The left's rejection of science

[OKTexas]

Life begins at conception? So you can take the zygote out of the women and it will live on its own ?

They're placed in a woman all the time and it results in a live birth. So yes it is alive, until it dies, just like you.

 

[12icer]

Life begins at conception? So you can take the zygote out of the women and it will live on its own ?

Actually yes! there are examples of cloning that do even more than that by using a microprobe to insert the male dna into the ova. It is you ignorant liberally educated to be low mental capacity followers.

 

[12icer]

You see anything that isn't in the bible 2,000 years ago is bad. You're not going to find logic or sense in discussing shit with these cock sucking republicans.

You layer on more and more proof of your lacking education, and intellect, each post proves that you are far below the average intellect, and education level of those you attack.

 

[OKTexas]

Life begins at conception? So you can take the zygote out of the women and it will live on its own ?

Do you understand the difference between the phrases "life begins" and "life is self-sustainable"? No? What a shame.

If it's not sustainable then it hasn't begun. You draw the arbitrary line at conception , but why not before ? EVERY SPERM IS SACRED!

How well could you sustain yourself the day you were born, without mom you would have died. No different than a fetus, just a slightly different supply chain.

.

 

[flacaltenn]

There is basic left-liberal concept at work that is PRE-DISPOSED to denying science. And it's FUNDAMENTAL to the difference in thinking between the left and the right. And that is the belief that the left can legislate EVERYTHING in life to be 'risk-free'. Because they can't fathom leaving any economic, social or societal risk elements alone in daily life.

This is best shown on enviro standards. Where science works hard to quantify the exact levels of a poison or pollutant according the levels ABOVE which health risks can be incurred. This gets pushed WAY BEYOND any beneficial results because they won't ACCEPT that ANY detectable level of pollutant or poison is benign.

In science --- there are CONCEPTS of pure air and pure water -- but these NEVER exist in nature. With or without man's interventions. And the left refuses to USE science to determine where those bounds SHOULD be set. Or reconcile their demands with economic concerns or costs to achieve a totally RISK FREE life and environment.

 

[whitehall]

The left claims (believes?) that the theory of man-made global warming has been proven. How does that work in real life?

 

[Timmy]

Life begins at conception? So you can take the zygote out of the women and it will live on its own ?

Do you understand the difference between the phrases "life begins" and "life is self-sustainable"? No? What a shame.

If it's not sustainable then it hasn't begun. You draw the arbitrary line at conception , but why not before ? EVERY SPERM IS SACRED!

How well could you sustain yourself the day you were born, without mom you would have died. No different than a fetus, just a slightly different supply chain.

.

I could've lived for hours on my own. Or someone else could take care of me . The same can't be said for the zygote .

 

[Timmy]

Turning off life support is murder ?

It can't be! According to you - someone on life support was never alive. After all, you claim the ability to self-sustain is the criteria of life (even though science has already proven otherwise).

Ummm, I never said that .

That's exactly what you said - liar. You said self-sustainability is the indication of when life starts. If those people aren't self-sustainable in an ICU, then clearly their life has not started yet. That's your definition chief - own it.

Psst....this is a prime example of why it is a bad idea to deny science.

No i did not . Those people were living beings before somthing happened where they got hooked up into machines .

Is turning off life support muder? Don't give me the "it can be" bullshit. It's yes or no Mr life at conception.

 

[mamooth]

Look! It's more PC revisionist dumbass science from our resident cult fuktard P@triot. This week, he's parroting hilariously stupid pro-life pseudoscience.

Life is a continuum, dumbass. It has no beginning. You pro-life nutballs are now claiming sperm and eggs aren't alive. You're getting dumber with each passing day.

Abortion was legal and common when the Constitution was written. The writers had no problem with it. That's because, not being retarded cult liars, they knew fetuses weren't people. It's only recentl y that pro-life liars have started revising science, history and common sense, and started pretending that fetuses are people. Even they don't believe something that stupid, of course. They just lie and pretend they do, so they have an excuse to implement even more of their fascist agenda.

 

[OKTexas]

If it's not sustainable then it hasn't begun.

Again dimwit...it is scientific fact that life has begun at conception. Do you have any idea how many lives are sitting in Intensive Care Units across the country as we speak that are hooked to life-support machines because their current condition is unsustainable for life? Does that mean their life "hasn't begun"? Dumb ass.

Turning off life support is murder ?

You see anything that isn't in the bible 2,000 years ago is bad. You're not going to find logic or sense in discussing shit with these cock sucking republicans.

There was a leftist broad on Tucker Carlson the other night that said breast feeding is unnatural, do you agree with her?

.

 

[mamooth]

There is basic left-liberal concept at work that is PRE-DISPOSED to denying science. And it's FUNDAMENTAL to the difference in thinking between the left and the right. And that is the belief that the left can legislate EVERYTHING in life to be 'risk-free'.

The fundamental difference is that the right lies about the left at every opportunity, and feels no guilt whatsoever over doing so, being that "the ends always justify the means for my own side" is the only moral standard they possess.

Needless to say, nobody on the left thinks like that. Righties make up stories like that to deflect from their current open science denial and environmental rape. It used to be that a conservative could be an environmentalist, but not any more. They're all now science deniers and environment-rapers. TheParty told the conservative environmentalists to start mouthing the party line or be cast out, and so they all rolled over and showed their bellies and begged not to be kicked. Now, they all sing the praises of every bit of pseudoscience their party passes down, and constantly make excuses as to why the latest environmental travesty is really a wonderful thing.

they won't ACCEPT that ANY detectable level of pollutant or poison is benign.

Such a vivid imagination, and he's putting it to work in service of his anti-science cult.

 

[mamooth]

Actually yes! there are examples of cloning that do even more than that by using a microprobe to insert the male dna into the ova. It is you ignorant liberally educated to be low mental capacity followers.

So you're saying life begins at cloning, and not at conception?

Modern science makes a total mess of pro-lifer stupid beliefs. Like almost all pro-lifers, you're plainly staggeringly ignorant of the science, not to mention deficient in logic and ethics.

Go on, prove me wrong. Define exactly what a person is, without using any circular definitions.

The rational and moral people, we have it easy. We simply use the same definition humanity has used over all of human history. Human, born and alive. Pro-lifers, they're trying some flaming PC historical revisionism, with no justification beyond "Because I say so!".

 

[P@triot]

Life is a continuum, dumbass. It has no beginning.

 

[P@triot]

The just lie and pretend they do, so they have an excuse to implement even more of their fascist agenda.

It's about time you address the left in a thread about the left!

 

[flacaltenn]

There is basic left-liberal concept at work that is PRE-DISPOSED to denying science. And it's FUNDAMENTAL to the difference in thinking between the left and the right. And that is the belief that the left can legislate EVERYTHING in life to be 'risk-free'.

The fundamental difference is that the right lies about the left at every opportunity, and feels no guilt whatsoever over doing so, being that "the ends always justify the means for my own side" is the only moral standard they possess.

Needless to say, nobody on the left thinks like that. Righties make up stories like that to deflect from their current open science denial and environmental rape. It used to be that a conservative could be an environmentalist, but not any more. They're all now science deniers and environment-rapers. TheParty told the conservative environmentalists to start mouthing the party line or be cast out, and so they all rolled over and showed their bellies and begged not to be kicked. Now, they all sing the praises of every bit of pseudoscience their party passes down, and constantly make excuses as to why the latest environmental travesty is really a wonderful thing.

they won't ACCEPT that ANY detectable level of pollutant or poison is benign.

Such a vivid imagination, and he's putting it to work in service of his anti-science cult.

RISK -- and what to do about and how much is too much --- is one of just a couple FUNDAMENTAL decouplings between the left and the right. EVERYONE on the left FIGHTS to create a "zero-risk" society... Economically and public safety wise.

And since science can now measure ever tinier TRACES of poison and pollutants, they insist on going down that road to zero risk. Look up the "Precautionary Principle".. ASPIRIN wouldn't even be over the counter if these folks could re-legislate it...

 

[OKTexas]

Life begins at conception? So you can take the zygote out of the women and it will live on its own ?

Do you understand the difference between the phrases "life begins" and "life is self-sustainable"? No? What a shame.

If it's not sustainable then it hasn't begun. You draw the arbitrary line at conception , but why not before ? EVERY SPERM IS SACRED!

How well could you sustain yourself the day you were born, without mom you would have died. No different than a fetus, just a slightly different supply chain.

.

I could've lived for hours on my own. Or someone else could take care of me . The same can't be said for the zygote .

The point is you were no more self sufficient and weren't for nearly 2 years.

.

.

 

[mamooth]

Yeah...and after 150 years....science has completely disproven it. Leave it to a left-wing regressive to insist that climate science was better in 1867 than it is today.

Given how all the Trumptards have been repeatedly so humiliated on the global warming topic, do you really want to go another round?

The only argument you ever have is conspiracy theory retardation. All the actual science says you're just making everything up. You can't talk about the science, so all you can do deflect by crying that the entire planet is engaged in a VastSecretGlobalSocialistPlot against you.

Do you have any idea how stupid, crazy and cowardly that makes you look? No matter. You probably like being laughed it. By showing your willingness to be humiliated on behalf of the cult, you earn big brownie points with the cult.

 

[mamooth]

Life is a continuum, dumbass. It has no beginning.

And P@triot runs, as usual. He's actually claiming that sperm and eggs aren't alive and human. What a maroon. He thinks people come from dead sperm and eggs, apparently.

Come on P@triot, at least try to defend your loopy cult pseudoscience. You're giving up and running much too quickly.

 

[mamooth]

EVERYONE on the left FIGHTS to create a "zero-risk" society... Economically and public safety wise.

I've never met anyone on the left with that attitude. After all, liberals are reality and reason-based, as opposed to the mostly emotion-based conservatives. We go with hard data, you go with feelings.

And since science can now measure ever tinier TRACES of poison and pollutants, they insist on going down that road to zero risk.

And as usual, we're expected to just take your word on it.

 

[P@triot]

The only argument you ever have is conspiracy theory retardation.

Here are the facts (backed up with links) and they are indisputable:

• If "Global Warming" existed - why have "scientists" (ie dirt-bags on the Democrat payroll) been caught in not one, but two rounds of "Climate Gate" in which they were caught talking in emails about how they falsified their research in order to make it look like "Global Warming" existed?

Climategate 2.0: New E-Mails Rock The Global Warming Debate

Three themes are emerging from the newly released emails:

(1) prominent scientists central to the global warming debate are taking measures to conceal rather than disseminate underlying data and discussions;

(2) these scientists view global warming as a political “cause” rather than a balanced scientific inquiry and

(3) many of these scientists frankly admit to each other that much of the science is weak and dependent on deliberate manipulation of facts and data.

• If "Global Warming" existed - why has the planet been on a "cooling period" which was predicted decades in advance as part of a natural cycle?

Sorry Global Warming Alarmists, The Earth Is Cooling

• If "Global Warming" existed - why did liberals rebrand it to "Climate Change" after several years of cooler than normal periods proved them wrong? The left's entire position was that greenhouse gases were being trapped in the atmosphere causing the planet to heat up. Well then how in the hell is that also causing cooler temperatures. The same thing cannot cause opposite results. It's like saying my automobile drives both forward and backward simultaneously. Um...no. No it doesn't. I have to change the transmission manually from drive to reverse and can only do one at a time. It defies the laws of physics to proclaim that trapped greenhouse gases which are causing the earth to heat up are also causing the earth to cool down.

If "Global Warming" existed - why did the polar ice-cap expand a mind-boggling 60% (or over 900,000 miles) when "scientists" (ie political activists on the Dumbocrat payroll) predicted it would be completely melted by 2014?

Updated NASA Data: Global Warming Not Causing Any Polar Ice Retreat

Antarctic Sea Ice Reaches New Record Maximum

Owned your ass again, mammaries!