German Jehovah's Witness Scholar Defends 'Intelligent Design'

by slimboyfat 10 Replies latest jw friends

  • slimboyfat

    Here is the link:

    What do you think?

    Maybe some here are more up to date than me on debate about "ID". But more interesting is the angle of a 'brother' attempting to engage in such scholarly debate. In addition to being a scientist, the author is also reputedly an elder in Germany.

    Anyone read Hal Flemings' book by the way? Any good?

    He is a brother as well, by the way...

  • Terry
    Additionally, the fossil record displays a regular pattern of abrupt appearances of new life forms (instead of their arrival by innumerable small steps in a Darwinian manner),

    He begins with a false premise. It shouldn't be surprising to end up with a tall pile of fallacious conclusions.

    What EVOLUTION is and what a DARWINIAN manner are is worth noting at the outset.

    Darwin observed finches in the Galapagos with a range of beaks and feathers, tails, etc. that were discrete. That was the beginning. Puzzling out the reason for the range of differences and discovering a mechanism for isolating species from the same bird-type was the problem.

    Darwin was completely unaware of genes or genetic laws. Had he known the ACTUAL method of passing morphological information from life to life his hypothesis would have been without the need to postulate OTHER causes.

    Today, however, science has more data. What does this mean?

    EVOLUTION is not exactly the same as a DARWINIAN MANNER.

    Evolution is what it IS and not what Darwin's best guess made it out to be.

    End of story.

    Creating a straw man to beat with "facts" is an old trick. A tired one.

    I find the subject of Evolution vs Creation the most boring of all subjects.


    Because discussions bog down in the sludge of mind-numbing details that proliferate ad nauseum.

    It is a war of data and not of thought or reason.

    What could be interesting about watching a column of figures swarm like ants over another column of figures in a death-match of ciphers and integers?



  • tetrapod.sapien
    I find the subject of Evolution vs Creation the most boring of all subjects.


    i can see why.

    on the other hand, the country you live in has something like 40 states trying to smuggle creationism into science classes. this is dangerous, considering that your country is the most powerful on earth, and these children it's future.

    and the debate belongs on ex-JW boards too. because the theory of evolution is incompatible with JW doctrine. they've painted themselves into a corner. if evolution is a fact, as it is, then it's possible for a JW to lose her faith over it. and so the debate rages ad nauseum.


  • avishai

    Well, because the terms "Jehovahs witness" and "Scholar" are mutually exclusive, i find it hilarious!!

  • slimboyfat


  • RunningMan

    "I find the subject of Evolution vs Creation the most boring of all subjects."

    I find it not so much boring as frustrating. It's like every time the subject is broached, you need to go back to kindergarten and start over. When a thread thoroughly discusses the matter at length, invariably the next day another thread begins, starting right over again. And it always appears that it is the same people who wipe their memories clean and start over. I often feel like telling them to go back to school and call me in 15 years when they are up to speed.

    As for the JW scholar, I find his mere presence interesting. There seems to be a specific chain of events surrounding intelligent JWs. They begin by stepping out to defend doctrine articulately, since the society has left a void there. They debate, learn, and gradually moderate, sometimes eventually changing sides under the weight of evidence. I would keep an eye on this guy. Sometimes the greatest appologists become the most effective critics (see: James Penton)

  • kid-A

    I would agree, equal parts boring and frustrating. It is literally impossible to debate evolution with a creationist because they are vainly attempting to use logical arguments to defend a position that is unfalsifiable. No amount of evidence at the phylogenetic, molecular, genetic, anatomical, behavioural, etc. in clear support of evolution can convince a creationist otherwise. WHen you get down to it, most creationist defenders know virtually nothing about basic biology, anatomy, molecular genetics, etc. so you find yourself presenting incomprehensible evidence to somebody who has long ago made up their minds.

    The most difficult thing to convey to a creationist is the reality that "the theory of evolution" no longer has moved beyond the theoretical realm many many years ago and is now a solid foundation of FACTS based on concrete, hard data.

    THis so-called "JW SCHOLAR" (indeed the ultimate oxymoron) sounds like any other north american 'intelligent design' wind-bag.

  • 144001
    Well, because the terms "Jehovahs witness" and "Scholar" are mutually exclusive, i find it hilarious!!

    Jehovah's Witness scholar is an oxymoron.

  • tetrapod.sapien

    any body read the TIME cover article from last week on evolution and creationism in american schools? i bought it. it was pretty good.

    america may have led the world in the computer revolution, but i would not expect it to lead the world in the bio revolution. all the smart kids are in china, and india and korea.

  • Gerard

    I recently read an aricle in Time Magazine; Basically, the difference between Creationists and Inteligent Design, is that Inteligent Design advocates use scientific language to try back up their asumptions.

    This reduces resistance and legal repercusions at being teached at schools.

Share this