by AuldSoul 12 Replies latest jw friends
Drew,
I hope you don't mind my blowing your cover like this. If so, please forgive and I will request the thread removed.
Forum,
For those who didn't know, unless Carl Sagan had a long lost twin, or a clone generated from cryogenically stored cellular material, or a son by a woman who also looked remarkably like himself: Drew Sagan's avatar is a picture of Carl Sagan.
Respectfully,
AuldSoul
For comparison purposes:
I don't mind at all! To many people actually think that's me. I guess I should have used a picture of Ben Stiller or something, somebody a little more familiar.
Long live Carl, the great skeptic that he was. He is one of the biggest reasons I started to question the WTS. I remember reading this quote a long time ago (so it seems now):
Doctrines that make no predictions are less compelling than those which make correct predictions; they are in turn more successful than doctrines that make false predictions.
But not always. One prominent American religion confidently predicted that the world would end in 1914. Well, 1914 has come and gone, and -- while the events of that year were certainly of some importance -- the world does not, at least so far as I can see, seem to have ended. There are at least three responses that an organized religion can make in the face of such a failed and fundamental prophecy. They could have said, "Oh, did we say '1914'? So sorry, we meant '2014.' A slight error in calculation. Hope you weren't inconvenienced in any way." But they did not. They could have said, "Well, the world would have ended, except we prayed very hard and interceded with God so He spared the Earth." But they did not. Instead, they did something much more ingenious.
They announced that the world had in fact ended in 1914, and if the rest of us hadn't noticed, that was our lookout. It is astonishing in the face of such transparent evasions that this religion has any adherents at all. But religions are tough. Either they make no contentions which are subject to disproof or they quickly redesign doctrine after disproof. The fact that religions can be so shamelessly dishonest, so contemptuous of the intelligence of their adherents, and still flourish does not speak very well for the tough-mindedness of the believers. But it does indicate, if a demonstration were needed, that near the core of the religious experience is something remarkably resistant to rational inquiry.
Something to add: Thanks to everybody who actually thought that the picture was really me. I know some of you felt I had guts in putting my face out there, well the truth is that i'm a weenie. Sorry, I guess the myth is over.
small world -- I actually went to Cornell, and used to walk by his house. I also know a JW that did some contracting work on his house too.
-silent
So is that Carl Sagon on the blog? I just thought the name sounded familiar, but lot of people have the same name. I never knew what Carl Sagon looked like. So you are a skeptic?
There are at least three responses that an organized religion can make in the face of such a failed and fundamental prophecy. They could have said, "Oh, did we say '1914'? So sorry, we meant '2014.' A slight error in calculation. Hope you weren't inconvenienced in any way." But they did not. They could have said, "Well, the world would have ended, except we prayed very hard and interceded with God so He spared the Earth." But they did not. Instead, they did something much more ingenious.
They announced that the world had in fact ended in 1914
Interesting that they couldn't pull that one again in 1975, so instead went one better, blamed the membership and denied ever saying the world would end in 1975.
They are slowly running out of options.
Ah yes, the one after which the scientific unit the SAGAN is named!!!
[Sagan: a unit of measure of large numbers; billl-yunnnz and billl-yunnnz...]
Mustang
Drew,
I like what I saw from Carl with one exception. I wish he had not applied Drake's Equation-esque mathematics to the impacts of thermonuclear war. In a large way, his use of it inspired the application of that sort of calculation to global warming. Such calculations are antithetical to skepticism. I felt betrayed, a bit. But only a bit.
Respectfully,
AuldSoul
Drew,
Just to say, you come across as a really nice guy and I enjoy reading your posts.
Chris
