The literature produced by Jehovah's Witnesses is so often mistaken on matters of basic science that I thought it might be fun to do a daily feature on the subject.
I'll preface this first installment with a little explanation:
"Why pick on the JW's, Tom? Why not comb through old issues of Ensign and point out embarrassing things printed by The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter Day Saints?"
I can think of several good reasons:
First:
even though Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses are similar in some respects, the leadership of the Mormon church at least has the sense to differentiate between human teachers and alleged divine guidance. Most of what they print falls into the former category while the mantle of prophet is reserved only for special occasions. This at least gives them a graceful way to correct most mistakes. --Simply acknowledge them, thank the person or persons who offered the correction and move on.The JW's have no such escape because everything is published under the anonymous guise of "Spirit Direction" and questioning any of it can potentially result in ostracisim for the average JW. JW's have in fact, explicitly been instructed not to be critical of publications provided by the parent organizations because this would constitute a lack of appreciation towards God himself.
Second:
unlike the JW's most other churches heartily embrace and encourage secondary education. Consequently you will find far less ignorance in their publications JW's reject the very thing that would help them.Third:
I know of very few religions besides the JW's that stubbornly attempt to back up controversial positions, like the transfusion medicine taboo, with science and scientific opinion rather than as pure matters of faith. Although it would be a logical fallacy to judge the accuracy of a specific argument based on other mistakes, a consideration of these mistakes may nevertheless promote a little healthy caution when quasi medical arguments are presented in JW literature.Fourth
, the JW organization is not the least bit shy about self-praise when it comes to the type and quality of research that goes into their publications. This propensity of self adulation not only invites, but to some degree justifies a more thorough scrutiny of publication content than might otherwise be given.With all this in mind, here's the JW science quote of the day:
This is taken from the article, "The Virgin Birth --Can You Believe It?" appearing in the February 15th, 1982 issue of The Watchtower.
The diagram on page 5 reads:
"A female's egg contains two X chromosomes. The male sperm cell has an X and a Y."
This statement is completely wrong. As any high school biology student could tell you, this would be true for normal (Diploid) cells in females and males, but it is not true for mature gametes, which are haploid.
In other words, the female's egg contains only one X chromosome. The male sperm cell has either an X or a Y, but not both.
The point of this article was that Jesus could not have been the result of parthenogenesis since he was male. (i.e. Mary by herself could not have provided him with a Y chromosome) This suggests that the incorrect statement may simply have been an error of wording. However since the JW organization declined to acknowledge, let alone correct this mistake when it was pointed out, we have to assume that they meant what they said. It was subsequently reproduced in the yearly bound volume for all posterity to read and thus became fair game for the JW science quote of the day.
Tomorrow: "The China Syndrome"