Embryonic Stem Cell Research - Finally!

Devil505 wrote:

coaledsweat wrote:

Devil505 wrote:I think when some is tortured to death (without evidence of any guilt) they are just as dead as if they had not been innocent though....am I right?

That is a little ironic coming from a guy from a state with a history of throwing bound women into a body of water to see if they float and then they can execute her for being a witch. Oh yeah, that's right, if they sunk to the bottom like a rock they were innocent. Dead, but innocent.

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

I haven't thrown any bound women into any bodies of water in..............weeks now!

Slacker.

Go ahead & throw them, by the time the ice melts we`ll know if they were guilty or not.

VigIIPeaBurner wrote:Interesting analogous overview of the conflict as discussed here.

T_e_c_h_n_o_p_h_o_b_i_a

I don't find this interesting, analogous nor accurate.

Stockingful said,

Hey, Bill, didn't you just violate your own rule? (I don't see any backup of your "facts.")

I did the research you need to do it too. Like I said adult stemcell research is making huge advances so google it. Just because you don't believe it don't make it so. Hears 1 to get you started http://www.stemcellresearchfacts.com/pros_cons.html


Bill S.

Thanks for posting the link supporting your "facts," Bill.

Did you know that, when you click on "contact us" on that page, you find out that it was put up by the "Vitae Caring Foundation?" That's not a lab, it's not a group of scientists who are giving you objective answers to scientific questions; it's a big pro-life advocacy group.

Here's a link on pro-lifer Mike Huckabee's site about the Vitae Caring Fdn's "13th Annual Pro-Life Benefit Dinner":
http://www.mikehuckabee.com/index.cfm?fa=Events.View&Event_id=5db36596-a906-4b16-9091-6c958031c43f

As a refugee Catholic, I recognize the sponsoring "Elizabeth Ann Seton Pro-Life Committee" as a Catholic church-related group, obviously anti-embryonic-stem-cell-research.

So I ask you, Bill: Is that the kind of site where we're going to get our "facts"? If I find something different from, say, Planned Parenthood, would you accept that as "fact"?

av8r wrote:

VigIIPeaBurner wrote:Interesting analogous overview of the conflict as discussed here.

T_e_c_h_n_o_p_h_o_b_i_a

I don't find this interesting, analogous nor accurate.

Some will, some won't. Read the Wiki History section. It's not new terminology. Now, that's an analogy

Stockingful,

Like I said in a prior post opinion is not fact I read scientific documents on adult stem cell research but when you can prove your facts (opinion right now) then argue your point. There are no embryonic break thrus right now it's all assumed but adult stem cell break thrus are a fact today you do the math. Speaking of planned parent hoods are they not under investigation for soliciting minors and throwing live infants in the trash and partial birth abortion let me jam a pair of scissors in the base of your skull and suck your brains out and tell me theres no pain. So show me on the site I gave as an example where on that site that the truth is in question. As usual an o pinon is an assumption. I do not follow the catholic dogma I may agree on some things but that doesn't make me confederate with them.

Bill S.

Stockingful,

This is fact,

http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/a ... _cell.html

http://www.stemcellresearchfacts.com/cu ... lures.html

Bill S.

BillMarti wrote:Stockingful,

Like I said in a prior post opinion is not fact I read scientific documents on adult stem cell research but when you can prove your facts (opinion right now) then argue your point.

Then please stop trying to claim your opinion is fact. You republicans crack me up sometimes. Ever hear of the anagram IOKIYAR? You are a perfect example of where it comes from.

BillMarti wrote:There are no embryonic break thrus right now it's all assumed but adult stem cell break thrus are a fact today you do the math.

I think you should practice what you preach and do your own math. Of course there are no breakthroughs right now; stem cell research was pretty much verboten the past 8 years by an administration more intent on voodoo than science.

BillMarti wrote:Speaking of planned parent hoods are they not under investigation for soliciting minors and throwing live infants in the trash and partial birth abortion let me jam a pair of scissors in the base of your skull and suck your brains out and tell me theres no pain. So show me on the site I gave as an example where on that site that the truth is in question. As usual an o pinon is an assumption. I do not follow the catholic dogma I may agree on some things but that doesn't make me confederate with them.

Passing opinion based on falsehoods as fact again? You got a citation for your delusions about Planned Parenthood? You do, however, prove Jon's point about being careful of the source of your 'facts'. PP is no more a reliable source in this debate than the one you posted. You obviously have revulsion at the mere mention of PP as a source and yet, disregard the revulsion others may feel when you cite a religious based site as the basis of your "facts". Both are subject to point of view bias and thus, pretty much everything and anything they claim as 'fact' should be regarded as simply their opinion and suspect.

BillMarti wrote:Stockingful,

This is fact,

http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/a ... _cell.html

http://www.stemcellresearchfacts.com/cu ... lures.html

Bill S.

21st Century Science & Technology magazine challenges the assumptions of modern scientific dogma, including quantum mechanics, relativity theory, biological reductionism, and the formalization and separation of mathematics from physics. We demand a science based on constructible (intelligible) representation of concepts, but shun the simple empiricist or sense-certainty methods associated with the Newton-Galileo paradigm.

Gravity - it's so inconvenient sometimes.

tvb,

I choose to ignore your nonsense. I will no longer respond to foolishness.

Bill S.

Taking your ball and going home, eh?

BillMarti wrote:Stockingful,

Like I said in a prior post opinion is not fact . . . Speaking of planned parent hoods are they not under investigation for soliciting minors and throwing live infants in the trash and partial birth abortion let me jam a pair of scissors in the base of your skull and suck your brains out and tell me theres no pain.

Bill S.

Bill, until you got to the scissors part, I thought you might indeed have been talking about the Catholic church. Because after all the young lives that have been ruined by pedophile priests, they've got a lot of nerve talking about the "sanctity of life."

Now that's just my opinion. But here's a theologian who believes there's actually a "moral imperative" to move forward with embryonic stem-cell research:
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/susan_brooks_thistlethwaite/2009/03/the_moral_imperative_to_reliev.html

Here's a fact:

Embryonic stem cell research, ongoing since 1963, has yielded no useful healthcare treatment to date.


The dogma of the liberal left holds hope, like a rosary praying nun, that stem cell discoveries hold the fountain of youth. Cafeteria Catholics should take note that faith comes in secular forms.

I have faith in God and science. I don't wish to impede the current stem cell research but, I also want to respect the devinely discrete nature of human life.

Life is a precious gift. It would be rude to scrutinize its hallmark. To cure cancer and other hideous diseases is in the spirit of life as God intended, but the notion of more, that is, customized bodies, perpetual youth, unending life on earth, and genetic pre-selection smack of megalomania and narcissism. It would be there that I depart from the support of this research.

Please don't disparage the faithful. It's bigotry. Science may serve our physiological needs better than faith, but faith brought us to science.

Stem cells were discovered from analysis of a type of cancer called a teratocarcinoma. In 1964, researchers noted that a single cell in teratocarcinomas could be isolated and remain undifferentiated in culture. These types of stem cells became known as embryonic carcinoma cells (EC cells).[2] Researchers learned that primordial embryonic germ cells (EG cells) could be cultured and stimulated to produce many different cell types.

Embryonic stem cells (ES cells) were first derived from mouse embryos in 1981 by Martin Evans and Matthew Kaufman and independently by Gail R. Martin. Gail R. Martin is credited with coining the term 'Embryonic Stem Cell'. The breakthrough in HUMAN EMBRYONIC STEM CELL research came in November 1998 when a group led by James Thomson at the University of Wisconsin-Madison first developed a technique to isolate and grow the cells when derived from human blastocysts.