Well you are the most prolific poster of irrational nonsense on the board, so that explains why you would feel taht way.
No, what explains it is the fact that you always are choosing to characterize posts instead of addressing the topic or offering something relevant or intelligent.
Yes, indeed. Some can and do add relevant and intelligent thoughts and some are reduced to moronic drivel. When will you add something relevant or intelligent?
That is a good thing no, at least the entertaining part? Unfortunately, your posts still remain devoid of intelligent reasoning.
Well--I for one am not debating, I have tried to point out the foolish, hateful and uncaring attitude behind your "opinion". You seem incapable of understanding so I am left with laughing at you and trying to get others to see the less evil side of your nature.
It is extremely difficult to get someone to understand why supporting the premeditated wanton killing of a defenseless child in utero is more caring and empathetic than supporting protecting the child's life, so I can see why you have such a steep uphil climb. You can laugh all you want, it only makes you look more foolish than you already do.
I am quoting from your precious manual: How can a living human exist without a brain ? Not according to a coroner !
Well Merck says that a baby exists and goes through the stages of zygote, embryo, blastocyst, newborn, infant, toddler, adolescent, adult ....... So it seems a medical expert has defined a baby as a zygote and embryo. Take it up with him or her should you have any questions.
If it did say that, your cherry-picked sentence would read like this: "A baby, beginning as a fertilized egg, goes through several stages of development." As it is written, however: "A baby goes through several stages of development, beginning as a fertilized egg." the modifying phrase "beginning as a fertilized egg" refers to stages (of development), because, correctly, a modifier is placed after the thing it modifies.
No it still does not say that as anyone with the most basic language skills knows. You have been show this repeatedly yet you continue to maintain a known fallacy. NO they have not, but you conveniently are misrepresenting what they say. Why not ask someone to help you understand the text?
Using terms you don't understand yourself will not help your credibility PMS. It absolutely does say what I allege. Anyone who reads the quote can plainly see that, so you must not have read it!
These childish tactic Amy work for you on your playground but not so much in the adult world. Care to remain on topic and make a point? It does not, regardless how you wish it or how many times you will allege it or if you stomp your feet. Yes it is plain, that is why you resorting to misrepresentation.
Your lack of response to this post which refutes your claim is noted. Yet you still continue as if your claim was not refuted. Hmmmmmmmmm Denial perhaps ?
