Whom can we trust? Where can we turn to for protection?

abiather

Though we can easily dismiss many of JWs teachings on many counts, the sad part is that we do not have any alternative.

1) 1) Though some of the things Bible said may have gone wrong (most of which would not even touch our day-to-day lives), the worst thing it foretold (WHICH VERY MUCH AFFECTS OUR DAY-TODAY-LIVES) has come true: “People will faint from TERROR, apprehensive of what is coming on the world.” (Luke 21:26). Despite all-out résistance and fighting by nearly all the Governments—including the Super Power and NATO forces, terrorism is on the increase!

2) If we turn to Science, it is also equally DOGMATIC! For example take a very major subject: the age of earth and life on it. They often prefer to speak in terms of Billions of years as age of earth, and Millions of years as age of life on it. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution). Yet when we do some home-work on what scientists claim, we are disappointed! If Homo Sapiens appeared on earth millions of years ago, what could be the present population on earth? Would it not be UNIMAGINABLY greater than the present 7.12 billion? Let us start from something concrete, and go backward! According to United States Census Bureau, world population was 2 Billion in 1927 and 4 Billion in 1974 and will be 8 Billion in 2026. That means population almost doubles about 50 years.

Now let us make a simple calculation! Though a couple can produce four children in about four years, let us give a too liberal 160 YEARS TO PRODUCE JUST FOUR CHILDREN! Suppose the human tree starts with just 8 people (or 4 couples), and each couple produces 4 children each in 160 years (and then the original couples/parents pass away). Now the history is 160 years old and population of the earth is just 16 (or 8 couples). These 8 couples produce 32 children (or 16 couples) in another 160 years, and the parents pass away. Now the history is 320 years old, and population is 32. If we go on calculating like this, earth’s population will be 17.17 Billion in just 4960 years (160 years x 31 = 4960). [Yet the present population is only 7.12 Billion, and the excess of over 10 Billion would adequately provide room for all those who remained childless for various reasons and all those who died prematurely due to war, accident, diseases … etc]

No of couples	No of children	No of years
4	16	160
8	32	320
16	64	480
32	128	640
64	256	800
128	512	960
256	1024	1120
512	2048	1280
1024	4096	1440
2048	8192	1600
4096	16384	1760
8192	32768	1920
16384	65536	2080
32768	131072	2240
65536	262144	2400
131072	524288	2560
262144	1048576	2720
524288	2097152	2880
1048576	4194304	3040
2097152	8388608	3200
4194304	16777216	3360
8388608	33554432	3520
16777216	67108864	3680
33554432	134217728	3840
67108864	268435456	4000
134217728	536870912	4160
268435456	1073741824	4320
536870912	2147483648	4480
1073741824	4294967296	4640
2147483648	8589934592	4800
4294967296	17179869184	4960

Their claim of “millions of years” makes no sense!!!

Whom can we trust? Where can we turn to for protection?

KateWild

I don't really know what point you're trying to make. Are you trying to discredit science with your calculations? If so your calculations are based on assumptions that have no proof.

I believe in god and in science. The two are not mutually exclusive.

Your post is not coherent abianther. What exactly is your point?

Kate xx

Simon

Oh, this is too laughable.

You're taking *current* life expectancy (post industrial revolution and modern farming techniques + medicines) and then trying to apply that to "cavemen".

Never mind that you don't factor in any catastrophes like mass starvation or plagues.

Your model is also simplistic - is it as easy to farm and feed 10 people as it is 10,000,000 for example? You need a much more complex model to factor in everything that contributes to a size of a population being what it is at different times - the size of the population itself being a factor to account for because of how it affects things (more people doesn't always = more growth).

Just a few reasons off the top of my head why your figures and your reasoning is way off base.

Here's a tip: instead of looking for "facts" to select to prove your beliefs, look at a all the facts and form a belief from them.

Also, why is it that true believers ALWAYS have to use CAPS just to MAKE THEIR POINT. Shouting doesn't make any of it any more valid pal.

OneEyedJoe

1. It's clear to any objective mind that the verse you quoted has been taken completely out of context and was not meant to be a prophecy of terrorism. Furthermore, by essentially any metric the world is improving at an increasing rate. Just because communication has allowed for negative global events to gain more publicity does not mean that they are increasingly frequent.

2. Science is not "equally dogmatic." Science has no pope, no GB, etc. I suspect that your problem with science is that you cannot make unfounded assertions without evidence and have them readily accepted like you can in the domain of religion. If you have evidence that some accepted scientific theory is wrong, publish it and present your case for the world to see. If you actually have evidence and know what you're talking about you won't be ridiculed, you'll be praised for increasing the sum of human knowledge.

Your calculations on human growth rate are inherently flawed. You neglect to account for the extremely high rate of infant mortality that was present in the early ages of the human species. This only began declining in the last century or so. Furthermore, you neglect to account for wars, famine and disease that have, at times, resulted in a decrease in the world population over a long period (a good example would be the black plague which contributed to a decrease in population of around 100 million people within a century). The human population of the earth probably remained in the thousands for a very long time, and only after the invention of things like farming and domestication of animals did things become stable enough for the species to truly flourish. Even then, as I said, human population growth was nothing like what we've seen in the last century.

Simon

If you used the same logic and applied them to other animals, we should be overrun with all of them by now with the possible exception of giant pandas.

Why aren't we knee-deep in rabbits?

Maybe because things kill them. Population is about more than reproduction rates, it's about survival rates.

Science is constantly questioned and corrected. Compare that to religion where people are killed for questioning the orthodoxy of theocracy.

millie210

Im not good at math or statistics but I dont think you can make massive "rounding off" of numbers like you did above and then feel that science got it wrong.

The trouble that you are pointing out in your post is what to put your trust in (if I understand you correctly).

Put it in the Bible? The flaws of that are found on hundreds of threads here posted by those who see them.

Trust in science? The problem there (as I see it) is that science when it knows better - does better.

Heres one example of that in our recent life span: After two world wars and the movement of women further in to the work place baby formula became much more mainstream. Bottle feeding a baby was presented to women as scientifically superior. And while there was definitely a marketing effect at work here, there was actual science to help drive the concept.

Time passes, our knowledge of the body and the advances of science march alongside the progression of time. The 70s arrive, the hippie movement surges to the fore. Along with hash and LSD comes a renewed interest in things perceived as natural. Home birth enjoys popularity again, along with breast feeding.

Surprise surprise, now there is emerging science to support the bio-availability and superiority of all mammals feeding their young milk from the mother.

All of that to say that science while helpful and indeed wonderful, does not have all the answers either.

Even though it always appears to at the moment of a persons life.

So I understand why you are wondering where exactly to put your trust.

I wonder that also.

LisaRose

Science is based on evidence, it is only dogmatic in that if an idea is proved to be incorrect it is discarded, where as religious belief is based on the writings of men thousands of years ago, who had no understanding of science and the natural world. If something in the bible is proven to be incorrect scientifically, the deluded believer will discount science because they cannot accept that the bible isn't true, they are biased, as you are biased. You are attempting to make the facts fit your belief, so you ignore many important things and focus on a few minor points you mistakenly believe proves you right.

The Christian Church once taught that the sun revolved around the earth, because it seemed obvious to them, Copernicus was considered a heretic for saying otherwise, but he was right. With all the scientific advances in the last hundred years it amazes me that anyone would still believe lathe bible account of genesis. DNA research alone proves man has been around far longer than the bible says, yet you still stubbornly refuse to accept reality, preferring to discount things that have been proven over and over.

Do you have advanced training in any relevant science? If not, why should anyone believe your theories over men who have years of training and experience?

Phizzy

The Scientific Method is the best way we have to make sense of the world around us, the Universe, and of ourselves.

As to "trust" it would be foolish to think that Science has all the answers, or will even provide them, but once a Scientific Theory has been established we can certainly trust that, for the present, it is the best explanation.

This is about as far from Blind Faith as you can get, but it works in the real world.

It is incumbent upon us to educate ourselves if we do not wish to appear foolish, or worse, act in a foolish way.

Before we criticise a scientific position, we need at least to see what it actually says.

When did Modern Man first appear, according to the facts ?

You also ask for "protection", from what ?

Falsehoods, mis-information, mis-direction ?

The JW religion, in common with all religions, are Masters at all of those.

If you want something or somebody to trust, educate yourself, thoroughly, learn Critical Thinking skills, then trust your own opinion and judgement.

This is a great protection.

Simon

The Christian Church once taught that the sun revolved around the earth, because it seemed obvious to them, Copernicus was considered a heretic for saying otherwise, but he was right

And now the religious falsely make the claim that "scientists used to think the sun revolved around the earth".

Religion is only a salve to satisfy questions that science hasn't yet answered. The need for it is evaporating (for you theists, that means it's diminishing, not that it's being taken up to the heavens due to the power of christ).

MadGiant

DP

Ismael

Whom can we trust? Where can we turn to for protection?

Share this