Incredible Video Shows Unborn Babies Jumping Around, Waving, Yawning and Sucking Their Thumb

[Joes Place]

The picture you posted in post # 11 contradicts what the Mayo website says.

No; it doesn't.

It's much harder to "see" what you're looking for in poorly differentiated tissues.
Much like how a Gray's Anatomy book shows structures, but when you go look at those in a surgery, nothing is nearly as clear, particularly to an untrained eye. Artists illustrations are nearly always exaggerated.

 

[SIXERS24]

Joes Place says kill the babies whenever you want. That's your opinion and you are allowed to have it. You can pretend they are not babies and that's totally your prerogative! You can say they are not and that is fine! If you sleep fine at night feeling that way more power to you!!

 

[LuciousBDragon]

No; it doesn't.

It's much harder to "see" what you're looking for in poorly differentiated tissues.
Much like how a Gray's Anatomy book shows structures, but when you go look at those in a surgery, nothing is nearly as clear, particularly to an untrained eye. Artists illustrations are nearly always exaggerated.

Ok, so I see you chose to take the double-down route. I’ll humor you just because it humors me to see the lengths you will go to vindicate your own stupidity.

You honestly think this picture that you posted in post # 11 of a supposed 9-week baby:

…Equates to this description of a fetus from the Mayo website?

“In the ninth week of pregnancy, or seven weeks after conception, your baby's arms grow and elbows appear. Toes are visible and eyelids form. Your baby's head is large but still has a poorly formed chin.”

Or, are you unequivocally saying that the Mayo Health website is horribly wrong?

 

[Bonerfarts]

The Democrats can make their laws on abortion so can republicans

But if you have an abortion you killed a baby.

Pro-Abortion people can pretend they didn't but they did!

Also miscarriages. Sucks but you now a baby killer.

 

[biggreydogs]

Maybe my conservative friend would get on board with free contraception etc, and preventing unwanted pregnancies.

I have always been an advocate for tax funded adoption.

 

[biggreydogs]

New covenant, let’s compromise and go with 16 weeks. With exceptions for rape, incest, and mothers health

That would be against my religion.

 

[NoleATL]

Really? Why don't you pose that question to the leading libs on this board?

This is idiotic thinking. I'm a "lib", not sure about leading", and I would not say up to birth.

 

[NoleATL]

Did you miss the peace sign throwing baby? Amazing how they can already pick up this bit of sign language.

 

[ClarindaA's]

That would be against my religion.

That’s fine, and also against mine, but we aren’t a theocracy, and we don’t ever have to get an abortion.

 

[ClarindaA's]

I have always been an advocate for tax funded adoption.

What about contraception?

 

[Rudolph]

It’s beautiful to see a living human before birth. And? Doesn't look much like just a clump of cells to me.

Just when I thought people were just stupid, you take it to a truly unbelievable level. Geeeeeezussszz fffuçççking wowwww.

 

[biggreydogs]

Just when I thought people were just stupid, you take it to a truly unbelievable level. Geeeeeezussszz fffuçççking wowwww.

Did you watch the ultrasound?

 

[Rudolph]

Did you watch the ultrasound?

Nope. Don’t need to. It’s not new info, dumbass. And, dumbass, nobody is confusing the shit in that video, dumbass, with “bundle of cells”, dumbass.

Goddddamnnn you are fuçking dumb as fûck.

 

[kc78]

It’s beautiful to see a living human before birth. And? Doesn't look much like just a clump of cells to me.

Nobody is calling a baby being born a clump of cells. But get back to me after you see what they look like during the first trimester.

 

[Rudolph]

Nobody is calling a baby being born a clump of cells. But get back to me after you see what they look like during the first trimester.

SMH that this needs explanation.

 

[kc78]

There is a real debate to be had over what point a baby becomes a person who deserves civil protection. It certainly is not at conception. At some point we have to accept some grey area here and make some concessions on both ends. My personal moral code kicks in at viability, which we accept medically of around 24 weeks of age. Any abortion after 24 weeks would need to meet some extraordinary issues for me to be ok with it, but there are life of mother issues that should be allowed.
I do understand that for many, 24 weeks is way too long. I'd be willing to compromise at any value between 16 and 24 weeks.

But Republicans have gone crazy and are all in on at conception which the majority of the country, even amongst Republicans disagrees with.

 

[Rudolph]

There is a real debate to be had over what point a baby becomes a person who deserves civil protection. It certainly is not at conception. At some point we have to accept some grey area here and make some concessions on both ends. My personal moral code kicks in at viability, which we accept medically of around 24 weeks of age. Any abortion after 24 weeks would need to meet some extraordinary issues for me to be ok with it, but there are life of mother issues that should be allowed.
I do understand that for many, 24 weeks is way too long. I'd be willing to compromise at any value between 16 and 24 weeks.

But Republicans have gone crazy and are all in on at conception which the majority of the country, even amongst Republicans disagrees with.

All fine and dandy. But the real stupidity in all this is that the roe policy had been working pretty well, and could probably work even better by leaning more into making reproductive health care services EVEN MORE ACCESSIBLE. Reality is there will always be some level or measure of demand for ablution. Period. So, then, what can we do to reduce as much as possible that demand? Well, we were kind of doing that. But, you know, muffućkers need to win elections… so the issue has to resurface every election cycle and the only way to motivate this stupid fućk base is to… well, opee exemplifies it. Make it stupid. Reduce it to base moronic stupidity. And now? We’ve stepped backwards and appear intent on not just stepping backwards, but creating sweet gov grift opportunities, too. Disaster capitalism, baby. Love that shit. Create a problem and have the grift solution at the ready sold to the idiots as a solution… round and round we go.

 

[Joes Place]

Ok, so I see you chose to take the double-down route.

You DO understand what "microscopes" are, right?

 

[LuciousBDragon]

You DO understand what "microscopes" are, right?

I do! But that has nothing to do with this discussion since we are talking about things that can be observed with the naked eye (like the picture that you posted for example).

It’s ok to admit you made an error Joe. It will make you feel better.

 

[Joes Place]

I do! But that has nothing to do with this discussion

It sure does; the photos I've posted are camera pics, with a ruler for reference.

 

[Joes Place]

we are talking about things that can be observed with the naked eye (like the picture that you posted for example).

Yes; and that picture indicates the features you want to claim are "obvious" are NOT obvious to the naked eye.

Artists draw pictures based on microscopic images, too, you know.

 

[LuciousBDragon]

It sure does; the photos I've posted are camera pics, with a ruler for reference.

You have trouble seeing things 1-2 inches? Have you been to the eye doc?

 

[LuciousBDragon]

Yes; and that picture indicates the features you want to claim are "obvious" are NOT obvious to the naked eye.

I didn’t make the claim. Mayo Health did. You should probably take it up with them?

 

[KFsdisciple]

I can't name one to be honest and there may not be any. However, not every religion believes life begins at conception, and I guess that's the rub. Can you accept that for people of other faiths, or maybe even people who do not have any religious beliefs?

They don't all believe like you do, and that is what our constitution tries to defend.

For the record, you and I share the same beliefs on this subject from a religious viewpoint. However, I don't believe that I have the right to impose my will on what others want to believe. In my opinion, that would be un-American.

No matter what someone somewhere is going to be unhappy. If we're going to err, I think the error should skew towards life not death. I'd rather be wrong about right to life rather than right about right to death.

 

[Joes Place]

You have trouble seeing things 1-2 inches?

One of YOUR links says "22mm"

Do you know how many mm are in 1 inch?

 

[Joes Place]

I didn’t make the claim. Mayo Health did.

And Mayo Health probably has things called "microscopes" to view things with.

 

[LuciousBDragon]

And Mayo Health probably has things called "microscopes" to view things with.

Correct! But again, we are talking babies at 9 weeks old and not microscopes.

Your position is that a baby at 9 weeks looks like a load that the average HORT’er dumps on your mom’s face. With no discernible features.

My position says at nine weeks there are features, discernible to the naked eye, at 9 weeks and looks more like a tiny baby than a snot ball. Mayo’s agrees with me. Here is a link to WebMD that agrees with me. No one agrees with you though.

https://www.webmd.com/baby/ss/slideshow-fetal-development

All this is important because the thread is about abortion and the idea that a baby actually looks like a baby (arms, legs, face, even toes) becomes visible in the first trimester.

Also, I gave you an easy layup peen joke earlier and you missed it. You don’t belong on HROT, HORT, GIAHORT. For shame.

 

[Joes Place]

Correct! But again, we are talking babies at 9 weeks old and not microscopes.

Which is why I posted a photo.

Not a artist's "graphic" or an image from a microscope (or similar instrument).
Sorry that generic photo is troublesome for you; but that's what the embryo looks like at that stage.

 

[LuciousBDragon]

Which is why I posted a photo.

Not a artist's "graphic" or an image from a microscope (or similar instrument).
Sorry that generic photo is troublesome for you; but that's what the embryo looks like at that stage.

Sorry Joe, you are quite mistaken. I watched my own two kids ultrasounds through their gestation. Mayo Health and WebMD seem to be better and more reliable sources than a guy in his “tripped out” truck.

Do better buddy.

 

[Joes Place]

Sorry Joe, you are quite mistaken. I watched my own two kids ultrasounds through their gestation.

Kewl

But you didn't get to view them w/o image enhancements, did you?

 

[LuciousBDragon]

Kewl

But you didn't get to view them w/o image enhancements, did you?

I can say this. It looked nothing like the picture you posted. It did match the description of what Mayo said to expect. And yet it was smaller than the sample in the picture you posted.

Sorry Joe, 9 week old babies in utero look like tiny babies and not 2.5 inch snotwads like you say.

You’re confused.

 

[Rudolph]

While y’all argue over loads on moms… nobody seems able to argue my point. This is all dumb. We, as a society in this dumb ass country, had made really good progress on reducing the demand.

Demonizing planned parenthood — one of the main players in effectively reducing the demand, WHILE PROVIDING MUCH-NEEDED CARE FOR A WIDE RANGE OF WOMEN’S HEALTH NEEDS, is comicallytragically dumb.

Y’all religious zealot fučks are duped and dumb. Every damn election cycle. Dumb.

 

[Joes Place]

Sorry Joe, 9 week old babies in utero look like tiny babies and not 2.5 inch snotwads like you say.

Sure; under microscopy and US image enhancement. And they aren't ' 2.5" snotwads'. They are <1" in size, which means without imaging aids, you can't see much. That's what the photos posted indicate.

 

[LuciousBDragon]

Sure; under microscopy and US image enhancement. And they aren't ' 2.5" snotwads'. They are <1" in size, which means without imaging aids, you can't see much. That's what the photos posted indicate.

^^^ This statement in no way aligns to the picture you posted.

 

[Joes Place]

^^^ This statement in no way aligns to the picture you posted.

LOLWUT?

That photo shows the embryo AND the egg-sac material. The embryo is on the right, and it's barely 1" in size.

Learn some fricking biology.

 

[FAUlty Gator]

Which is why I posted a photo.

Not a artist's "graphic" or an image from a microscope (or similar instrument).
Sorry that generic photo is troublesome for you; but that's what the embryo looks like at that stage.

Weird...here's an actual image 8-10 weeks

Holding up the Head

www.ehd.org

 

[LuciousBDragon]

LOLWUT?

That photo shows the embryo AND the egg-sac material. The embryo is on the right, and it's barely 1" in size.

Learn some fricking biology.

Now you’re just being disingenuous. You should have stopped a long time ago.

How Your Fetus Grows During Pregnancy

Although each pregnancy is unique, fetal growth and development follow a pattern.

www.acog.org

 

[FAUlty Gator]

Now you’re just being disingenuous. You should have stopped a long time ago.

How Your Fetus Grows During Pregnancy

Although each pregnancy is unique, fetal growth and development follow a pattern.

www.acog.org

View embedded media

Amazingly, he'll still continue to argue the point. It's pretty wild. Looking forward to it.

 

[Joes Place]

Weird...here's an actual image 8-10 weeks

Holding up the Head

www.ehd.org

Yes...that's what "image enhancement" does.

And it's "9 weeks" my photo refers to, when <1" is the norm.

 

[Joes Place]

Now you’re just being disingenuous.

No; I'm informing you what "image enhancement" means.

You're posting blown-up and enhanced images; my post was what things look like to the naked eye.