Putting the JW Stand on Evolution in Perspective

[Subduction Zone]

Really? Even Jose Fly believes the claim....


Or is this a unique claim, to you?

You do realize that the linked JW website lost their argument in their very first paragraph, don't you?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

You do realize that the linked JW website lost their argument in their very first paragraph, don't you?

Only in your pov.

(You're talking about "lasting purpose," right? If so, you might like this:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...etzsche-blog/201101/the-meaning-life-revealed )

 

[Subduction Zone]

Only in your pov.

(You're talking about "lasting purpose," right? If so, you might like this:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...etzsche-blog/201101/the-meaning-life-revealed )

That is an obvious false dichotomy. It also puts a huge burden of proof upon the writers of the article. They not only have to show that somehow reality means that life is meaningless, but that their myths give a meaning to life. They cannot do either. That is why the lost.

You really should work on not only the concepts of evidence and the scientific method. You could also use some work on basic logic as well.

 

[oldbadger]

So all of the supposed shop lifters that you ever caught should have been found not guilty because you lacked sufficient evidence.

Being inconsistent is a form of dishonesty.

Stupid sly personal comments, intended to inflame.
Nasty.......

 

[oldbadger]

8% of the active ones agree with me according to the OP.
(I'm shooting for 10%.)

OK..... I'll agree with you then.
I'm a Deist but you could sneak my vote in....... Hell, look at your recent presidential elections, you can get away with it Revolting....... so long as nobody finds out.....

......... ah..... yes...... that could be a problem here.....

 

[ecco]

Learning to live without God is like learning to live without sight or without hearing or limbs

A slow process of mindless undirected evolution is illogical to us ...

Well, this thread is about "putting-the-jw-stand-on-evolution-in-perspective".

I think you've just done that very succinctly.

You believe without God your life would be much worse.
You believe if evolution is true, there is no need for your god.
Therefore, you must argue against evolution in any way you can. You cannot allow evolution to be real. If evolution is real, your God is not real.

 

[ecco]

I too have a friend treated for prostate cancer. His was in the early stages (fortunately) and he has no interest in natural medicines so he went down the orthodox route.
He has erectile dysfunction and incontinence as a result of the surgery. He is alive, but his quality of life is severely diminished.

Since we're dishing anecdotes... A close acquaintance developed a form of cancer. The doctor suggested the usual round of chemo and radiation. He asked the doctor: Doctor, how is the chemo and radiation going to affect my quality of life? The doctor responded: What is your quality of life if you are dead? He took the treatments. Fifteen years later, he's enjoying a great life.

Maybe that's where your mindset really is.. You don't care if those close to you die because you believe you/they are all going to wind up in JW heaven.

I wish he'd had the option of trying whole plant cannabis (not the synthesized stuff being produced in labs that is useless) then he may have been able to defeat the disease and still have a good quality of life. But no one knows, because of the demonization of a harmless plant that may reduce pharmaceutical company revenues by a large margin. Watch them now make their expensive synthetic fake version and then claim that its useless.

You're still on your bandwagon of Big Pharma being the bogeyman behind pot being illegal. You refuse to admit it was Hearst's greed and racism that started the anti-marijuana crusade.

Herbs and other "natural" remedies may work for some things. Herbs and "natural" remedies are also a billion dollar industry. Unlike pharmaceuticals, these products are mostly unregulated. There are suckers born every minute and there are hucksters around to take their money.

Back in the '60s, many people with cancer, famously including Steve McQueen, went to Mexico to get treatments with ground walnuts. They died.

 

[ecco]

That is not what I have found in my own research. I am hypoglycemic and can control my sugar levels well with diet alone.
Hyperglycemia can be the result of stress affecting hormones. If it is an ongoing problem, (cause unknown) it is treated the same as type one diabetes.

You are comparing hypoglycemia with diabetes?!? Seriously?

Your "research" showed that eating a raw carrot when you get frizzy helps. Now you believe you are an expert in hypoglycemia and diabetes.

That ties into the topic of this thread as well. Your JW mindset is all about simplisticism.

Cancer cause and treatment complicated: Eating raw pot easy cure.
Diabetes cause and treatment complicated: Eat a raw carrot, easy.
Evolution complicated: GodDidIt easy.

 

[ecco]

Some scientists are still open minded about the possibility of outside interference between the evolution links and mankind.

Name some. If you are thinking about the proponents of panspermia, remember those building blocks originated without a God.

 

[ecco]

Dishonest?

Where does life come from? Despite years of research, scientists still rack their brains over this most existential question.

What's your point?

In the few hundred years that science has truly been practiced, we have learned more facts about nature than in the tens of thousands of years that came before. We now know that continents move and make mountains. Science has no problem admitting that we don't know everything. That kind of arrogance only comes from theists.

In that same time archaelogists, and biblical scholars have determined that most of the stuff in the Bible is false. We now know Exodus never happened; we now know the "authors" of the gospels are not the authors of the gospels.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Stupid sly personal comments, intended to inflame.
Nasty.......

No, a point that went right over your head. You are making obvious errors again by being inconsistent. It was not a personal comment, it was a comparison using your work. By your standards none of the thieves that you caught were shown to be thieves. When it comes to man's descent you will not accept reality no matter how much evidence is given to you.

 

[ecco]

If I managed a company that had problems with theft I too would stop it. I wouldn't go into hiding and allow it to continue, and threaten action 'soon' through a handful of employees that I revealed myself to.

If I was a manager of a company that had problems with theft I would stop it. How would I stop it? As a fair-minded, rational atheist I would find those employees committing the thefts and then punish them - perhaps even fire them.

Let's compare that to what the irrational Christian God did. He determined that everyone except Noah and his family was bad. He killed everyone except Noah and his family. He killed innocent children. He killed all the animals. He killed all the plants and trees. Some believe that such a sadistic act was a good thing.

 

[oldbadger]

No, a point that went right over your head. You are making obvious errors again by being inconsistent. It was not a personal comment, it was a comparison using your work. By your standards none of the thieves that you caught were shown to be thieves. When it comes to man's descent you will not accept reality no matter how much evidence is given to you.

Idiotic comments like that just show up your general ignorance.

The subject matter of Retail Thief Profiling doesn't have to lead to any arrests if a client prefers to then use various deterrents. But to actually use the system to arrest thieves, once noticed, they have to be observed to actually commit an offence, two very different subjects right there.. Oh... please....... it's far beyond you, matey.

Just stick to what you know, which was..... what? ...... messing up water tables, probably, which was possibly why you ended up redundant and working outside science for the rest of your life. Just a guess. Your science work description would have looked pathetic on any job application, much like your debating technique.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Idiotic comments like that just show up your general ignorance.

The subject matter of Retail Thief Profiling doesn't have to lead to any arrests if a client prefers to then use various deterrents. But to actually use the system to arrest thieves, once noticed, they have to be observed to actually commit an offence, two very different subjects right there.. Oh... please....... it's far beyond you, matey.

Just stick to what you know, which was..... what? ...... messing up water tables, probably, which was possibly why you ended up redundant and working outside science for the rest of your life. Just a guess. Your science work description would have looked pathetic on any job application, much like your debating technique.

Oh my, you really should not be using such words as "idiotic" and "stupid". The problem is that according to your standards your work is worthless. You are being inconsistent.

The problem is that you are soooooo deep in denial that you can't see how you are making the errors that you are making. Don't say that something is beyond someone else when you can't face reality. Let's take an example. You see a female employee or customer put something in her purse. She is picked up before she can leave the store and the goods are found on her. The problem is that no video system is perfect. There would have been times when her body was between her and a camera and at that time she could have put the goods back on a shelf or elsewhere that you missed. You see you have a problem here. You have a "gap". You can't be sure that she did not already have that item, in her purse, with all the tags on it because she bought it earlier. This is what your bleating complaint of "gaps" amount to. By your standards you could not say that she is guilty because of the 'gaps' in your coverage.

And as bad as my debating technique may look, yours is even worse. When an error of yours has been explained to you multiple times to try to make it personal is that ultimate failure in a debate.

 

[ecco]

The first humans stole something that was so significant that it needed a clever strategy to resolve the fallout and teach a valuable lesson at the same time.

Imagine.....there are just two humans in the world, ready to begin the most amazing project that God has ever undertaken in the universe. (that we know of) They were instructed to "fill the earth and to subdue it" under the watchful eye of their Creator. It should have been a happy and rewarding project, but a third party became involved with an agenda of his own.....he wanted to be a god but he didn't have anyone less powerful than himself to see him as anything special. Now there were lower creatures with intelligence who could see him as a god and give him the worship he craved. He told the newbie that God lied...he said that they would become like God if they ate of the forbidden fruit and that they would not die. They would know good and evil for themselves. He made it sound so appealing.....the first attempt at propaganda....and it worked.

But now there was a dilemma. Should God destroy these three rebels just because he could? The rebels did not challenge his power but questioned his sovereign right to make some rules to limit the use of their free will.

He decided to use them as an object lesson that would last for all eternity? Without intervening except when his purpose was threatened, God allowed these three to 'do their thing'.....he knew it would not turn out well, but telling them did little to bridle their free, will so he allowed them to see for themselves where making their own decisions independently of him, would take them.....and here we are.

He is not hiding, but stepped back to allow things to take their natural course. At the end of this lesson, all humanity, as well as the angels who joined in with this rebellion, will have proven what they are. God will not need to judge them because by their own actions, they will have judged themselves, worthy of either life or death. Precedents will then be set for all eternity to come, so that this challenge of God's Universal Sovereignty can never be raised again.

That's it...nothing more complicated than that.

Yep - That's it...nothing more complicated. That comment, in and of itself, is another nail in the coffin of JW beliefs - especially evolution.

It's simple - God made A&E - some third party came along and messed with A&E's heads - A&E disobeyed God - God made a lesson of them.
Nothing complicated. That's the real beauty of Fundie, especially JW, beliefs. KISS. Keep It Simple Stupid.

The problem is that that scenario is only simple until it's examined.

Religious people who fear science will go through all kinds of twists and turns to find ways to try to denigrate science. But they spend no time, make no effort whatsoever, finding the gaping holes in their own beliefs. And there are really a lot of gaping holes. The Fundies just want to continue to ignore them. It's less complicated.

 

[ecco]

Truth and proof are unnecessary....even irrelevant....I think we get it.

You sure do.

The End of the World is upon us!
The world does not end.
Shortly thereafter...
The End of the World is upon us!
The world does not end.
A little later...
The End of the World is upon us!
The world does not end.
Still later...
The End of the World is upon us!
The world does not end.
Even later
The End of the World is upon us!
The world does not end.
Later...


As you said, for you, truth and proof are unnecessary....even irrelevant.

We know. We have the evidence.

 

[Jose Fly]

And you didn't "debunk" the evidence I presented. You only offered counter-arguments.

I presented counter arguments that you ran away from, as you've done so many other times.

That's why creationists always lose in court and science. In both arenas ignoring questions rapidly erodes one's credibility.

You forget, I'm not a Young Earth Creationist.

Never said you were.

 

[Jose Fly]

Bold statement.

And true.

Not me mate.
Are you an expert?

So your declarations on the subject aren't really worth much, are they.

And yeah, I suppose I could be considered an expert in biology.

There is a gap, and neither you nor I have any exact idea about what might lay within.

Leave out your personal stabs, mate. It's not going to help you to fill that gap, is it?

You keep avoiding the same question over and over. Why is that?

 

[Jose Fly]

Really? Even Jose Fly believes the claim....

Or is this a unique claim, to you?

Evolution is a "fact" the same way erosion is a "fact". We directly observe both taking place.

 

[ecco]

Although having different designs, the use of stucco seems to indicate that they had the same builder. So I checked it out: they did.

So, you believe that brick houses have a different builder than stucco house builder. And the man making wood houses is a different guy altogether. Sure sounds like polytheism to me.

Or maybe ...

Oh, looky, there is Satan blowing down the wooden one.