Current events discussion

[RobGMN Premium Member]

I am not wrong. You are changing the goalpost yet again. You said a ***** is not a human. It is. Now you have changed it to "It's not a "person"". You are again arguing against proof and scientific fact. Troll. Nice try pulling out the one statement YOU think supports your argument. THIS debate has never been about a ***** being a "person" it has always been about it being a human.

A ***** is human cells but it is not "a human". Chop off your leg. It's human cells. Would you call it "a human"?
A ***** is also not "a person". Legally AND in medical science.

So, are you able to answer the question of WHEN an abortion is "killing a baby", or do you not actually know what to answer?
If you are against abortion, you must have an opinion of WHEN it is wrong. One guy here is against abortion, but only within a certain timeline, possibly because he doesn't know what a zygote is.
What is YOUR answer?

If you're not going to be a part of the conversation, then you are simply trolling the thread.

Is that why you are here? To simply troll the thread and offer nothing of value to the conversation?
It's sure looking that way if you're going to just type random shit and then post a meme like you triumphed over the world.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

They are not requisite for being human, but you don't get one if you're NOT a legal person of the human (?)species.

Show me a B.C. or SSN issued to a *****.
Show me one issued to a horse, or a dolphin, or a cat.


And it can continue that was until someone can provide absolutes.

Slappy thinks aborting a zygote is not aborting a baby because the cells haven't "combined", even though a zygote is the very first cell that then splits, and they split, and so on, through the process. He thinks a dog ***** IS a baby that should not be aborted because it LOOKS like a human *****.

For reasons unknown, Thxone thinks that the cells become a baby at some point indistinct between 8 and 9 weeks.

Medical science says a ***** is a ***** until it is born, and then it is a neonate. But it is NOT a neonate before birth, which is very specific.

When the people who are fighting to ban abortion can't even agree on what is or is not "killing a baby", how is it reasonable to demand laws that prevent it from happening?
A tangential situation was the religious right demanding censorship of TV and radio that they felt was hurting society.
They couldn't define the offensive material so that the performers and entertainment industry could stop doing it. They simply said "we know it when we see it or hear it"
REALLY? YOU know it when YOU see it or hear it? Your personal reaction is what should be used to determine how the rest of society should perceive things?

NOPE. If people want to stop abortion, they really need to get their shit together and come up with definitive guidelines and standards of what is what. Don't tell me that the clump of cells becomes a "baby" "at some point in time between here and there" and that we should no longer be able to abort "at some point in between here and there".
Don't have one person saying it's "killing baby" if done the day after conception, while another says it's not "killing a baby" until some point between 8 and 9 weeks, while the law doesn't even consider it a legal person until it is born, and medical science confirms a very clear distinction between ***** and neonate.

Any line we draw whether pro choice or pro life will be arbitrary. IMHO, the USSC 1973 did a good job finding a workable arbitrary line with Roe v Wade.

While the pro-life crowd may have varying opinions where that line should be drawn, at least it's relatively consistent from person to person. OTOH, the feminist have no standards what-so-ever and are willing to fall on either side of the line whenever it suits them.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

This all started with you getting upset, man. You’re complaining about not wanting to show evidence, yet you were the one who decided to quote me. So why are you crying so much now when you started it? The problem is that you haven’t proven your point—that’s the issue.

The first link to CNN contains this quote: "Those of us closest to the science of CRISPR understand that it’s a powerful tool that can positively transform our health and world but could potentially be used nefariously." This statement has as much weight as saying nuclear energy can be great but also dangerous.

The second article from Global News includes this: "So, the biggest long-term danger is that, once these artificial intelligences get smarter than we are, they will take control – they’ll make us irrelevant. And that’s quite worrying; and nobody knows how to prevent that for sure, so we need to do lots of research on that right now." This actually supports my view that a truly intelligent AI wouldn’t need to mind-control humans—it would see us as an inefficiency in the system. So, thank you for linking an article that backs up my argument.

Regarding AI attempting to "Escape labs," are you referring to the Tom’s Guide article you posted? Because it literally says, "It's a far cry from heralding the end of humanity in some sci-fi-esque showdown." Want to try again?

Finally, the Harvard article even acknowledges that the world will adapt to and use AI to benefit us against malicious AI actors: *"Eventually, the cyber marketplace will sort things out. In a world full of false material that’s promulgated by AI, there will be lots of AI that can detect the false stuff. 'We will start to build economies around the whack-a-mole problem of the Good Guys AI staying slightly ahead of the Bad Guys most of the time — but not always. And some people will make some real money doing this.'"
How about you read the garbage you post before posting it to see if it back up your viewpoint

Dude, that's just beginner stuff, and it is evidence, are you retarded? Like I said, you're gonna disagree with me no matter what I post. You really don't prove anything yourself. You just try to naysay anything that I say. That's the problem is that you're fronting, you don't actually know what you're talking about. You haven't even done research into the stuff I'm talking about because you can't disprove how the technology works and functions. The technology does work and it does work because it's being field tested right now and they just have to tune it properly and get it rolled out into a corporate product or mass distributable mass production scale, which some of the things have been like mRNA, which is a key part of genetic editing that will be ran by artificial intelligence against your will.

It's far from a dumb subject, which is what you said. You absolutely do not address realistic concerns of the problems with AI. Many experts do and you don't, because you're fronting your knowledge on this subject. That's why you only pick apart what I say. It's not hard for you to do your research. I'm not gonna hold your hand. It's far from a dumb subject which is what started this all. It's just really funny how I'm posting all the knowledge and all you're doing is posting no knowledge and calling me dumb in the meantime. You can quote any small part of any article, doesn't mean you know shit about the big picture. If you did, you'd be able to refute the specific technology that I've mentioned.

All you have to do is ask yourself what would Hitler do with AI? Do you not understand the motives for these people? Why are the richest people in the world working on combining human bodies with machines? Tell me that. The good guys aren't ahead because the good guys don't run the world. If the good guys ran the world, World War III wouldn't be starting. You don't get the motive, you don't get how evil it is.

So keep calling me dumb just for talking about this in whatever way I see it and watch as World War III starts and you are surrounded by artificial intelligence.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

View attachment 61926
That's slapper alright...

Show me where that says ANYTHING about it being legal to kill illegals because they don't have a birth certificate or SSN.

Or do your usual and wait for me to ask seven times, and then claim you already provided the proof...

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

A ***** is human cells but it is not "a human". Chop off your leg. It's human cells. Would you call it "a human"?
A ***** is also not "a person". Legally AND in medical science.

So, are you able to answer the question of WHEN an abortion is "killing a baby", or do you not actually know what to answer?
If you are against abortion, you must have an opinion of WHEN it is wrong. One guy here is against abortion, but only within a certain timeline, possibly because he doesn't know what a zygote is.
What is YOUR answer?

If you're not going to be a part of the conversation, then you are simply trolling the thread.

Is that why you are here? To simply troll the thread and offer nothing of value to the conversation?
It's sure looking that way if you're going to just type random shit and then post a meme like you triumphed over the world.

STFU. You are a clown on the internet. You don't get to dispute medical facts then tell us they are wrong.

Go ******* troll a welfare website secretary man.

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

legal to kill illegals

Show me where I implied anything about the killing part...don't try that spin shit with me

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

Show me where that says ANYTHING about it being legal to kill illegals because they don't have a birth certificate or SSN.

Or do your usual and wait for me to ask seven times, and then claim you already provided the proof...

You said it as okay to deletus a ***** because it's a human. You offered as proof it wasn't a human/person was the lack of SSN & BC.

 

[Old_Slapper]

That's a really odd strawman. Why do you think Mexicans don't get birth certificates and SSNs when they are born? Do you think USA is the only country to issue such things? That's downright weird.

Not only Mexicans are coming across the border illegally.

I forgot that you live under a rock. Many of these immigrants are coming from extremely poor areas where birth is commonly taking place outside of a hospital. Therefore, birth certificates are not provided. On top of that, not all countries have any form an SSN.

Proof?
My mom was born in the Philippines. She was never given a birth certificate or an SSN.

And it doesn't provide an example of a ***** that has been issued a birth certificate and an SSN.
You have to legally be a person to get those.
But go ahead and show me an example where it has happened.

Go back and review what your said. You stated that embryos are not human because they don't have an SSN or birth certificate.

Your challenge is ridiculous because I never said non-humans can get those.

And you demand others live by your beliefs. More specifically, your religious beliefs.

Please show me proof that I demanded ANYONE to believe what I believe. Go ahead! Show me!

I'm not like you. I don't demand that everyone has should live my beliefs.

The story of creation. It's simply not possible that our entire existence is only 6,000 years old when they have physical specimens of humans that are carbon-dated at ~233,000 years old.
The story is a fairy tale, as are many other stories in it.

I do understand there are so many holes in the Bible as well as science. I had the same question back about 30 years ago. This topic can get pretty fricking deep, and it's really fascinating. I'll try to break it down to be as simple as possible.

There are different types of **** Sapiens. They are the "Archaic **** Sapiens,' known as the neanderthal, and the Modern **** Sapiens, which is us.

• AHS date back to 600,000 years ago.
• MHS date back to about 200,000 years ago
• Science showed that they both lived during a certain time frame, but it is unknown how long that was for, but we guess it was for about 150,000 years.
• There is no scientific proof on when the MHS was created, but there are many theories. Evolution, of course, is the best theory science can come up with, but there are no fossils to show the actual stages. It was almost like there were neanderthals evolving, then all of a sudden, here's the MHS.
• The MHS is believed to have come from Africa due to the oldest remains being found there. The oldest AHS was found in the European area.

So, now for the Bible's 6,000 year question.

• Adam and Eve were placed in the Garden Of Eden, which is estimated to be around the northeast area of Africa or even Iraq.
• During this time, there was no true way to measure time, so there is no way anyone one could know what day it was or how old they really were.
• In the Bible, it states, for God, 1 day is 1 thousand years. Meaning, the time stated is more of a metaphor for a time, but not the actual time. For example, the Bible states that the earth was created in 6 days. We all know that isn't true, so we consider 6 days actually means 6 stages.
• The Bible states that Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden for a substantial amount of time before they were forced out. We have no idea how long that was, but we do know it was an extremely long time.

Science bases many of its calculations off of theories. This means that some of their final thoughts are not 100% factual. For example, science still cannot explain where the mega dinosaurs came from.

Dude,
I can go on for hours showing you documents that would have you question things.

Already showed it to you.
I never said enslave homosexuals. I said enslave the enemy. Deuteronomy 20.

I don't see it stated that we should enslave the enemy, but you should read these.
“Whoever steals a man and sells him, and anyone found in possession of him, shall be put to death.” (Exodus 21:16)

“If a man is found stealing one of his brothers of the people of Israel, and if he mistreats or sells him, then that thief shall die. So you shall purge the evil from your midst.” (Deuteronomy 24:7 ESV).

I did no such thing.

Whatever! At your age, I can see why you don't remember.

A zygote is the UNION of the sperm and the egg.
There is no UNION if they are not TOGETHER. Let's try again:

zygote - a diploid cell resulting from the fusion of two haploid gametes; a fertilized ovum.
fusion - the process or result of joining two or more things together to form a single entity
diploid - a cell or organism that has two complete sets of chromosomes
Perhaps YOU need a refresher on English comprehension?

So, what you're saying is, a zygote is actually a human?

Embryos are formed by mitosis, not by cells "coming together".
They literally split to form new cells.
mitosis - a process of cell division that produces two identical daughter cells from a single parent cell
A ***** is formed by the process of mitosis; after fertilization, the zygote (a single cell formed by the fusion of sperm and egg) repeatedly divides through mitosis to create a multitude of cells, which eventually develop into an embryo and then a *****
Did you skip anatomy and physiology in high school?

So you needed me to spell it out for you? You actually want me to go through all the stages?

You are asking me if I skipped anatomy and physiology when you're the one who can't define a woman or whether or not an embryo is a human?

Hahahaha. You identified a zygote incorrectly, and identified a dog ***** as human.

I can't believe you are so childish. What a typical liberal to pull words out of nothing.

The law says a ***** is not legally a person. It is made of human cells, for sure, but not legally a person.
You said aborting a zygote is not "killing a baby". So, at what point of gestation does it become "a baby"?
Thx guesses it's between 8 and 9 weeks, but will not commit beyond that. How about you?

I just provided you proof that it is a felony to maliciously kill an embryo in the state of California. If it wasn't a person, then why would California care what happens to it?

Technically, it's a baby once it's born. Before that, it's an embryo.

This is the best way to explain it.

https://www.focusonthefamily.com/pro-life/when-does-a-*****-become-a-baby/

At what point would you say an abortion should not happen? Can you put a time frame on that?

Oh? Over 1,000 wars were started due to Christianity. Ever hear of the Crusades?
Jesus said "“But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.”
Lets do the math on THAT.

The bible is full of parables. This is to mean that those who don't believe in me, bring them to me and I will judge them. Some people took these sayings literally and used them to get what they wanted. Yes, the Catholic church has started more wars, in the name of God, than any other group of people. I would love to be there when God judges them for their actions.

You're parroting the AI result an awful lot. But the AI results are very often a "survey says" type of compendium.
if the "survey said" that the moon is bigger than the sun, would you accept it because the AI result told you so?

So you're saying that article was AI generated? If that is your defense, then all of your articles for proof are AI generated.

Why can't you just believe that most pro-abortion biologist believe that a ***** is a human?

So can you show me a B.C. and an SSN issue to a *****, or not?

Sure, right after you show me that I stated a ***** gets a birth certificate and SSN.

What is your cut-off time for an abortion?

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

RobGMN has lost any and all credibility with me the moment he decided that medical experts have no idea what they are talking about. He thinks that definitions from the Oxford dictionary are the only correct definitions so I gave him Oxford definitions... he disputed them as well.

Bottom line, in Rob's mind, he is right about everything and we are all wrong even if we agree with him. If we agree with him he will argue our agreement as if he is the only person entitled to his opinion. Rob is a cowcunt.

 

[Old_Slapper]

Rob, you mentioned the Great Flood.

We don't believe the entire earth was flooded. That would be almost impossible. However, we do believe there was a great flood that covered that entire region, and there is proof of that. If you research on where Noah was and where there is actual proof of a great flood, then you will notice they are both in the same region and took place at about the same time.

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

Rob when called on his bs...

 

[Old_Slapper]

Show me where that says ANYTHING about it being legal to kill illegals because they don't have a birth certificate or SSN.

Or do your usual and wait for me to ask seven times, and then claim you already provided the proof...

You stated that a ***** is not human because they don't have a BC and SSN and you believe it is legal to kill a ***** because of that. If that is your logic, then...

Your words, not ours.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

STFU. You are a clown on the internet. You don't get to dispute medical facts then tell us they are wrong.

Go ******* troll a welfare website secretary man.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.
Says the guy who claimed the world of medical science is wrong about bones having nerves IN them, because they use the word "in" wrong, but do so to make it easier for the layman to understand.
Says the guy who claims that nerves IN bones is only a "theory".
Says the guy who claims that a persons mental ****** identity is determined by their genitals, but can't account for people who are born with no genitalia or with both male and female genitalia, because that's a rare event.

So, are you able to answer the question of WHEN an abortion is "killing a baby", or do you not actually know what to answer?
If you are against abortion, you must have an opinion of WHEN it is wrong. One guy here is against abortion, but only within a certain timeline, possibly because he doesn't know what a zygote is.
What is YOUR answer?

If you're not going to be a part of the conversation, then you are simply trolling the thread.
If you're here simply to troll and not converse, at least say so and your posts can be regarded in that light.
Which is it? You a troll, or not?

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Are you on yet another break Rob? How are you saving the taxpayers money trolling a car audio web site?

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.
Says the guy who claimed the world of medical science is wrong about bones having nerves IN them, because they use the word "in" wrong, but do so to make it easier for the layman to understand.
Says the guy who claims that nerves IN bones is only a "theory".
Says the guy who claims that a persons mental ****** identity is determined by their genitals, but can't account for people who are born with no genitalia or with both male and female genitalia, because that's a rare event.

So, are you able to answer the question of WHEN an abortion is "killing a baby", or do you not actually know what to answer?
If you are against abortion, you must have an opinion of WHEN it is wrong. One guy here is against abortion, but only within a certain timeline, possibly because he doesn't know what a zygote is.
What is YOUR answer?

If you're not going to be a part of the conversation, then you are simply trolling the thread.
If you're here simply to troll and not converse, at least say so and your posts can be regarded in that light.
Which is it? You a troll, or not?

ROUND AND ROUND WE GO. KEEP POSTING THE SAME TROLLING QUESTIONS. PERHAPS IF YOU POST THEM ON OTHER WEBSITES TOO, YOU MAY GET AN ANSWER.