The simple fact is that there is no point of meaningful transition from non-human-being to human being. The process of conception involves millions of individually similar and insignificant chemical events occuring serially and in parallel. On some time scale, the process appears quite smooth and gradual. Life can be said to exist at specific time points, but it does not start at any point.
So, if anyone askes "When does life start?", the answer is simply, "It doesn't."
In short, there is no poof.
You sound like some kid who has just heard a couple of new words, but doesn't have a clue what they mean. You sound like a raving, rambling lunatic.
In FT January 2003: Constitutional Persons, Robert H. Bork stated,"Science and rational demonstration prove that a human exists from the moment of conception." This objective fact refutes any wishful subjective speculation stating otherwise!
"After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into existence. This is no longer a matter of taste or opinion. Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception." Dr. Jerome Lejeune, genetics professor at the University of Descartes, Paris. He discovered the Down syndrome chromosome.
"From the moment a baby is conceived, it bears the indelible stamp of a separate distinct personality, an individual different from all other individuals." Ultrasound pioneer, Sir William Liley, M.D. 1967.
"It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception." Professor M. Matthews-Roth, Harvard University Medical School.
"By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception." Professor Hymie Gordon, Mayo Clinic.
"The question as to when a human being begins is strictly a scientific question, and should be answered by human embryologists - not by philosophers, bioethicists, theologians, politicians, x-ray technicians, movie stars, or obstetricians and gynecologists." http://www.l4l.org/library/mythfact.html
"The fusion of the sperm (with 23 chromosomes) and the oocyte (with 23 chromosomes) at fertilization results in a live human being, a single-cell human zygote, with 46 chromosomes - the number of chromosomes characteristic of an individual member of the human species." http://www.l4l.org/library/mythfact.html
"Scientifically, the international consensus of embryologists is that human beings begin at fertilization (or cloning)--i.e., when their genetic code is complete and operative; even before implantation they are far more than a "bunch of cells" or merely " potential human beings."" http://www.stemcellresearch.org/statement/
"The question as to when a human person begins is a philosophical question - not a scientific question. I will not go into great detail here, but ""personhood"" begins when the human being begins - at fertilization." http://www.l4l.org/library/mythfact.html This objective argument refutes all metaphysical speculations stating otherwise.
"Life begins like everything else, at the beginning. At the moment of fertilization, a new human life begins. The human embryo is a being; and being human, she is a human being. She is person and not property because no property has the property of building itself. Everything necessary to make the new human being-the entire blueprint necessary to build a human being capable of going to the moon and putting a foot on the moon-is there in the very beginning. Nothing is added after the moment of fertilization. It is all locked in. Not only the color of our hair and eyes but even how long we will live, accident or sickness not intervening, is there in the very beginning. The complete information necessary to build the new human being is written in the smallest subscript of the universe. We are fearfully and wonderfully made!" http://www.cbhd.org/resources/reproductive/palmer_1999-10-15.htm
"A fertilized egg, or zygote, is the first cell stage and exists for only 24 hours. After cell division, this is no longer a fertilized egg. We then use several other names, which are incomprehensible to the general public, but one name covers them all and that is "embryo." So after the first day, he or she is a "living human embryo." Most importantly, "fertilized eggs" do not implant within the womb. There is a certain power to their sneering comment, "Why would you want to protect a fertilized egg from planting?" It makes a difference if you say, "Why would you want to prevent a living human embryo from planting?"" http://www.lifeissues.org/connector/display.asp?page=04oct.htm#health
They speak of reproductive and therapeutic cloning, "reproductive" being when the new living human is planted and carried to term and delivered. "Therapeutic" is when "it" will not be planted in a womb, but will be experimented upon and then "destroyed." We can accept the term "cloning for reproductive purposes," but it is best not to use "reproductive cloning," for that indicates there are other types. "Therapeutic" cloning is a total lie, for there is nothing therapeutic about this. President Bush uses the term "research cloning" which is quite adequate and accurate. But since they don't allow these tiny humans to live when they are done with their destructive research, very commonly the best words to use are "clone and kill." Finally, they often now don't use the word "cloning" at all because it is too negative. They use the term "somatic cell nuclear transfer." This is the scientific term for cloning, however it does confuse the public and sounds awfully important and scientific. From our standpoint we should not use those four words. Let's call it "cloning." http://www.lifeissues.org/connector/display.asp?page=04oct.htm#health
"....medical research shows ""the sensory pathways and connections to the cortex necessary for pain perception are present, or beginning to form, at twenty weeks gestation."" For documentation see a complete paper, "Fetal Pain Legislation: Is It Viable?" Teresa S. Colette, professor S. TX College of Law, Houston. See also, R. Hyfield, ""Unborn Child Can Feel Pain At Twenty Weeks"", Daily Telegraph 2, 8-28-01." http://www.lifeissues.org/connector/display.asp?page=04july.htm#advance and http://www.vanderbilt.edu/SFL/fetal_pain.htm
With all due respect to Judge Bork, taken literally, his statement is factually incorrect. There is no meaningful moment. On small enough time scales, almost all biological process are continuous and smooth, especially complex ones such as conception.
After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into existence. This is no longer a matter of taste or opinion. Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception." Dr. Jerome Lejeune, genetics professor
His first sentence may be true, but his third sentence is plainly false, if by "beginning" he refers to a infinitessimal time point (which he most likely does not).
"By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception." Professor Hymie Gordon, Mayo Clinic.
Ditto. There is no specific "moment", but rather a process.
"The question as to when a human being begins is strictly a scientific question, and should be answered by human embryologists - not by philosophers, bioethicists, theologians, politicians, x-ray technicians, movie stars, or obstetricians and gynecologists."
Instead of being factually false, this one is just an opinion I disagree with. The issue is primarily one of rights.
"The question as to when a human person begins is a philosophical question - not a scientific question. I will not go into great detail here, but ""personhood"" begins when the human being begins - at fertilization."
Here I agree that it is a philosophical, not scientific, question. But if he means by "begin" that there is a specific meaningful time point, then he is factually in error.
Much of the rest of your posting are pretty standard biology, with no bearing on the issue, except to the extent that the biological descriptions presuppose the space-time continuum.
It is fine for scientists to speak to one another about "beginnings" and "moments" in some vague sense presupposing the underlying continua. However, too many lay people (such as yourself, apparently) take such language literally and actually come to believe that there are magical poofs in time. However, such poofs are at odds with our most abundant observations.