Do you want the real truth or not?

by Jason 175 Replies latest jw friends

  • Jason
    Jason

    Ianao,

    My statement wasn't rediculous at all. My question about defending something you don't believe is true is valid. I never started "screaming" anything. It doesn't matter who started the discussion or how. The statements made in the middle matter too. If RHW doesn't claim to know the truth yet argues thing as though they are truth then she seems to believe they are true. Questions about anything are fine. But I don't see why people have to be so snarly about it. I do see that how I started the discussion and some of the things I said would piss people off. I made a mistake and we're past that now. I don't need to be reminded every second post of what I originally wrote. But thanks for your input.

    You told me to get over the fact that no one will agree with me 100%. I don't expect anyone to. I do expect someone who claims they want to learn to at least consider my statements. And consider the fact that it is POSSIBLE they have been misled. I can do the same. But we can all do it in a respectful and polite environment.

    I post many arguments. I think it is strange that a few of them are criticized but no one ever says, Hey that's not a bad point. Anyway, I'm just babbling.

    Jason.

  • larc
    larc

    Jason,

    In your last post to RedHorseWoman, you stated that there was plenty of room for all the cages without stacking them. You seem to ignore my calculation which shows that with even small cages they would have to be stacked from floor to cealing with very narrow aisles in between.

    Now, how deep is this deep bedding you are talking about and precisely how often would it have to be changed. It seems to me that any number you come up with would produce some dead animals.

    Now you assert that moths would not infest the food supplies. Perhaps, you are maintaining that God suspended all of nature for a year. With thousands of insects buzzing about the Ark, they would have to eat someting and live somewhere.

    Now, how much food do you think the average animal ate every day? Let us assume that the size of the average animal was the size of a dog and that they ate one pound of food a day, which I think is a rather small amount. This means that Noah and his family would have to harvest, transport, and store nearly 6 million pounds of food in one growing season. This would have to be done with simple hand tools like syths and wheel barrows. I don't think 8 people could do all this.

  • ianao
    ianao

    Jason:

    My statement wasn't rediculous at all.

    I disagree. The very "law" that defines "muck to human" is what you said was violated by inference of what it theorizes. That to me is totally ridiculous. But, I do understand that what you and I consider to be law in science are no doubt two different things.

    My question about defending something you don't believe is true is valid.

    Jason, you started the thread claiming ultimate truth, then you chastise people for disagreeing with you. Would you feel better if everyone just let you post, skipped it, and never replied? You also assume that someone else is defending something. Looks to me like you are the one defending something. RHW is simply knocking down your fort.

    I never started "screaming" anything.

    Yes you did. You may not have KNOWN that "Do you want the real truth or not?" has negative overtones to ex-witnesses, but it does.

    It doesn't matter who started the discussion or how.

    I agree, so quit arguing that others don't have a right to argue against you, as YOU STARTED THE DISCUSSION. You keep wondering what people are defending, and I am telling you IT IS YOU. You threw a rock, and now they are throwing back, so quit whining that they shouldn't throw stones for the hell of it, because they aren't. It's called retaliation.

    The statements made in the middle matter too.

    Shakey foundations lead to crumbled buildings. Shit splats worse the further it falls, etc. etc.

    If RHW doesn't claim to know the truth yet argues thing as though they are truth then she seems to believe they are true.

    You don't seem to want to realize that RHW doesn't think YOU have the truth. Don't you understand that? No, of course not. That's why you are still arguing. She has as much a right to disagree as you do.

    Questions about anything are fine. But I don't see why people have to be so snarly about it. I do see that how I started the discussion and some of the things I said would piss people off. I made a mistake and we're past that now.

    Good that you see that. So please quite whining about others disagreeing with you. If RHW believes something is true, it is her every right. She is not the one claiming ultimate truth, YOU are.

    I don't need to be reminded every second post of what I originally wrote. But thanks for your input.

    You are welcome, and yes you do. As long as you keep whining, someone will keep reminding. Of course, sense the beginning of your "argument" set the foundation of the discussion, what will you do now? Drop the subject? Maybe you should start a new thread with a different title.

    You told me to get over the fact that no one will agree with me 100%. I don't expect anyone to.

    Bullpucky. Your words betray you. Want to know HOW/WHY? Read the entire thread again.

    I do expect someone who claims they want to learn to at least consider my statements.

    In other words, you want to preach instead of discuss. Ok, fine. Please proceed to your nearest street corner and preach away.

    And consider the fact that it is POSSIBLE they have been misled.

    Looks to me like they feel YOU have been the one mislead. Sticks and stones may break your bones, but words will never hurt you. Remember that one?

    I can do the same. But we can all do it in a respectful and polite environment. I post many arguments. I think it is strange that a few of them are criticized but no one ever says, Hey that's not a bad point. Anyway, I'm just babbling.

    Looks to me like you are realizing you are a fallible human the same as all of us. I'm sorry if nobody agrees with you, but that's the way it is. Take it as being stern for what you hold dear, or maybe you just have the wrong idea. Any way you wish.

  • larc
    larc

    Jason,

    The last two pages have been dominated by dialogue between you, me, and RHW. RHW and I have not been the least bit snarly with you. We have both asked rational, straight forward questions. We have not told you, in general, what our beliefs are, but on the issue of the Ark theory, it is very clear what we believe. I really don't see a need to compiment you on your posts, just as you have not complimented ours.

    Still looking for some answers to my last set of questions.

    On the food harvesting issue, if 8 people harvested crops for 100 days working 16 hours a day, they would have harvest at the rate of 8 pounds per minute. Since grain has to be winnowed, I don't think they could work that fast. This time frame does not include the considerable time needed to transport the harvest.

  • Jason
    Jason

    Ianao,

    "The very "law" that defines "muck to human" is what you said was violated by inference of what it theorizes. But, I do understand that what you and I consider to be law in science are no doubt two different things."

    Now THIS is a rediculous statement. Can you rewrite this in english? Probably not.

    You said that what you and I consider scientific law are two different things. I was wonder just what you consider scientific law to be? You don't consider the second law of thermodynamics to be a law? Well, why don't we throw out the law of gravity too?
    If you don't consider thermodynamics to be law then what do you consider scientific?

    Larc, for someone who wasn't there you seem pretty certain about how much work Noah could do in x amount of time. Obviously I can't answer every question in detail at the moment. To go through all the calculations you expect me to go through to answer your questions would take a rediculous amount of time. Since none of you seem to want to give J.Woodmorappe's book a chance I will be ordering a copy shortly. Then I can answer much more in depth.

    "Shaky foundations lead to crumbling blah blah blah." You act like you think you're a pretty holy person. I am not chastising anyone for disagreeing. I am not whining about anything. I wouldn't be writing posts if I thought everyone would agree with me. But I never said anyone had to agree. I just don't understand why you have to be a prick about the whole thing. If it offends you too bad. But stop acting like you're better than me. And HOW is any "defending" me? They are defending their beliefs. Which they don't claim are true in the first place.

    And yes, I DO understand that RHW doesn't believe I have the truth. What would you ask a stupid question like that? You think that because she doesn't believe me I should stop arguing. But you don't seem to want to turn the argument on her since I'm the enemy. In case you haven't realized it yet, she is arguing as well and neither do I believe her. She asks good questions but they don't prove anything. If you don't like the discussion no one said you have to stay.

    It must make you feel good inside to say that I am always whining. But I haven't whined once. And when did it bother me that anyone was arguing? That is what I expect to happen.

    I think you are the only one whining about anything. And what are you talking about? You asked if I am going to drop the discussion. Does it look like I'm going to back down? This discussion may continue until all of you give up. I never once said you and you pal RHW couldn't believe what you want. That doesn't mean what you believe is true and it doesn't mean I can't argue about it. You call yourselves ex-witnesses but you still think the same way. If anyone challenges your beliefs you get all rude and start putting people down. JWs act the same way. can't you see I'm not trying to start a fight. You have no reason to act hostile. All I want is to have a friendly discussion. But that's clearly not possible with people who have trouble being friendly.

    And no, I don't need to be reminded about my previous posts. I know what I wrote.

    And about everyone having to agree with me. As you said "Bullpucky." Whatever the hell that means. I already told you that I don't expect you to agree. I expect the same from you as I would expect from a JW. Actually hear what I am saying and at the least consider the possibility that it might be true. But I doubt you can do that. Just because you left KH doesn't mean you found truth. And you don't really seem to care if you ever do. If you don't look for it, you won't find it.

    "In other words, you want to preach instead of discuss. Ok, fine. Please proceed to your nearest street corner and preach away."

    I'm not sure what prescription of specs your reading through but obviously you made something up that had nothing to do with what I wrote.

    "Looks to me like they feel YOU have been the one mislead."

    Don't we all feel that way about each other? So what you're saying is if I feel THEY have been misled I am wrong. But if they think I have been misled, they are right. That's a narrow way to think.

    Of course I am a fallable human being. I never said or even thought for a moment that I wasn't.

    Jason.

  • larc
    larc

    Jason,

    I don't have to have been there to use multiplication and division to calculate estimates based on the the size of the Ark, estimated number of animals and the length of time they were in the Ark.

  • RedhorseWoman
    RedhorseWoman

    Jason, my dear, you are not exactly "discussing" here, now are you? Be honest. You "know" you have the "truth" and anything that does not fit with your concept of "truth" is automatically a lie. Is this not correct?

    Larc and I and the others here spent years "knowing" we had the "truth" even though there was ample evidence available to poke holes in our "truth" around every corner. We all clung to that "truth" until finally something caused us to really stop and look at what we were doing.

    You say that we have not patted you on the back and said, "Good point, Jason....WOW!" Do you know why? It's because we used to believe exactly as you do (well, pretty much), but we finally learned to question things and see what facts fit the issue we were trying to discuss.

    You say that going through the calculations yourself would take a ridiculous amount of time. Now, Jason, that's a total copout and you know it. You are simply afraid that doing some simple arithmetic might show that something was not quite right and accurate in your little world. I think you're afraid to take that chance.

    Likewise, you have convinced yourself that I am trying to "promote my own beliefs" so to speak. Sorry, Jason, I am simply stating what I have found out through my own experience. I know for a fact that as little as 3 or 4 quarts of grain over and above what a horse should eat can cause colic and founder. How do I know? Well, one of my previous horses was a master at picking locks and opening feed bins--at which point he would gorge himself and require a visit from the vet to pump him full of mineral oil to get the excess grain out of his system before it killed him.

    I have learned how much forage is necessary because I have had to deal with figuring out how much to buy to see my animals through the winter. I also know how the hay looks and smells at the end of the season, and how the horses will refuse to eat it unless there is absolutely nothing else available. I also know that hay distributors don't maintain stocks from year to year--it loses nutritional value after one season. They sell any leftover bales to construction companies or as garden mulch. That's why hay prices fluctuate widely from year to year. They cannot store excess hay from a good year to use during a poor season.

    She asks good questions but they don't prove anything.

    Questions and facts prove nothing if you refuse to consider them. Believe me, Jason, I was once in your position. I KNEW everything because I had the "truth" from the Bible, and no amount of factual evidence to the contrary could prove otherwise. Disbelieving the literalness of a Biblical illustration does not equate to disbelief in God. All it means is that the chroniclers of that particular passage looked at things from their own perspective, which was quite narrow. If the facts don't fit the illustration, then we're interpreting the illustration incorrectly.

    This discussion may continue until all of you
    give up. I never once said you and you pal RHW couldn't believe what you want. That doesn't mean what you
    believe is true and it doesn't mean I can't argue about it. You call yourselves ex-witnesses but you still think
    the same way. If anyone challenges your beliefs you get all rude and start putting people down.

    Once again, Jason, you are mistaking statements of fact and relating of life experiences with "belief". You are so far off the mark it is pathetic. I would LOVE to believe that I could go out and purchase $1.00 a bale mulch hay for my horses and they would be perfectly fine.....damn, I could save a lot of money. Unfortunately, a belief like that would probably kill them, since they would have almost no nutritional feed through the winter months. As I stood there watching my animals wither away, my "belief" that everything was fine would count for nothing.

    Similarly, believing that Noah could have managed to fit everything into the confines of the Ark, AND maintain it all for a year on the water and for who knows how long on Mt. Ararat while waiting for the water to subside and vegetation to grow, is naive in the extreme. Couldn't happen, Jason.....simply couldn't happen.

    Your hypotheses so far are desperate attempts to explain away actual physical laws. Better to look at the facts first, then see if your "belief" fits, rather than trying to change factual evidence to fit your beliefs.

    You have been jumping through hoops trying to massage facts to fit what you feel you must believe. Been there done that, Jason, and I have no intention of denying what IS true for what someone tells me is the "truth".

  • Farkel
    Farkel

    Jason,

    : This is a very important topic and I am glad you could point out this intersting new evidence to me.

    I had to do somthing. You haven't presented squat in the way of evidence. Besides that, wouldn't you agree that "busts" are much more exciting than "Arks" that allegedly existed 4500 years ago, or so?

    I would. How did 8 people have time to feed those critters and deal with their poop? How many poop shovels would that take? Have you ever seen just ONE elephant dump? Just ONE? Shoot. That would take at least five minutes to scoop up and heave overboard. And that would only be true if the elephants and the other big guys like rhinos were on the top of the three levels. If they were on the bottom level, Noah and kin will have to haul those dumps from those two elephants up three decks to toss them overboard. This would take a number of trips. What about their pee? Don't tell me! I know! They had a drain plug in the bottom of the Ark! Duh! I should have known.

    It's all bullshit, er elephantshit.

    Farkel

  • larc
    larc

    Jason,

    It is clear the RHW and I do not believe the Ark theory. I once believed it as did she. Now, you came here with supreme confidence in that theory. What she and I did was to present certain facts that simply do not jive with that theory. Neither one of us insulted you or used derisive language. We simply asked questions, whose answers can not be explained by the theory. In such a case, a theory ought to be discarded or significantly modified in some way. As it stands, theory is severly deficient.

    Their have been Ark theorists here before. They usually leave after a few curserory questions. You have shown more tenacity than the others, and have put more effort into buttressing your arguement. Nontheless, there still is a lot that is left unanswered. If you want to read a book and come later with additional data - feel free.

  • crossroads
    crossroads

    RHW----Thanks for your insight into the real life situation
    of feeding animals. Hi Larc I believe that both of you have
    done well with the REAL truth.
    Mommy I always percieved you to be very small so I
    want to be the male chearleader oh and what sites
    I would see. my cheer.
    I have the truth
    and it has set me free
    and believe me I'm not giving it to thee
    Thats why I float like a butterfly
    and sting like a bee
    I don't follow the teachings
    of Mohomed Ali
    and this Jason fellow
    reminds me of Fiebie

    Just among "Friends " Jason you need to seriouslly
    question this Woodmorppe's fellows teaching much
    the same way you would Marx or Lenin, Hitler or Franz.
    From A man who once believed in this greatest of fables.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit