Idiot Witnesses

by RichieRich 49 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  jimakazi

  he said the sun;s ORBIT; It doesn't orbit.

  Sorry Richie - the Sun does orbit - it orbits the centre of the galaxy.
• 

  Nathan Natas

  the sun provides light to the farthest reaching corners of our galaxy."

  Yes, eventually the light gets there, and - as per the inverse square law - when it does it is almost as dim as that speaker.
• 

  RichieRich

  he said the sun;s ORBIT; It doesn't orbit.

  Sorry Richie - the Sun does orbit - it orbits the centre of the galaxy. ;

  it doesn't orbitt the EARTH. You took that out of context.
• 

  aniron

  even funnier are the WT quotes of richard dawkins. it's pretty hard to take him out of context yet they found a way.

  Richard Dawkins was on a TV discussion program here in Britain about a couple of weeks ago. The program was about religion and spirituality, late night program.

  On it he said that though he believed in evolution there is no way that it can be proved that it occurs or has occured. Thats why its still called "the theory of evolution".
• 

  funkyderek

  aniron:

  On it he said that though he believed in evolution there is no way that it can be proved that it occurs or has occured. Thats why its still called "the theory of evolution".

  That doesn't sound like Richard Dawkins. As one of the world's leading evolutionary biologists, he knows that evolution does occur and has been observed to occur. He may have stated that we can't tell for certain what happened in the past if we don't exclude supernatural explanations, or that natural selection is just one theory that explains evolution.
• 

  Nosferatu

  from quotes.watchtower.ca

  *** The Golden Age 1932 August 17, pp.707-710 ***

  Causes of Elliptical Movements
  The thought of the earth's accumulating magnetic energy as it nears the sun, and discharging that energy as it recedes from the sun, is very illuminating. Therefore, it seems that the density and super-valency of the northern hemisphere is responsible for the elliptical orbit. As the north half of our globe takes the heavier charge, it is the most natural thing that when the earth is under the sun, as in July, it would then recede the farthest from the sun, for then the sun is shining more directly into the northern hemisphere.

  At aphelion, greatest distance from the sun, the earth is negative and the sun attracts; at perihelion, closest to the sun, the earth is positive and the sun repels; and at about the mean distance the earth becomes neutral; but, as has been explained, its momentum carries it on and on in its orbit. This also explains the causes underlying the extraordinary atmospheric disturbances during the equinoxes. The earth at neutral would have less power of resistance of any climatic influence than at any other time; the spring equinox is always the worse, because up to that time the earth has been positive and expending its force as does the sun--fighting the sun, as it were.

  The theory that sun force in the form of light causes the rotary motion of heavenly bodies may be a correct one. But there must needs have been something to start the rotary motion in the first place, and something that caused the planet to become balanced in its orbit and constant in its axial motion. Every heavenly body was probably "set" spinning and whirling in its place at creation. It must be true that the whirling of the sun and planets on their axes, and also their orbital speeds, have much to do with keeping them in their respective places; for they have "set" places of operation. (Gen. 1: 16, 17) Whether the earth is a direct creation of Jehovah or whether the planets were thrown off from the sun and shot out into space to find their "balance" at the command of God is immaterial, yet for us to incline toward the former view is reasonable.

  The electronic energy of the sun makes impingements against the electronic content of our air, and this friction causes light. The earth turning like a ball, up and over from right to left, always speeding eastwardly, the day side of the earth always turning away from the sun and the night side always turning toward the sun, it is very easy to see that the western or back side of the earth should be receiving the greater push and the eastern or front side receiving the lesser push, causing it to keep up its habitual axial motion. And the proof of this lies in the fact that the outer strata of air are always moving eastward at greater speed than is the surface of the earth, apparently trying to keep pace with the more swiftly moving moon.
• 

  zagor

  Yeah, I’ve seen it many times. Quite a large number of elders can’t even quote properly what has been handed down to them by WTBS and just add their own bullshit interpretations as they go along. Which, I might add, is error of WTBS. They have for years discouraged people from pursuing education. So now in 21th century when many normal people are pursuing lifelong learning of constant upgrading i.e. having several degrees over the course of ones life, WTBS elders are still at the level of 1930’s primary school.
  I know of cases were university lecturers and professors were first drawn to the meeting by something they've read in Awake, but then first on the stage would be idiot elder giving a talk who made sure those people never came again. Quite ironic.
• 

  I quit!

  "Jehovah has set the sun's orbit so that it is close enough to keep up warm and happy year round."

  So why Melanoma?

  You have to remember that the founder of the J-Dubs believed Jehovah lived on one of the stars that make up the Pleides.
• 

  tetrapod.sapien

  On it he said that though he believed in evolution there is no way that it can be proved that it occurs or has occured. Thats why its still called "the theory of evolution".

  aniron,

  in science, theory is considered fact. as a matter of fact, a lot of laws end up being called theories, and a lot of theories end up being called laws. to scientists, the definitions are interchangable. it is often just a matter of semantics. for example, it sounds better to call the "theory of evolution", that, than to call it "the first law of biology", which is what it is of course. and conversely, the "second theory of thermodynamics" doesn't sound that great either because of the two "th"s.

  as applied to science, from google:

  theory: a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory"

  law: A statement that summarizes the results observed in an experiment that is repeated many times by many different scientists. A scientific law is widely accepted as true or as a fact.

  why does this matter? this is one of the first things that i have found a JW will bring up when they are discussing evolution and creation with anybody. if the person does not know how science defines and uses the two terms, the JW may have the continued misimpression that what they say is the truth. of course, as with most science related things, they are terribly challenged, but are ignorant to that fact.
• 

  LongHairGal

  What do you expect?
  
  These are the same morons who at the book study would point to a picture in one of the books and ask the question: "what does the picture show" or "look at the expressions on the faces" (as if there were a photographer or somebody with a video in the first century). This really used to send me.
  
  Doesn't anybody there actually think? These pictures are nothing more than somebody's art work regarding a particular scripture. But these people would carry on and comment as if they were looking at photographs being passed around in a court room.
  
  Ridiculous!