eugenie scott of the national center for science education has written a retraction, after being slapped with a libel suit.
she wrongly accused roseville, california attorney larry caldwell of presenting for adoption to the school board two books on young-earth creation, one (get this!
) published by jehovah's witnesses.
Oh no! I think you missed the point entirely...besides I think you are the one being hateful.
really? think what you like, it's actually exasperation.
so, what then was your point if not a veiled threat?
again, i believe your comment was:
Keep on mocking God tetra hope it's worth it in the end for you.please clear up my misunderstanding.
eugenie scott of the national center for science education has written a retraction, after being slapped with a libel suit.
she wrongly accused roseville, california attorney larry caldwell of presenting for adoption to the school board two books on young-earth creation, one (get this!
) published by jehovah's witnesses.
Keep on mocking God tetra hope it's worth it in the end for you.
hib-
take your religious bigotry elsewhere. try reading the board rules before posting hateful garbage like this. you might just find yourself banned (on second thought, keep it up...)
there can be little doubt that the wts 'shunning' policy is a dangerous weapon.
each year tens of thousands of people are disfellowshipped, and experience the reality of being shunned.
many of them still believing the wts doctrine that if they die in this condition they will shortly be executed by god at har-meggedon and die an eternal and disgraceful death some leaving the faith altogether.
i had a bottle of pills in one hand and a bottle of jack daniels in the other. the note on the floor said, "my blood on your hands."
i passed out and woke up about 20 hours later with a wicked hangover. shunning was not kind to me for awhile. now, i've never been better.
.
i am trying to think about examples of animals that would be bad for the intelligent design theory.
i like to use the ostrich because it has wings but doesnt fly.
Which feature would you choose, the ability to have a great sense of smell, breathe underwater or a far superior brain? Which ever a person believe, evolution or creation, everyone has to agree that no other animal even comes close to our level.
i understand what you're saying, but in the african savanna, i'd take speed. in the jungle, i would take greater strength. underwater, i would take ability to breathe underwater. ultimately, all things being equal and all animals starting at "zero" (with regards to levels of proficiency in various traits), whatever helps an animal survive to reproductive maturity will be favored by natural selection. in certain instances intelligence is not the most valuable trait. remember, in the beginning of the development of any trait, it would've been an archaic, vague representation of the trait that we observe now (greater intelligence would've been the ability to pick a piece of fruit...not understand advanced calculus).
let's say a species is being decimated by a land predator (maybe a lion or something similar). the individuals in the prey species with a slight advantage in speed would outlive/out-reproduce the individuals with a slight intellectual advantage, but are slow. speed wins and (assuming this is the only selective pressure) that species will become faster, not smarter. this scenario played out with each species in the prey role and a various actors in the predator role. whatever beats the predator wins. and the primitive seeds of intelligence weren't always the best defense.
isn't it amazing to see how these people can mingle in society and in reality be living a double life?
they may be nice to your face but ultimately, they think we (those who do not conform to their beliefs) deserve death.
Any comparison between JWs and extremist Muslims -- and of course there are some vague similarities -- should at least point out the fact that whereas the latter will murder, kill, torture and maim innocent people, the former will not (although their worldview believes that God will do this in due time).
i think minimus' point was that there is a private doctrine of intolerance and a public one that is much more friendly. in that respect, they are extremely similiar.
.
i am trying to think about examples of animals that would be bad for the intelligent design theory.
i like to use the ostrich because it has wings but doesnt fly.
why we don't see species closer to our own level?
what is our level? i look at it like if we're talking about the sense of smell, dogs have us beat hands down. if dogs had the ability to reason on things like a human they may wonder why other animal's sense of smell is so primative compared to theirs. or if we're talking about the ability to breathe underwater, tons of species have us beat.
humans happen to be the best adapted to rule this planet mostly because of the size of our brains compared to our body size. so we assume that we are the "best" and that other animals that have evolved differently somehow lagged along the way, or are dawdling in their evolutionary development towards human-like traits.
the assumption is that evolution should always point towards humanlike characteristics (like a big brain). this is not what evolutionary theory says. there is no concept of progress. every species on alive on earth at this time that is multiplying is perfectly evolved for this time. basically, we are the pinnacle of evolution...just like every other animal...just in different aspects (i.e. intelligence, sense of smell, sight, speed.).
i've just seen the pictures on the news from the children and babies who have just been killed.
from what i hear soldiers were giving out sweets and gifts to the children when i suicide bomber drove into them and blasted them all to pieces in baghdad.
makes me feel so helpless, but not hopeless.
but by that same logic, they should be flying permanently at half mast for the Iraqi civilians, and the Africans, and the Chechen's, and the Tibetans, and the Afghans, ...
this should probably be a separate thread, but i was just talking to my girlfriend last night about this. in the sudan, the death toll is between 70,000 and 400,000 (that's from the State Dept's website). the conflict has been going on about 2 and a half yrs. that puts the avg death toll at 77 to 438 deaths PER DAY!!!
it's crazy. i don't mean to sound heartless, but that's a lot of dead people and we have yet to see a moment of silence (edited to add: or any tangible acknowldgment of its reality) in their memory. that story is relagated to a 1 paragraph "article" once a week in the sunday paper that says, "umm...yup...it's still happening." i'm sorry, but it just seems like our priorities are out of whack.
i've just seen the pictures on the news from the children and babies who have just been killed.
from what i hear soldiers were giving out sweets and gifts to the children when i suicide bomber drove into them and blasted them all to pieces in baghdad.
makes me feel so helpless, but not hopeless.
But I would like all those others around the world who dont hapen to be white to be remembered too.
i'm glad you said this, crumpet. this is something that i am personally struggling with in the aftermath of the london bombings. this is meant in no way to degrade anyone who has suffered w/ regard to the bombings last week, but i'd hate to think that we who are Western society are able to express sympathy more readily to people that look and sound more like us.
the watchtower for decades has said consistently that both man and animals have the same spirit, or life force.
but what about plants?
i have not seen the watchtower ever mention that plants, which are living things, possess spirit, or a life force.. i wonder why that is so.. --vm44
they already have the lions eating grass in the new system. if they allow a life force for plants, the survivors would be living on rocks and air.
(paradise my ass)
.
i am trying to think about examples of animals that would be bad for the intelligent design theory.
i like to use the ostrich because it has wings but doesnt fly.
the best discussion of the evolution of the human brain i've seen was "The Dragons of Eden: Speculations on the Evolution of Human Intelligence" by Carl Sagan. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0345346297/qid=1121174834/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_ur_1/102-3219845-1664141?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
like abaddon said, we're can't go much further than speculation at this point, but this book does a great job of separating the fact from the speculation and it's all presented in a very logical, non-dogmatic manner. i don't think it would put anyone off.
