by frenchbabyface 38 Replies latest jw friends

  • frenchbabyface


    Had a talk yesterday with my son, I’ve read a book where the guy was talking about the Australopithecus … it’s weird how scientists are dealing with EVOLUTION statements.

    It says that actually the Australopithecus was less intelligent than we are because their (supposed) brain was only about 600 cm3 and ours brain now about 1600 cm3. (Scientists feel so comfortable feeling that they are more intelligent than ever !!! LOL)

    Now what’s the first statement about the evolution: if something is growing (fingers, brain, or whatever) mean that the specimen did entirely needed it and completely got to use it. Otherwise it wouldn’t have grown …

    So my son says : So in knowing that scientists told us that we only use 5 % of our brain NOW … means 80 cm3 (means that we forgoting about using 520 cm3 now) what about the Australopithecus who needed 600 cm3 … as a matter fact (if evolution statement is true) that means that the Australopithecus probably were 750 % more intelligent than we are !

    BIBLE or SCIENTISTS DO THEY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT ? What ever they say you still have to think by yourself about it !!!

  • AlanF

    Hi frenchbabyface,

    : So my son says : So in knowing that scientists told us that we only use 5 % of our brain NOW …

    The problem is the bolded statement -- it's not true. No scientist worth his salt would say such a thing. It's an old urban legend that has -- no surprise -- been repeated in Watchtower literature. But there's no evidence whatsoever for the claim. If you search around on the Net for something like "urban legend brain" you'll find something like this:

    What is beyond dispute is that manlike creatures have existed for at least five million years, and that over the years more and more manlike creatures appeared. The first manlike feature was that they started walking on two legs. Eventually the brain got bigger. Why did this happen? No one knows. We simply know it from the fossil record.


  • OrbitingTheSun

    Now what’s the first statement about the evolution: if something is growing (fingers, brain, or whatever) mean that the specimen did entirely needed it and completely got to use it. Otherwise it wouldn’t have grown …

    It is also important to remember that the brain didn't get larger--those born with larger brains were for various reasons better adapted to the environment and survived to procreate better than those with smaller brains.

  • frenchbabyface

    Thanks for the link ...
    We didn't heard about the 5 % in the WTBS but in many intems on tv and stuff
    What I'm trying to say here is that WE STILL DON'T KNOW about ANYTHING

    Now EVOLUTION should have a REASON ok let try something :
    maybe we need to get more intelligent to be able to survive while we don’t have everything that we need to be strong and physically able enough … Then we forget about the brain ! And more now than ever cause we living with lot’s of tools. Well this was a trial … LOL

    Let try some explanations by ourselves …

  • SixofNine
    What I'm trying to say here is that WE STILL DON'T KNOW about ANYTHING

    People who only use 5% of their brain don't know about anything !

    Orby only has to use 5% of her brain to talk to me, she says some men are easy on the eyes, but I'm easy on the brain! I think she likes me .

  • frenchbabyface

    LOLLLLLLLLLLL sixo ...

    they even said that when we are watching TV we only used 5 % of our 5 % capacity ... means that TV can bring very very very down ... WELL I LIKE TV ... LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

  • herk

    I sincerely would accept evolution if I could see evidence of it, but I don't. I see the opposite everywhere. It seems to me that if feet and hands started to develop in an ancient animal because it felt a need for them, we should see such development of other "add-ons" going on right now. No matter how much we may want them, none of us can focus our concentration so much as to start developing wings, or the long-distance vision of an eagle, or the ability to see at night like an owl, or to make our way through the dark using sonar like a bat, etc.

    Additionally, everywhere people, plants and animals are constantly dying. They grow through a stage of advancement from youth to maturity, but then their lives ebb and decline. If evolution were true, it seems to me, there would not be this receding into extinction. If life was originally sparked into existence eons ago, it would have died before very long, just as living things do now. No living things live long enough to advance into something better. Instead of advancing to a newer and better stage of development, they devolve into something inferior to what they were when they began until they finally die.

    Old cars may still run, but eventually they deteriorate into a heap of rust and useless metal. They don't of themselves sprout new tires, a new engine, a new paint job, etc. Old trees don't develop thinking ability. When they sprout their final crop of seeds, they don't pass on intelligence to any trees that sprout from those seeds. I have a neighbour whose dog sounds like he can talk. He's been trained to sing, and it does sound almost like a human. But when the dog dies, her ability to sing will die with her. Any puppies she has will not know how to sing without being trained, and their ability, in turn, will die with them. The same is true of us humans. We have kids, but those kids have to start from the very beginning just as we did. They don't immediately know instinctively all that we learned as we walked through life. And they don't inherit any skills that we developed. No matter how much we yearned to sprout wings so that we might fly, they won't be born with that same yearning. Whatever they become, they have to start from scratch as we did and grow for themselves.

    I honestly don't think I'm being stubborn about this. I've read several books that promote the idea of evolution, with the thought that maybe I'm missing something that might enlighten me. At this stage, I see evolution as simply another religion invented by humans. It's just another dogma that fills a need for some.

    So, when it comes to understanding the origin of life and of human nature, I'm inclined to feel that the argument of those who accept what they call "divine revelation" has as much merit as any other ideas floating around in this day and age.

  • OrbitingTheSun

    Six...I didn't tell you because I thought it might go to your head...but, compared to the usual 3.12%, I use 95.959595% of my brain when I talk to you!

    I would use 100% but I lent 4.040405% to a friendly bird I encountered years ago on my journey from Xanadu. She promised not to use what I gave her for evil, I promised to use what was left to be more attentive to good fellows.

  • shotgun

    French you and your son seem to use alot of brain power in your various old is that kid anyway..You look to young in your pictures to have a kid thats old enough to carry on these conversations..must be the french wine.

    Herk explain to me why God gave us the ability to pass on imperfection having it evolve into something progressively worse as time passes but decided not to let us pass on good traits that we accumulate over a lifetime.

    I have a hard time to accept evolution as well but that is exactly what the Wt teaches with the concept of all creation being destroyed in the flood and the earth then repopulated with small number of animals and birds from the Ark.

  • Satanus


    If you have divine intervention in your equations, they are infintely more problematic, because you have the question of how god came into existence. That's equivalent to draining 99.9% of your grey matter.


Share this