ShirleyW=I think although the issues of credibility the two organizations face are different, they are in essence the same. With regards to doctrinal flip flopping.
http://www.concernedchristians.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=298&Itemid=14
I also believe that the evidence to disprove the Book of Mormon is more substantial and concret. Sure watchtower has had flip flops but they have been that just flip flops. Explained away by new light, greater understanding, human imperfection etc. For instance did christ take up kingship in 1914. I'm buggard if I know and since God ain't saying anything I can't say for sure. We could argue both ways. Where as the with the Book of Mormon and the ideas of smith received under Devine inspiration by heavenly farther can be proven to be false with hard physical evidence. For instance we now know that people don't live on the sun and moon. The physical evidence of the kinderhook plates, and the book of Abraham ( pearls of great price) has clearly shown that Smith had no idea of translation. I think the most damning of all is the physical evidence from mitochondrial DNA which shows the ancient Americans immigrated from North Eastern Asia. For Gods sake you have just got to look at the American indians to see they have no physical charistics of the Jews. When I sort of look into the history of smith and some of his ideas I can't help but think of him as been a charismatic lyer who ended up believing his own lies. I think both religions developed out of the times they lived in. For instance at the time of smith there was speculation about the lost tribes and the American Indian roots. I guess the Book of Mormon was an answer to this. Then a few decades later with the Adventist movement of which the JWs and SDAs developed from. Both Russell and Smith were not immune to a few shady business dealings- perhaps more so with smith.