PDA

View Full Version : Incredible picture!!

Sozo
March 14th 2003, 07:38 PM
84 day old baby in the womb...
yxboom
March 14th 2003, 07:39 PM
Whoa that is simply........amazing!
$cirisme
March 14th 2003, 07:41 PM
Whoa. :thumb:

(saves picture)
Piebald
March 14th 2003, 07:42 PM
That's a photograph? It looks kind of CGI
Xmansmommy
March 18th 2003, 02:32 PM
Beautiful!
Lizard
March 18th 2003, 02:46 PM
Cool pic. :thumb:
graceinme
March 18th 2003, 03:08 PM
ohhh little sweet pea!









:gim: Love Grace
Patroclus
March 24th 2003, 04:48 AM
How was it taken?
Solly
March 24th 2003, 05:26 AM
Today @ 08:48 AM located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=43546#post43546)
Patroclus:

How was it taken?

My thought too. Ironically, most of the pictures we have like this are post-mortem. But this one also looks CGI.
yxboom
March 24th 2003, 12:04 PM
If it is taken in the womb it would be CGI generated.

32mm cameras don't really work inside of women's wombs.
flipper
April 5th 2003, 05:59 AM
THese images are from a documentary that's finishing production (I think it's German, but don't quote me). They're CGI.
Jade
April 5th 2003, 02:53 PM
The GE 4D ultrasounds (http://www.gemedicalsystems.com/rad/us/4d/index.html) are some of the best pictures we have from inside the womb.
lordsnooty
April 6th 2003, 12:27 PM
Ugly though, isn't it? Yeech.

Paul
$cirisme
April 6th 2003, 12:43 PM
Hey, Jade, thank you so much for that! I've been looking for gif version forever, thanks!! :yipee: :yipee: :yipee:

(clicks save)
$cirisme
April 6th 2003, 12:44 PM
Snooty,

That was in extremely poor taste.
dizzle
April 6th 2003, 01:31 PM
I think it is beautiful.
lordsnooty
April 6th 2003, 06:30 PM
Today @ 05:44 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=#post)
cirisme:

Snooty,

That was in extremely poor taste.

What? Can you tell me why, please?

I don't see much beauty in a semi-formed fetus.

Paul
AVmetro
April 7th 2003, 02:50 AM
I'd certainly say those are better than a sonograph. How doctors are able to read those, I'll never know.
Piebald
April 7th 2003, 03:02 AM
I don't see much beauty in a semi-formed fetus.

Is it ever in good taste to say that a Human Being is ugly?

</can of worms>
Socrates
April 7th 2003, 06:28 AM
:thumb: Superb pix, Sozo and Jade :yipee:

And as a former fetus myself, I object to Lord Snooty's disgustingly age-ist smear that the pix were "ugly". :no:
lordsnooty
April 7th 2003, 10:38 AM
Today @ 08:02 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=#post)
Hamster:

I don't see much beauty in a semi-formed fetus.

Is it ever in good taste to say that a Human Being is ugly?

Sure, if it's a fetus. I was an ugly fetus too!

Paul
Solly
April 7th 2003, 10:53 AM
Yesterday @ 11:30 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=#post)
lordsnooty:

What? Can you tell me why, please?

I don't see much beauty in a semi-formed fetus.

Paul

Now explain to us why Christians can find beauty in God's creation - but are wrong, whereas to you its "just" a fetus - and are right. I take it you are not interested in works of art in progress? I take it that paying thousands for a Picasso sketch is a waste of money to you, because it isn't a completed picture?
Tell me again how humanism is a viable philosophy that respects human beings and their rights, despite the fact that they are bits of flesh, and that you can categorically state that there is a dividing line between humanhood and scrap-of-fleshy-material-hood, and that the mere passage into this world by natural birth is the decisive dividing line. In your one comment you have done more to undermine the acceptance of your philosophy than a 100 arguments could to present it.
lordsnooty
April 7th 2003, 11:39 AM
Today @ 03:53 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=#post)
Solly:
Now explain to us why Christians can find beauty in God's creation - but are wrong, whereas to you its "just" a fetus - and are right.

Neither is 'right' necessarily. I just think it's an ugly little thing.

I take it you are not interested in works of art in progress? I take it that paying thousands for a Picasso sketch is a waste of money to you

I see no real merit in Picasso's work, but that's besides the point. I do value artwork. I don't know much about art, but I know fetus just isn't it.

Tell me again how humanism is a viable philosophy that respects human beings and their rights, despite the fact that they are bits of flesh, and that you can categorically state that there is a dividing line between humanhood and scrap-of-fleshy-material-hood, and that the mere passage into this world by natural birth is the decisive dividing line.

Strawman argument, nobody makes this distinction.

In your one comment you have done more to undermine the acceptance of your philosophy than a 100 arguments could to present it.

That's right. A fetus is ugly, therefore humanism is shown to be false!

I've got to get myself down to the church and sign up!

Paul
Ryokan
April 7th 2003, 11:53 AM
Let's put it like this. I agree, babies in the fetus stage are beautiful in that they represent the "miracle" of human growth and developement. It is a beautiful process. But from a strictly aethestic stand point, fetuses do look like the so called "gray" extra terrestrials. Just like I loveinfantsand think they are cute, but they also kinda look like old men.