yeah, the Watchtower is pretty stupid. But honestly, this tends to happen whenever uneducated, close-minded religious groups try to go toe-to-toe with science.
23 scientists misquoted by the ever so deceitful Watchtower society
thank you thank you thank you thank you!
When apes with typewriters start banging away on the keys it should surprise none of us that Shakespeare never seems to emerge.
The Watchtower Society is in love with Quote mining and has no interest in context, relevance or intent so much as rigging outcomes.
Always their ends justify their means so they think.
Honest arguments on science require both sides to be scientists.
How unlikely a certain outcome may be is ridiculous to compute when the fact it has happened is irrefutable.
There are over 5 billion people on Earth and everyday each one of them does something none of the others do.
There may be a 1 in 5 billion chance of it--but--so what?
@Reality79: Great to see this info consolidated in one link. Thanks for posting.
Regardless of your views on evolution, this is an excellent example of the intellectual dishonesty of the WTS.
Here too we have something that has always struck me as odd: JWs are encouraged to avoid reading things that don't align with WTS thoughts, yet someone, somewhere in a bethel, most likely Head Office, has read the books and articles quoted in this and other brochures and books. Double standard? Yes. Being on the GB is obviously a free pass to do whatever you want with minimal consequences. Unless what you want to do is be honest and act in good conscience.
You know, I think they actually get their info from other I.D. sources. I read something once that mimicked trash written in non JW I.D. literature. I really don't think they bother to mine those quotes themselves. The work was already done for them. It would require them to do some heavy reading of material they don't understand to find those gems.
I think NC may well be onto something here, they doubtless subscribe to every religious journal and monthly or annual available, so more than likely much of the work is already done for them in other fundie 'creationist' publications. That being said, the said about a year ago about the 'jumbo jet / spider web' quote that they research for THEMSELVES whether these kind of quotes are accurate... so you pays yer money and takes yer choice.
It wouldn't surprise me if they did go down the lazy route of using someone elses work. It would certainly align with their intellectual dishonesty - claiming by inference others work as their own. Even if they do get the info from other religious sources, the double standard is there front and center. I wonder how the local elders would react if they found out someone subscribed to the Journal of Creation?
Appropriating material from other relgious sources, usually without attribution, is Standard Operating Procedure for them, and has been for a long time... what do you think those large libraries are for? Ray Franz commented on this in CoC.
This one is a keeper! Many thanks.