Sunday, August 31, 2008

New Hurricane Post

Since the other one was getting a bit long, I figured I'd continue it on a new post. I'm sitting out on the front porch at the moment, which faces West (so I can actually be here throughout the storm if I so choose) and enjoying the very quite night air. The air has this quality about it, kind of like being in a steam room that's just slightly cooler than it should be, but there is a light breeze (5 mph or so) and I'm with my froggy friends that I mentioned earlier. I'm kind of hoping for more wind and rain soon so the vampire bats mosquitos go away. I think one the size of a hummingbird just flew by.

The worst part about hurricanes, in my opinion, is the anticipation. It's like the anticipation of surgery, you know you'll hurt for a few days, but you don't know exactly how long it will take to recover or if there will be complications.

To prevent being carried away by vultures mosquitos, I'm going to adjourn to the interior rooms with air conditioning until the winds pick up a bit, may as well charge up the computer while I'm in there, too.

I just remembered, I wanted to extend my thanks to my Hyla friends next to me preventing mosquitos from making me require a transfusion. I'm O+ in case anyone was wondering...

Next update will be when the rain comes again....
10:08 PM CST-it's still Sunday
Well, it looks like we won't be getting anything for a few hours, so I'm going to take a nap and charge my computer...
10:23 PM
I overheard the radio with Archbishop Hughes of New Orleans saying he was "praying for the least damage." I wonder if he realizes that the "least damage" may involve the hurricane taking a path over people that are less prepared than we are here at the moment. It's a damn good thing prayers don't work...
Oh yea, anyone else think it's funny how this hurricane hits during th Republican convention instead of the Democrat convention like this guy wanted. Just another example of the power of prayer [to fail].
11:05 PM
Well, I managed to get teh interwebs indoors here, so that means no mosquitos, less humidity, and A/C! I'm keeping an eye on rain bands, and I intend to take video of the heavy stuff if it comes this way. My girlfriend recently told me she'll be taking pictures and e-mailing them to me. She is located about 70 miles East-southeast of me.

Read more!

Hurricane updates

Well, I took some pictures of the lovely weather we have now, I'll try to add photos from the entire duration of the hurricane, pending power and internet connection. So here's what it looks like now in Opelousas, LA.
Sunday, August 31, 2008 at 12:00 CST
Images 1, 2, 3

The last two are actually not duplicates, I took two in rapid succession to illustrate a lack of wind right now; I'll probably refer to these later.
Clouds are beginning to roll in at 3:00 CST...same place

More and more clouds, a light breeze, but overall, it's fairly warm and pleasant outside at the moment...
Well, the hurricane sped up a bit, now moving at 18 mph (29 km/h) so that means it may pass over slightly faster. This is a good thing. Most people always thing wind causes the most damage, but in reality, the ultimate causation is the rain. In Louisiana, we have very, very rich, soft, soil that can hold quite a bit of moisture, but once it reaches the saturation point, it doesn't take much wind to uproot a tree or shift a building's foundation. If you look at the pictures from downed trees after Katrina, you'll notice most of them still have the root structure intact. This indicates the ground was saturated and soft. Most of the trees that are actually standing in Louisiana have been through a hurricane or two, so wind really won't uproot them, they tend to have a solid root structure. Saturated soil is what makes it possible for trees to be completely uprooted. Anyway, these two images give you an idea of where I am.

It's going to be an interesting night...
Not much going on, we relocated to a safer location: brick vs. wood. More photos pending unpacking my camera again.
Looks like I'll have internet unless the power goes out, YAY!
6:30-took some pictures, here's some of the clouds coming

1720-rain coming, I can see a band off in the distance, not going to be one of the bad bands just yet...

7:35, just started raining, the sun's still out, I'll post the picture later.

Hyla squirella! There are hundreds of these things under the front porch where I am currently located sucking up bandwidth from the neighbor (he's a friend of mine). I absolutely love it. The sounds are so amazing.
8:46 PM, still Sunday
First major band expected to hit here around 10:00 PM
Next post will be froggy pictures!

Read more!

Saturday, August 30, 2008

Gustav is on his way...

Well, it seems that hurricane season is upon us, and here comes one two three tropical storm storms... I just finished prepping generators for three houses, cleaning up projectiles wood in the yard, and checking food stocks. Let's hope New Orleans doesn't get trashed again, I like the French Quarter...
Those of you in the Gulf South (I know I get hits from Louisiana, Texas, Florida), good luck to you.

Read more!

Friday, August 29, 2008

Obligatory political post...

Well, the results are in, let's find something good to bash every candidate for, below are the list of each candidate and why I think they are complete morons:
McCain: Opposes abortion, favors "equal opportunity," favors abstinence-only education, and favors vouchers for education.
These are all bad ideas because:
1) A fetus is not a human, in no way, shape, or form has any compelling argument been made to suggest that a fetus has the ability to think or feel. In fact, the destruction of a fetus or embryo is less the destruction of a human than cutting off your own hand.
2) Affirmative action or "equal opportunity" presents the problem of benefiting upper class minorities far more than the lower class, the very people it is supposed to help.
3) Abstinence only education fails.
4) Vouchers leave only the poorly performing students.

Next person: Obama, I'm going to truly be fair and explain why I think this guy is an utter numbnut and politician. He actually decided to answer the Science Debate 2008 questions, and for that, I applaud him, but he answered them in a completely indirect way dodging most of them and only giving, what I like to call, "post-modernism answers." There are no answers here, they only raise questions. Here's a good example which I posted on ERV earlier...
As a resident cynic, I must say his answers are written similar to much of the post-modern literary criticisms I have read. A good example of this is:

" First, I have proposed programs that, taken together, will increase federal investment in the clean energy research, development, and deployment to $150 billion over ten years. This research will cover:"

Ok, let's see what research he's talking about...

"Basic research to develop alternative fuels and chemicals"

Well, that could be millions of possibilities, are they carbon-based alternative fuels such as biofuels or synthetic gasoline? Are these alternative fuels/chemicals including hydrogen? What about geothermal, hydroelectric, and tidal energy? This answers NOTHING, it just says "yea, I want to develop alternatives.." without saying anything about what they are. Next:

"Equipment and designs that can greatly reduce energy use in residential and commercial buildings – both new and existing"

Really now? I don't think a more vague statement exists, are there any specific technologies you have in mind or is this just another generic "oh yea, I'm thinking of something."

"New vehicle technologies capable of significantly reducing our oil consumption"

Doesn't this go with the "alternative fuels" group?

"Advanced energy storage and transmission that would greatly help the economics of new electric-generating technologies and plug-in hybrids"

Can't the previous two go together? And how would he "enhance" this research? It's ALREADY BEING DONE. Recent advances in Li-ion batteries, hydrogen fuel cells, and so forth are making it possible within the next 5 years to have a zero emission vehicles which are viable.

"Technologies for capturing and sequestering greenhouse gases produced by coal plants"

Which one? Also, CCS technology makes the plant require 25% more energy to operate thus meaning you actually use MORE hydrocarbons! Our problem isn't just CO2, it's also COST of hydrocarbon fuels.

"A new generation of nuclear electric technologies that address cost, safety, waste disposal, and proliferation risks"

Ok, which generation nuclear reactors? II? III? Invest in IV? Seriously, if you're going to make a claim as to what will happen, at least say HOW you plan on making it happen
I recently did a little quiz on On The Issues. My results were somewhat astonishing, I actually got a 45% agreement with one of them... Next up is candidate number 3, for this one we'll go on to the Socialist party. Brian Moore is also a complete fucktard and here's why:
Moore-on also supports school vouchers, doesn't want nuclear power, public ownership of all natural resources, and a $15/hr national minimum wage.
Here we go: school vouchers covered already, generation III and IV nuclear reactors are very safe and low on nuclear waste. Yucca Mountain makes a pretty safe place for storage. Top this off with research to develop fusion reactors after we've had nuclear, hydroelectric, geothermal, etc. power sources can aid us in providing some augmentation to a nuclear infrastructure. Public ownership of natural resources means "natural" resources such as trees, streams, and so on are all the domain of the public. Of course, he's also wanting corporations to be removed, but hey, he's a socialist...

Next up is Cynthia McKinney.
Do I really need to explain why I think the lady arguing a conspiracy theory and screaming "racism" every chance she gets is a complete waste of carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, sulfur, iron, and space. Perhaps we can toss her into a fusion reactor later...

After her, Bob Barr, Mr. Libertarian that thinks same sex marriages in one state shouldn't be required to be accepted by other states, but at the same time, he criticizes efforts to restrict rights of homosexuals. I don't know where he really stands on anything (or if he does) and those few things he does have a firm standing on I disagree with. Namely the "God Bless America" on schools and vouchers for private schools.

Now I'll move on to Alan Keyes and Chuck Baldwin: these two I can take out with one fell swoop; that is abortion rights. Both think abortion is equivalent to murder and embryonic stem cell research is bad. They are both very extreme in this with Keyes thinking "snowflake babies" shouldn't be experimented on either and Baldwin saying abortion is a holocaust. They also both like the idea of drilling in ANWR.

SOMEONE PLEASE FIND ME A DECENT CANDIDATE! Someone that could defeat this guy in a debate and possibly has IDEAS that MIGHT work.

Read more!

Monday, August 25, 2008

Fun with Creationists!

Well, some Creationist (not IDiot, the regular idiot), posted a little snippet as a comment over on ERV. It's down at comment #6, but for easy of reading, I'll copy the entire thing here...

We fully expect you to NOT post this, but we'll give it a whirl anyway.

Please refer to:

Do they expect it not to be posted because it is complete nonsense? I certainly think that's why it wouldn't be posted...

More below the fold...

Scroll to:
"How is it that ERVS are Considered Copies of Disease Producing Exogenous Retroviruses but None Have Been Proven to Directly Cause Disease?"
Ok, it's complete fiction; in the event you are unfamiliar with multiple sclerosis, I suggest reading up on it. Also, we would expect HERVs to lose functionality if those humans are to survive, if they are completely functional and cause disease, person dies, ERV goes away.

"By Chance, What Made ERVS Evolve into "The Cure," Instead of Remaining Disease Related Viruses?"
As stated previously, ERVs with (notice the last "s" is in lower case?) beneficial effects are kept, those with extremely deleterious or no effects undergo much more mutation.

"By Chance, What Made ERV Elements Change From Viral Activities to Cellular Activities and Create New Essential Genes?"
In the event you still don't get the effect selection plays on the survival of genes, perhaps you should take a few remedial courses in biology; ERVs seem to be far out of your league...

"ERVS Created the Specie-Specific Regulatory Network that Controls the Expression of Cells in a Collective Manner. What Came First � the Host or the Regulatory Network?"
This is a false dichotomy; neither came first, retrovirus invades germ cell-->germ cell produces gamete-->infected gamete forms zygote which grows up to be adult (if virus doesn't kill it)-->virus loses some functionality due to mutations-->genome adapts to include ERV as functional element or ERV slowly disappears... I know, that's really simplified, but I figured I wouldn't make your brain explode just yet...

"By Chance, What Made ERV LTRS Immediately Turn into Essential Gene Regulators Upon Insertion?"
In the event you don't know what an LTR is, it is a "Long terminal repeat" which is used for insertion into the host DNA; now, what happens is after dsDNA is formed, LTR-specific integrases put the DNA into the genome. Now, they are presenting evidence that the TF binding site was present in the consensus sequence of the original retrovirus, it didn't "turn into" anything, it just happened to contain the consensus sequence for the TF in the original consensus sequence of the retroviral integrase because it is present in many related species... no magic...

"By Chance, What Made LTRS Gain Transciptional Abilities for Essential Genes?"
As the lovely lady over at ERV already said, "Its possible that a retrovirus plops down next to a gene, and the genes like 'Whoa! Ur a better promoter! I keepsies you!!'" Neat, huh?

"Misc. Examples of biased and inaccurate research and publications:"

I could explain each and every one of these papers, but then how would you learn?

Please note that there are about 50 + research articles referenced so we look forward to your rebuttal.

(If you can restrain yourself, it would serve all of us well if you would debate without insults and foul language.)

Posted by: who is your creator | August 25, 2008 4:52 PM

Look, I went the whole time without using any words you may consider "foul."

Read more!

Beauty Pageants and Habits?

No, it's not what you think! Nuns aren't protesting beauty pageants as "amoral" or "in poor taste." An Italian priest by the name of Antonio Rungi is holding a beauty pageant for nuns...

Next for news, and this is slightly more serious, teaching science to high school students that are brainwashed into being bible-carrying creationists has a new hero.
More after the fold...

And now for a little Swedish humor, I think my lovely Swedish girlfriend will enjoy it...
And more Swedish humor....

And here's one along similar lines. Isn't it any wonder how the ugly women are generally the ones saying looking at beautiful women lustfully is bad?

Finally, another awesome blog to enter into my blogroll! Cognitive Daily

Read more!

Sunday, August 24, 2008

Cancer 101-The End

Cancer--Next two papers!
Again, you should see my previous posts (here and here) on angiogenesis.
I'm going to summarize these two (here and here) papers in one (hopefully) short(ish) post and wrap up angiogenesis discussions for a while. After this, I will go into something far more fun; I've got lots of fun things in store!

So here we go:
I'm going to start out with a little info on CXCL4, also known as PF4. CXCL4 is fairly small, only 70 residues, and looks something like this.

It binds to several integrins (αvβ3, αvβ5, and α5β1) and by these integrin interactions, inhibits angiogenesis to some degree. Unlike HB-19, CXCL4 does not invade the cell, but functions as a surface signal. CXCL4 blocks endothelial cell migration in response to VEGF and FGF, and as a result, prevents angiogenesis. The precise mechanism of this is not yet known.

It is also interesting to note exactly how many things
αvβ3 actually binds to, I may make a post on this in the future, but I'm confident that, if you are interested, you can find many of them.

Lastly: Erythropoietin (EPO) blockade; not the same as a naval blockade, but similar

Recombinant EPO therapy is commonly used after chemotherapy to replenish red blood cells. This has been implicated in making recurrence of tumors far more likely. These researchers decided to look at what EPO actually does with regard to tumors and angiogenesis and the results were pretty interesting.

Studies previously looked at systemic and short term EPO treatments to determine effects of EPO on turmors while this study involved high concentrations of EPO in the tumor microenvironment.
Now, this is interesting, but doesn't really give any good treatment options. It does do something, however. It tells us how NOT to treat after chemotherapy. We should NOT give high doses of rEPO to patients after receiving radiation or chemo.

I'm going to conclude here by saying these three papers I covered (two of them only very briefly) are part of the rapidly growing body of knowledge relating to cancer formation, growth, and progression which will ultimately lead to our ability to treat most, if not all, forms of this disease from humans, and perhaps pets as well.

Here is a little hint of what is to come:
Naturopathy quacks

Read more!

Atheist Antarctica Escape

Here's an image of a rough little idea I had as a response to Tom Willis, one of the crazy creationist morons I am familiar with. PZ Myers bought this recent little tidbit to my attention, so I figured I'd make a little image of what I thought such an "evolutionist colony" should look like. It comes complete to be self-sufficient in terms of power, food, education, etc.
Ready for it?
It's after the fold...

Read more!

Saturday, August 23, 2008


Flip over to Hyphoid Logic, he put up a neat little blurb on Fleshmap.

Read more!

Friday, August 22, 2008

Funny picture

Read more!

Cancer 101-HB-19

I'm going to start with this paper.
But if you haven't read the intro yet, and you don't know much about cancer, you probably should start here.

Nucleolin is a potential target for tumor treatment for a number of reasons. Chief among these is the fact that nucleolin plays a role in angiogenesis, and as previously stated, without angiogenesis or metastasis, tumors cannot exceed a very small size. The researchers here used an antagonist to cell surface nucleolin (HB-19 and anti-nucleolin monoclonal antibody (mAb) which, while not resulting in disruption of normal cell metabolism and behavior, resulted in marked decreases in tumor proliferation. Another observation was that a marked decrease in cells at S phase was observed. This is consistent with the expected decrease in replication of cells via prevention of DNA replication.

Now for angiogenesis. The researchers then looked at VEGF stimulated HUVECs ("vascular endothelial growth factor" and "human umbilical vein endothelial cells" respectively) . When VEGF or PTN (pleiotrophin) were used, HB-19 and anti-nucleolin mAb had very similar inhibition of vascular formation. When FGF-2 (basic fibroblastic growth factor) was used, HB-19 had a much higher efficacy than anti-nucleolin mAb at decreasing angiogenesis.

They then had some fun torturing poor little athymic nude mice. They injected human breast carcinoma cells (that proliferate when untreated into palpable tumors in two weeks) into them. Following this, they began treatment with tamoxifen in some mice and HB-19 in others. Autopsy revealed no side apparent side effects compared to control mice injected with phosphate buffer solution (PBS) alone. The HB-19 treated mice also exhibited no side effects such as diarrhea, infection, weakness, lethargy, blood cell counts, or body weight. Mice treated with HB-19 also exhitibted some elimination of measurable tumors. HB-19 was also more efficient at treating tumors than tamoxifen in higher dose levels! Now, HB-19 was not as effective as 5-FU, however 5-FU has significant side effects on lymphocyte counts.

So, what does this mean? Well, firstly, HB-19 may make a very good auxiliary treatment for tumors. It may allow chemotherapy to be in much lower doses and far less frequently. This is one possible route for tumor treatment presented by this specific research. The other papers I'll be talking about will further explore ways to control and treat angiogenesis and thus, tumors.

The final installment can be found here.

Read more!

Thursday, August 14, 2008

Cancer 101

We'll start out with a few definitions:
Integrin-cell surface proteins which interact with the extracellular matrix
Angiogenesis-the branching and growth of new blood vessels by growth of new branches.
CXC chemokine-small proteins (CXCL4 has 70 residues) which play a role in chemotaxis
Specific proteins to know:

αvβ3-vitronectin receptor

α5β1-fibronectin receptor; also plays a role in angiogenesis

CXCL4-an αvβ3 antagonist found in platelets and plays a role in neutralizing heparin like molecules thereby enhancing coagulation

Now for some basics on cancer.

As tumors grow, they require more and more nutrients to feed the mass of cells. To accomplish this, they rely upon angiogenic factors to trigger growth of new blood vessels bringing oxygen and nutrients. Metastasis is one way tumors spread. This involves the migration of a cancerous cell into the blood stream and moving to another location and invading the surrounding tissue further downstream by use of integrin proteins. By stopping cancer from producing blood vessels and spreading, we can isolate tumors to very small masses in isolated locations making them far easier to treat with very specific radiation levels in very specific locations.

But first, we must prevent metastasis and angiogenesis. I'll cover that next time.

Part 2
Part 3

Read more!

Upcoming and Response

I'm working on a post about CXCL-4, integrins, and cancer, but until I finish that, here's something I wanted to write to Mr. Ray Comfort, but I figured it would be overly long

Examples of species-to-species transitions are:
ring species of Ensatina salamanders
ring species of Larus gulls (kind of; it's really, really complicated)
[More after the fold]

These two examples are BETWEEN speciation by pretty much any biological definition of species. Neighboring populations can hybridize while distant populations cannot. You will rebut this by saying "but they're the same type." Yes, they are still salamanders or birds respectively, but, for example, are crocodiles reptiles? Myself, and many other biologists, say that while they are reptiles, they are a very unique kind of reptile with four-chambered hearts. This is very unlike any other reptile. It has also been established that genetically, crocodiles and turtles are slightly closer related to birds than other reptiles making the class Sauropsida paraphyletic unless you include Aves. Again, you'll say "common designer" but why, oh why, would a common designer include hundreds of sequences of transposons, retrotransposons, and silenced DNA sequences not present in the genetic sequences of animals which are less similar? Your reply will be "we cannot know, because my God works in mysterious ways."

I'll even say to you that evolution DOES have problems, but the ones you are talking about are NOT the problems. By drawing attention to your nonsensical representation of evolutionary biology, the real questions are not addressed. These include:
1) classification of bacteria due to horizontal gene transfer
2) establishing phylogenies of asexual organisms
3) exploring genetic change based upon things such as codon bias and induced mutation.
4) Many others.
Note, these do not conflict with the current model, rather they are additions which need to be made. Most organisms DO evolve by natural selection and genetic drift. Viruses also evolve in this way, but they, and bacteria, are also much more capable of the aforementioned horizontal gene transfer. Viruses also are capable of introducing their own DNA, which is usually done via RNA converted into DNA then inserted into the genome, and thus giving us insight into said virus evolution, as well as the evolution of progeny of the previously infected organism.

Cue "cosmological evolution" argument which neither you nor I are qualified to argue. Unlike you, however, I have a collegiate education in evolutionary biology and have read more publications on genetics and molecular biology than you can pronounce the titles of (granted that may be zero); this makes me, while not inherently smarter, certainly better educated. You can start with Berkeley's kiddy version of an evolutionary biology course. Ernst Mayr's "This is Biology," Mark Ridley's "Evolution," and D.Q. McInerny's "Being Logical" also would be good reads for you.
*note, I could have included pictures and more links, but then you wouldn't have to do any work.

Read more!

Saturday, August 2, 2008


No, this is not another review of a show, not yet anyway. That will be on Tuesday. This is some speculation as to what selective pressures lead to the development of snake fangs. Researchers recently discovered how fangs develop and PZ Myers described the research in relatively easy-to-grasp terms. If you would like the original paper, the citation is at the bottom of PZ's review of it.

The paper addresses what we know about how snake fangs evolved, but it does not answer why snake fangs evolved. The selective pressures for snake fang development are fairly easy to identify in a stepwise manner.

1) no fangs, no venom
2) venom gland formation from modified secretory cells located in the mouth
I leave this one open for several purposes I shall get to later.
3) fang development (normal teeth being modified to form grooves)
4) in some species, the grooves were refined into hollow fangs, and in others, further evolution of the grooves occurred.

We do not, as yet, know how the venom glands specifically evolved, however, it is probable that some mutations prior to the separation of various lineages. Here's a phylogeny based upon mitochondrial DNA...below the fold.

If you look at the points of mutation among all genera containing venomous snakes (Viperidae, Elapidae, Colubridae, Atractaspis), all of them are related by a common ancestor dubbed Colubroidea. Dr. Brian Grieg Fry made a nice little breakdown of Colubroidea evolution.

It is likely that the evolution of venom glands directly lead to the development of fangs due to efficiency of delivery. The method of feeding for colubrid snakes is generally that of constriction with the venom serving the role of accelerating the death of the prey. It is also a misnomer that colubrid snakes are nonvenomous. Many colubrid snakes, in fact, have venom glands, but many are not harmful towards mice. Of the ~1400 species of colubrid, 700 have venom of some kind. This indicates that some species commonly classified as colubrids are actually closer related to other groups than previously thought. This is reflected in Dr. Fry's phylogeny.

It may also be noted that no snake species outside of Colubroidea has been observed to have venom indicating that venom production likely developed in one of the common ancestors of these organisms. I would also note that many of the proteins found in venom are made in many other parts of the body, so it could be a modification of the expression of these proteins which lead to the development of venom.

I would like to add that much of what I said is purely an educated guess as we do not have the data yet to prove it, but it does have evidence in the form of protein homology in a number of venom proteins for origins in other.

Now, for the glands. Because some species of lizards also have venom glands, it is probable that the development of a new oral gland much earlier than previously thought.

Since I find this so very interesting, I can go on at length about the the origin of the glands and how they form, blah, blah, blah. Instead, check out Dr. Fry's page, he's got lots of good information on there.

Read more!

Friday, August 1, 2008

I figured I'd post this

This is a comment I left on a blog earlier, but since it's likely never going to show up, I figured I'd post it here.

The argument for "human life beginning at conception" is indefensible and ignorant of our knowledge of human biology and physiology. The reasons for this are quite simple: why draw the line at conception? Why not say that human life began several billion years ago and has continued since via a chain of organisms? The reason for saying a "human starts" at conception is based upon the silly notion that humans have souls that enter the child at conception. I suppose it communicates via the pineal gland like Descartes said?

But let's digress to another point completely; you think that a fertilized egg is special in some way, and that your god cares what happens to it. Explain to me, then, why less than 25% of the time, (on any given cycle) when a woman is TRYING to conceive, she succeeds, not because an egg isn't released, fertilized, and viable, but because it did not implant into the uterine lining. Then, of those, 25% miscarry by the sixth week. Of those remaining (down to 20% of the original ones trying to get pregnant) an additional 10% of them end in clinical miscarriages. So we're down to 18% chance of pregnancy with NO form of contraception and the woman is fertile, healthy, and on a good diet. To top it off, an additional 1% of births are stillborn.

So now let's review, if a fertilized egg is a newborn child, the ramifications for this are MUCH farther than you expected.
1) we must try and convict your god of murder
2) we must try and convict every woman to have ever had a child, because, statistically speaking, she's killed at least 3 for every child she's had.
3) we must engage in actively thwarting your gods plan to kill more embryos by removing the ovaries of all women and producing children for society by means of an artificial womb.
4) we must put your god in prison for a life sentence for each murder he/she/it committed.

Or we could just admit how silly calling a anything with absolutely no means of experiencing the world as we do "human." After all, humans care for humans out of empathy, but we cannot possibly conclude that an embryo suffers pain, feels joy, or has any thoughts at all, because thoughts require neurons, neurons are cells, and the most a birth control pill will stop is a few hundred undifferentiated cells.

Think he's gonna post it? Nah, I don't think so either.

Read more!

Stumble Upon Toolbar