Posts by Disillusioned JW

86

Is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the WT, charlatanism?

by Disillusioned JW in

is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the wt, charlatanism?.

https://www.fullmoon.nu/sources.bak/chapter%2010/part%202/gish%20exposed.html [which has an article called "creationism: bad science or immoral pseudoscience?

- (an expose of creationist dr. duane gish)"] says the following.. 'a look at the "scientific" creationist movement and a close examination of the tactics of a well-known and influential creationist will reveal that the creation "science" movement gains much of its strength through the use of distortion and scientifically unethical tactics.. .... with the facts explained and the lawsuits won, scientists declared victory and returned to their labs and offices.

Disillusioned JW

Vidqun, in the lab nature has often been observed forming complexity out of simplicity - simply from a combination of the laws of nature (and it forces), randomness, and the presence of a little energy. For example, complex molecules have been observed coming into existence from very simple molecules under simple environmental conditions. This is largely due to the electric charges of the atoms of various elements, which only allow certain elements to bond in certain configurations with certain atoms. As an illustration of this concept, see the video from PBS show called "Genius by Stephen Hawking" at https://www.pbs.org/video/genius-stephen-hawking-how-atoms-are-created-magnet-experiment/ . The nature of the carbon atom allows it to form complex molecular chains - far more so than the atom of any element can. Scientists discovered that organic chemistry is the chemistry of carbon based molecules.

To me abiogenesis is a strong possibility, so much so I am convinced it happened more than 3.5 billion years ago. I am even surprised that scientists haven't yet seen it happen in their simulated environments of their labs.

86

Is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the WT, charlatanism?

by Disillusioned JW in

is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the wt, charlatanism?.

https://www.fullmoon.nu/sources.bak/chapter%2010/part%202/gish%20exposed.html [which has an article called "creationism: bad science or immoral pseudoscience?

- (an expose of creationist dr. duane gish)"] says the following.. 'a look at the "scientific" creationist movement and a close examination of the tactics of a well-known and influential creationist will reveal that the creation "science" movement gains much of its strength through the use of distortion and scientifically unethical tactics.. .... with the facts explained and the lawsuits won, scientists declared victory and returned to their labs and offices.

Disillusioned JW

waton, are you saying you believe a god exists and that the god is a female, or are you saying you believe in pantheism (of the kind which says that the universe/cosmos really is a god or is the God), or something else? I believe in scientific naturalism - no supernatural beings at all. I also believe that of everything which exists, and of everyone who exists, the universe/cosmos comes the closest to fitting the definition of the word "god". That is because it exists everywhere that something exists, and it contains within it all of the power and all of the knowledge that exists. As such, it comes the closest to being a 3 O (omnipresence, omnipotence, and omniscience) type of god.

In addition knowledge of the existence of quantum entanglement and of what is called the "fabric of the universe" adds support to the idea that universe is one entity (in some ways like a living organism/being) made up of many interconnected parts - even when the interconnections are invisible to us.

86

Is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the WT, charlatanism?

by Disillusioned JW in

is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the wt, charlatanism?.

https://www.fullmoon.nu/sources.bak/chapter%2010/part%202/gish%20exposed.html [which has an article called "creationism: bad science or immoral pseudoscience?

- (an expose of creationist dr. duane gish)"] says the following.. 'a look at the "scientific" creationist movement and a close examination of the tactics of a well-known and influential creationist will reveal that the creation "science" movement gains much of its strength through the use of distortion and scientifically unethical tactics.. .... with the facts explained and the lawsuits won, scientists declared victory and returned to their labs and offices.

Disillusioned JW

In an article from 2014 Bill Nye (see https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/04/science/in-undeniable-bill-nye-speaks-evolution-directly-to-creationists.html) makes the following excellent point.

"My biggest concern about creationist kids is that they’re compelled to suppress their common sense, to suppress their critical thinking skills at a time in human history when we need them more than ever. By the time you’re 18, you’ve made up your mind. It’s going to be really hard for you, as they say in the Mormon tradition, to “lose your testimony.” But if you’re 7 or 8, we got a shot."

The WT literature definitely hindered my ability (by causing me to suppress my common sense in some areas) to draw the correction conclusion that evolution is a fact and that there is no Jehovah God and no heavenly Jesus Christ. If only I had become convinced of evolution during my preteens, then I would never had become a baptized JW and never a baptized Christian and my life would be better off as a result! Even now, despite being an atheist, I still study religion (though it is now from an atheistic mindset).

86

Is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the WT, charlatanism?

by Disillusioned JW in

is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the wt, charlatanism?.

https://www.fullmoon.nu/sources.bak/chapter%2010/part%202/gish%20exposed.html [which has an article called "creationism: bad science or immoral pseudoscience?

- (an expose of creationist dr. duane gish)"] says the following.. 'a look at the "scientific" creationist movement and a close examination of the tactics of a well-known and influential creationist will reveal that the creation "science" movement gains much of its strength through the use of distortion and scientifically unethical tactics.. .... with the facts explained and the lawsuits won, scientists declared victory and returned to their labs and offices.

Disillusioned JW

Anony Mous, had the word "created" in quote marks, suggesting it was not really created by humans but that humans merely created a favorable environment for nature (undirected by any intelligence) to bring into being the various chemicals.

24

From Paradise Lost To Paradise Regained: Is the WTS the sole promoter of this doctrine?

by Pallbearer in

howdy folks,.

i am interested in learning whether or not the watchtower society is the only religious entity that teaches the "from paradise lost to paradise regained" idea.. the "idea" is that god's original purpose for man and the earth has not changed.

god purposed for adam and eve and their offspring to reproduce and fill the earth and live forever upon it; but the problem of sin entered into the picture and temporarily interrupted that purpose from being completed.

Disillusioned JW

Pallbearer, those are excellent points you made. It would indeed be bizarre for the god (God), assuming he exists, to totally destroy the entire physical heavens and the entire supernatural/spiritual heavens, assuming the latter exists, especially in light of Genesis chapter one saying that Elohim's/God's creations were good.

86

Is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the WT, charlatanism?

by Disillusioned JW in

is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the wt, charlatanism?.

https://www.fullmoon.nu/sources.bak/chapter%2010/part%202/gish%20exposed.html [which has an article called "creationism: bad science or immoral pseudoscience?

- (an expose of creationist dr. duane gish)"] says the following.. 'a look at the "scientific" creationist movement and a close examination of the tactics of a well-known and influential creationist will reveal that the creation "science" movement gains much of its strength through the use of distortion and scientifically unethical tactics.. .... with the facts explained and the lawsuits won, scientists declared victory and returned to their labs and offices.

Disillusioned JW

Anony Mous, I also would like to see the science journal article or at least a science news article about RNA and DNA being created completely from scratch under simulations of early Earth-like conditions, for I am not aware of such having been accomplished. I am aware of scientists partially creating RNA under such conditions but I don't know if its specific code (that which was created under early Earth-like conditions) is biologically useful.

I know they have created genetic material using enzymes extracted from living organisms, but that is not the same as demonstrating an aspect of abiogenesis. I also have the impression they have not solved the protein folding problem. It also appears that they have not made a true cell membrane from scratch though they have made proteinoid microspheres. It also appears they have not made complete ribosomes from scratch.

What you said about a Turing-complete computer having been made is news to me.

24

From Paradise Lost To Paradise Regained: Is the WTS the sole promoter of this doctrine?

by Pallbearer in

howdy folks,.

i am interested in learning whether or not the watchtower society is the only religious entity that teaches the "from paradise lost to paradise regained" idea.. the "idea" is that god's original purpose for man and the earth has not changed.

god purposed for adam and eve and their offspring to reproduce and fill the earth and live forever upon it; but the problem of sin entered into the picture and temporarily interrupted that purpose from being completed.

Disillusioned JW

Regarding those mainstream non-JW churches that teach a literal 1,000 year reign of Christ, do they believe that Earth will become totally destroyed and later replaced with a totally different new Earth, or do they believe our Earth will become severely damaged and then fully restored/repaired (and made better than it ever was) and made new in that sense? Likewise do they believe the heavens (where they say God lives?) will be completely destroyed and replaced with a totally different new heavens, or do they mean some other kind of heavens will be destroyed?

Furthermore, if all faithful Christians go to heaven upon death and if they all later rule with Christ for 1,000 years in heaven, what point would there be for them to later return to Earth and live the rest of their lives on Earth in paradise instead of in heaven? Also, why does Revelation say that the God will literally dwell on Earth after the 1,000 years?

I really want answers to the above questions because I have been very puzzled by what the non-JW churches say about that topic and also by some of what the Bible (especially in Revelation) says on that topic.

86

Is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the WT, charlatanism?

by Disillusioned JW in

is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the wt, charlatanism?.

https://www.fullmoon.nu/sources.bak/chapter%2010/part%202/gish%20exposed.html [which has an article called "creationism: bad science or immoral pseudoscience?

- (an expose of creationist dr. duane gish)"] says the following.. 'a look at the "scientific" creationist movement and a close examination of the tactics of a well-known and influential creationist will reveal that the creation "science" movement gains much of its strength through the use of distortion and scientifically unethical tactics.. .... with the facts explained and the lawsuits won, scientists declared victory and returned to their labs and offices.

Disillusioned JW

Though Francis Hitching is convinced of biological evolution (but not of natural selection) the http://www.jwoolfden.com/procreat.html website gives criticism of his The Neck of the Giraffe book in addition to the books of various creationist authors, but I think that Hitching's book has a lot of informative accurate content. [To my surprise I haven't yet been able to find any online article written by an evolutionist (whether by a scientist or by a non-scientist) about Hitching's book which which says anything positive about the book. Granted Hitching's book promotes some incorrect ideas, but a lot of the content of the book is factual and important information.] In Hitching's book called The Neck of the Giraffe Hitching said that Bowden's book called Apemen - Fact of Fallacy? is the best of the creationist books, yet http://www.jwoolfden.com/procreat.html sharply criticizes that creationist book.

86

Is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the WT, charlatanism?

by Disillusioned JW in

is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the wt, charlatanism?.

https://www.fullmoon.nu/sources.bak/chapter%2010/part%202/gish%20exposed.html [which has an article called "creationism: bad science or immoral pseudoscience?

- (an expose of creationist dr. duane gish)"] says the following.. 'a look at the "scientific" creationist movement and a close examination of the tactics of a well-known and influential creationist will reveal that the creation "science" movement gains much of its strength through the use of distortion and scientifically unethical tactics.. .... with the facts explained and the lawsuits won, scientists declared victory and returned to their labs and offices.

Disillusioned JW

Is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the WT, charlatanism?

https://www.fullmoon.nu/sources.bak/CHAPTER%2010/PART%202/gish%20exposed.html [which has an article called "Creationism: Bad Science or Immoral Pseudoscience? - (an expose of creationist Dr. Duane Gish)"] says the following.

'A look at the "scientific" creationist movement and a close examination of the tactics of a well-known and influential creationist will reveal that the creation "science" movement gains much of its strength through the use of distortion and scientifically unethical tactics.

...

With the facts explained and the lawsuits won, scientists declared victory and returned to their labs and offices. But stubbornly, the creationist movement refused to die. Scientists had misjudged their opponents because they had assessed the creationist arguments from a scientific standpoint. Many failed to realize that it is not facts or theories that drive the creationist machine; it is strong religious beliefs, and the need to protect traditional lifestyles and values from the threat of secularism and "godless" evolution. Because of this, creationists do not use the methods of science to spread their message. They rely on charisma, religious faith, and emotional appeals which depict evolution as a destroyer of society (LaHaye 1974) and evolutionists as materialistic atheists who conspire to suppress creationism while hiding the many supposed weaknesses of evolution (Gish 1990a).

In recent years, some scientists have implied or stated that creationists regularly use distortion and deception when promoting creationism (Kitcher 1984; Godfrey 1984). For example, Tim Berra, a zoology professor at Ohio State University has stated: "The arguments of these fundamentalist missionaries often involve tortured logic, a stubborn denial of the evidence, a shallow understanding, or a reckless disregard for the truth" (1990: 125-126). Do creationists knowingly use deception to promote their cause?

...

According to the book, The Creationist Movement in Modern America, the psychology of creationists is very different from that of evolutionists (Eve and Harrold 1991). The authors say that creationists tend to perceive the world through the filter of their religious beliefs, and they differ from their opponents in "their most profound understandings of reality, religion, American society, and the nature of the scientific enterprise" (pp. 67).

In light of that perspective, it is not surprising that some people who have met or debated Gish have come to the conclusion that he is not knowingly dishonest.'

http://www.jwoolfden.com/procreat.html says the following.

'APE-MEN: FACT OR FALLACY?
Bowden, M.
c.1977, Sovereign Publications
ISBN: 0-9506042-0-8
An all-out attack on paleoanthropology, heavily criticizing all aspects of the evidence for human evolution. Besides being hopelessly mistaken in many areas, it's mostly obsolete since so many new finds and reinterpretations have been made in paleoanthro since 1977.

...

EVOLUTION: THE FOSSILS SAY NO!*
Gish, Duane
c.1978, Creation-Life Publishers
ISBN: 0-89051-046-6
Duane Gish has written three books in an ongoing attempt to discredit the fossil record as evidence for evolution. This was the first of the three. Long on polemics and short on details, riddled with mistakes in the few facts it does offer, this book shows little evidence that Gish really understands the details of the topics he is attacking.

EVOLUTION: THE CHALLENGE OF THE FOSSIL RECORD
Gish, Duane
c.1985, Creation-Life Publishers
ISBN: 0-89051-112-8
Despite the different title, this is really just a rewrite or update of Evolution: The Fossils Say No! Like the earlier version, it's full of errors of many kinds.

EVOLUTION: THE FOSSILS STILL SAY NO!
Gish, Duane T.
c.1995, ICR
ISBN: 0-89051-112-8
The third and (so far) latest version of Gish's ongoing attack on the fossil record as support for evolution. Like the two earlier versions, it's full of mistakes and fallacies of many kinds. It's interesting to note that this book is nearly twice the size of Evolution: The Challenge of the Fossil Record, which itself was twice the size of the first edition, Evolution: The Fossils Say No! The books keep getting longer because the collection of fossil evidence that supports evolution, which Gish is trying to refute, keeps getting larger.'

Months ago I saw the book EVOLUTION: THE CHALLENGE OF THE FOSSIL RECORD at a thrift store and I thought of buying it, but I decided against doing so because I suspected it likely has numerous false and misleading claims in it, and I didn't want to spend a lot of time fact checking it. Due to what the article called "Creationism: Bad Science or Immoral Pseudoscience? - (an expose of creationist Dr. Duane Gish)" says it looks like I made a wise choice to not purchase that book. However, studying Gish's book would have caused me to see specific examples of the extent of the flaws of creationist statements about evolution, as well as seeing some problems with evolutionism. The WT in its criticisms of evolution and evolutionism is considerably influenced by creationist literature.

14

Which WT book (or booklet) has illustrations of prehistoric animals?

by Disillusioned JW in

i remember that i once saw a wt book (or maybe a booklet) which in depicting one or two of the creative days of genesis had illustrations depicting now extinct prehistoric animals.

which publication was that?

i think the illustrations were of a 1950s or 1960s style.. update: i found it.

Disillusioned JW

dropoffyourkeylee, I wonder if the WT stopped making illustrations of prehistoric animals and prehistoric plants in depictions of the 5th and the 6th creative days because it might suggest to many people's minds (such as mine) the idea that life on Earth has existed for millions of years and that animals and plants have evolved over time. What do you think about that?

Some of the prehistoric animals shown in some of the illustrations are also classic examples of evidence of evolution shown in pro-evolution science books [as transitional forms, or as evolutionary 'cousins' of ancestors of current species].