Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Scientists had thought embryos could only keep developing if they were safely in the womb and receiving instructions from the mother's body.

Turns out: We can grow a mutant army of Devil Children!!!

"It's a step they say will yield important insights into human development and could lead to a better understanding of the factors that cause miscarriages and birth defects.

"All of this research which we do in the lab should have enormous benefit," says Magdelena Zernicka-Goetz, a professor of developmental biology at the University of Cambridge in England who helped conduct the research.

But the advance is reviving a debate about the ethics of conducting experiments on human embryos in the laboratory..."


http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shot ... cal-debate

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

Chizzang wrote:Scientists had thought embryos could only keep developing if they were safely in the womb and receiving instructions from the mother's body.

Turns out: We can grow a mutant army of Devil Children!!!

Don't have time to read now, but this could cause big problems for you "viability" nut bags.

89Hen wrote:

Chizzang wrote:Scientists had thought embryos could only keep developing if they were safely in the womb and receiving instructions from the mother's body.

Turns out: We can grow a mutant army of Devil Children!!!

Don't have time to read now

Late for a pro-life rally, nutbag?

Anyone seen The Island?

That's all we need is more politicians.

Wow, that is shocking that science continues to be refined and improved so that we can have a viable human being earlier and earlier in the development stage. Meaning of course that viability has always been a man-made limitation and just reflective of our incomplete knowledge/ability of science and techniques, and that human life really does begin much earlier than whatever is the extent of our scientific abilities at that point in time. Shocking stuff, really.

First things first. They need to first focus on the problem with gluten intolerance. The gluten-free shit is taking up too much space in the grocery stores and offsetting space needed for new varieties of chips.

CAA Flagship wrote:First things first. They need to first focus on the problem with gluten intolerance. The gluten-free shit is taking up too much space in the grocery stores and offsetting space needed for new varieties of chips.

Or pretzels.
Have you tried these yet? Da BOMB.

Grizalltheway wrote:

89Hen wrote: Don't have time to read now

Late for a pro-life rally, nutbag?

Hit too close to home?

GannonFan wrote:Wow, that is shocking that science continues to be refined and improved so that we can have a viable human being earlier and earlier in the development stage. Meaning of course that viability has always been a man-made limitation and just reflective of our incomplete knowledge/ability of science and techniques, and that human life really does begin much earlier than whatever is the extent of our scientific abilities at that point in time. Shocking stuff, really.

I know, right?

89Hen wrote:

Grizalltheway wrote:
Late for a pro-life rally, nutbag?

Hit too close to home?

No, but I'm not surprised to see you taking shots before you even read anything.

Grizalltheway wrote:

89Hen wrote: Hit too close to home?

No, but I'm not surprised to see you taking shots before you even read anything.

I clearly said I didn't read it and said it could. Get the sand out lady.

bandl wrote:

CAA Flagship wrote:First things first. They need to first focus on the problem with gluten intolerance. The gluten-free shit is taking up too much space in the grocery stores and offsetting space needed for new varieties of chips.

Or pretzels.
Have you tried these yet? Da BOMB.

Haven't tried them. Haven't seen them through all the glutenless shit.
I have a hankerin' (redneck term) for some crab chips though.

CAA Flagship wrote:First things first. They need to first focus on the problem with gluten intolerance. The gluten-free shit is taking up too much space in the grocery stores and offsetting space needed for new varieties of chips.

Chips are gluten free, Julia.

89Hen wrote:

GannonFan wrote:Wow, that is shocking that science continues to be refined and improved so that we can have a viable human being earlier and earlier in the development stage. Meaning of course that viability has always been a man-made limitation and just reflective of our incomplete knowledge/ability of science and techniques, and that human life really does begin much earlier than whatever is the extent of our scientific abilities at that point in time. Shocking stuff, really.

I know, right?

It goes to show that each side of the political spectrum will ignore or trumpet science based on the issue at hand. The GOP are anti-science when they minimize man's impact on the changing climate and the Dems are Luddites when they ignore that abortion is the stopping (i.e. killing) of a human life. Each party's appreciation of science and consequently their rebuke of the other party for supposedly ignoring science only exists when science is on the same side as one of their positions. Otherwise science is conveniently ignored.

GannonFan wrote:

89Hen wrote: I know, right?

It goes to show that each side of the political spectrum will ignore or trumpet science based on the issue at hand. The GOP are anti-science when they minimize man's impact on the changing climate and the Dems are Luddites when they ignore that abortion is the stopping (i.e. killing) of a human life. Each party's appreciation of science and consequently their rebuke of the other party for supposedly ignoring science only exists when science is on the same side as one of their positions. Otherwise science is conveniently ignored.

Ding ding ding

89Hen wrote:

Chizzang wrote:Scientists had thought embryos could only keep developing if they were safely in the womb and receiving instructions from the mother's body.

Turns out: We can grow a mutant army of Devil Children!!!

Don't have time to read now, but this could cause big problems for you "viability" nut bags.

Yeah because I'm sure God would be happy with us growing all our babies in test tubes.

kalm wrote:

CAA Flagship wrote:First things first. They need to first focus on the problem with gluten intolerance. The gluten-free shit is taking up too much space in the grocery stores and offsetting space needed for new varieties of chips.

Chips are gluten free, Julia.

I'm talking about space. If one aisle is all glutenless, then all aisles have to sacrifice space. Including the chip aisle. You folly?

Vidav wrote:

89Hen wrote: Don't have time to read now, but this could cause big problems for you "viability" nut bags.

Yeah because I'm sure God would be happy with us growing all our babies in test tubes.

You missed the point and it has nothing to do with religion.

kalm wrote:

CAA Flagship wrote:First things first. They need to first focus on the problem with gluten intolerance. The gluten-free shit is taking up too much space in the grocery stores and offsetting space needed for new varieties of chips.

Chips are gluten free, Julia.

Not the good kind!

89Hen wrote:

Vidav wrote:
Yeah because I'm sure God would be happy with us growing all our babies in test tubes.

You missed the point and it has nothing to do with religion.

You ever consider that if so many people are allegedly "missing" your points, the problem might be that you aren't making them clear enough?

Oh, and I just cleaned out the sand this morning.

89Hen wrote:

Vidav wrote:
Yeah because I'm sure God would be happy with us growing all our babies in test tubes.

You missed the point and it has nothing to do with religion.

My point is this is an affront to God. Who are we to do such a thing?

Grizalltheway wrote:

89Hen wrote: You missed the point and it has nothing to do with religion.

You ever consider that if so many people are allegedly "missing" your points, the problem might be that you aren't making them clear enough?

Oh, and I just cleaned out the sand this morning.

Was I talking to you?

Vidav wrote:

89Hen wrote: You missed the point and it has nothing to do with religion.

My point is this is an affront to God. Who are we to do such a thing?

But that wasn't my point, so why quote me when you posted that? I NEVER bring religion into an abortion debate. My position on abortion has zero to do with religion or God.