No, my statement, which I do not find ridiculous at all, is that both the blastocyst stage and four-and-a-half years old are stages of human development. That should be quite clear from a plain reading of the original statement.
Don't you agree that this statement is true?
I do not confer equivalence to a blastocyst and four-and-a-half year old. They are obviously different. Likewise a sigle spermatazoa is different, even from a blastocyst. This should be apparent even to the casual observer.
Don't you agree that this statement is true?
Oh. Ok. So we're back to the unremarkable observation that human reproduction and development involves a lot of "stages." I am, of course, happy to agree with that, but I don't find it any more insightful than an observation that weather involves a lot of "patterns."