Posts by EntirelyPossible

I'm sure you do... and I'm sure they aren't. Just surprising, coming from someone who made such a big deal about having nothing to hide, per se. I mean, post as EP, sure. But why not let folks know who you really are?

I don't have anythign to hide. I got banned and never could figure out why. It probably had something to do with me being an impatient judgmental asshole, but I can't be sure. That happened right about the time I started my new job with Dell and I got distracted by other things and it was the playoffs (NFL). You have to understand, unless it's life or death, NOTHING gets in the way of the playoffs.

And there you GO! Perhaps you and I should stick to subject we agree on.

Well that's no fun. As long as we know we can be friends at the end of the day and don't take anything personally (since, at least, on my end, it's never meant personally), there is nothing wrong at all with with a healthy and vigorous disagreement.

Omigosh... what is WRONG with you people?

How much time do you have?

125

The Hobbit and Evolution: So What's Up With That?

by AGuest in

jw
friends

may you all have peace!.

hubby and i happened to catch an episode of "nova" last night.

fascinating stuff.

EntirelyPossible

First, during the program, the statement was made that "there is actually very little known about... and in evidence to support... evolution"

That is clearly not correct. I am sure they didn't make the statement including the ellipsis' that you added in. It seemd you are adding or taking away or attempting to paraphrase on a subject you clearly aren't educated in.

It wasn't that big of a deal to me because, as I stated, it wasn't about evolution... but about the hypocrisy of [primarily] those HERE... who want to hold others to a standard they can't uphold themselves. You know, speaking of standards and all.

So you were innaccurate and not educated on in a thread you started to talk about standards? Pot, kettle, etc.

Dear, dear NVL... peace to you, dear one... and two things: first, why are you posting as "Entirely Possible"? I mean, I quite GLAD that you are; it's an improvement, isn't it, from "Not Very Likely"?

It's quite good to see you too! I have my reasons for posting under this name. They aren't that important.

Second, I told you the truth: you have a drinking problem. While you may having taken the time you spent away from the board to get a grip on it... and I am sorry I had to be the one to point the truth out to you... you really should just own it and move on.

I didn't take time away from the board for any reason. You told me LOTS of things your Lord told you, all of them wrong. Interesting that you would pick that one to bring up. Perhaps the lady doth protest too much? I in fact own EVERYTHING about me. I embrace it. Interesting that you would think I don't.

No one hear is judging you; certainly not me.

I know and appreciate that. I think you happen to be batshit crazy, but I love you nonetheless and would help you out any way I could given the chance. We all have our issues. Mine is primarily being an impatient judgemental asshole that leaps before he looks.

It bothers me that many in religion totally disregard all that is "science", just as much as it bothers me that many who denounce religion (and I am one) totally disregard all that is "spiritual".

Well that is certainly something we can agree on!

125

The Hobbit and Evolution: So What's Up With That?

by AGuest in

jw
friends

may you all have peace!.

hubby and i happened to catch an episode of "nova" last night.

fascinating stuff.

EntirelyPossible

If anyone here wants to understand WHY science is "wrong" and gets updated, read this entry in Bad Astronomy. I have included relevant portions below.

12 Year Old Thinks He Can Prove Einstein Wrong

I first saw it at Time magazine’s site, with the headline "12-Year-Old Genius Expands Einstein’s Theory of Relativity, Thinks He Can Prove It Wrong".

Barnett may very well be a genius, and may very well rewrite a lot of physics… as, no doubt, future generations of genius scientists will. But one thing they won’t do is prove relativity wrong.

Bold statement? Not really. We know relativity is right. It may be incomplete, but it’s not wrong.

What I mean by this isn’t too hard to understand. In science (ideally, if you’ll pardon the pun), an idea becomes a hypothesis, a testable statement. If it passes the test, it can be expanded upon, broadened, tested and retested. Eventually, as it grows and becomes more solid, it becomes a theory — I know, in the general jargon that word means "guess", but to a scientist a theory is an explanation of phenomena so profoundly certain that a layperson would call it a law.

Relativity is just such a theory. It has passed essentially every single test to which it has been put for the past century. It is literally tested millions of times a day in particle accelerators, for example.

As I wrote in a post on relativity and geocentrism:

Relativity is one of the most well-tested and thoroughly solid ideas in all of science for all time. It is literally tested millions of times a day in particle accelerators. We see it in every cosmological observation, every star that explodes in the sky, every time a nuclear power plant generates even an iota of energy. Heck, without relativity your GPS wouldn’t work.
Relativity is so solid, in fact, that anyone who denies it outright at this point can be charitably called a kook.

So I don’t think anyone, young Jacob Barnett or otherwise, will ever prove relativity to be wrong. What they might do, what I think and hope someone eventually will do, is show how it’s incomplete.

Put it this way: Isaac Newton formulated his Universal Law of Gravitation, and it revolutionized physics and astronomy, allowing us to apply math to the thorny issue of gravity. Newton’s Law is still valid today, four centuries later. However, it’s limited to a regime where masses are small and velocities low. If you want to calculate the Moon’s effect on Earth, Newton is the way to go. We still use his basic equations to plot the trajectories of our spacecraft, and they ply the solar system’s gravitational pathways with incredible precision.

But when you start to approach the speed of light, or deal with masses that are very large, Newton’s math breaks down. It doesn’t work.

Einstein fixed that. His Theory of Relativity uses far more complex math that can deal with these large velocities and masses, and get you the correct answers. When you look at Einstein’s equations for low velocities and small masses, they simplify right down to what Newton wrote. Newton wasn’t wrong, he was incomplete.

Einstein added to Newton, made the math more accurate. The thing is, we know relativity is incomplete right now. In the realm of the very, very small, relativity has some issues with quantum mechanics. QM is just as solid as relativity as theories go. Atomic bombs make that clear, as well as digital camera, electronics in general, and on and on. Obviously, one or both of QM and relativity are incomplete.

Again, we know they are not wrong — not like creationism is wrong, or astrology and Geocentrism are wrong, in that they don’t explain anything and all the evidence is against them — but just that we don’t know everything about them yet. There may be some bigger idea, some broader concept that unifies them, and reduces to either one if you use the right conditions, just as relativity reduces to Newton’s law in certain circumstances.

I am very much looking forward to seeing what Barnett can do in the next few years. If he can garner the insight and the imagination needed to marry QM and relativity, to unite these two seemingly immiscible fields, then I will happily cheer him on as he accepts his Nobel Prize. But that’s a whole different ballgame than proving it wrong.

125

The Hobbit and Evolution: So What's Up With That?

by AGuest in

jw
friends

may you all have peace!.

hubby and i happened to catch an episode of "nova" last night.

fascinating stuff.

EntirelyPossible

Imagined, no. Divine, I believe so. Mumbles? Ummmmm... more like clear whispers, dear one. Mumbles aren't very clear. Whispers, while low, can be clear. These were.

You might want to check your divine receptor for hearing. You claimed the things you hear from your Lord were always right, however, on no less that 3 occasions said your Lord Jemimah Maple Syrup told you things about me that were 100% incorrect.

And no, I am not going to go back and cite them. As you so eloquently said earlier to dismiss your errors, "To try and hold the board to a "university" standard is... absurd"

And you still never apologized to Cofty for claiming he was the one slinging mud when you were the one that started calling names and dishonestly attempted to blame it on him. Does your Lord Jemimah Maple Syrup like it when you lie and then blame others and then, when called on it, don't apologize or admit your error? If he allows it, this might be an example of the false stylus of the scribes that claimed to hear the voice of the Lord you often refer to when dismissing the parts of the bible you don't like (and then routinely quote from when convenient).

3

I'm Now A Member Of JwTalk.net.

by Philadelphia Ponos in

jw
friends

to my surprise my membership was approved for jwtalk.net, which is to my knowledge the only forum with "real" jws.

after reading through a few threads it appears that these jws believe in the watchtower 100% and i don't see any signs of doubt or borderline apostate comments like some other past pro-jw forums.

are any of you guys members of jwtalk.net and actively posting.

EntirelyPossible

I am a member and I find it ridiculous, but also informative of what my ex is attemping to fill my kids heads with. Keep your friend close and your enemies closer.

34

Just saw with MY OWN eyes the JWs have THEIR OWN Bible!

by FollowedMyHeart in

first, i wouldn't have seen this w/o simon's jwn, publishingcult's bible humor thread, sweetbabycheezits' non stamp collector link, and non stamp collector.

i've always heard this, but this is the first time i've actually seen it for myself!.

jephthah and his daughter.

EntirelyPossible

You're hot. Let's talk ;)

125

The Hobbit and Evolution: So What's Up With That?

by AGuest in

jw
friends

may you all have peace!.

hubby and i happened to catch an episode of "nova" last night.

fascinating stuff.

EntirelyPossible

Sigh. As if you don't consider that already dear EP (peace to you... and don't YOU sound "familiar"!). The only thing that stops "you" from actually doing it is the board rules. So, come off it already.

As if you already know what I consider. And the rules wouldn't stop me if I felt a need to call you a name. They rarely do. Stop playing the constant victim. Come off it already. And I AM familiar, love :)

Ummmmm... isn't that what the WTBTS... the Vatican... the Council of Churches... and most of the rest of them say? How, then, is science different in this regard?

No, it's not what they say. They say "This is the infallible word of God" until it isn't. Science says "this is out current best understanding, and it will almost certainly change as we learn more."

"You" do. Others not necessarily. My point, however, is... how is changing "light" based on the exposure of MISTAKES... DIFFERENT?

Yes, you do trust in science. Every time you go to the doctor, watch TV, use a computer, get on a plane, make a call, use your GPS, use a microwave, eat food, drive a car, listen to the radio, walk down the street, put on your clothes, use the restroom or drink a glass of water you are trusting to science that you don't necessarily believe in. To have the opportunity and means to educate yourself and not do so is to be willfully, puposefully and laughably ignorant.

To answer your "point", which is more of a question, is that science START from the position of "we don't know as much as we can" and methodically moves towards better and more accurate answers. Religion is still debating the same questions from 10000 years ago with no firm or verifiable method of obtaining a single answer and, if the answer proves to be deficient, has no method for refining it.

You think I disrespected Cofty. Nope. I only gave Cofty what s/he said should be the case: a name shouldn't matter.

Liar liar pants on fire. You said exactly "Perhaps, but I am choosing to call you "Coffy" and since an accurate name doesn't matter, I expect you to respond when I do. Otherwise, I'll be forced to consider you a nasty slang name for the male genital appendage". Purposefully maligning someone's name that is talking to you and then using sexual slurs is disrespecting someone.

The ISSUE is one camp decrying the changes in statements of "fact" of another, while they themselves change "fact."

Total BS. It has been explained to you many times that, in science, "facts" are the current best understanding of the best evidence obtainable and that it IS a fact that more often than not, a better understanding will come along along with better evidence. Your current willful misunderstanding and constant denial of that is comical, and not in the good way.

You are mistaken, dear Twitch (peace to you!). Unfortunately, dear Cofty started the "dance"; I merely followed his/her "lead." You are just unaware of all that was posted... and, obviously, dear Cofty wasn't going to step up and clear it up. Which I knew. Which is why I posted to him/her as I did.

Pure and total BS. After you got his name wrong, Cofty posted "Its Cofty" with respect to his/her name. You didn't follow, you started the music and jumped onto the dance floor by threatening to call him/her a dick. You slung the mud there, sister. To suggest otherwise is an outright lie. There was nothing for Cofty to clear up. You slung that mud and are now trying to blame him and are suggesting you were following his lead. BS.

164

looky looky - A 'real' J-dub forum! (are they becoming normal???)

by Reality79 in

jw
friends

so did the 'da society' give these dub internet savvies permission to start a forum?

because last i checked, the ole boys in their oversized brooklyn bunker didn't want their members on the internet unless it was to view their own official websites.

i thought maybe it was an apostate forum until i read their long winded, typically condescending jdub style membership guidelines:.

EntirelyPossible

Why didn't krettnawe come back to address my post? (s)He(?) said I would never be able to find anything that showed the WT said the preaching work would be concluded before 2000 and I did. Whence the response?

125

The Hobbit and Evolution: So What's Up With That?

by AGuest in

jw
friends

may you all have peace!.

hubby and i happened to catch an episode of "nova" last night.

fascinating stuff.

EntirelyPossible

whereami, I knew I had seen that pic, just couldn't find it. great picture, consider credit given :)

watersprout, I don't see what was wrong with that. Shelby WAS acting rude toward cofty with regard to his name. Yeah, she puts up with a lot, but hey, when you tell people your Lord is whispering in her ear about them, what do you expect? Call a spade a spade and move on.