₦airaland Forum

Onechancearmy:
My bad. I keep confusing you with Catfishbilly or whatever his silly name is. In any event, you are an atheists aren't you? Or is that also a lie?

Why you dey mention me?

butterflylion:
Op said the below and I am very sure you can read



He had an 8hr delayed treatment due to obvious negligence. What you should be asking for are details and not posting unspecified reports which do not focus in detail on what the op specifically said.

So, I'm going to take his word that his appendix ruptured for 8 hours cos he's a doctor and knew exactly when his appendix ruptured?

Abeg.


People survive ruptured appendix with formation of abscess and even full blown peritonitis.

His case is not extraordinary.

CuteMadridista:
Catfishbilly!!! welcome back

Thanks, man.

It's good to be back, illness, work and exams kept me away.

Can see y'all are still fighting the good fight.

EzeDictator:
you Are Wrong sir... My Mother's close Friend Had An Accident and Her Head Was Chop off, the People Around The Scene Grabbed her Head, tied It To The Body then Rushed Her To The Hospital, she Couldnt Turn Her Head For A Long Time. She Is Still Alive today

I know lying for Jesus is a thing. It has a name for it, PIOUS FRAUD, and early church fathers were in support of it, but damn this is taking it way too far.

EzeDictator:
I Had Appendicitis which Ruptured at 7am, the Pain Was Excruciating, I Was Left Unattended To For 8hours in The General Hospital... 4 to 5hours Is Enough For All The Pox and Bacteria to Flow Into My Alone Streams And Heart and Kill But That Didnt Happen, can You Explain Why Scientifically?

The mortality rate of a ruptured appendix is 5.1 per 1000. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1562475/

This means that out of every 1000 people with a ruptured appendix, 5.1 will die.


That you didn't die doesn't qualify as a miracle, medically speaking.
1stSonOfLucifer

Apt.

Broad daylight hypocrisy.

Martinez19:
God didn't remember to kill Christopher Hitchens at age 8, he forgot to kill Richard Dawkins at the age of 16 and now Dawkins is an atheist. Oh no, he forgot to kill Bill Maher, Rick Gravis, Martinez19, 0temAtum, catfishbilly, hopefulLandlord and Co.

LMAO

1Sharon:
Smarter foreigners? Do you have inferiority complex?

He has this insane mix of superiority and inferiority complex at the same damn time, it's amazing.

He's a chimera.

THT80:
To many cry babies trolling me in every section. How sad.

And he'll be making noise about his impeccable Queen's English. It's "too" not "to"

But, THT80, the post you were referring to was a private conversation between Dalaman and Hopefullandlord. It didn't concern you in any way. How you come take carry the matter for head na that one I no come know. Abi you got your ass handed to you on the thread and had to look for a way to chicken out?

Originakalokalo:
You don't lie for Jesus.

What for?

To win souls?

You don't win souls. The Holy Spirit does that by himself.

If you lie for any reason, that's the works of the flesh.

A child of God will not lie. The devil is a liar and the father of lies.

That's actually a thing. There's a name for it. "Lying for Jesus" and "Pious Fraud". You should check them out.

vaxx:
pls am not on nairaland to keep beef with anyone..ever since I have spoken(written) my mind,I have move ahead....bros show some love...

Me? Keep beef with you?
You never reach naa.
I just call out hypocrites wherever I see them, that's all

butterflyl1on:
Is that the guys picture? I see no insult there. That was even a caricature of Dawkins so how does that offend you? Are you Dawkins or is the guy him?

Abeg go and sleep and stop making yourself look even more childishly silly.

Of course you and him would see no insult. But if it were the reverse he would be playing the victim. Just common correction na im una 2 carry for head. Let me hear him chide someone for being rude or utters "no insults" again fest

butterflyl1on:
So telling someone who told him he believes in talking donkeys that the person believes in talking apes is now an insult?

I can see he was right about you. Ever since he commented on your egocentric nature you seem to have been monitoring him. Looking for a slip up and you thought this was it.

You are childish and silly. Your antics show your immaturity.

I don't care what you think about me, I'm not bothered one bit.

So, him, uploading a picture that depicts the guy as brainless is not an insult?
Later vaxx will be shouting respect and no insults upandan. I can't stand hypocrites.

vaxx:
lol..but you believe in talking apes...

I have meet one Nigerian atheist but not in Nigeria, i still consider him a joker anyway...

And the embodiment of discussion without insults has spoken.
Fuckkking hypocrite

vaxx:
let me be sincere with you...any average beliver can easily win a one and one debate with atheist...... I do not have a science background but I do realised that most atheist with a strong science background failed to apply science evidence in their discussion.....


An advice to atheist , do not go into public debate with babalawo..

Are you for real?

I understand your points. The transcendent god argument works best for a Deistic god as you've rightly said, but it's still an argument for a god.

Now, a god that trascends our own time and space but is limited by time and space in another "realm", it kind of limits the "powers" of this god.
Which would now lead to a kind of ad hoc rescue attempt by declaring that the said god is not limited by any time and space in any realm whatsoever.

vaxx:
I just said it .... Keep to your intelligence.... Your aim is to look for someone to correct....am sorry to dissapoint you.that isn't me...engaged your peers....until you learn how to show courtesy with your written.... You have nothing to offer me....and if this is your way of life in reality....I will advice you to adjust...even if my claim are outlandish as you claim..it is logical for you to point out my errors not trying to show off you are better...i read one of your thread with a lady who also claim to be in the same profession with you.... I see the way the lady point out your error without bashing you.... From that thread ....I doubt you are whom you called yourself....that lady really do an interesting job...


My first engagement with you was very poor...

Errors? Without bashing me? Please I'll like to see those errors.
Whether you doubt who I claim to be is your freaking cup of tea. Just know that when you come to my profession and start spewing ignorance, I'll be there to set you straight with as much rudeness as possible since that's how you want it.

I don't know why the ignorant ones are always the loudest.

vaxx:
that sound like a proud statement.... The purpose of debate is to let the sees his or her own flaws by poinying making your own argument flawless. And not by telling him you are better than him. It is very absurd in thinking, For you to nurse the mind that your are better than your opponent in the first place. ,it will mean there is nothing to talk about. Just like you openly told me with your foul mouth, ,you want to school yourself..I wonder how you guys learn...since you already belive you know it all..keep to your intelligence it is not useful for me...

You came to my profession and was making outlandish claims, you think I'll just close my eyes and watch you carry on? No wonder I said you're impervious to corrections. You're doing it all over again.
And I've no way suggested that I'm better than you in the post you quoted. Wonder where you got that from.

hopefulLandlord:
Aarrrggghh!!!!!!!! okay

Engaging vaxx is futile, trust me. Been there. Dude is impervious to anything that remotely looks like a correction to his erroneous beliefs.

butterflyl1on:
Yes those cases do exist. But I am also sorry to disappoint you that doctors always would address their patients according to their level of experience. What one doctor cannot achieve another doctor would tell you he can and another can also tell you he can try his best.

Like I said there are levels to cancer and each is handled according to its severity. Decisions are made based on what is known and seen.

There is always a chance

What are you saying? Cases that made it to the court where the judges ruled against abortion.

Do you think if there was any other way or there was a better doctor that the case would have made it to court in the first place? There are cases where abortions are inevitable. That's just the truth of the matter butterflyl1on

butterflyl1on:
I used the term "nothing is clear in medicine all the time " and not "nothing is clear in medicine".

If a pregnant woman has cancer, cancer is always in stages and the assessment for treatment would be done according to the stage it is. If it's yet early, why not wait till after birth before treatment while monitoring the mother? Even if the baby needs to be born premature and artificially nursed while the mother is receiving treatment, that is an option. Everything does not have to be cut and join.

There is always a chance.

Babies can be born at 6 months and nursed artificially till they are fully grown can they not?

Well, sorry to disappoint you, there are cases where treatment wasn't given to the mother cos she was pregnant and she ended up dying with the baby.
That's all shades of stupid if you ask me. The fetus that they were protecting ended up dying. With the mother that could have been saved.

butterflyl1on:
Nothing is clear in medicine all the time. Doctors have said that a baby would die within 3 months if they are born in their condition but these babies went ahead to lead full active lives to a good old age or even into their 30s.

Medicine took a gamble with that life when they said the baby would die in months but it defied the odds.

There is always a chance.

There are things that are abundantly clear in medicine.

Pregnant woman has cancer and needs life saving chemotherapy or radiotherapy that will harm the fetus, you're saying she shouldn't abort?

butterflyl1on:
Your opinion and I believe others would have preferred the suffering to the death.

See why I said the question offers nothing to the discussion?

butterflyl1on:
If you could choose, would you have asked that you be aborted Since all you see yourself to be as a fetus is a lump of cells?

How does this further this discourse? What bearing does it have on the validity of an argument?


I'll answer. If my parents didn't want me and didn't have the financial, emotional and social capacity to take care of me, I'll pick abortion in a heartbeat. I no come this world come suffer.

butterflyl1on:
So the fetus are the guinea pigs? The pregnant women are unknowingly being used as guinea pigs right? They are encouraged to kill what they term as defective and retain the whole.

I thought evolution was meant to be a continues process still? Who says the allegedly defective fetuses are not evolution still ongoing? Random mutations are supposed to aid evolution so why are we not allowing this randomness to continue? Why kill the mutated fetuses?

The embryo. Not the fetus. Big difference. The woman is not a guinea pig, everything is done in the lab using techniques like IVF. Nobody is killing any defective anything in what I wrote.

This one that you're harping on kill kill, what in write up suggested that?

johnydon22:
Murder can be quantified through several points and moral directives, cultural, religious or political (so called legal)

and for clarity sake can you produce a legal definition of "HUMAN BEING" with credible link there be, i will like to read on that.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/1/8
This is American law.
As you can see, the fetus has to be born and alive to be considered a human. I couldn't find anything on Nigerian law

Oh at the very conception. it's a life circle and that is the beginning of a homo sapiens.

I disagree with you on this. To be a homo sapien is a process which terminates at being born. Tadpoles are not called frogs, they'll end up becoming frogs. But at that point in time, they're tadpoles, not frogs.

Not making more than was required in the first place.

That's not an option, excess has to be made because there's no saying how many times you try before the embryo takes, so a lot has to be made. And whatever is left behind is subsequently destroyed.

Maybe during world war 2 German scientists were right after all to use kids for medical research, after all such research could also have medical implications.

We are talking about a collection of cells here without rights, can't be compared to full blown humans with rights.

johnydon22:
There is no convenient left out here, the point was simple: a human is no more defined as someone who can be counted in a census any more than it is defined by someone who has rights to a property.

My definition of human is biological and on that biological note i base my arguments, unborn babies are as much human as any of us



Murder can be quantified through several points and moral directives, cultural, religious or political (so called legal) I have seen gross abhorrence legalised and quite the reverse made illegal, yes this gives credence to the subjectivity of human moral outlook.

legal is not necessarily good as much as illegal is not necessarily bad.

Again i do not base my definition of human on your so called legal definition of human if there is such a thing.

Definitions could be biological and legal, for example, adult has a legal definition and a biological definition.
So, if you say abortion is murder, then we've entered the area of law, so you'll have to prove that fetus are humans under the law. But if you say abortion is killing a fetus, now we've left the law, we can now discuss it outside the confines of the law.
Saying abortion is murder is a moot point in my opinion.

This i contend in every way, drawing your first breathe free of the womb does not define human, classified under the homo sapiens specie does.



I am arguing on a traditional biological sense, none the less still find this action abhorable

So, at what point is the fertilized sperm and ovum called a homo sapien in your opinion?


If you consider destruction of unused embryo abhorrent as well, what would you rather be done to them?
Declaring abortion murder would have far reaching consequences in the medical world. It would affect assisted reproduction, scientific research into ways of curing genetic diseases, the list is endless.

vaxx:
Proudgorgeouga ,this is what I post to johndon22...

let's say there was an egg that had been fertilized. The womb is an hazardous place to be without implantion. Especially during menstruation. The uterus swells, it contracts, it shed the lining that the egg would've implanted on. If the womb didn't dissolve the fertilized egg before the period, it wouldn't be in a position to stay in there ... Catfishbelly...what do you enjoy in foul statement

There was so much wrong with this your post that I just ignored it. I saw it the first time you posted it.


When different people repeatedly tell you the same thing and you still refuse to learn, it becomes frustrating. I didn't use foul statement. What I said might be considered rude, but definitely not foul statement.

vaxx:
that was my understanding initially.... But since you are women ...pls read this article....http://www.womens-health.co.uk/menstruation-during-pregnancy.html

So, na blog post you carry come?

Let me school you then since you're being unnecessarily obtuse.

In menstrual cycle of 28 days, ovulation occurs mid cycle at about day 14 and this egg lives for about 24 to 48 hours, meaning that the sperm has this range to fertilize the ovum. After that, it's implanted into the wall of the uterus. If no implantation occurs, to wall of the womb is shed as menses. As you can see in this timeline, there's nothing like "getting pregnant close to your period".

If you still want to be unnecessarily dense, pick up a textbook on reproductive biology and leave blogs alone.

Proudgorgeousga:
oga pregnant women do not have menstruation. If you have conceived and you start spotting you are at a risk of a miscarriage.

Nigga just wants to argue. Reminds me of someone on this platform.

butterflyl1on:
Women do not conceive close to their menstruation. Conception timing occurs after ovulation and the conditions for ovulation and conception prohibit menstruation.

Once fertilisation occurs the body is notified to stop menstruation in order to aid implantation.

What you are saying can only happen during a hormonal imbalance episode but even at that, once a fertilised egg is implanted then any bleeding after that is known as a miscarriage aka spontaneous abortion which can be caused due to a hormonal issue or excessive implantation bleeding or spotting.

C.atfishbilly do you concur?

Thumbs up