You are so stupid...
It's a pretty dumb thing to laugh about. This story was out there more than Five years ago. She knew about it. You didn't. The experiments for 22 years or so. What she said, as unlikely as it is, could be true.
Maybe we should laugh at those who didn't know this, like you?
Transplanting human stem cells into animals is not even in the same league as "cross-breeding humans and animals and coming up with mice with fully functioning human brains".
Transplanting stem cells is old news. You're the one who just revealed your ignorance on the issue. And that you think her confusion is reasonable is even more revealing.
I want her to win then I want to her.
A fully functioning brain wouldn't be completely human, but could have added traits beyond animal intelligence. This now depends of where you draw that line called "functioning." It can mean different things.
You are so stupid...
In the back seat of a 1969 Muscle car... Sounds like old times...
No Sherlock.
Have to do gene splicing, or strategic stem cell transplants.
No, you are ignorant for not understanding my level of understanding.
Who knows what all happened in those experiments. At least what she said does have a basis in truth. It cannot be demonstrated that she made anything up. Who knows the extent of rumors or papers going around during her college years.
Love how you liberals are always "guilty (or dumb) until proven innocent." Claim to be open minded, but are so ing bigoted.
You have derailed...
You have to do more than that. And yet you had accepted her inability to differentiate the two as acceptable.
Thanks for agreeing with me now though.
"Fully functioning" is pretty unambiguous. Nice try though...
I already did, dumb .
This is the exact quote from the 80 minute video which I will post again:
I triple dog dare you to watch that 20 seconds worth of question.
:facepalm
Your understanding from Wikipedia and 20 seconds worth of Google searches...
At least I don't expect someone without a scientific education to know the difference.You have to do more than that. And yet you've accepted her inability to differentiate the two as acceptable. Thanks for agreeing with me.
I can agree for the most part. Still, I don't expect a layman's understanding of science to understand the difference. What if the brain had a "fully functioning" pituitary only? What if PET scans showed it replicated the human pattern? What were the researchers saying?
There would be no way to make the "fully human" claim, if it means everything.
Look, it boils down to this in my view. The story she says is true with some changes. Easily accounted for by misunderstanding.
Buy moron. I see you changed the subject because you see I'm right, and cannot accept it.
I'm not a subscriber, but I buy Scientific American from time to time. Seen some rather interesting articles over the years.
Yes, I googled it to find it. At least I looked to see she wasn't completely full of like you thought.
I'm so sorry, Dr. Wild Cobra. Please forgive me.
"Buy moron" is exactly what you're doing if you like the Tea Party candidates.
Bye!
You guys are way to biased to be open minded. You give Coon's a break for misstating the 1st amendment and more. An amendment that any politician should be ably to cite from memory, but chastise O'Donnell for misstating obscure scientific work?
My God...
That is pathetic.
So what. She doesn't know all the amendments by number. Big whoop-t-do. If that's the best you guys have, then... Well, you aint got .
it was an irrelevant misstatement in which the point was still clearly made.
Interesting that you are open minded about O'Donnell's whack statement but close the mind door fast on Coon.
No, the best is that she doesn't/didn't know that separation of church and state is alluded to in the Cons ution.So what. She doesn't know all the amendments by number. Big whoop-t-do. If that's the best you guys have, then... Well, you aint got .
It's a big enough of a whoop-t-do to crap on a potential law-making witch [allegedly] that doesn't know the most basic of federal law.
News today is that McDummell couldn't name a single Dem senator.
ouch. that was painful.
edit
I take it back.. mastubating = gay is funny
actually, I didn't think O'donnel was that bad. Until she got incredulous about what was in the first amendment.
If you had asked me about the 14th, 17th, and 16th amendments, I would have been about as flat footed.
I thought her hounding that coon dog over not knowing it was funny.
Yes, it was.
Haven't you ever had a brain-fart?
I don't judge anyone from a few soundbites. As I pointed out earlier, from thousands of statements made, you can find some misstatements, mistakes, etc. on everyone.
As for the adultery thing in the military. This is fact.
well, brain fart is not as bad as not knowing a single supreme court case.
That is simply ignorant.
Funny in a sad way.
Seperation of church and state is in the first amendment.
No it isn't. It's not a separation like spoken about. It doesn't use those words. It does not say that religion cannot influence government. The separation is one-way.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to pe ion the Government for a redress of grievances."
Where is it written that there is a wall of separation, which would divide government away from religion?
What you are talking about would "prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote