How do Jehovah's Witnesses Explain This Fossil Record?

by sabastious 143 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  thetrueone

  I find it ironically funny when a JW/creationist supports the theory of adaptation concerning species,

  but then at the same time, try their darnest to debunk evolution as a whole. Where is the logic ?

  There are now other scientific tools beside radio carbon testing to determine the age of fossils.

  Lets face it , religions are universities and colleges of fear and human ignorance that is their basic teaching knowledge.

  Isn't that right Debater ?

  Your embracing the knowledge of privative ancients rather than the knowledge acquired by man accumulated over the

  past thousand of years. Creationists stalemate themselves over words spoken out accepted ignorance then try

  to make counter arguments, what bastion of redundancy. There were many stories of told by ancient civilizations

  about how the world came into existence mostly involved around those twinkling bright things in the sky.

  There is a mountain high of factual evidence that species evolve and biologically change as the environment entails them,

  some people just refute all that evidence and refer back to the ancient knowledge of spiritual story telling .
• 

  wobble

  Evolution, as a science, has nothing to do with whether there was a designer or not, a number of respected scientists in a number of fields also believe in a god.

  They do not foolishly ignore the overwhelming proof that the species we see today, including man, have evolved.

  Where and how life on earth started is not what Evolution is about.
• 

  Will Power

  debator:

  why not just thank god for evolution and be done with it?

  for anyone desperately trying to marry the two, there is a book "Thank God for Evolution" that might give you a way out.
• 

  zoiks

  Wow, these evolution threads take on a life of their own!

  To answer the OP, the fossil record is explained away in the publications as "incomplete" or "full of gaps" (duh, since 99% of everything that has lived did NOT fossilize), etc. Then scientists are misquoted to give the impression that they support the WT's premise. Add in a dash of argument from authority and perhaps a hint of "it's really hard to figure out so god must have done it", and voila! You have a glossy film of an 'argument' that would never stand up to scrutiny, but "that's ok....there are about 7 million people who will just take our word for it, so let's just call it a day!"

  And that is how it's done.
• 

  xchange

  Debator said:

  Evolution is just another word for "adaption" within species with extreme amounts time used to get over the difficult bits.

  Science may build on knowedge but it is constantly destroying the previous theories as it goes along and just sticks the new theories in a frame called evolution (hense why darwins original theory is forgotten but the title is kept). Content is unimportant as long as it can be called Evolution and they can reject a designer.

  Hi Debator:

  So your main issue seems to be with science then. Am I right in saying that? Again, I would encourage you to read more about the scientific method as I don't think you have a good grasp of it. That's not meant to be an insult. Just to continue with this discussion is more or less useless when you have closed your mind to science and it's methods.
• 

  thetrueone

  Nearly all peoples have developed their own creation myth, and the Genesis story is just the one that happened

  to have been adopted by one particular tribe of Middle Eastern herders. It has no more special status than the

  belief of a particular West African tribe that the world was created from the excrement of ants. All these myths

  have in common that they depend upon the deliberate intentions of some kind of supernatural being.
• 

  jookbeard

  I still wonder how the WTS and Creationists explain pre Adamic human existence the peoples of Sumer,Aboriginals and the ancient peoples of Central and South America? there is a ton of evidence that these peoples existed tens of thousands of years ago, The Spinx in Egypt has a chance of being older then 7000 years old.
• 

  wobble

  And we are learning more about Neanderthals, they were caring for each other, used grave goods, so believed in an after-life etc. they seem to have been a slightly different group than modern humans, but we share DNA, so where do these folks fit in to the Bible story ?
• 

  sabastious

  The Spinx in Egypt has a chance of being older then 7000 years old.

  China is a good soruce for ancient civilizations as well.

  -Sab
• 

  debator

  Hi Xchange

  I have no problem with Science Just the mythology of darwinism stuck on it as supposed fact.

  If we have only got 10% of the fossil record (as someone mentioned above), how can we say anything is definitive by it? since it just too small a percentage to judge anyhting by and thats if we haven't put it in the wrong places. Which can often happen when we are puting a jigsaw together without a picture.

  My thoughts are that neanderthals are pre-flood which would allow for a greater DNA difference.