Posts by konceptual99

43

Chelmsford is green-lighted

by Saltheart Foamfollower in

looks like chelmsford is going ahead after all.

here is the text of a letter to be read out this week:.

to all congregations in britain and irelandre: branch relocation project updatedear brothers:we rejoice to inform you that in june of this year, the governing body gave approval for thebritain branch to relocate to new facilities that will be constructed just south of chelmsford.

konceptual99

The far right residential buildings essentially remain but are cut to three rows and not four. Look at the pond for reference. The two big sets of blocks to the left go.

Also going:

printery (now a much smaller warehouse)
maintenance building
offices below printery
indoor recreation
sports pavilion
laundry
office development smaller
residential services (now offices)
infirmary (maybe smaller allowance elsewhere)

It looks like the auditorium is remaining.

Accommodation looks roughly 1/4 of the original size (around 1200 residents and guests)

43

Chelmsford is green-lighted

by Saltheart Foamfollower in

looks like chelmsford is going ahead after all.

here is the text of a letter to be read out this week:.

to all congregations in britain and irelandre: branch relocation project updatedear brothers:we rejoice to inform you that in june of this year, the governing body gave approval for thebritain branch to relocate to new facilities that will be constructed just south of chelmsford.

konceptual99

New site...

43

Chelmsford is green-lighted

by Saltheart Foamfollower in

looks like chelmsford is going ahead after all.

here is the text of a letter to be read out this week:.

to all congregations in britain and irelandre: branch relocation project updatedear brothers:we rejoice to inform you that in june of this year, the governing body gave approval for thebritain branch to relocate to new facilities that will be constructed just south of chelmsford.

konceptual99

Just trying to upload some comparison images... taking ages....

532

I conclude evolution is guided

by KateWild in

your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.

k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.

in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.

konceptual99

Looks like we are going round in circles. It seems you are not really interested in understanding my perspective. I started this thread to explain my conclusions and I have done that.

Er... no you haven't. I am very interested in your perspective but you keep stonewalling any questions that seek to understand why you have come to your conclusion. You used a very specific example yet all you have explained is that you think the process could be being guided by God. You haven't answered why you think that conclusion is more probable and what your reasoning was that led you to that conclusion. The fact that I keep asking for more information is proof I am very interested in understanding your perspective.

As I have already said to Bhom, in my view it's more probable.

Why is is it more probable?

I don't want to convince people that my view is correct. I want to encourage free thinking. Science has the facts and science is impartial. People then are free draw their own conclusions.

Whatever you say I am still free to draw my own conclusion.
An avowed atheist might say "I have drawn the conclusion that natural selection is a valid and reasonable explanation for all the molecules being left handed because the hypothesis is not disproven by the facts and follows the pattern of scientific explanation for many, many other and similar bio-chemical processes."
You are currently saying ""I have drawn the conclusion that guidance from a deity is a valid and reasonable explanation for all the molecules being left handed" and there it seems to stop. There is no "because" and when asked for your reason you claim the your statement is reason enough, just go off and make your own mind up.
I can still make my mind up. I still don't understand how you made yours up and I really, really, really am really, really, really interested to do so.

43

Kids continue to leave in droves - so what is the organization's grand plan? This

by sir82 in

jw
friends

jws have one of the worst, if not the worst, retention rates among their kids.

i've seen numbers from 65% to 88% who leave, never to return.. you'd think this would be a priority amongst the leadership, right?

where do tomorrow's leaders come from, if the vast majority of kids leave the organization?

konceptual99

Use emotional videos at RCs to reinforce fear, obligation and guilt.

532

I conclude evolution is guided

by KateWild in

your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.

k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.

in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.

konceptual99

Just to add, right now the argument seems circular....

1. Kate - The auto catalystic nature of L/H molecule creation leads me to conclude it is being guided by God.

2. Others - why?

3. Kate - see 1.

I have an open mind Kate and am happy to be convinced. The question is what can you add to your argument that convinces? I don't have to think differently to you, I could be persuaded to think the same as you but what is the reason that I should? Why should I not accept that the L/H molecule thing is a product of natural selection? What are the weaknesses in that conclusion?

532

I conclude evolution is guided

by KateWild in

your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.

k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.

in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.

konceptual99

Indeed. I am not interested in having an argument about the merits of one conclusion or another.

Kate - your OP uses the example of process that L/H molecules come into existence by. If I understand your OP the fact that this is an auto-catalytic process where the reaction is the catalyst for further reactions leads you to conclude that God is guiding this process.

Given that there is an alternative and reasonable explanation, why is it that you have concluded God is guiding it?

532

I conclude evolution is guided

by KateWild in

your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.

k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.

in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.

konceptual99

But why is it your conclusion? There is no need to attribute it to a God as there is a perfectly acceptable reason suggested by natural selection. I agree that in itself is no proof that NS is responsible but it does fit with the rest of science. Many, many, many other lines of scientific evidence show zero need for a God so what is it about the creation of L/H molecules that make you conclude that God is guiding this chemical process?

532

I conclude evolution is guided

by KateWild in

your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.

k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.

in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.

konceptual99

Good point, this is exactly what Bhom's conclusion is too. I think both perspectives are valid, but neither are absolute yet. In time science will have conclusive evidence, until then we can only draw conclusions from what we have.

I'm not drawing any conclusions as yet. I've understood the flow of the argument such that the presence of just L/H in living things does not disprove natural selection as the process that determined this. Equally it is not possible to disprove this result as being due to the guidance of a deity.

The question then is why you think it is guided? Why does the evidence lead you to that conclusion. The process in itself can be the result of natural selection, it doesn't need a "god of the gaps". So why the need to attribute it to a deity?

532

I conclude evolution is guided

by KateWild in

your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.

k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.

in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.

konceptual99

So what is your conclusion?

I don't know Kate. I don't understand the subject enough to see there being a problem with this at all. Is the dominance of L/H molecules a problem? Is this simply just a case of natural selection at work? Are you saying that something is guiding the chemical process so that only L/H molecules are formed in living things? Why can this not be natural selection?