by Stewart75 33 Replies latest jw friends
Hey Slugga,Thanks for your opinion, sorry if I asked this stupid question or said anything to lead you label me as stupid.
Stewart, please note my use of the smiley ( :) ) at the end of that line, I was joking around and as such didn't mean to be serious. It wasn't meant to cause offence so please don't take any.
Matt
It seems to me.........
.....that the question (and responses) show more about how far we've ditched WT presumptions than 'answer' the question.
If there's one thing I've learned post-borg is that so much 'fact' is really presumption and none more so than with much of what the WT teaches as fact and Bible fact.
They count back using Bible chronology and claim that humankind is just 6,000 years old. Then they square up with current scientific research because it runs contrary to their claims.
Much of what they go to war about is so unnecessary to faith. What does it matter how long humankind has been around?
Then we come to the conumdrum about the unique Australian fauna. The WT gets into a bind because they can't explain it according to their own presuppositions. If they were willing to put them aside they'd be able to enter the current research and debate about the issue.
To me, the 'evidence' of continental shift is persuasive and this may have something to do with the presence of kangaroos and wallabies in the Australian continent.
Frankly, I'm willing to admit I don't know. If only the dubs would afford themselves the same luxury!
Stevenyc.....I take you point, but a kangaroo is a bit different from a mouse.
The kangaroo carries it's young in a pouch until they are quite large. It's amusing to see two huge feet sticking out of the pouch whilst the youngster has a nap.
But amazingly, the kangaroo not only has a baby in it's pouch but a fertilised egg hidden away for safekeeping. If the kangaroo is in danger (bushfire, dingos, hunters, etc) it will ditch it's youngster and escape to safety. Then it will place the fertilised egg in position to breed again.
The big Red kangaroo towers over a man and is very dangerous. It will lean back on it's tail and gut a man or dog so easily with it's big toes. They have a harem of does and it is not wise to approach them. Interestingly menstruating women are at high risk of attack.
I hand-raised a kangaroo from when it was a little fur-less joey. Had to feed it every 4 hours for 3 months. Never had any sleep. It would love playing games with our cattle dog. The blighter would be covered in mud then lope into the house looking for food leaving a red mud stain trail from his tail all through the house.
Ah...I miss Rhubarb. An ignorant neighbour's electric fence finally got her.
It never occured to me that her forebears 6,000 years ago could have been mice.
Stewart - slugga was definitely joking - its the type of thing we brits say to each other when being sarcastic !
And by the way some fantastically funny replies - especially the Tasmanian Devil sailing one!
Interestingly menstruating women are at high risk of attack
It's about time they had some of their own medicine.
Clam.........I can't stop laughing
wombat,
I understand the you Aussies may think you have the upper hand on marsupial information, however, we know a thing or two about Roo's ourselves.
Check here, it will show you the Kangaroo / Mouse geno confusion: pop I'm pop (requires Quicklime player)
steve
Stevenyc....I take back what I said. I stand erected, sorry, corrected.
I was once on a bible study, and the gentleman put across many good points - suffice it to say he never joined . Anyhow he asked a similar question of us, so I went away and found the WTS answer was continental ridges! Basically paths connecting up the continents, so the respective animals simply walked to any of the continents. I remember at the time thinking what a lame answer, but was no where near opening my mind at that time.
" Not Now Kid "
