So do 48%, IMO.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Putting the JW Stand on Evolution into Perspective
- Thread starter Skwim
- Start date
So do 48%, IMO.
SkylarHunter
Active Member
In order to evolve, life had to come from somewhere. So yes, the origin of life would have to be the first step to make evolution possible. If they don't know how life started one of the most important pieces of the puzzle is missing.
SkylarHunter
Active Member
Over the years I've had this same conversation many times and it always ends up the same way.
I did consider spending a few hours of time I don't have answering all your questions but I would be wasting my time. In your mind you already decided that because I refuse evolution as a fact I am ignorant and stupid. Nothing I can say will make you see me or others who don't believe in evolution differently.
I did see this article on BBC this morning that I found fitting, probably to all of us: BBC - Capital - How we wrongly convince ourselves we’re right
Sapiens
Polymathematician
I never start at ignorant and stupid, I suspect ignorant, until proven stupid.
Bunyip
pro scapegoat
They are either clueless or dishonest.
We know that life started somehow. We are here, aren't we? Since life did start, that means that the first step was indeed taken and evolution could proceed from there. Do we have to know how the first bacteria came into existence before we can prove that bacteria are capable of adapting to antibiotics? Do we have to know how the chemical elements were first formed before we can prove that various chemical reactions yield particular compounds? Do we have to know how the first humans came to be in order to describe how human culture has changed through the millenia?
In the spirit of putting things in perspective could you please name just a couple of the many many book you have surely read on the topic during your long and intensive study?
Thanking you kindly in advance.
Monk Of Reason
༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
Out of curiosity can you name a few of the holes in evolution? And are they holes considered by evolution or by those that are in active attempt to discredit evolution?
Monk Of Reason
༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
Everyone is clueless about something. Evolution is a common one. If 92% of the population of JW (or 100% as you say) would you assume that such a large group of people who believe it to be false for whatever reason would put in a large amount of time and effort needed to have a decent understanding of such an encompassing theory?
Skwim
Veteran Member
Not at all because the origin of life is not germane to evolution. Evolution has to do with how life evolves from one form to another, and not how it initially arose. Life could have arisen from some primordial muck eons ago, arrived from outer space, or was snapped into being by a couple of gods three thousand years ago. It Just-Doesn't-Matter. And your insistence that the origin of life is germane to evolution plainly shows that you haven't "studied the issues of those people who support evolution" as you claim. *sigh*
Last edited:
Personally i don't believe in evolution. I am not going to spend/waste any time going into it. What will it add to my life/existance if i do? NOTHING. Will it change anything for me? NO...
Can i say exactly what process God used to create life? NO. Again i am not going to go into it. I will however give Him the credit for creation.
How can i become a better person and hopefully receive God's favour? By finding out what God's purposes are. Putting on the new personality that He requires of me. Then MAYBE at some point He will approve of my life/worship and grant me a better life. This gift is all i am seeking... if/when at the end it's all just make believe then so be it. At least my worship would have made me a better person.
The JW's spend most of their time putting on the "new personality" and trying to live the life that God requires of them. Also going out and telling people about God's promises and plans for the future...(which he commanded them to do).
Just my opinion... The JW's may correct me if i am wrong!
shawn001
Well-Known Member
Jehovah's Witnesses and Evolution
Jehovah's Witnesses and Evolution
Criticism of Jehovah's Witnesses
Criticism of Jehovah's Witnesses - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
ABC Nightline
03/12/15: Former Jehovah's Witness Takes on Church Over Sex Abuse Allegations
Nightline : Nightline 03/12/15: Former Jehovah's Witness Takes on Church Over Sex Abuse Allegations Watch Full Episode | 03/12/2015 - ABC.com
The way they handle child sex abuse is totally wrong.
Jehovah's Witnesses and Evolution
Criticism of Jehovah's Witnesses
Criticism of Jehovah's Witnesses - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
ABC Nightline
03/12/15: Former Jehovah's Witness Takes on Church Over Sex Abuse Allegations
Nightline : Nightline 03/12/15: Former Jehovah's Witness Takes on Church Over Sex Abuse Allegations Watch Full Episode | 03/12/2015 - ABC.com
The way they handle child sex abuse is totally wrong.
Curious George
Veteran Member
I don't think there are holes per se, however I do know that there are unresolved questions with several competing viable theories. Such as is the case with the evolution of DNA.
But I hope everyone here realizes that science is supposed to lead to more questions. This is a characteristic of knowledge: the more we know, the more we realize we do not know. However, the knowledge we gain answers some very important questions along the way.
Curious George
Veteran Member
Why not believe in it if you are not "going into it."
This is like saying I don't believe in gravity, but I am not going into it. People might say but how do you explain such and such. And your reply is simply "nope, not going into it." Why would one do that?
At least you are honest though. Frankly, I would like it if religion just let go of evolution. Let us teach kids truth in schools, let us pass legislation that requires home school to teach evolution. And when kids in a religion ask about it please just say, "I don't believe in it, and I am not going into it." This would really be much better for us all.don't try to dispute it, don't try to rationalize it, don't even talk about it. If you would like to ignore truth, I support you in that right. But just don't distort truth.
Thank you.
shawn001
Well-Known Member
However the more we know about evolution the more we know its both a fact and a scientific theory for the last 150 years. Like knowing the Earth orbits the sun. In fact we know how our solar system formed, how the elements form from Star Dust in super nova's and how oxygen on this planet is from evolution.
"Remarkably enough, only four nitrogenous bases that make only 20 amino acids account for all diversity of life on Earth. There has not been any other code or system found in any living, or once living, organism on Earth. Organisms from bacteria to humans to dinosaurs all have the same DNA system as a genetic code. This may point to evidence that all life evolved from a single common ancestor."
"
Evidence for Evolution in DNA
DNA has only come to be understood over the last century. The technology has been improving and has allowed scientists to not only map out entire genomes of many species, but they also use computers to compare those maps. By entering genetic information of different species, it is easy to see where they overlap and where there are differences.
The more closely species are related on the phylogenetic tree of life, the more closely their DNA sequences will overlap. Even very distantly related species will have some degree of DNA sequence overlap. Certain proteins are needed for even the most basic processes of life, so those selected parts of the sequence that codes for those proteins will be conserved in all species on Earth.
DNA Sequencing and Divergence
Now that DNA fingerprinting has become easier, cost effective, and efficient, the DNA sequences of a wide variety of species can be compared. In fact, it is possible to estimate when the two species diverged or branched off through speciation. The larger the percentage of differences in the DNA between two species, the greater the amount of time the two species have been separate.
These "molecular clocks" can be used to help fill in the gaps of the fossil record. Even if there are missing links within the timeline of history on Earth, the DNA evidence can give clues as to what happened during those time periods. While random mutation events may throw off the molecular clock data at some points, it is still a pretty accurate measure of when species diverged and became new species."
The Role of DNA in Evolution
Life's Building Blocks 'Abundant in Space'
Life's Building Blocks 'Abundant in Space'
What are the "several competing viable theories"
"KENNETH R. MILLER: Not a single observation, not a single experimental result, has ever emerged in 150 years that contradicts the general outlines of the theory of evolution. Any theory that can stand up to 150 years of contentious testing is a pretty darn good theory, and that's what evolution is."
"Remarkably enough, only four nitrogenous bases that make only 20 amino acids account for all diversity of life on Earth. There has not been any other code or system found in any living, or once living, organism on Earth. Organisms from bacteria to humans to dinosaurs all have the same DNA system as a genetic code. This may point to evidence that all life evolved from a single common ancestor."
"
Evidence for Evolution in DNA
DNA has only come to be understood over the last century. The technology has been improving and has allowed scientists to not only map out entire genomes of many species, but they also use computers to compare those maps. By entering genetic information of different species, it is easy to see where they overlap and where there are differences.
The more closely species are related on the phylogenetic tree of life, the more closely their DNA sequences will overlap. Even very distantly related species will have some degree of DNA sequence overlap. Certain proteins are needed for even the most basic processes of life, so those selected parts of the sequence that codes for those proteins will be conserved in all species on Earth.
DNA Sequencing and Divergence
Now that DNA fingerprinting has become easier, cost effective, and efficient, the DNA sequences of a wide variety of species can be compared. In fact, it is possible to estimate when the two species diverged or branched off through speciation. The larger the percentage of differences in the DNA between two species, the greater the amount of time the two species have been separate.
These "molecular clocks" can be used to help fill in the gaps of the fossil record. Even if there are missing links within the timeline of history on Earth, the DNA evidence can give clues as to what happened during those time periods. While random mutation events may throw off the molecular clock data at some points, it is still a pretty accurate measure of when species diverged and became new species."
The Role of DNA in Evolution
Life's Building Blocks 'Abundant in Space'
Life's Building Blocks 'Abundant in Space'
What are the "several competing viable theories"
"KENNETH R. MILLER: Not a single observation, not a single experimental result, has ever emerged in 150 years that contradicts the general outlines of the theory of evolution. Any theory that can stand up to 150 years of contentious testing is a pretty darn good theory, and that's what evolution is."
Skwim
Veteran Member
Catholic cardinals, bishops and priests and now JW leaders. Makes one want to vomit.
shawn001
Well-Known Member
again
"
Is Evolution a Theory or a Fact?
It is both. But that answer requires looking more deeply at the meanings of the words "theory" and "fact."
In everyday usage, "theory" often refers to a hunch or a speculation. When people say, "I have a theory about why that happened," they are often drawing a conclusion based on fragmentary or inconclusive evidence.
The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence.
Many scientific theories are so well-established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially. For example, no new evidence will demonstrate that the Earth does not orbit around the sun (heliocentric theory), or that living things are not made of cells (cell theory), that matter is not composed of atoms, or that the surface of the Earth is not divided into solid plates that have moved over geological timescales (the theory of plate tectonics). Like these other foundational scientific theories, the theory of evolution is supported by so many observations and confirming experiments that scientists are confident that the basic components of the theory will not be overturned by new evidence. However, like all scientific theories, the theory of evolution is subject to continuing refinement as new areas of science emerge or as new technologies enable observations and experiments that were not possible previously.
One of the most useful properties of scientific theories is that they can be used to make predictions about natural events or phenomena that have not yet been observed. For example, the theory of gravitation predicted the behavior of objects on the moon and other planets long before the activities of spacecraft and astronauts confirmed them. The evolutionary biologists who discovered Tiktaalik predicted that they would find fossils intermediate between fish and limbed terrestrial animals in sediments that were about 375 million years old. Their discovery confirmed the prediction made on the basis of evolutionary theory. In turn, confirmation of a prediction increases confidence in that theory.
In science, a "fact" typically refers to an observation, measurement, or other form of evidence that can be expected to occur the same way under similar circumstances. However, scientists also use the term "fact" to refer to a scientific explanation that has been tested and confirmed so many times that there is no longer a compelling reason to keep testing it or looking for additional examples. In that respect, the past and continuing occurrence of evolution is a scientific fact. Because the evidence supporting it is so strong, scientists no longer question whether biological evolution has occurred and is continuing to occur. Instead, they investigate the mechanisms of evolution, how rapidly evolution can take place, and related questions.
From Science, Evolution, and Creationism, National Academy of Sciences and Institute of Medicine. © 2008 National Academy of Sciences
Evolution Resources from the National Academies
"
Is Evolution a Theory or a Fact?
It is both. But that answer requires looking more deeply at the meanings of the words "theory" and "fact."
In everyday usage, "theory" often refers to a hunch or a speculation. When people say, "I have a theory about why that happened," they are often drawing a conclusion based on fragmentary or inconclusive evidence.
The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence.
Many scientific theories are so well-established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially. For example, no new evidence will demonstrate that the Earth does not orbit around the sun (heliocentric theory), or that living things are not made of cells (cell theory), that matter is not composed of atoms, or that the surface of the Earth is not divided into solid plates that have moved over geological timescales (the theory of plate tectonics). Like these other foundational scientific theories, the theory of evolution is supported by so many observations and confirming experiments that scientists are confident that the basic components of the theory will not be overturned by new evidence. However, like all scientific theories, the theory of evolution is subject to continuing refinement as new areas of science emerge or as new technologies enable observations and experiments that were not possible previously.
One of the most useful properties of scientific theories is that they can be used to make predictions about natural events or phenomena that have not yet been observed. For example, the theory of gravitation predicted the behavior of objects on the moon and other planets long before the activities of spacecraft and astronauts confirmed them. The evolutionary biologists who discovered Tiktaalik predicted that they would find fossils intermediate between fish and limbed terrestrial animals in sediments that were about 375 million years old. Their discovery confirmed the prediction made on the basis of evolutionary theory. In turn, confirmation of a prediction increases confidence in that theory.
In science, a "fact" typically refers to an observation, measurement, or other form of evidence that can be expected to occur the same way under similar circumstances. However, scientists also use the term "fact" to refer to a scientific explanation that has been tested and confirmed so many times that there is no longer a compelling reason to keep testing it or looking for additional examples. In that respect, the past and continuing occurrence of evolution is a scientific fact. Because the evidence supporting it is so strong, scientists no longer question whether biological evolution has occurred and is continuing to occur. Instead, they investigate the mechanisms of evolution, how rapidly evolution can take place, and related questions.
From Science, Evolution, and Creationism, National Academy of Sciences and Institute of Medicine. © 2008 National Academy of Sciences
Evolution Resources from the National Academies
Curious George
Veteran Member
@shawn001
Origin and Evolution of DNA and DNA Replication Machineries - Madame Curie Bioscience Database - NCBI Bookshelf
But we do not know whether DNA evolved from RNA, or by itself parallel to RNA, people have suggested viruses helped in this process. You know I am certainly not the foremost experts on evolution, however I am a staunch supporter. That said, the study of anything only leads to more questions. This does not mean that your original questions are not answered.
I absolutely agree that evolution is fact but where do we go from there? There are more questions, in fact 150 years worth of more questions. So many questions that whole fields of science have risen up. You seriously cannot be arguing that molecular evolutionists have turned in their reports and now they are done? You show me one person in the field that says "there are no more questions." That you do not acknowledge there are still competing theories under the umbrella of evolutionary theory makes me question whether your understanding is any better than the JWs that would seek to ignore and defraud truth.
Origin and Evolution of DNA and DNA Replication Machineries - Madame Curie Bioscience Database - NCBI Bookshelf
But we do not know whether DNA evolved from RNA, or by itself parallel to RNA, people have suggested viruses helped in this process. You know I am certainly not the foremost experts on evolution, however I am a staunch supporter. That said, the study of anything only leads to more questions. This does not mean that your original questions are not answered.
I absolutely agree that evolution is fact but where do we go from there? There are more questions, in fact 150 years worth of more questions. So many questions that whole fields of science have risen up. You seriously cannot be arguing that molecular evolutionists have turned in their reports and now they are done? You show me one person in the field that says "there are no more questions." That you do not acknowledge there are still competing theories under the umbrella of evolutionary theory makes me question whether your understanding is any better than the JWs that would seek to ignore and defraud truth.
Let me try and explain what i meant... i don't believe in evolution, i did look into it years ago and it's not something i can accept. That is why i said i won't go into a discussion about it in this thread.
So i am not sure how i am distorting anything. You are obviously welcome to your opinions and beliefs... i will not judge you on that.
I said that i believe God created everything, how He did it i don't know. If He felt that it was important for me to know the specific details then it would have been in the scriptures...