Zygote, Fetus, Clump of Cells, Alive, Dead???

No, you're still not answering the questions coward. A

Your post doesn't mean anything. The end product of SCNT is not a human with A2, it's stem cells. I could care less about implantation or any other method, the end result is not a human. I'm perfectly okay with the definition that A2 makes, you yourself have offered definitions where the definition of a clone is a full human being, that's just not what is happening.

Now answer my questions.

1) If I cloned your liver, would it be cloning a human being?
2) What about a sperm or egg? Would this be human cloning to you?
3) What are you so affraid of?

0 Replies

...oh the sound of silence.

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

The end product of SCNT is not a human with A2, it's stem cells. I could care less about implantation or any other method, the end result is not a human. I'm perfectly okay with the definition that A2 makes, you yourself have offered definitions where the definition of a clone is a full human being, that's just not what is happening.

The AMA calls it a human embryo, from which stem cells are then extracted.

You either don't understand the issue, or are telling the truth 'you could care less'.

But it is still a human embryo.

0 Replies

and then a...

human nerve,
human liver,
human eye,

but it's still never a human is it?

I'm still enjoying your silent answers to my questions. Speak up librarian.

0 Replies

If you extract stem cells from a human embryo in order to produce a liver, a nerve, an eye, etc you destroy the embryo in the process.

The human embryo produced by the SCNT process is just that -- a human embryo.

It's a clone.

Just because it is not implanted in the womb does not mean it's not a clone, regardless of the 'legal definition' which the supporters of A2 foisted upon the gullible voters of Missouri.

So when you say 'no humans are being produced' you are incorrect.

Why don't you respond to the AMA statement I posted to that effect?

Talk about silence.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

If you extract stem cells from a human embryo in order to produce a liver, a nerve, an eye, etc you destroy the embryo in the process.

The human embryo produced by the SCNT process is just that -- a human embryo.

It's a clone.

Just because it is not implanted in the womb does not mean it's not a clone, regardless of the 'legal definition' which the supporters of A2 foisted upon the gullible voters of Missouri.

So when you say 'no humans are being produced' you are incorrect.

Why don't you respond to the AMA statement I posted to that effect?

Talk about silence.

Repost the statement, with your answers to my questions, and then I'll answer.

0 Replies

In case you hadn't recognized it, that IS the answer to your question.

Your premise that they are 'cloning a liver, an eye, etc and not producing a human' is false.

The AMA says it is[/u] a human embryo, from which[/u] stem cells are then extracted to make a liver, etc.

What am I afraid of?

Well, it is kinda scary that folks like you who don't understand the issue voted on it.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

The AMA says it is[/u] a human embryo, from which[/u] stem cells are then extracted to make a liver, etc.

.

So if cells are extracted that makes in cloning? So when the nurse draws red blood cells she is cloning. If you pull some hair out it is cloning. Since pulling hair out is cloning that would mean cutting your hair is cloning. Clipping your fingernails would be cloning. No one is denying that the person all this extraction of cells is occurring to is human, are they?

Extracting cells is not cloning of human life. Until you can show those cells are grown into a breathing human able to survive on his/her own there is no human clone. Arguing that the fetus is killed after the cells are extracted is a red herring. It has nothing to do with the issue of "cloning."

0 Replies

parados wrote:

real life wrote:

The AMA says it is[/u] a human embryo, from which[/u] stem cells are then extracted to make a liver, etc.

.

So if cells are extracted that makes in cloning?

No.

Read the AMA statement.

The SCNT process produces a human embryo. That is cloning.

From that, they destroy the embryo to extract stem cells.

Amendment 2 in Missouri was sold to the public by inserting a false definition of cloning, i.e. that it is only cloning if the product of SCNT, (the embryo), is implanted in the uterus.

0 Replies

You still don't ahve a human in the end. Say all you like, it doen't change that.

As for answerring my questions, not hardly. Try again.

and While I wait...

Hello darkness, my old friend
I've come to talk with you again
Because a vision softly creeping
Left its seeds while I was sleeping
And the vision that was planted in my brain
Still remains
Within the sound of silence

In restless dreams I walked alone
Narrow streets of cobblestone
'Neath the halo of a street lamp
I turn my collar to the cold and damp
When my eyes were stabbed by the flash of a neon light
That split the night
And touched the sound of silence

And in the naked light I saw
Ten thousand people maybe more
People talking without speaking
People hearing without listening
People writing songs that voices never shared
No one dared
Disturb the sound of silence

"Fools," said I, "you do not know
Silence like a cancer grows
Hear my words that I might teach you
Take my arms that I might reach you"
But my words like silent raindrops fell
And echoed in the wells of silence

And the people bowed and prayed
To the neon god they made
And the sign flashed out its warning
In the words that it was forming
And the sign said "The words of the prophets
Are written on the subway walls
And tenement halls
And whispered in the sound of silence"

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

You still don't ahve a human in the end.

No, you don't if you've killed him/her by destroying the human embryo to harvest stem cells.

If the human embryo was allowed to grow and the stem cells not harvested, do you agree that it would develop into a human being?

If so, then in what way is this human embryo different from one that would be implanted into the womb to be born 9 months later?

If you don't agree that the product of SCNT is a human embryo, then exactly what error do you attribute to the AMA statement?

0 Replies

"Grow into" and "human" are different forms of life. A seed is not a tree no matter how much you wish to twist the definition of "human."

0 Replies

What is the difference between a human embryo (that is what the AMA calls it) produced by SCNT and destroyed to harvest stem cells.........

............and a human embryo produced by SCNT and implanted in the womb to be born?

Are they biologically different at all?

If there is no biological distinction, then are they not the same?

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:
You still don't have a human in the end.

No, you don't if you've killed him/her by destroying the human embryo to harvest stem cells.

If the human embryo was allowed to grow and the stem cells not harvested, do you agree that it would develop into a human being?

Not if it wasn't in a womb. And if it was in a womb, guess what... I know you'll hate it... wait for it... it would be a clone, even if by symantics, it's a resonable definition.

Quote:

If so, then in what way is this human embryo different from one that would be implanted into the womb to be born 9 months later?

As it has been explained by yourself: The difference is that it isn't in a womb and won't ever be.

Quote:

If you don't agree that the product of SCNT is a human embryo, then exactly what error do you attribute to the AMA statement?

Again, one of little logic, I won't defend a statement which I have not made. You've answered for me. If anything a embryo, as a part of stem cell cultivation, is a ignot. The final product is not a human.

For you to make as firm a stance as you have about the super secret conspiracy to clone humans and make some secular army of evolutionist-abortioners, you've provided no reasons yet to qualify such a posture.

Quote:

"Grow into" and "human" are different forms of life. A seed is not a tree no matter how much you wish to twist the definition of "human."

I'm sure this won't register with you, but to sensible people it does.

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

real life wrote:
Diest TKO wrote:
You still don't have a human in the end.

No, you don't if you've killed him/her by destroying the human embryo to harvest stem cells.

If the human embryo was allowed to grow and the stem cells not harvested, do you agree that it would develop into a human being?

Not if it wasn't in a womb. And if it was in a womb, guess what... I know you'll hate it... wait for it... it would be a clone, even if by symantics, it's a resonable definition.

Quote:

If so, then in what way is this human embryo different from one that would be implanted into the womb to be born 9 months later?

As it has been explained by yourself: The difference is that it isn't in a womb and won't ever be.

Quote:

If you don't agree that the product of SCNT is a human embryo, then exactly what error do you attribute to the AMA statement?

Again, one of little logic, I won't defend a statement which I have not made. You've answered for me. If anything a embryo, as a part of stem cell cultivation, is a ignot. The final product is not a human.

For you to make as firm a stance as you have about the super secret conspiracy to clone humans and make some secular army of evolutionist-abortioners, you've provided no reasons yet to qualify such a posture.

Quote:

"Grow into" and "human" are different forms of life. A seed is not a tree no matter how much you wish to twist the definition of "human."

I'm sure this won't register with you, but to sensible people it does.

You are using the political definition of 'clone' as conjured up by the proponents of A2.

But you ignore the medical definitions of 'clone' given by medical sources that I have cited.

Why do you toss science out the window for political reasons?

0 Replies

clone (kln)
n.
1. A cell, group of cells, or organism descended from and genetically identical to a single common ancestor, such as a bacterial colony whose members arose from a single original cell.
2. An organism descended asexually from a single ancestor, such as a plant produced by layering or a polyp produced by budding.
3. A DNA sequence, such as a gene, that is transferred from one organism to another and replicated by genetic engineering techniques.
v.
1. To make multiple identical copies of a DNA sequence.
2. To create or propagate an organism from a clone cell:
3. To establish and maintain pure lineages of a cell under laboratory conditions.
4. To reproduce or propagate asexually.

0 Replies

clone, group of organisms, all of which are descended from a single individual through asexual reproduction, as in a pure cell culture of bacteria. Except for changes in the hereditary material that come about by mutation, all members of a clone are genetically identical. Laboratory experiments in in vitro fertilization of human eggs led in 1993 to the "cloning" of human embryos by dividing such fertilized eggs at a very early stage of development, but this technique actually produces a twin rather than a clone. In a true mammalian clone the nucleus from a body cell of an animal is inserted into an egg, which then develops into an individual that is genetically identical to the original animal.
Later experiments in cloning resulted in the development of a sheep from a cell of an adult ewe (in Scotland, in 1996), and since then rodents, cattle, swine, and other animals have also been cloned from adult animals. Despite these trumpeted successes, producing cloned mammals is enormously difficult, with most attempts ending in failure; cloning succeeds 4% or less of the time in the species that have been successfully cloned. In addition, some studies have indicated that cloned animals are less healthy than normally reproduced animals.

In 2001 researchers in Massachusetts announced that they were trying to clone humans in an attempt to extract stem cells. The National Academy of Sciences, while supporting (2001) such so-called therapeutic or research cloning, has opposed (2002) the cloning of humans for reproductive purposes, deeming it unsafe, but many ethicists, religious and political leaders, and others have called for banning human cloning for any purpose. South Korean scientists announced in 2004 that they had cloned 30 human embryos, but an investigation in 2005 determined that the data had been fabricated.

0 Replies

So what you're saying is that this entire arguement is quite futile as SCNT doens't reproduce a clone but a twin?

Well, if that's the case then I think I'm done here. I've used the legal definition, the end result is not a human. I'm satsfied, as is Missouri. You're reasons for contempt of A2 have never held any water.

you're conspiracy theory is lame.

RL - I'm tired of the sound of silence. I'm switching songs. You had your chance to speak up. you don't know how to think for yourself. Pathetic.

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

So what you're saying is that this entire arguement is quite futile as SCNT doens't reproduce a clone but a twin?

Apparently you didn't understand CI's post. Dividing a fertilized egg early in it's development produces a twin. SCNT produces a human embryo which is a clone.

Diest TKO wrote:

Well, if that's the case then I think I'm done here.

It's not the case, but you've been done for a long time. You just didn't know it.

Diest TKO wrote:

I've used the legal definition,

Only in Missouri.

The medical definition is the one that really means something, not some fabricated definition voted on by the general public.

Notice that the definition posted by CI (that right wing fanatic ) says nothing about it only being a clone if it's implanted in the uterus.

I thought you were all about science?

Diest TKO wrote:

the end result is not a human.

The end result is a dead human if you destroy the human embryo.

Diest TKO wrote:

I'm satsfied, as is Missouri.

So?

Diest TKO wrote:

You're reasons for contempt of A2 have never held any water.

You apparently don't yet understand A2, or at least want to pretend you don't.

Diest TKO wrote:

you're conspiracy theory is lame.

I'd love to have you explain what you're talking about. I need a good laugh. Your previous post talked about

"the super secret conspiracy to clone humans and make some secular army of evolutionist-abortioners"[/u][/i]

Were you on drugs when you wrote this? You sure weren't quoting me.

Diest TKO wrote:

RL - I'm tired of the sound of silence. I'm switching songs. You had your chance to speak up. you don't know how to think for yourself. Pathetic.

Unstop your ears. I've answered you repeatedly. You simply don't like or don't understand what you hear.

Find a biology major in Rolla and have him explain it to you.

0 Replies

I'm sure if my biology major friends were on A2K, they'd have something to expalina to you. As for your conspiracy, you have several times made the unfounded claim that A2 was about making money.

So since you've never said what you're so affraid of then I can only assume from the crap that you post that you believe that this is a some huge conspiracy.

Further,
If we make a liver and put it in someone's chest, by your illogic we are putting a dead human in a human's chest.

Further,
Since the product is ultimately not a human, the point of all this is that it's not the murder as you have described.

I'm all about science. Medical science is a observable science. If you cultivate stemcells into a nerve or a liver, you can observe without doubt that the product is certainly a nerve or a liver. VERY CLEAR. You seem to stop short of that fact.

Further,
You are nobody to refute the legal definition here in MO.

Further,
I am done trying to rationalize with the irrational. You refuse to use your mind.

Finally,
A seed is not a tree. You ignore this logic. You ignore all logic. You have YOUR answer no matter what the answer is. I'm not even interested in your reply anymore. I recognize more than ever that you have nothing to bring to disscussion.

0 Replies

Zygote, Fetus, Clump of Cells, Alive, Dead???

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know