HOTBLOODED/COLDBLOOED ANIMALS

by badboy 5 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  badboy

  What is jw theory on why some animals are hotblooded and some animals are coldblooded?
• 

  Gregor

  Not sure I recall any WT position on this BadBoy. But it is interesting that the dinosaurs were for a long time considered reptiles (cold b) but in the past few years there has been a very strong theory that they were, for the most part, of the bird familly (hot b).

  ps. The JW's don't have "theories" they have the "Truth" (until they change it)
• 

  cameo-d

  Mammals evolved from reptiles, that's for sure. Primitive living mammals, the monotremes (platypus and spiny anteaters) clearly show this, via many traits, like egg-laying, bones, and... even their penises.

  But the reptiles from which mammals evolved no longer exist. In fact, if birds evolved from dinosaurs the reptiles from which the mammals evolved disappeared even before them. In fact, they ruled the Earth before the emergence of the dinosaurs. Because they have already many traits hinting to mammals (like differentiated teeth), they were called mammalian reptiles. Some of them are presented here:
  http://news.softpedia.com/news/Top-7-Mammal-Like-Reptiles-83841.shtml

  Gregor: "But it is interesting that the dinosaurs were for a long time considered reptiles (cold b) but in the past few years there has been a very strong theory that they were, for the most part, of the bird familly (hot b)."

  This article says the pterosaurs were a "missing link". (http://news.softpedia.com/newsTag/reptile)

  Besides birds and bats, the only true flying vertebrates ever were a group of reptiles contemporaneous to dinosaurs, called pterosaurs. They were the first flying vertebrates (appeared 215 million years ago) that had wings make of skin similar to those of bats, but sustained only by one finger.

  I would think WT might lump these theories under evolution. And of course would combat that with

  Although evolution is usually presented in scientific language, it is really a religious doctrine. It teaches a philosophy of life and an attitude toward God. Its beliefs are subtly attractive to mankind’s selfish, independent tendencies.

  Teachers of evolution are often motivated, not by the facts, but by “their own desires”—perhaps a desire to be accepted by a scientific community in which evolution is orthodox doctrine.

  Professor of biochemistry Michael Behe, who has spent most of his life studying the complex internal functions of living cells, explained that those who teach the evolution of cell structure have no basis for their claims. Could evolution occur at this tiny, molecular level? “Molecular evolution is not based on scientific authority,” he wrote. “There is no publication in the scientific literature—in prestigious journals, specialty journals, or books—that describes how molecular evolution of any real, complex, biochemical system either did occur or even might have occurred. . . . The assertion of Darwinian molecular evolution is merely bluster.”

  http://www.watchtower.org/e/20080101a/article_01.htm

  As far as this "professor" that WT quotes, this is what wiki says:

  Behe's claims about the irreducible complexity of essential cellular structures are roundly rejected by the scientific community. The Department of Biological Sciences at Lehigh University has published an official position statement which says "It is our collective position that intelligent design has no basis in science, has not been tested experimentally, and should not be regarded as scientific." [ 1 ] Behe's ideas about intelligent design have been rejected by the scientific community and characterized as pseudoscience. [ 2 ] [ 3 ] [ 4 ]

  Behe's testimony in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District is extensively cited by the judge [ 5 ] [ 6 ] [ 7 ] [ 8 ] in his ruling that intelligent design is not science but essentially religious in nature. [ 9 ]

  Due to Behe's views on evolution, Lehigh University exhibits the following disclaimer on its website:

  “	While we respect Prof. Behe's right to express his views, they are his alone and are in no way endorsed by the department. It is our collective position that intelligent design has no basis in science, has not been tested experimentally and should not be regarded as scientific. [ 13 ]
• 

  badboy

  BTTTT
• 

  IP_SEC

  Well... Joehoover had to get some stamina into his creation. Sure, lazing about was fine for frogs and turtles but would not do for humans.

  Elijah would not have had the stamina for running hundred of miles if he were cold blooded. JWs would not be able to work D2D on Xmas day if they were cold blooded.

  It worked so well for Elijah, Joehoover upgraded sparrows (which we know he just loves... they so cute) to warm blood too.

  Sheesh BB everyone knows this stuff.
• 

  cameo-d

  JWs would not be able to work D2D on Xmas day if they were cold blooded.

  And herein lies the dilemma.

  How could JWs turn their back on someone they professed to love when that person asks deep questions?

  How can JWs throw loved ones out into the cold because the dictates of an organization/dictates of man tell them their children are 'unsuitable' (not easily programmed to the mind control)?

  This would lead me to believe that your statement above is contrary.

  JWs, though physically warm blooded, have been trained to be mentally cold-blooded. Isn't this part of the conditioning process?