21
   

When does baby's life start?

 
 
TheJackal
 
  2  
Reply Thu 25 Dec, 2014 10:11 pm
@TheJackal,
Adding to my previous post..

Quote:
Strange reply indeed! How about children who communicated, e.g. by dreams, with the mother before they were physically born?


I would love to see the scientific peer review paper on this claim. I know of no evidence showing mothers communicating with a fetus by "Dreams", and I would argue best case scenario it's the mother's own dream, as in dreaming she is communicating with a fetus. Yeah, a magical talking fetus... O.o
NSFW (view)
FBM
 
  3  
Reply Thu 25 Dec, 2014 10:18 pm
For what it's worth, language acquisition begins in the womb:
Quote:
"This research confirms that the mother is the primary initiator of language and suggests that there is a neurobiological link between prenatal language acquisition and motor skills involved in speech," Lassonde said.


Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2010-12-mom-voice-special-role-newborn.html#jCp
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  3  
Reply Thu 25 Dec, 2014 10:43 pm
@Rickoshay75,
Neocons just love to control women; their bodies and vaginas. They have nothing better to do to improve the standard of living for all Americans.

They're supposed to be the party of less government intrusion. Somebody needs to remind them of their party ideology.
coldjoint
 
  0  
Reply Thu 25 Dec, 2014 10:45 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
Neocons just love to control women; their bodies and vaginas.


You do(or say) nothing to stop Islams treatment of women, so I guess the Neocons have nothing to worry about.
0 Replies
 
Quehoniaomath
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Dec, 2014 02:21 am
@TheJackal,
Quote:
I would love to see the scientific peer review paper on this claim. I know of no evidence showing mothers communicating with a fetus by "Dreams", and I would argue best case scenario it's the mother's own dream, as in dreaming she is communicating with a fetus. Yeah, a magical talking fetus... O.o


O peer reviewed eh??? Keep on dreaming mate!
Of course children can talk with their mother by dreams, the same as people who have died do that.
Nothing special. But of course, 'science' wouldn't admit that, they would lose their status quo. Anyone thinking 'science' is honest and looking fro truth is in a deep somnambulistic trance.

Quote:
Pre-Birth Communication
by Elisabeth Hallett

When does the connection of parent and child begin? Is it at birth, or is it some time during pregnancy, when the first fluttery kicks announce the baby's presence? Does it begin at the moment of conception - or perhaps even earlier? Experiences of pre-birth communication reveal that we may be in touch with our future children long before there is any physical link at all. Many parents describe a one-time contact, an unforgettable glimpse of the person to come. Others enjoy a series of "visits" that allow them to get acquainted with their child even before conception. Renee's story involves this kind of courting relationship. She shared it with me when her daughter was close to a year old.

"My dreams about my daughter started about one year before we conceived her. My husband and I weren't trying hard to have a baby, but thought that if it happened it was meant to be. I remember going to bed one night wondering to myself when I would become a mother. That night, I had a dream that seemed to last all night long. I was talking to a little girl in the dream. We were just light and carefree and chatting about anything and everything. I woke up remembering the dream vividly and feeling great.

"Over the course of the next year, I would have a dream like this at least once a month, sometimes more often than that. We'd spend hours playing and laughing and enjoying each other. For a while I didn't know her name or even that she was the child I would give birth to. I finally asked her if she was my daughter and she said 'yes.' I asked her when I would get to meet her in the flesh and she said 'soon.'


More here..
http://www.naturalchild.org/guest/elisabeth_hallett3.html
TheJackal
 
  2  
Reply Fri 26 Dec, 2014 03:59 am
@Quehoniaomath,
Where is their data, what is their methodology, and where is their published work? Oh, they don't have any of that, and they only have claims while they haven't actually done any science. Look, appealing to conspiracy theories about science to try and give your non-academic citation credulity is laughable. However, even within that which you quoted, we can already find pseudoscience :

Quote:
When does the connection of parent and child begin? Is it at birth, or is it some time during pregnancy, when the first fluttery kicks announce the baby's presence? Does it begin at the moment of conception - or perhaps even earlier?


First of all, any kicking generally begins with reflexes, and later when the brain actually develops connections to the nervous system to which connect to the legs and feet. And even then, any conscious kicking isn't till those higher order brain functions develop. Next, kicking isn't a form of communication, there is no language involved and not transmission of meaningful information. Furthermore, your citation doesn't define what a "connection to parent" even means. So far the above speaks of physical connection and awareness, not some talking fetus telepathically communicating with the mother in her dreams.

Quote:
"My dreams about my daughter started about one year before we conceived her.


Magical talking fetus before conception.. Yeahhhh....., I think it's safe to say this woman is selling bullshit.

Quote:
That night, I had a dream that seemed to last all night long. I was talking to a little girl in the dream. We were just light and carefree and chatting about anything and everything. I woke up remembering the dream vividly and feeling great.


Yeah, and I had a dream of owning a kitten and how it would play and communicate with me, love me, and so forth.. Wow, the cat I found must have been her! /s ... Sheesh, I even had a dream that I was a space ranger to, and even reoccurring dreams about things I've really wanted. I'm sorry, but this argument through made up testimonials is severely lacking in credulity. All it shows at best is that someone can dream about something they want, especially if it is something they really and deeply want. As in that which they are emotionally invested into wanting.. This reminds me of vivid dreams such as the guy who suffered a deep water blackout and then supposedly experienced leaving Earth, flying through space, and meeting aliens.. Well, that was just a dream too and didn't really happen either.

Essentially, you let me know when they get published in an accredited journal, when they do the science, and when they can survive peer review. You let me know when they can present a magical communicating fetus missing it's atoms, and by what data connection they are using. Especially when cognitive information is in the format of ion and photon based information, this in which biological systems such as the brain use to communicate.

Basically, you're asking us to believe in magic through appeals to ignorance and emotion. I'm left wanting to be impressed.

Oh, and I checked out the source citation from the journal of psychology, and not to my surprise it was quote mined. Hence it doesn't actually say what you're trying to imply, or what the loon of that website was trying to imply what-so-ever.

https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1P3-1380835871/two-voices-from-the-womb-evidence-for-physically

Prenatal development of consciousness is likely as the brain develops. Especially after 27 weeks. The only thing the paper establishes is that sensory information in the womb become a part of a fetuses conscious self. But sadly the paper references sources of woo as well such as those that claim superphenomenal sources, a fancy word for injecting supernatural woo.. What's worse, is that this paper has not inspired any further research into it's claims. It's also not in an accredited journal, it is rather a journal in where if you pay a fee, you can get pretty much anything published. It also states a claim that this is somehow beyond physics even though we know that consciousness is most likely a state of matter..., this being since we discovered that energy and information are two sides of the same coin, and that we are physically effected by time particle dilation... Yes, consciousness is physical, and likely electromagnetic phenomenon:

http://arxiv.org/abs/1401.1219

We understand it well enough that we can now start developing ion based transistors and processors to which can directly communicate with biological systems such as the brain. Even the color you see is Ion / photon (electromagnetic) waves and frequencies. That's right, your visual conscious state is electromagnetic sensory information. We can take it away, and even give it back in certain cases such as 3D printing you a new retina.
TheJackal
 
  2  
Reply Fri 26 Dec, 2014 05:05 am
@TheJackal,
I would also like to add that the author of the paper cited gets some fundamental things wrong such as saying memory is the source of consciousness when in fact sensory information to which is processed by the brain is. Sensory data that is actively processed and as well as stored. Stored sensory data can be recalled and used such as color, shapes, and experiences etc. That which such can also be used to construct dreams, or figments of the imagination like smurfs.. Hence I can take just 4 descriptive words to construct a figment of the imagination:

One
Eyed
Green
Monster

From this, the brain can and will play with shapes, color, and experiences to produce an imaginary one-eyed green monster. All of which is based on sensory information processed into a single frame of reference you know as the conscious state. Furthermore, a fetus can't have consciousness without first the development of the brain and it's sensory systems, or even have so much as a sense of direction without geometric data. Hence if you have nothing to process information with, or store it, you can't possibly be conscious. Though you can feel free to demonstrate someone missing their brain holding a conscious conversation at anytime you feel like proving me wrong here. However I can easily demonstrate my point :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XM4rS38pd0U

0 Replies
 
Quehoniaomath
 
  0  
Reply Fri 26 Dec, 2014 05:27 am
@TheJackal,
Whatever I will write, you won't believe it.
You even don't understand what I wrote about the religion called 'science'.
The ONLY thing is that your belief systems won't allow this.

It is ok. Some indoctrinations run deep, very deep.

Such is the nature of things.
TheJackal
 
  2  
Reply Fri 26 Dec, 2014 06:01 am
@Quehoniaomath,
What-ever you write without supporting yourself empirically is meaningless. But if you want to call evidence based methodology "Science" a religion, then feel free to do so even though that would be incoherent to call a methodology a religion or a belief system.. Thus far you present pleading arguments desperate for credulity they do not have. Dogmatic discourse is also meaningless, and thus you are right that I wont believe you as you have provide nothing worth consideration. Did you seriously think I should take what you say as fact on faith? Heck, you can't even outline your methodology for establishing your position..

You let me know when you can prove your position and claim. You don't get a free pass, or get to hide behind excuses.
Quehoniaomath
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 26 Dec, 2014 07:21 am
@TheJackal,
Quote:
What-ever you write without supporting yourself empirically is meaningless. But if you want to call evidence based methodology "Science" a religion, then feel free to do so even though that would be incoherent to call a methodology a religion or a belief system.. Thus far you present pleading arguments desperate for credulity they do not have. Dogmatic discourse is also meaningless, and thus you are right that I wont believe you as you have provide nothing worth consideration. Did you seriously think I should take what you say as fact on faith? Heck, you can't even outline your methodology for establishing your position..

You let me know when you can prove your position and claim. You don't get a free pass, or get to hide behind excuses.


bla bla bla
You don't even understood one yota of what I have written.

Just continue your dependence unon a religion called science.

That is ok with me, mate.


It is just as I said eralier: Some indoctrinations run deep, very deep.

0 Replies
 
NSFW (view)
Quehoniaomath
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 26 Dec, 2014 12:12 pm
@TheJackal,
Quote:
Yeah, and I had a dream of owning a kitten and how it would play and communicate with me, love me, and so forth


Well, there IS such a thing as an animal communicater:

Maybe check this out!

The incredible story of how leopard Diabolo became Spirit - Anna Breytenbach, "animal communicator".




An Interview With An Animal Communicator - Anna Breytenbach






You see the world that is sold to us by education and universities and
mainstream media has NOTHING TO DO WITH REALITY.

It is there to HIDE REALITY!

TheJackal
 
  3  
Reply Fri 26 Dec, 2014 12:40 pm
@Quehoniaomath,
Animal communicators rely on well studied animal behaviors, calls, and body language. And even then you have your frauds out there.

Quote:
You see the world that is sold to us by education and universities and
mainstream media has NOTHING TO DO WITH REALITY.


Lol, that is a typical argument by those trying to make their ideas seem like they have credulity in fields they have no education in.. Reminds me of the Banana man arguments, or those of Kent Hoven. And universities are not mainstream media, they are educational institutions of higher academia. They teach things like computer science and applications such as that which you are using now to which has everything to do with "REALITY". You're arguments a laughable, and so terribly bad that I suspect you are likely just trolling than actually trying to have meaningful discussion . Either that, or you're actually really uneducated and gullible to believe anything any woo talker will send your way..
Quehoniaomath
 
  0  
Reply Fri 26 Dec, 2014 12:49 pm
@TheJackal,
Quote:
Animal communicators rely on well studied animal behaviors, calls, and body language. And even then you have your frauds out there.


No, it seems you haven't seen both of the video's so much is clear!

Quote:
Lol, that is a typical argument by those trying to make their ideas seem like they have credulity in fields they have no education in..


Where wouldn't I have 'education' in, mate?


Quote:
Reminds me of the Banana man arguments, or those of Kent Hoven. And universities are not mainstream media, they are educational institutions of higher academia. They teach things like computer science and applications such as that which you are using now to which has everything to do with "REALITY".


Oh ic, well you are then not aware that there is not one invention that is because of the what you so inapropriate call "educational institutions of higher academia". In reality they are indoctrination institues.




Quote:
You're arguments a laughable, and so terribly bad that I suspect you are likely just trolling than actually trying to have meaningful discussion . Either that, or you're actually really uneducated and gullible to believe anything any woo talker will send your way..


Hmm trying some Ad Hominem's now because you are out of arguments?
I am not trolling, but I think you want to thik that is so, because you can better deal with that.

I have my personal reasons to believe what I wrote.


But as I have said, considering your 'arguments'' is that you are too dependent on mainstream information. Everything that runs counter to that seems to be impossible to you. It is also called a 'closed mind'.


As said, that is ok with me. Everybody is entitled to their religion.
And yes, I mean that.




Now, tel me why you haven't watched the video's btw?




0 Replies
 
Quehoniaomath
 
  0  
Reply Fri 26 Dec, 2014 12:56 pm
For our more open minded audience:
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/71G6gSfGpYL._SL500_SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg
http://www.amazon.com/Babies-Remember-Birth-Extaordinary-Discoveries/dp/0345364112


Quote:
The best part of this book is its collection of awesome, authenticated birth (and pre-birth) memories. They support the belief that babies are beings of a very high level of consciousness at the time of birth, to a degree that most people would never suspect. This book belongs on a list about spirituality as much as it belongs on a list about birth. The memories that many people are able to retrieve about their births indicate that tiny infants indeed come into the world "trailing clouds of glory". Their emotions and level of understanding at birth are those of fully evolved spiritual beings, who--one assumes--lose their memories of a former spiritual existence as they mature. Anyone who is truly open to the message of this book will be deeply moved by stories such as the one about the baby in the womb who was worried about his mother because he understood that she was bleeding and near death. After reading this book, you're very likely to want your baby to have as gentle and natural a birth as possible--and you just might be careful what you say in the delivery room!
TheJackal
 
  3  
Reply Fri 26 Dec, 2014 12:56 pm
@DNA Thumbs drive,
That isn't a life I brought, your statement makes no sense. The photo looks like a premature birth. It doesn't establish anything concerning such claims being discussed.
Quehoniaomath
 
  0  
Reply Fri 26 Dec, 2014 01:05 pm
@TheJackal,
Quote:
That isn't a life I brought, your statement makes no sense. The photo looks like a premature birth. It doesn't establish anything concerning such claims being discussed.


read this very good books, mate! Might turn you around !

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41YoOseOSYL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg
http://www.amazon.com/Windows-Womb-Revealing-Conscious-Conception/dp/1583945512/ref=pd_cp_b_1

Quote:
Perhaps the most remarkable aspects of this book are its revolutionary empirical details about fetal memories reported by young children and the lucid and entrancing writing style of its author. The first chapters take any uninformed reader through a captivating learning experience of the exciting details of how a human comes to be, written in easily understood prose. Much of the latter part of the book contains anecdotal individual case reports, each followed by brief clinical commentaries. There is no mistaking the significant impact that the research exemplified by this book must have on health professionals as well as the clergy and even pro-life advocates. Prospective parents and other laity will substantially enhance their understanding and appreciation for fetuses as "little humans," especially since traumatic emotional events experienced by parents can be sensed and affect fetuses for an indeterminate future, yet go undetected and unsuccessfully treated with traditional obstetric, pediatric, and psychological care. Worth many times its purchase price!

0 Replies
 
Linkat
 
  2  
Reply Fri 26 Dec, 2014 01:12 pm
@Quehoniaomath,
I remember after my first born - the nurse telling me how very intelligent these little creatures are - I think many people have difficulty believing anything that is very concrete and solid that they can touch and see. It doesn't mean what is all stated in this book is necessarily true; however, there is much that is not concrete and solid that is true. Just because one cannot prove something and see something does not make it untrue.

I think one thing written in the notes on this book is about how babies used to be whisked away from the mother; now they are put immediately on the mom's chest skin to skin to give comfort and security. It is obvious with the baby's reaction how this is good for them without there being solid concrete evidence like the baby saying thanks mom that feels good.

there is alot of complexity in the brain that is not known. I would be open minded to the spiritual side - the human being is much more complex than our scientific minds can fully understand.
0 Replies
 
TheJackal
 
  2  
Reply Fri 26 Dec, 2014 01:30 pm
@Quehoniaomath,
Babies that remember the birthing process is certainly possible as I would imagine babies born and alive have a functional brain and sensory systems. It would be no shocking revelation that some people remember birth. However, Chamberlain is known for his pseudoscience in proclaiming that babies before and after birth think and feel like full grown adults. He of course provides no actual evidence, and rather sticks to authority arguments and assertions. A lot of this stuff was supported by Pre- and Perinatal Psychology and Health (APPPAH), a well know crank / pseudoscience organization that has never actually done any science. They are equivalent to the Flat Earth Society, or the Creation Institute. In fact, I don't even think they exist anymore as a quick search comes up blank.. Same goes for that supposed scientific journal.

Worse still, much of his crap stems from the Church of Scientology, yeah as if that **** was ever credible.. Yep, Chamberlain cites L. Ron Hubbard, founder of the “Church of Scientology”, and his “auditing” methods. He uses Ron's handbook of techniques for ‘auditors’ taught a method of tracing symptoms back to their supposed asserted origins, some of which they claim, through assertion, to that of birth or in the womb. Hence he claims ‘dianetic reverie’ …, a supposed mental state in which they could have access to painful ‘recordings’ (not memories) ‘locked’ in the cells of the body. Yep, access to information that does not exist, but rather uses dishonest psychological suggestion regarding scars while patients are either drugged or hypnotized. They even were found to brainwash people into believing they had experiences they never actually had through suggestion and emotional / pyshcological manipulation. Hence if you can get them to attach a strong emotion to a planted idea, you have a good chance of making them believe it. You can't get much more pseudo-scientific, or crank than that. That is how cults brainwash their victims, and largely by targeting their vulnerabilities. You should read a few books on the mechanics of brainwashing, and what that has to do with cults such as Scientology and this sort of BS that can't survive in the academic arena.

Yeah, there is a reason why this crap doesn't make it into an accredited journal, or ever pass peer review. They insist on the supernatural explanation, and yet there are millions of dollars out there in reward money for if they ever were to prove their claims according to the scientific method. But hey, if you can make money off stupid people, why bother with actually conducting science and relying on verifiable evidence. Heck, many of his supposed patients also appear to be made up, as in don't actually exist. This as with much of his supposed evidence to which can magically only be repeated by making it up and asserting it.



 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/06/2021 at 03:39:50