Posts by Disillusioned JW

25

Professors and Students Defend Evolution

by Sea Breeze in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uc_w9vtzj0a&ab_channel=livingwaters.

Disillusioned JW

Hi Jan. I don't see any dislikes for my two most recent posts; maybe your error was corrected. Maybe the website will now let you post a "like" for the post you intended to say "like" to.

25

Professors and Students Defend Evolution

by Sea Breeze in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uc_w9vtzj0a&ab_channel=livingwaters.

Minor correction to my prior post: I had some typos when I said "Have you ever seen a 'giraffant' or an "eleraff'? How abut 'pigdeer' or a 'catdog'?" Instead I should have said the following. 'Have you ever seen a "giraffant" or an "eleraff'? How about a "pigdeer" or a "catdog"?'

The young earth creationist illustration I referred to also misleadingly shows a flying fish with feathered wings (the wings of a bird). In contrast, evolutionist scientists (more than 95% of scientists are evolutionists) say that birds evolved from biped non-avian dinosaurs, and that none of the bird's fish ancestors had bird wings, and that all of the bird's fish ancestors are from hundreds of millions of years ago. Numerous fossils have been found of biped non-avian dinosaurs with feathers on their forelimbs (arms) and some of those fossils look more like fossils of birds than do the other fossils of feathered non-avian dinosaurs.

25

Professors and Students Defend Evolution

by Sea Breeze in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uc_w9vtzj0a&ab_channel=livingwaters.

Disillusioned JW

Giraffes don't turn into elephants and dogs don't turn into cats. Claims that if evolution is true then giraffes should turn into elephants and that dogs should turn into cats are straw man arguments of young earth creationists. They are the very arguments used in some creationist literature. For example, the evolutionist (though not a scientist and though not believing that natural selection is the cause of macroevolution) Francis Hitching's Neck of the Giraffe book contains of an illustration from such creationist literature which show the following misrepresentations of evolution: an animal with the main body of an elephant and the head of a giraffe; an animal with the main body of a giraffe and the head of elephant; an animal with the main body of a dog and the head of cat; an animal with the main body of a cat with the head of a dog. I know that because I have Hitching's book, checked out from the library. The creationist illustration shown in the book (In "chapter five: Creation v. evolution") is accompanied by the following words.

"People who believe in evolution say that one animal can change into another. The Bible says they can't. Have you ever seen any of these animals? Have you ever seen a 'giraffant' or an "eleraff'? How abut 'pigdeer' or a 'catdog'?"

Giraffes evolved (by descent with modification) from some animals which were not elephants, elephants evolved from some animals which were not giraffes, cats evolved from some animals which were not dogs, and dogs evolved from some animals which were not cats (recent scientific evidence indicates that dogs evolved from grey wolves). But, the known fossil record clearly shows the following:

anatomically modern humans evolved from humans who were less human looking than modern day humans;

the earliest ape-like hominid beings existed before the first humans (the ones which are less anatomically modern looking humans than modern humans) [in this example I am defining human as those who are assigned to the genus Homo];

the earliest apes existed before the earliest ape-like hominids;

an ape species (Aegyptopithecus zeuxis) existed with some monkey-like features (including a tail as an adult) before the first full apes existed;

the first primates (ones who were not monkeys) existed before the first monkeys (monkeys, apes, and humans are some types of primates);

the first mammals existed before the first primates existed;

the first mammal-like animals (synapsids, which used to be commonly called mammal-like reptiles since in a number of ways they resembled reptiles) existed before the first mammals;

the first four legged terrestrial egg laying animals existed before the first mammal-like animals;

the first amphibious four legged animals with webbed feet existed before the first four legged terrestrial animals;

the first fish with leg-like limbs and webbed feet existed before the first fully amphibious four legged animals with webbed feet;

the first fish with lobe fins as limbs and paddle-like digits existed before the first fish with leg-like limbs and webbed feet;

the first fish with a nasal passage to the throat existed before the first lobe finned fish existed (lobe finned fish, amphibians, reptiles, and mammals have a nasal passage to the throat);

the first fish with jaws existed before the first fish with both jaws and the the nasal passage to the throat;

the first fish without jaws existed before the first fish with jaws;

the first vertebrate existed before the first fish;

etc.

I know the above about the fossil record because in science books I have seen illustrations of discovered fossils of that which I stated above.

17

Does anyone have a copy of the Jan 1st 1989 Watchtower I can buy

by mickbobcat in

i want to buy a copy not a copy of one but the actual copy of a 1989 jan 1st watchtower.

let me know i would like to have one to show someone i am talking to about it.

.

Disillusioned JW

menrov, you might be right regarding the meaning for the change, or they changed it because they didn't want to limit how long they would still train people to become missionaries and still send out missionaries.

I think it is possible (at least slightly possible) that the phrase "20th century" was the wording of a PIMO at Bethel (done to cause problems for the WT) and that thus they changed it when the bound volumes came out.

17

Does anyone have a copy of the Jan 1st 1989 Watchtower I can buy

by mickbobcat in

i want to buy a copy not a copy of one but the actual copy of a 1989 jan 1st watchtower.

let me know i would like to have one to show someone i am talking to about it.

.

Disillusioned JW

BluesBrother and others, my understanding is the the "work" that is spoken of ending (whether in "20th century" or in "our day"), was not the entire ministry work but rather only the missionary work. Such was always my thought, since I didn't read more into the sentence and its paragraph than what they specifically said. Note that the prior sentence ends in the phrase "missionary activity" and thus the word "work" in the last sentence of paragraph 12 is specifically referring to the missionary work. The subheading (that paragraph 12 falls under) is even called "Missionaries to the Nations". Likewise paragraph 13 is specifically about missionary work.

25

Do JWs buy old JW books to destroy?

by mickbobcat in

i have never heard of this but i doubt its never been done.

i sell some older jw books on etsy and have always been a bit afraid that some jws are buying them to destroy.

if you have heard of this let me know.

Disillusioned JW

After the elder left my door, my mom told me that the elder told her I am very nearly an apostate, but what the elder did not know is that I was already an apostate (from the WT) though not an outspoken one. I was shocked that the elder was angry of me learning the truth of what the WT literature written by Rutherford says. I didn't even say anything negative about Rutherford's book (such as mentioning crazy teachings or failed predictions, though I was saying something critical about biblical prophecy). Instead I said (and I paraphrase since I don't remember the exact wording) that "even Rutherford in one his books taught that the prophecy about Tyre becoming completely destroyed, by the king of Babylon, for forever, did not come true literally." It was right after I mentioned that, that the elder got angry regarding me reading Rutherford's books.

15

Al Gore speech or JW convention?

by neat blue dog in

it literally could be either.

the clip starts at 1:15. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ljymc--cpoy&feature=youtu.be.

Disillusioned JW

When CO2 was way, way higher tens of millions of years ago, much of what is currently dry coastal land (land which includes very large cities throughout the world) was under oceans. Keep that in mind. Furthermore, the rate of CO2 increase, according to scientists, is currently much higher than more than 1000 years ago. The scientists say that while the current level of CO2 might not in itself bring large numbers of extinctions (and other devastation), the rapid rate of increase makes it hard for the ecosystem to adapt quickly enough to avoid disaster. Bill Nye (The Science Guy), in his book called Everything All At Once says the following.

"Sometimes the self-proclaimed skeptics point out that climate has always changed. They are right--but only up to a point. It has always changed, but the rate of change that humans are introducing now is unprecedented." He then provides the example of driving a car at 70 miles per hours and the effect of gradually reducing the speed to 0 miles hours, verses the effect of suddenly reducing the speed to 0 miles per hours by crashing the car into a brick wall. He then says the following.

"It ain't the change that's the problem, my educated colleagues--it's the rate of change that gets you. It's very much the same thing with the climate. ...

These days, it seems as though for every genuine nerd expert, there is someone else peddling false doubt. That's why we have to work together, do some thoughtful information-filtering, and make the informed voices heard. We need to make sure everyone understands the real situation; the welfare of the planet (and those of us who happen to live on it) hangs in the balance."

By the way, Al Gore's book from 1992 about the environment is called Earth In The Balance: Ecology and the Human Spirit and as we know Al is a nerd (at least somewhat). My copy of that book is signed by him (though not to me). The Introduction of that book shows a chart of CO2 concentration from April 1958 (at about 315 PPM) through June 1991 (at about 360 PPM).

25

Do JWs buy old JW books to destroy?

by mickbobcat in

i have never heard of this but i doubt its never been done.

i sell some older jw books on etsy and have always been a bit afraid that some jws are buying them to destroy.

if you have heard of this let me know.

Disillusioned JW

skin wrote "the branch had a letter read out about 6 years ago asking for all old publications to be returned to them." RolRod said "I was later told by Randall Watters that the Society had a bonfire with them." I remember the WT literature used to say that the WT does not produce a list of banned/forbidden books. It is disappointing to read that the WT is now trying to confiscate WT books and likely intending to destroy them. This sounds like one way, out of several ways, they are starting to act like the Catholic Church (or the way the Catholic Church used to act).

After I stopped attending KH meetings, (and maybe starting a few years before) I read quotes online from the old books and I read some PDFs of pages of the old books. I thought the quotes, especially the PDFs were probably accurate, but I wanted to obtain the actual WT books to be certain. Over a number of years I ended up finding and buying many of the books at a thrift store, and I bought some of the books from eBay auctions. Another reason why I bought them was because I was simply curious o what they say, including that which I didn't find in quotes. I think some JWs are buying them for each of those reasons. Later I sold (at a profit) nearly all of the pre-1965 books on eBay since I Iearned what I wanted to learn from them, since most can be read online, and since I didn't think I could persuade JWs by showing the books to them. When I listed the books on eBay I quoted some strange statements in them (including failed predictions and abandoned doctrines) in order to attract potential buyers who are JWs that have begun questioning the WT religion and to thus get higher prices for the books. However, to some extent I worried that some of the people buying the books might be doing so to destroy them, and that they are doing so in order to prevent other people from seeing what those books say.

A number of years ago my mom (a JW) had a JW elder visit me at my door (to try to change my views and/or answer questions I have). Immediately after I told the elder that I have (or had) some Rutherford books and read them, the elder angrily asked me where I obtained them. I did not answer that question since I wanted to prevent him from obtaining (with the intention of destroying or hiding) the literature from those sources.

15

Al Gore speech or JW convention?

by neat blue dog in

it literally could be either.

the clip starts at 1:15. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ljymc--cpoy&feature=youtu.be.

Disillusioned JW

Today the NBC Nightly News broadcast in the USA had an exclusive interview of Al Gore about climate change. The news anchor reported that what Al predicted 15 years ago about climate change (melting polar caps, extreme hurricanes, extreme heat, and other extreme weather, etc.) is now coming true. Al said he was merely telling people what the scientists had been saying. Al also said that the changes are at a much faster rate than what the scientists thought would be case, and that we thus need to take very quick corrective action. The news broadcast also said that China announced it will cease all its financing of coal fired power plants that are outside of China. [See https://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-news/video/exclusive-al-gore-on-worsening-climate-crisis-121741381523 .] Al said that since China currently finances 70% of all coal fired plants located outside of China, it is major news. [Besides the prior link see https://www.politico.com/news/2021/09/21/chinas-xi-pledges-to-end-funding-for-overseas-coal-power-plants-513493 .]

Yesterday the nightly news was showing how extreme heat in Guatemala is destroying crops on a massive scales and making it very hard for people there to have enough food to eat. See https://www.nbc.com/nbc-nightly-news/video/climate-change-ravaging-crops-in-guatemala-leaving-millions-on-brink-of-starvation/644613695 .

Tonight (shortly before the interview of Al being broadcast on TV in locality) I told my sister (a JW) that Al will soon be on TV talking about climate change. She said the fact that climate change is happening doesn't surprise her since she knows what the Bible says. She said the Bible (referring to Matthew chapter 24) foretold the drastic climate/environmental changes.

The curve of CO2 levels in the atmosphere, which is included in a chart in post on the first page of this topic thread, confirms the curve that Al Gore included in his environmental books (including the books from many years ago). It also shows that Al was right in projecting continuing rises in of CO2 level, for the years following the years that Al plotted for in his books. When will the climate change deniers wake up and stop denying climate change?!

55

Remember when HITTING A WOMAN was just WRONG!

by pistolpete in

just a few years ago, any man that slapped a women was considered a piece of shit.

today people are are paying and cheering to see a man knocking the shit out of a woman.

what feminists, social warriors, and gender recognition fighters don't realized is that their actions are actually causing the world to revert back to the days when the world treated women as property, second class species, with no rights whatsoever, whose only value was a sex instrument for the male species.

Disillusioned JW

Well I'm making another post in this topic after all.

I read in a book by Michael Shermer (called Why Darwin Matters:The Case Against Intelligent Design) that men contain a vestigial uterus and that such is evidence of evolution! https://vridar.org/2009/06/16/fearfully-and-wonderfully-or-tearfully-and-clumsily-made/ contains a quote about that from the book.The quote about the male vestigial uterus says “Men have the remnant of an undeveloped female reproductive organ that hangs off the prostrate gland for the same reason.”

In looking for more sources pertaining to that I found the article at https://www.cosmopolitan.com/lifestyle/news/a36344/man-discovers-he-has-a-working-womb-and-uterus/ . I recommend that people read it. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostatic_utricle which says the following.

'The prostatic utricle (Latin for "pouch of the prostate") is a small indentation in the prostatic urethra, at the apex of the urethral crest, on the seminal colliculus (verumontanum), laterally flanked by openings of the ejaculatory ducts. It is also known as the vagina masculina or uterus masculinus or (in older literature) vesicula prostatica.[1] ... The prostatic utricle is the homologue of the uterus and vagina ....'