Dermot's Waterfall
Well, there's a difference between the terms because they aren't the same words
Thank you for agreeing ...... at last
, but the only differences between a fetus and a baby are 1, a baby has been/is being born while a fetus is unborn and 2, a fetus is typically smaller than a baby.
I know you just agreed there’s a difference after saying the opposite
I can,
But yet you didn’t
but I didn't see the need to since you didn't either, when you said "Incorrect".
I did , I said a fetus was reliant on a mother’s body , you said a baby was also , making you incorrect yet again
Ok , leave textbooks out and maybe consult a dictionary or your nearest medic for clarification
You did say A fetus is still a separate entity
That’s absolute nonsense and you know it
Ok , so you don’t see the difference between the terms fetus and baby why’s that ?
I know the definition of a fetus do you know the definition of a baby ?
Incorrect ? But you cannot Back your objection up
I’m not using books to help my points I’m pointing out what you’re blissfully unaware of medically ,the rest of your point makes no sense at all
They aren’t different
They are thus the terms fetus and baby
A baby is a fetus, a fetus is a baby
Read above
. Size doesn't matter here.
Ok , so is an adult a fetus and if not why not ?
A newborn is reliant on a mother
I know but it’s not reliant on her body to live
Again, a newborn is reliant on a woman
I know it’s also in most cases reliant on a man as well
and by extension their body) as well.
Incorrect
And yet again, yes, a fetus is separate to a mother.
Medical textbooks disagree with your assessment as do I
They are different if not what are you arguing about ?
Regarding a baby it’s not reliant on a woman’s body to have life is it ?
A fetus if it was a “ separate entity “ then how come it’s reliant on a woman’s body ?
I never used the term “ parasite “ did I ? Yet again a fetus is not separate to a mother
So it's magically not okay to kill as it's being born?
What are you talking about ?
How's that?
???
Babies are reliant on the mother until they aren't infants, and they still have no right over her or her body,
Yes a baby has no right over a woman’s body as it’s now a separate entity
so why isn't it okay to kill a newborn?
Read above
Yes I do ; nearly every day one hears yet another account from the U S about how unfairly blacks are treated and the accounts always come from some group with a vested interest in constantly pushing this agenda ; any attempted debate on the topic leaves one open to the lame knee jerk reaction of being branded a racist
Recently I watched a very intersting documentary which clearly showed that worldwide universities and colleges are the ones who push the whole over the top P C bullshit which discourages debate of any sort on these controversial topics , it’s the new form of censorship of which I will not be a part off
Hi Marcus , neither do I , they're merely a demonstration of the typical names used in name calling in this particular case .
Offence is not given but taken , agreed , but many blacks do in fact find these terms deeply offensive .
When I was a kid we had Golliwogs and my parents used to watch the black and white minstrel show , one never saw a black man or women in Ireland unless it was a tourist ; Dubliners used to joke about the late Phil Lynott of Thin Lizzy fame being the only black man in Ireland
This is so true we are the bestest name callers ever , here ya go courtesy of Wiki ....... 🙀🙀🙀
Af
(Rhodesia) African to a white Rhodesian (Rhodie).[1]
Ape
(U.S.) a black person.[2]
Béni-oui-oui
Mostly used during the French colonization of Algeria as a derogatory term to describe Algerian Muslims.[3]
Bluegum
An offensive slur used by some United States white Southerners for an African-American perceived as being lazy and who refuses to work.[4]
Boogie
a black person (film noire) "The boogies lowered the boom on Beaver Canal".[5]
Buck
a black person, also used to describe Native Americans.
Buffie
a black person.[6]
Burrhead / Burr-head / Burr head
(U.S.) a black person (referencing stereotypical hair type).[7]
Colored
(U.S.) a Black person. Once generally accepted as inoffensive, this word is now considered disrespectful by some. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People continues to use its full name unapologetically. Some black Americans have reclaimed this word and softened it in the expression "a person of color".
Coon
(U.S. & U.K) a black person. Possibly from Portuguese barracoos, a building constructed to hold slaves for sale. (1837).[8]
Crow
a black person,[9] spec. a black woman.
Eggplant
(U.S.) A black person. Notable for appearing in the 1979 film, The Jerk.[10]
Fuzzies
(U.K.) A black person. In the 1964 film classic, "Zulu", the British officer played by Michael Caine refers to the Zulus as "fuzzies".[11]
Gable
a black person.[6]
Golliwogg
(UK Commonwealth) a dark-skinned person, after Florence Kate Upton's children's book character [12]
Jigaboo, jiggabo, jijjiboo, zigabo, jig, jigg, jiggy, jigga
(U.S. & UK) a black person (JB) with stereotypical black features (dark skin, wide nose, etc.) Used to refer to mannerisms that resemble dancing.
Jim Crow
(U.S.) a black person; also the name for the segregation laws prevalent in much of the United States until the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s.[13]
Jim Fish
(South Africa) a black person[14]
Jungle bunny
(US and UK) a black person.[15]
Kaffir, kaffer, kaffir, kafir, kaffre
(South Africa) a. a black person. Considered very offensive.
Macaca, same as "macaque"
a person of black African descent, originally used in languages of colonial powers in Africa[16]
Mammy
Domestic servant of black African descent, generally good-natured, often overweight, and loud.[17]
Monkey
a person of black African descent.[16] See also Macaca (slur). It also gave rise to the racist "monkey chants" in sports.
Mosshead
a black person.[6]
Munt
(among whites in South Africa, Zimbabwe, and Zambia) a black person from muntu, the singular of Bantu[18]
Nig-nog
(UK & U.S.) a black person.[19]
Nigger / nigra / nigga / niggah / nigguh
(U.S., UK) An offensive term for a black person. From the word negro which means the color black in numerous languages. Diminutive appellations include "Nigg" and "Nigz". Over time, the terms "Nigga" and "Niggaz" (plural) have come to be frequently used between some African-Americans without the negative associations of "Nigger".
Niglet / nigglet
a black child
Nigra / negra / niggra / nigrah / nigruh
(U.S.) offensive for a black person [first used in the early 1900s][20]
Pickaninny
a term – generally considered derogatory – that in English usage refers to black children, or a caricature of them which is widely considered racist.
Porch monkey
a black person,[21]
Powder burn
a black person.[6]
Quashie
a black person.[6]
Sambo
(U.S.) a derogatory term for an African American, Black, or sometimes a South Asian person.[17][22]
Smoked Irish / smoked Irishman
(U.S.) 19th century term for Blacks (intended to insult both Blacks and Irish).[6]
Sooty
a black person [originated in the U.S. in the 1950s][23]
Spade
A black person.[24] recorded since 1928 (OED), from the playing cards suit.
Spook
a black person.
Tar baby
(UK; U.S.; and N.Z.) a black child.[25]
Teapot
(British) a black person. [1800s][26]
Thicklips
a black person
The Pakistanis seem to be a most savage nation and when one reads of atrocities like the one you cited by the military it makes for very sad reading .
An annex of Pakistan seems most sensible maybe future government may take the step unless of course it's all tied up agreements that are legally binding .
Thank you for the information it's good to hear fro one who knows firsthand .
Trump is a loose cannon and an egotist what's more chilling is ihis Vice President Mike Pence an out and out nut job .
Actually there are a lot of similarities in both our countries in our struggles for independence and I remember reading an article about the similarities from history Ireland it's most interesting ....
The situation here is very complicated republicans would indeed support a united Ireland , the people of Nothern Ireland would be majority Protestant and loyalist and would resist any such change whilst the Catholics would support it .
I live in the Republic and a united Ireland and can not envisage a united Ireland anytime soon ,I often think the brits would prefer to be rid of it
A typical reply from a dimwit who seems to think he has a right to dictate what a woman can and connotation do with her body .
Refusing to admit the obvious is something you consistently do yet you accuse others of it ..... you're dismissed
Well actually it's you who fail to see that your inane argument was put to bed in my opening salvo , then again your stupidity is the stuff of legend as your daily rantings demonstrate beautifully.
American politics does not really interest me and your obsession with the democratic party shows how insecure you are .
Why do you speak of inhumanity when you think it's right and proper to tyrannise a woman by forcing your views on her ?
Only a moron like you could bring slavery into this debate because you have nothing significant to say and as usual you downvote differing opinions to yours .
It's sad that people like you seem to assume you can tell a woman what she can and cannot do with her body , you mister anti slavery seem to assume it's ok for you to dictate to a woman what she can do with her body ....isn't that what slavers used to do as in tell slaves what they could and couldn't do with their bodies .. ouch 🙀
You say .. you might destroy my claims 😂 you haven't done so as yet , and this latest long winded post of yours is just more of your mind numbingly boring nonsense which actually aids you in your goal which is not to engage in real debate .....
Incidentally I think you may wish to read your opening comment on the debate topic because it does exactly what you accuse others of ....... posting utter nonsense which totally ignores the debate topic .....
Your argument is destroyed and you're dismissed
Jeffrey you told me to go look at all the great arguments you make and all the up votes you get ?
This latest attempt by you is an example I take it of your ' powerful ' debating style ?
It's extremely amusing the butt kicking you're taking I almost feel sorry for you ...... easy now I said ....... almost
The data worldwide is indeed confirming what I claim at the moment anyway , here is a snippet from an article in the Guardian ; my own brother is involved in the implementation of a scheme for a large multinational in replacing a large number of office workers with bots as we speak .....
Guardian .....
Last year, reporters for the Associated Press attempted to figure out which jobs were being lost to new technology. They analysed employment data from 20 countries and interviewed experts, software developers and CEOs. They found that almost all the jobs that had disappeared in the past four years were not low-skilled, low-paid roles, but fairly well-paid positions in traditionally middle-class careers. Software was replacing administrators and travel agents, bookkeepers and secretaries, and at alarming rates.
Economists and futurists know it's not all doom and gloom, but it is all change. Oxford academics Carl Benedikt Frey and Michael A Osborne have predicted computerisation could make nearly half of jobs redundant within 10 to 20 years. Office work and service roles, they wrote, were particularly at risk. But almost nothing is impervious to automation. It has swept through shop floors and factories, transformed businesses big and small, and is beginning to revolutionise the professions.
Knowledge-based jobs were supposed to be safe career choices, the years of study it takes to become a lawyer, say, or an architect or accountant, in theory guaranteeing a lifetime of lucrative employment. That is no longer the case. Now even doctors face the looming threat of possible obsolescence. Expert radiologists are routinely outperformed by pattern-recognition software, diagnosticians by simple computer questionnaires. In 2012, Silicon Valley investor Vinod Khosla predicted that algorithms and machines would replace 80% of doctors within a generation.
In their much-debated book The Second Machine Age, Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee argued that we now face an intense period of creative destruction. "Technological progress," they warned, "is going to leave behind some people, perhaps even a lot of people, as it races ahead … there's never been a worse time to be a worker with only 'ordinary' skills and abilities to offer, because computers, robots and other digital technologies are acquiring these skills and abilities at an extraordinary rate."
So where does that leave the professions, whose hard-won expertise is beginning to fall within the power of computers and artificial intelligence to emulate? The efficiency of computerisation seems likely to spell the end of the job security past generations sought in such careers. For many, what were once extraordinary skillsets will soon be rendered ordinary by the advance of the machines. What will it mean to be a professional then?
"We'll see what I call decomposition, the breaking down of professional work into its component parts," says leading legal futurist professor Richard Susskind. Susskind's forthcoming book Beyond the Professions, co-authored with his son Daniel Susskind, examines the transformations already underway across the sectors that once offered jobs for life. He predicts a process not unlike the division of labour that wiped out skilled artisans and craftsmen in the past: the dissolution of expertise into a dozen or more streamlined processes.
The point I'm making and you're missing is the fact that the jobs being replaced at the moment are not the ones that require manual skills as in the jobs I mention but are more office related jobs that are now beginning to make workers in theses fields redundant .
Where did you get your information from ?
Here is a piece from the Guardian .....
Last year, reporters for the Associated Press attempted to figure out which jobs were being lost to new technology. They analysed employment data from 20 countries and interviewed experts, software developers and CEOs. They found that almost all the jobs that had disappeared in the past four years were not low-skilled, low-paid roles, but fairly well-paid positions in traditionally middle-class careers. Software was replacing administrators and travel agents, bookkeepers and secretaries, and at alarming rates.
Economists and futurists know it's not all doom and gloom, but it is all change. Oxford academics Carl Benedikt Frey and Michael A Osborne have predicted computerisation could make nearly half of jobs redundant within 10 to 20 years. Office work and service roles, they wrote, were particularly at risk. But almost nothing is impervious to automation. It has swept through shop floors and factories, transformed businesses big and small, and is beginning to revolutionise the professions.
Knowledge-based jobs were supposed to be safe career choices, the years of study it takes to become a lawyer, say, or an architect or accountant, in theory guaranteeing a lifetime of lucrative employment. That is no longer the case. Now even doctors face the looming threat of possible obsolescence. Expert radiologists are routinely outperformed by pattern-recognition software, diagnosticians by simple computer questionnaires. In 2012, Silicon Valley investor Vinod Khosla predicted that algorithms and machines would replace 80% of doctors within a generation.
In their much-debated book The Second Machine Age, Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee argued that we now face an intense period of creative destruction. "Technological progress," they warned, "is going to leave behind some people, perhaps even a lot of people, as it races ahead … there's never been a worse time to be a worker with only 'ordinary' skills and abilities to offer, because computers, robots and other digital technologies are acquiring these skills and abilities at an extraordinary rate."
So where does that leave the professions, whose hard-won expertise is beginning to fall within the power of computers and artificial intelligence to emulate? The efficiency of computerisation seems likely to spell the end of the job security past generations sought in such careers. For many, what were once extraordinary skillsets will soon be rendered ordinary by the advance of the machines. What will it mean to be a professional then?
"We'll see what I call decomposition, the breaking down of professional work into its component parts," says leading legal futurist professor Richard Susskind. Susskind's forthcoming book Beyond the Professions, co-authored with his son Daniel Susskind, examines the transformations already underway across the sectors that once offered jobs for life. He predicts a process not unlike the division of labour that wiped out skilled artisans and craftsmen in the past: the dissolution of expertise into a dozen or more streamlined processes.
At the moment worldwide bots are replacing humans in the workplace I know two people actively involved in the day to day implementation of such schemes .
Interestingly the safest jobs in the future may be ones that require manual skills as in gardening , shelf stacking , restaurant work etc ,etc. as bots are not yet advanced enough to carry out these tasks .It would be most interesting to re visit the world in a hundred years time to see how much society is affected by these changes.
I remember watching the debates and the impression I got about Hillary was that she was petty and nasty , when I watched Trump and Hillary in action they looked like a pair of bickering school kids and you're on the money Clinton is universally hated
And he's even got this 👉 .....
Hyphenation: trump‧ery
Noun Edit
trumpery (plural trumperies)
Worthless finery; bric-a-brac or junk.
1610, William Shakespeare, The Tempest, Act IV, scene 1:
PROSPERO.[To Ariel]
This was well done, my bird.
Thy shape invisible retain thou still:
The trumpery in my house, go bring it hither
For stale to catch these thie...
It could be true but beware of cats 👉 🐈🐈🐈 they watch silently all the time and are the ultimate opportunists 😺 .... there you go just turned my back and my kitty is devouring a plateful of fried chicken ... she will now work her way back into my affections by purring and licking my hand 😻😻 they want to rule us 🙀🙀🙀
Over here we go down the local 🍺🍺🍺 take the piss out out of each other sing🎤 ( a lot ) dance a lot 💃🏼 and laugh at Trumps hair ( a lot ) 😱 let the rest of the ' civilised ' world decide our fate ...and free balloons 🎈🎈🎈🎈🎈for everyone 💃🏼🍺🍺💃🏼💃🏼
Well I keep telling you if you leave me alone I won't go near you but for some strange reason you keep stalking me ... I know you're gay you came out last night 👏👏👏👏👏well done 👏👏
Jefferey it's gonna break your heart 💔 I'm married to a woman . ... 🙍 If you desire strong men .... I'm not available ✋ stick with guys and .... please stay safe 👋👋
So my profession is now an abortionist 🤔 ... ok
But you're the one who admitted last night on CD that you were gay 💃 and your best friend was gay .... so I guess that makes you ... still gay
Told you before baboon 🐵🐵 you throw a punch you get two back ,
Bet your mum wished she had an abortion ....
Keep pushing ...
Stop it Jefferey you admitted online you wer gay and now you're not ?
Are you bisexual ? Honestly I know you said your best friend was gay did he turn your advances down ?
It's cool I'm not anti gay ... congrats on coming out online I admire your bravery 👏👏👏👏👏👏👏
