My intention is to look at each of the 51 Endnotes in that WTS publication, and I have 2 more to go. That is the reason I was able to provide that information.
If you email me, I would appreciate your expert criticism.
Thank you Doug will do.
A recent Watchtower also conflates evolution with the origin of life. I thought it was simply a mistake, but maybe it’s deliberate. They claim the theory of evolution includes an explanation of the origin of life. I wonder if there’s any basis for that.
13 Satan appeals to natural desires. We have a natural desire to learn skills that can help us provide for ourselves and our families. (1 Tim. 5:8) Often, we can gain those skills by attending school and being diligent students. But we must be cautious. The educational system in many countries teaches students not only practical skills but also human philosophy. Students are encouraged to question the existence of God and to disregard the Bible. They are told that the theory of evolution is the only intelligent explanation for the origin of life. (Rom. 1:21-23) Such teachings are opposed to “the wisdom of God.”—1 Cor. 1:19-21; 3:18-20.
Thank you for finding that.
I cannot say, but I wonder whether the WTS's confusion of "the spark of life" with "evolution" arises because it says life originated fully formed as seen today. Or are they being deliberately obscure, just like they equate "Evolution" with "Darwin", totally ignoring people such as Lamarck, whom the French credit.
Of course all of the animal and plant variations emanated after being released from Noah's Ark. Pairs of each different type of Kangaroo hopped all the way to the Ark and then returned back to the Land of Oz, along with termites and red back spiders.
A recent Watchtower also conflates evolution with the origin of life. I thought it was simply a mistake,
but maybe it’s deliberate.
Oh it's very definitely deliberate. They've been doing it non-stop for well over 60 years.
Someone knew we were coming then,think about oxygen someone knew we would need
air to live here.
a colorless, odorless reactive gas, the chemical element of atomic number 8 and the life-supporting component of the air.About a fifth of the air is made up of oxygen, and almost all the rest is nitrogen. Oxygen comes from plant photosynthesis where carbon dioxide is absorbed and oxygen is emitted.
This is classic faulty logic. You start with the premise that humans were the objective and frame your argument backwards. I could just as easily argue that "someone knew I was supposed to go to a strip club when the grocer gave me all ones as change because they were out of 20's." Foolish isn't it. And just to be clear oxygen 'breathing' life was an evolved adaptation to the increasing levels of oxygen from newly evolved photosynthesizing microbes. As it turns out, oxygen is a highly reactive element as you noted, this makes it a capable catalyzer for metabolic reactions but at the same time it attacks cells and other compounds needed by the body. As far as intelligent design this was not the best. It works because the costs are outweighed by the benefits. Life needs only to reproduce before it dies and this is possible while using oxygen by spending large energy on antioxidant defenses. Its like using the radioactive cancer causing sun to energize the planet. Life has adapted to it because it is what was available but it is about the worst source of energy as far as cells are concerned.
You start with the premise that humans were the objective and frame your argument backwards.
This also is something the JWs have done for many, many decades.
There was an entire talk at this year's regional convention about this - it somehow proves how much "God loves us" because he created the universe, 14 billion years ago, with exactly the right 100+ elements to support human life. As if "the creation of human life" were somehow the primary, if not sole, reason for calling the entire universe into existence.
Here is a piece of data ...
It's a fossil of a young male who lived more than 1 million years ago.
Evolution has it that we share a common ancestor with the great apes and extinct species of Homo, and modern humans evolved gradually hundreds of thousands of years ago. JWs believe that all life was created by God, and that humans, a special act of creation, are 6,000 years old at the most.
How well does the above piece of evidence fit into the theory of evolution? ... And how well into the biblical belief in divine creation?
This is such a nice proper place for such a debate on such a big subject.
No disrespect to Robert Shapiro, professor emeritus of chemistry at New York University, but he is one person with one point of view that is different from many other point of views on his specific subject.
And as mentioned, evolution and abiogenesis are two different discussions.
Man is in his infancy of understanding the big questions and their answers. The vastness of outer and inner space are just being barely reached. There were so many scientists in the past who swore that it was impossible for so many things to exist or occur- and so many were wrong. But that's okay- we learn and move on.
I stick with something more basic- WE KNOW THE GOD OF THE BIBLE DOESN'T EXIST. So much of science has proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that the life on this planet is older than the Bible would make it, that it has evolved in a way contrary to the Bible, and that things like the great worldwide flood could not have occurred. Any other "God" has not made it clear that he/she/it does actually exist, so until he/she/it contacts us, we can assume they are not there (or don't want us spending all our time worshiping them).
"If you have any other examples of misleading references in Origins of Life I would love to see them too."
You might try downloading this review of the 5 Questions and Was Life Created brochures.
It's pretty lengthy (40 pages) but also serves as a good intro to evolutionary theory although the referencing could have been better.
If you just want to pick out the selective quote-mining the text is searchable.
I'm fed up of explaining to JW's that branching descent means that statements like "but we see that dogs always produce dogs" are correct and exactly what evolutionary theory says we should expect. They seem to have some odd straw man caricature to demolish and never seem to bother to learn much about the theory they oppose.