Search hard enough and long enough and you'll find SOMEONE that agrees with you.......or at least APPEARS to. Then you tout that person as though they are the leading expert in that field and voila! You have 7 million JWs that believe you! The JWs won't check on the credentials of that person nor will they check to see if that was his WHOLE quote.
Here is a good example I wanted my disfellowshipping committee to address. They refused:
Oct 1, 2011 WT "When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed" - "Thus Christopher Walker of the British Museum says that Ptolemy's canon was "an artificial scheme designed to provide astronomers with a consistent chronology" and was "not to provide historians with a precise record of the accession and death of kings".
As you can see, the intent of the writer was to use Mr. Walker as a reference to back up the idea that Ptolemy's canon is unreliable since it's purpose was not to provide a precise record of kings. What they left out was what Mr. Walker said next.
" "Nevertheless it has served as the backbone of the chronology of the Neo-Babylonian and Achaemenid periods, and served reliably. There is no difficulty in correlating Ptolemy's chronology with the vast accumulation of data now available from Cuneiform sources."
If they put the whole quote in their article......it would only serve to show that Ptolemy's canon is accurate. But they need to show it as INaccurate. How do we do that? Only quote the parts that suits our need! If you really think about it......the GB launches forth Theocratic Warfare against its own followers on a continual basis. I mean......they continually leave out parts of quotes that don't suit their need.....so ultimately......aren't they "withholding" the truth from those they have determined don't deserve to see it?