@ RC: "For evolution to be true..."

by Scully 40 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Scully

  According to a JW contact, one of the speakers at the Regional Convention™ stated that "for evolution to be true, two of the same kind would have had to evolve at the same time; one would have to be male and the other would have to be female, and then they would have to find each other". Apparently the crowd had a good laugh over how evolutionists overlook such a simple "fact".

  I mentioned that bacteria and viruses use asexual reproduction, and that many sea creatures / fish, etc. are hermaphrodite and do not require a sexual partner to produce offspring.

  Oddly enough, the conversation stopped there. I wonder why??
• 

  OUTLAW

  LOL@Scully!!..

  .
  

  ...........JWs INTRODUCED TO THINKING..
  

  ..
• 

  Scully

  
  

  mind blown!!
• 

  Finkelstein

  Apparently the crowd had a good laugh over how evolutionists overlook such a simple "fact".

  Not surprising of a reaction based from the fact that most JWs don't even have a high school education, nevertheless have studied biological evolution.
  

  Simple answer to the uneducated ..... God waved his hand over the ground and a man came to be who justed happen to look like god, complete with nose, two hands, a bum and a penis cause he's male.
  
• 

  cofty

  Oh dear!

  Wilfully ignorant buffoons playing to the gallery. Never read a science book in his entire life but thinks he has spotted a blatant error that thousands of brilliant scientists have missed.

  I have seen the same dumb argument used on this forum quite a few times.
• 

  OUTLAW

  Swallows are evolving shorter wings because they keep getting hit by traffic

  • Birds' wings have reduced in length by as much as four millimetres over the past 30 years
  • Natural selection has favoured birds that are better able to get out of the way of oncoming cars and trucks

  By Daily Mail Reporter

  Published: 16:04 GMT, 18 March 2013 | Updated: 03:50 GMT, 19 March 2013

  Collisions with road vehicles are driving a population of swallows to evolve into faster, more agile fliers with shortened wings.
  

  Natural selection has favoured birds that are better able to get out of the way of oncoming cars and trucks, scientists in the US discovered.
  

  Survivors tend to have shorter wings that make it easier to take off quickly and pivot out of the path of danger.

  

  A swallow in flight:Researchers say the birds have developed shorter wings to help them dodge traffic.

  .
  

  To Read More..

  CLICK THE LINK BELOW:

  http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDQQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Fsciencetech%2Farticle-2295275%2FSwallows-evolved-shorter-wing-dodge-traffic-just-30-YEARS.html&ei=aYmhVeiYCNHYoATawYmwAQ&usg=AFQjCNGweal1EVVmsvk6CVCd-eVdb0KEyg&sig2=Tr5_lEqNXuUAAJPcIse-kQ
  
• 

  Finkelstein

  You can have ONE species that is both male and female at the same time. Over time the selection mechanism differentiates the sexual organs so that the future species now produces two sexually different versions of itself. Or six. Whatever works better for THAT organism in its particular environment.
  
  
  
  This argument, by the way, shows how poor the logic exhibited by non-Darwinist's is when discussing their beliefs. They can do nothing but pose a set of alternatives that has no possible solution. What they do not propose is the alternative that does... hoping that people who have even less logic skills than they do will fall for it.
• 

  nicolaou

  I guarantee that a small percentage of that RC audience will be feeling frustrated and annoyed that their organisation presents such an ignorant impression in public. Not that they necessarily agree with evolution but some JW's are educated enough to understand what the real arguments are.

  Let's not write them all off.
• 

  Finkelstein

  Let's not write them all off.

  True but realistically we are only talking about 1 or 2 % of the membership.

  Even the ones that do have some higher education will go long with any assertion against evolution because it doesn't fit into the creation via Yahweh.

  Group think is self confirming in organized cult environments.
  
• 

  flamegrilled

  @Finkelstein

  You can have ONE species that is both male and female at the same time. Over time the selection mechanism differentiates the sexual organs so that the future species now produces two sexually different versions of itself. Or six. Whatever works better for THAT organism in its particular environment.

  I confess to not fully understanding the answer to the question myself. I have read a reasonable amount from both sides of the argument and can see plenty of compelling evidence for biological evolution.

  But why do some species not have "six" genders as you seem to suggest this is just as reasonable a contender. Even when polymorphism occurs the morphs are still distinguishable as male/female as far as I understand it.

  I'm not taking a position on the OP, although I understand the oversimplification that betrays some ignorance on the matter. But this is just a genuine question.

  FG