[beavus]

It's conception. The penetration of the egg by the sperm that BEGINS the sequence that 9 months (or so) later produces what is legally called an infant. Sort of a mini big bang.

Please read my comment to post 1.

Conception is a continuous process involving millions similar chemical reactions occuring in parallel and in serial. There is no specific time point in the process of conception that meaningfully delineates human life.

Cosmologists speak of the big bang as resulting from a singularity, but strictly speaking, this is unrealistic speculation. No singularity (in the mathematical sense) has ever been observed, nor is it possible to imagine observing one. Furthermore, cosmologists know that the evidence to describe the earliest moments of the big bang are too limited to say anything with much confidence.

[Jaded]

But without conception the chemical reactions would not take place.

[RBranha]

So you're saying that just because humans can't observe something, it's not true or it can't exist? Sorry, but I'm not so pretentious as to believe that current human knowledge and ability are at the highest level in the universe. I'm sure earlier humans thought that they were "all that", and look at how we've advanced since then. In another 1,000 years, I'm sure we'll look like imbeciles compared to the people who will then be alive.

[MHGinTN]

"Cosmologists speak of the big bang as resulting from a singularity" ... Oh really? Do ALL Cosmologists say this?... Or do one or more say the bang may have resulted from branes colliding?

Beavus, you work so hard to talk down to us, yet you're just another scoffer trying to be subtle in your insult to conservatives and those who desire individual life be protected from conception to grave.