The scientific hypocrisy of Jehovah's Witnesses

by jwfacts 20 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Retrovirus

    They really are shockers

    faulty “scientific” theories invented by imperfect men.

    and yet, if there is an "new light" or demonstrated bad conduct by an elder, quick to use the "imperfect men" defense themselves.

    And the common jw concept that if the messenger has been successfully smeared, there's no need to investigate the message any further. Sad. .

  • maninthemiddle

    The arrogant words show the mind to be closed.

  • WTWizard

    First, the flood could not have pushed rock masses to form ocean basins. Problem is that water is not heavy enough to depress rock mass, and in liquid form, you do not get enough accumulating to do any good (ice, however, can depress the land because it piles up enough to create enough weight to do the job). But a liquid is simply going to level off. And, if you have water to a depth of 15 meters everywhere, it is going to press equally in all directions. Also, for every newton of force the water is exerting, the rock is pushing back with a force of 2 or more newtons (depending on the density). There is no way the water could exert enough force. And for ice to do that, it would have to be several times deeper than the amount of depression--having a kilometer thickness of ice might depress the land by several meters at best, and not in a few years. It takes thousands of years, and once the ice melts, the rock will tend to come right back up within a few hundred thousand years.

    And how is life expectancy going to degrade so quickly after the flood? Until the flood, we lived around 800 years. After the flood, it declined within a few generations until, by the time Tyrant David lived, that thing lived only 70 and was "old and satisfied with days" (when that thing didn't deserve to live more than a few zeptoseconds if that long). Why then didn't our life expectancy keep on dwindling until there was nothing left? Even allowing for that the Rockefellers are reducing it now with poisons in your food and that infections killed most babies (and that, if you survived past about 10, you were likely to live into your 80s or 90s back in the early 1900s), that wouldn't explain why the average person didn't see life expectancies dropping into the single digits by the time Jesus showed up (at that rate, it would have reached 10 by then).

    Evolution anyone? We are seeing it right before our eyes. Every time the flu mutates, that is evolution. Without it, you would have it once and be permanently immune, and the virus would die out. Science is seeing evolution on smaller scales within species of orchids and insects. Even allowing that humans are a breakaway species, that doesn't rule out that evolution reached the point where Satan (yes, Satan) could then genetically engineer our species to reflect His Glory. And that happened far more than 6,000 years ago. Yes, you might be able to fit all solid proof for evolution on a ping pong table. But I could fit all the solid evidence for jehovah-creation on a ping pong table, and you could play a game of ping pong on it.

    There are so many other scientific foibles within the washtowel. Some have been "fixed", but many others remain. Aluminum, while not the best for cookware, remains excellent for heat distribution (second only to silver, which is extremely expensive and cannot take the heat as well as aluminum). Taking a blood transfusion the equivalent of eating blood is totally absurd. A blood transfusion is a medical procedure, not food. And I think they are off in people being their happiest just above the poverty level--I believe people are much better off when they have plenty of material wealth but are not worried about being guilted into throwing it all away.

  • cantleave

    It is not just JW's that show this level of scientific illteracy I am afraid. It seems to be prevalent amongst all fundamentalists.

  • Heaven

    HIM - Our conversation proved to be futile since you couldn’t prove me scripturally that I and JW’s are wrong

    When people use the scriptures as 'fact' that's where you have to decide whether you want to invest the time presenting a case to the falseness of the Bible. This is what it ultimately comes down to. JWs (and many other religionists) believe the Bible is the literal, inerrant word of God no matter what the actual facts state. They are living a delusional life and want everyone else to do so as well. And when others do not wish to sign up with them, they get angry and play the destruction at Armageddon/no eternal life for you card.

    My reply? "Well, you have a nice day then." and walk away or close the door.

  • blondie

    The water circles theory the WTS uses is from the 1890's, Vail is his name. When I was growing up, they never mentioned how long ago this scientific expert lived and what his contemporaries thought about him...Now the WTS fails to mentional his name but still uses this "proof".

  • undercover

    HIM - Our conversation proved to be futile since you couldn’t prove me scripturally that I and JW’s are wrong on the matter of a global flood.

    He's right. Your conversation is futile. You're arguing with a person who will take the stories from an ancient manuscript as literal history over the findings of modern science. Ironic that he knows it's futile but doesn't realize that he's the reason.

  • james_woods

    If you point out to people like this that there simply is not enough water to cover all the planet - they will look you in the face and say that there used to be more water than there is now.

    If you point out to people like this that there cannot be an eternal paradise earth, because the sun will eventually exhaust its fuel and burn out - they will look you in the face and say that Jehovah will somehow refuel the sun.

    There is little point in this kind of debate - these people are totally out of touch with reality.

  • jgnat

    Thank you for the history lesson, Blondie. The following article addresses the water canopy theory pretty comprehensively.

    I found a short biography on Isaac N. Vail (1840-1912) in a pseudoscientist encylopedia.

  • bohm

    Vails book is quite interesting, for instance the introduction spend much time explaining how his theory is about to get accepted by everyone..

    the frozen mammoth idea is from vails book, btw.

Share this