When is a theory 'just a theory'?

by HB 70 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Fisherman

    Read some books!

    I should read some books to make me foney bolony qualified cut and paste to refute or advocate evolution-like cofty!

  • cofty

    Fisherman you might dislike that I present evidence for the fact of evolution but you could at least give credit where it is due.

    I don't copy-paste. I do revision on topics that I am familiar with by using multiple sources and then I write it up in my own words. I go out my way to make it as easy to understand as possible.

    I am working on number 20 now. It's about Lucy and the evolutionary history of humans. You will love it

  • Fisherman

    credit where it is due.

    I do not discredit your thought provoking posts on science. I was planning to post a statement saying something about that before -not that I agree with your arguments or conclusions.

    I suppose that anyone sitting in the hot seat in Nuremberg could not feel cold blooded to evidence and same goes for anyone who's faith could possibly be destroyed with bitter challenging evidence. I do not feel that way about evolution. There is a lot of stuff to read and analyze in your posts on evolution.

    There are ONLY 2 methods that I use that convinces my mind that something is a fact. 1. Observe, hit with a hammer. Measure. 2. Test. Same results time and time and time and time again.There is a dangerous fallacy in 2 and that is that same results will result for all conditions and another danger is conclusions from and about the results except for the results of the experiment.Even a talking horse would have to measure up to that fact determining standard.

    I believe that DNA test shows paternity because it has been proven that the test accurately does so, but not because I understand the mechanics of the test. Logic tells me that if a male human clone took the test, the test would fail to accurately show paternity for that set of conditions.

    I would like to ask you a few questions.

    1 Since brevity is the soul of wit... briefly list the strongest evidence that show that humans evolved from any non human.

  • Anders Andersen
    Anders Andersen
    briefly list the strongest evidence that show that humans evolved from any non human.

    While that is being compiled, can you then please list the evidence (as has been requested before) there is for divine creation?

  • Fisherman

    divine creation?

    You are not looking.

  • Anders Andersen
    Anders Andersen


    Apparently not.

    Please educate me, as we are trying to educate you. And please be as specific as you are requiring cofty to be.

    If you are simply referring to looking at the universe and everything in it...well that's just evidence they exist, no divine creator to be seen.

    If that is your resoning I could apply that 'evidence' to any of the creation myths that exist. And their existence only is just as much evidence of big bang and evolution.

    So please state at least some specific evidence for divine creation.

  • Fisherman

    Andy, I already posted what you requested. Ro 1:20.

    The evidence comes from God not from me. What good to you is anything that I claim to have witnessed? Or anything the Bible says that others have witnessed? Why should you believe me more than the Bible?

    Anyway, God says in the Bible: "And they will have to know that I am Jehovah." If a creator really exists he will prove it. If he does not, means that there is no creator right?

  • Anders Andersen
    Anders Andersen

    So, if I understand correctly...

    1 guy who never researched anything related to geology, biology, chemistry, astronomy, etc say: "Nature exists, therefore an invisible person living in the sky must have created it"

    is more compelling to you than all the evidence (including visible evidence, and there for everyone to check for themselves) that tens of thousands of people who thoroughly researched their specific fields have discovered?

    And is the claim by that ancient person in Rom 1.20 more credible than my following claim?

    "Life on earth has been created by 3 invisible, undetectable pink dudes living on Mars. By just looking at their creation their power is shown, and everyone should thank them for that".

  • Half banana
    Half banana

    Good point made Anders.

    Fisherman, you are a paradigm; an example of what JW belief and faith in God does to the brain. You have got the cart before the horse.

    The Bible is a book of propaganda; it is full of ridiculous mistakes and errors and was only made ‘sacred’ by the Roman Catholic Church. To base your life on this shows that you cannot think for yourself, you only follow other people.

    People who are afraid to think for themselves often end up in high control cults like JWs.

    There is no scientific or measurable evidence, for a sprit deity to whom we are all beholden. The Bible is a collection of fictional tales (which happens also to mention some real things).

    What book of factual events ever recorded talking animals and people coming back from the dead?

    The WTBTS is a money-collecting and dishonest cult which is not in the slightest degree concerned for the welfare of its flock. It trades in the gullibility of people who trust in God and blind faith. What a confidence trick!

    The horse which drives the cart of human progress is verifiable knowledge.

    (If you were you to cast off your comfort blanket of faith, you could then correct me and say that the real horse is actually “disprovable” knowledge... but such subtleties are not accessible to believer’s minds).

  • Island Man
    Island Man
    I think people are confusing the theory of evolution with evolution. Evolution is a scientifically and historically proven fact. The theory of evolution is the scientific model or explanation that describes how evolution occurred.

Share this