated.

And yes, stem cell research has the potential for finding a cure for Parkinsons, for Alzhimers, for spinal cord injuries, for a whole host of medical problems. Did you think cures would be found overnight?

I love it. You have the unutterable gall to smugly denounce me for not providing links right away, and then you honestly think you can just throw this paragraph in, sans any substantiation, and expect me to let it stand? Try again, screwboy. Let's see some evidence that ESCR - nice try with the generalized "stem cell research" phrase - has this potential. And I don't mean raw speculation that "well, since these cells do this, that must mean they can do that".

I don't expect cures overnight, but I DO expect evidence that they exist to be found at least as fast as actual cures using ADULT stem cells turn up. And if adult stem cells are churning out cures and treatments while ESCR can't even get out of the gate with the possibility in the same amount of time, then I consider it a waste of money to pursue the latter instead of the former.

Now, your forthcoming apology for having accused me of "lying my ass off" is accepted.

I'm deeply sorry that you're a lying sack of dog feces. I don't think this constitutes an apology so much as a generalized show of regret and sympathy, though, since it's not my fault that you're a lying sack of dog feces.

I am, however, impressed with your willingness to accept the fact that you're a lying sack of dog feces and that I'm very regretful that this is the case. It saves time.

 

[Skeptik]

Obviously, the moral thing to do is lie your ass off in every sentence you utter, since that's what you did.

ESCR is, by and large, NOT conducted on embryos that would have existed anyway. The in vitro industry doesn't produce enough waste and donated embryos to cover that. ESCR uses embryos created specifically to experiment on.

And we've been hearing that "might cure Parkinson's and repair nerve damage" canard for years, without a single iota of proof that it can do either, so spare us the faux moral outrage on behalf of cures that amount to nothing but your own fevered wet dreams.

You did not, of course, add a link or any other evidence to support your claim. Here is a link to mine:

First of all, your link doesn't work. BIG shock. Second of all, dumbass, look at your own quote: "TYPICALLY from embryos left over from fertility treatments". Gosh, that would mean they don't all come from there, wouldn't it? It's called "reading English", ass clown. Try it sometime.

As for providing links, I'm amused by your assumption that because I don't provide a link every time I point out that a dumbass like you is lying, that must mean I don't have one. What it actually means is that there isn't enough time in my day for that many links. So many lying morons, so few hours to slap them down.

RAND: How Many Frozen Human Embryos Are Available for Research?

As you can see, although there ARE many embryos created and frozen in fertility clinics, only a very small percentage are made available for research. The sort of research necessary to find cures from ESCR, if such cures can be found, would require far more stem cell lines than the embryos available from fertility clinics would provide. The need for many more stem cell lines, in fact, was the major objection to President Bush's restriction of federal funding for ESCR to only those lines already isolated.

And yes, stem cell research has the potential for finding a cure for Parkinsons, for Alzhimers, for spinal cord injuries, for a whole host of medical problems. Did you think cures would be found overnight?

I love it. You have the unutterable gall to smugly denounce me for not providing links right away, and then you honestly think you can just throw this paragraph in, sans any substantiation, and expect me to let it stand? Try again, screwboy. Let's see some evidence that ESCR - nice try with the generalized "stem cell research" phrase - has this potential. And I don't mean raw speculation that "well, since these cells do this, that must mean they can do that".

I don't expect cures overnight, but I DO expect evidence that they exist to be found at least as fast as actual cures using ADULT stem cells turn up. And if adult stem cells are churning out cures and treatments while ESCR can't even get out of the gate with the possibility in the same amount of time, then I consider it a waste of money to pursue the latter instead of the former.

Now, your forthcoming apology for having accused me of "lying my ass off" is accepted.

I'm deeply sorry that you're a lying sack of dog feces. I don't think this constitutes an apology so much as a generalized show of regret and sympathy, though, since it's not my fault that you're a lying sack of dog feces.

I am, however, impressed with your willingness to accept the fact that you're a lying sack of dog feces and that I'm very regretful that this is the case. It saves time.

My imbedded link didn't work for some reason, and, since your mind is already made up, you can't do any research of your own. Ok, here's another link:

Obama Lifts Ban on Embryonic Stem-cell Research

When the question was raised as to whether the Obama decision would remove prohibitions on creating embryos specifically to harvest their stem cells — a matter still to be determined — Dr. Mark A. Kay, a researcher at Stanford University's School of Medicine, told the Washington Post: "I don't personally have any problem creating embryos for embryonic stem cell research. But if he decides that embryos that have already been created and are going to be discarded are the ones that would be used, that would be reasonable as well. These things exist and are going to be discarded. It's really mind-boggling to me these things are going to be discarded and scientists haven't been allowed to use them to do research."

Oh, and I found the original, as well:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/09/us/politics/09stem.html?_r=1&hp

And, here's one about stem cells and Parkinsons:

ISSCR :: Public : Beyond the Basics : Stem Cells and Parkinson's Disease

Happy reading. There's a response, sans sophomoric insults.

 

[Cecilie1200]

You did not, of course, add a link or any other evidence to support your claim. Here is a link to mine:

First of all, your link doesn't work. BIG shock. Second of all, dumbass, look at your own quote: "TYPICALLY from embryos left over from fertility treatments". Gosh, that would mean they don't all come from there, wouldn't it? It's called "reading English", ass clown. Try it sometime.

As for providing links, I'm amused by your assumption that because I don't provide a link every time I point out that a dumbass like you is lying, that must mean I don't have one. What it actually means is that there isn't enough time in my day for that many links. So many lying morons, so few hours to slap them down.

RAND: How Many Frozen Human Embryos Are Available for Research?

As you can see, although there ARE many embryos created and frozen in fertility clinics, only a very small percentage are made available for research. The sort of research necessary to find cures from ESCR, if such cures can be found, would require far more stem cell lines than the embryos available from fertility clinics would provide. The need for many more stem cell lines, in fact, was the major objection to President Bush's restriction of federal funding for ESCR to only those lines already isolated.



I love it. You have the unutterable gall to smugly denounce me for not providing links right away, and then you honestly think you can just throw this paragraph in, sans any substantiation, and expect me to let it stand? Try again, screwboy. Let's see some evidence that ESCR - nice try with the generalized "stem cell research" phrase - has this potential. And I don't mean raw speculation that "well, since these cells do this, that must mean they can do that".

I don't expect cures overnight, but I DO expect evidence that they exist to be found at least as fast as actual cures using ADULT stem cells turn up. And if adult stem cells are churning out cures and treatments while ESCR can't even get out of the gate with the possibility in the same amount of time, then I consider it a waste of money to pursue the latter instead of the former.



I'm deeply sorry that you're a lying sack of dog feces. I don't think this constitutes an apology so much as a generalized show of regret and sympathy, though, since it's not my fault that you're a lying sack of dog feces.

I am, however, impressed with your willingness to accept the fact that you're a lying sack of dog feces and that I'm very regretful that this is the case. It saves time.

My imbedded link didn't work for some reason, and, since your mind is already made up, you can't do any research of your own. Ok, here's another link:

LOL You get on your high frigging horse about "You didn't provide any links, but I did because I'm so fucking wonderful", and THEN you have the gall to say that I "can't do any research" when your precious link doesn't work? Where was YOUR research on MY points when you didn't have a link right away? Have you always been a hypocritical buffoon, or is this a new skill you learned just for us?

Obama Lifts Ban on Embryonic Stem-cell Research

When the question was raised as to whether the Obama decision would remove prohibitions on creating embryos specifically to harvest their stem cells — a matter still to be determined — Dr. Mark A. Kay, a researcher at Stanford University's School of Medicine, told the Washington Post: "I don't personally have any problem creating embryos for embryonic stem cell research. But if he decides that embryos that have already been created and are going to be discarded are the ones that would be used, that would be reasonable as well. These things exist and are going to be discarded. It's really mind-boggling to me these things are going to be discarded and scientists haven't been allowed to use them to do research."

And this relates to the point of argument currently in question how? Since you probably forgot, it was whether or not ESCR is exclusively, or even primarily, performed with "waste" embryos from fertilty clinics. This cute little blurb proves nothing either way.

[Oh, and I found the original, as well:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/09/us/politics/09stem.html?_r=1&hp

Goody for you. And this is productive and/or related to the question at hand how?

And, here's one about stem cells and Parkinsons:

ISSCR :: Public : Beyond the Basics : Stem Cells and Parkinson's Disease

Well, gloryosky! You found a press release that says absolutely nothihng I didn't already know, AND does nothing whatsoever to prove any of your premses. Am I supposed to applaud your blind, ideological ability to read what you want to see into whatever is said, regardless of any actual relation?

Happy reading. There's a response, sans sophomoric insults.

::yawn:: If you deserved respect, you wouldn't have to waste my time whining and trying to force it. Don't blame ME if you invite contempt upon yourself.

 

[Skeptik]

First of all, your link doesn't work. BIG shock. Second of all, dumbass, look at your own quote: "TYPICALLY from embryos left over from fertility treatments". Gosh, that would mean they don't all come from there, wouldn't it? It's called "reading English", ass clown. Try it sometime.

As for providing links, I'm amused by your assumption that because I don't provide a link every time I point out that a dumbass like you is lying, that must mean I don't have one. What it actually means is that there isn't enough time in my day for that many links. So many lying morons, so few hours to slap them down.

RAND: How Many Frozen Human Embryos Are Available for Research?

As you can see, although there ARE many embryos created and frozen in fertility clinics, only a very small percentage are made available for research. The sort of research necessary to find cures from ESCR, if such cures can be found, would require far more stem cell lines than the embryos available from fertility clinics would provide. The need for many more stem cell lines, in fact, was the major objection to President Bush's restriction of federal funding for ESCR to only those lines already isolated.



I love it. You have the unutterable gall to smugly denounce me for not providing links right away, and then you honestly think you can just throw this paragraph in, sans any substantiation, and expect me to let it stand? Try again, screwboy. Let's see some evidence that ESCR - nice try with the generalized "stem cell research" phrase - has this potential. And I don't mean raw speculation that "well, since these cells do this, that must mean they can do that".

I don't expect cures overnight, but I DO expect evidence that they exist to be found at least as fast as actual cures using ADULT stem cells turn up. And if adult stem cells are churning out cures and treatments while ESCR can't even get out of the gate with the possibility in the same amount of time, then I consider it a waste of money to pursue the latter instead of the former.



I'm deeply sorry that you're a lying sack of dog feces. I don't think this constitutes an apology so much as a generalized show of regret and sympathy, though, since it's not my fault that you're a lying sack of dog feces.

I am, however, impressed with your willingness to accept the fact that you're a lying sack of dog feces and that I'm very regretful that this is the case. It saves time.

My imbedded link didn't work for some reason, and, since your mind is already made up, you can't do any research of your own. Ok, here's another link:

LOL You get on your high frigging horse about "You didn't provide any links, but I did because I'm so fucking wonderful", and THEN you have the gall to say that I "can't do any research" when your precious link doesn't work? Where was YOUR research on MY points when you didn't have a link right away? Have you always been a hypocritical buffoon, or is this a new skill you learned just for us?



And this relates to the point of argument currently in question how? Since you probably forgot, it was whether or not ESCR is exclusively, or even primarily, performed with "waste" embryos from fertilty clinics. This cute little blurb proves nothing either way.



Goody for you. And this is productive and/or related to the question at hand how?

And, here's one about stem cells and Parkinsons:

ISSCR :: Public : Beyond the Basics : Stem Cells and Parkinson's Disease

Well, gloryosky! You found a press release that says absolutely nothihng I didn't already know, AND does nothing whatsoever to prove any of your premses. Am I supposed to applaud your blind, ideological ability to read what you want to see into whatever is said, regardless of any actual relation?

Happy reading. There's a response, sans sophomoric insults.

::yawn:: If you deserved respect, you wouldn't have to waste my time whining and trying to force it. Don't blame ME if you invite contempt upon yourself.

So, you didn't read any of my links, didn't respond to anything I said, and came back with yet more sophomoric personal insults.

Let me know when you graduate from junior high, and maybe I'll try again to have a dialogue with you. Until then, sayonara.

 

[Cecilie1200]

My imbedded link didn't work for some reason, and, since your mind is already made up, you can't do any research of your own. Ok, here's another link:

LOL You get on your high frigging horse about "You didn't provide any links, but I did because I'm so fucking wonderful", and THEN you have the gall to say that I "can't do any research" when your precious link doesn't work? Where was YOUR research on MY points when you didn't have a link right away? Have you always been a hypocritical buffoon, or is this a new skill you learned just for us?



And this relates to the point of argument currently in question how? Since you probably forgot, it was whether or not ESCR is exclusively, or even primarily, performed with "waste" embryos from fertilty clinics. This cute little blurb proves nothing either way.



Goody for you. And this is productive and/or related to the question at hand how?



Well, gloryosky! You found a press release that says absolutely nothihng I didn't already know, AND does nothing whatsoever to prove any of your premses. Am I supposed to applaud your blind, ideological ability to read what you want to see into whatever is said, regardless of any actual relation?

Happy reading. There's a response, sans sophomoric insults.

::yawn:: If you deserved respect, you wouldn't have to waste my time whining and trying to force it. Don't blame ME if you invite contempt upon yourself.

So, you didn't read any of my links, didn't respond to anything I said, and came back with yet more sophomoric personal insults.

Let me know when you graduate from junior high, and maybe I'll try again to have a dialogue with you. Until then, sayonara.

Wrong, fool. Had you bothered to read my post, rather than just seeing that I STILL think you're a moron and full of crap and then assuming that that MUST mean I didn't read your links (because obviously, the only reason anyone could disagree with your revealed wisdom is lack of information, right?), you would have seen that my responses were based quit firmly in your own lnks and their inability to substantiate your bullshit positions. Which, by the way, is why you continued to be insulted for the uninformed imbecile you reveal yourself to be, and why you STILL have to demand respect you can't earn.

On the other hand, it's been amusing watching you go from "Your forthcoming apology is accepted" to "How dare you insult me!" I can't decide which is more ironic: Your kindergarten sniveling about not getting respect you don't deserve, or your kindergarten sniveling about not getting respect you didn't offer back before you realized that you were in for an ass-whipping.

Pride goeth before a fall. Thanks for demonstrating. Dismissed.

 

[wdsholmass]

If you don't understand SCT, you have little to say.

 

[wdsholmass]

If you don't understand SCT, you have little to say.

 

[Cecilie1200]

If you don't understand SCT, you have little to say.

You're applauding yourself, dude, and for a post that didn't actually say anything. You and your multiple personalities need to come to an agreement about only one of you using the computer.