Posts by Midget-Sasquatch

40

How can you be raised in the 'truth' and not be one

by Satanus in

jw
friends

.

s

Midget-Sasquatch

I think that an outside counterbalancing influence makes a world of difference. In my case, I lived totally as a jw because of my father, with the exception that I went to Catholic schools because of my mother. I had direct contact with really good people from "Babylon the Great". Mind you I couldn't associate with them because of my father, but I saw with my own eyes as I was growing up that they were actually helping people more than most of the jws who were just preaching to them.

On top of that though, as best as I can figure, there's a lack of belief in general about all things supernatural. I was always fascinated by it, even found myself wanting to believe at times, but never really did. I think its just an innate tendency in some of us.

21

Create your own diety...

by love11 in

.

this was pretty fun.

http://www.philosophersnet.com/games/god.htm it said that the chance of my god being real was 0.7 what did you get?

Midget-Sasquatch

My diety (omnibenevolent, omniescent, eternal, personal diety) had a plausibility quotient of 0.8

The quibbles were with what "eternal" means, and how one could have a personal relationship with something so unlike us.

Blasted metaphysicists!!!!! Poking holes in my sasquatch god before I could even start recruiting ~~cult shmucks~~ honest hearted ones.

7

The Due Time has Arrived !!!

by Amazing1914 in

jw
friends

the term 'generation' can mean a number of time frames.

it can refer to the time from the birth of one generation to the birth of the next, which is about 20 years.

the society used the psalms to determine the length of a life-span to calculate the "last generation" in making its case that 70 years from 1914 would put us at the threshold of 1975.psalm 90:10 says, "the days of our years are threescore years and ten [70 years]; and if by reason of strength they be fourscore years [80 years], yet is their strength labour and sorrow; for it is soon cut off, and we fly away.".

Midget-Sasquatch

The "generation" so firmly touted as those who had seen 1914 is no more.
The new "generation" is simply the one YOU are in, the "contemporary" generation.

The GB bought themselves some time by removing that handy marker, but it has taken its toll on the zeal of the rank and file.

Many are realizing that according to this New Light, they may die in this system of things before the Big A comes. I've seen a good deal of JWs in their 30s and 40s going .

Part of a talk given at Copps Colisseum in Hamilton, Ontario just last week (one of those extra meetups by invitation only ) stressed how we "are in the end" and the prophecies are being fulfilled. There was far less chatter about how encouraging this talk was from the usual tripe, which I think bodes ill for the WTS.

53

Evidence for evolution, Installment 2: Cytochrome c

by seattleniceguy in

jw
friends

this is the second installment in my new series on short, understandable, powerful evidences for evolution.

the first installment is here:.

installment 1: endogenous retroviral sequences.

Midget-Sasquatch

Awesome article AA!

Just speculating here, but along the lines of Satanus' info on similarities between people and animals, there's one interesting tidbit, if I'm recalling it accurately.

Narkissos brought up thinking symbolically and expressing it through language as a key human trait, and I think he's right on with that.

Now this is where I may be wrong, but I think I heard it's been found that people and apes have about the same number of phonemes in their vocabulary. Apes apparently are limited in how they relate phonemes to form a "word" or "object". So that really limits their range of expression. People can combine phonemes in many more ways and modify these symbols, and so vastly increase their range of expression. I don't know what change in the neural makeup is needed for that but there's one possible stepping stone for selection to work on and build that gap between the two.

They've also found a direct relationship between the size of a mammal's neocortex and the size of its social groups. (Makes sense that it takes a good deal of grey matter to keep track of individuals, how you should recipricate etc.)

Being more socially skilled, can give you an edge in a group nowadays. Maybe that was also a factor, to some extent, in more archaic bands. If it fetches you more mates, selection can begin to build on that. It may seem circular because the process is iterative in nature and in this particular case I'm postulating the people themselves contributing to shaping their evolution to an extent. It may explain how those traits that aren't usually critical for survival, can be kept and not lost, because they can make life more interesting.

53

Evidence for evolution, Installment 2: Cytochrome c

by seattleniceguy in

jw
friends

this is the second installment in my new series on short, understandable, powerful evidences for evolution.

the first installment is here:.

installment 1: endogenous retroviral sequences.

Midget-Sasquatch

Terry,

I'm by no means an evolutionary expert, but here's a thought...for whatever its worth.

Many animals can alter characteristics of their species by the mates they choose (e.g. longer horns, longer feathers, more impressive dance or song). Evolutionary forces can be exerted within the species itself. Maybe sexual selection had a large part in the emergence of our species' creative faculties.

Someone who was more artistic, musical, or inventive as well as more astute would make for a more interesting mate. That could serve as a driving selective force beyond the basic survival demands of te environment.

An appealing mate for alot of people isn't strictly focussed on the physical.....Thankfully.

48

Evidence for evolution, Installment 3a: Mitochondrial DNA and Neandertals

by seattleniceguy in

jw
friends

okay, everyone, buckle your seatbelts and put on your thinking caps.

in this week's installment in my continuing series, we'll be examining two (count 'em!

) pieces of the evidence and how they relate to each other.. you can check out my previous articles here:.

Midget-Sasquatch

Pedigree dates "older" the Biblical timeline can probably be relatively easily accounted for be assuming a possible higher mtDNA mutation rate in the past. Woodmorappe discusses this in his book Noah's Ark a Feasibility Study.

The mution rates (and corresponding mt Eve dates) generated using the fossil record (with a subjective interpretation of fossils*) all assume a uniform rate of evolution (as well as of course evolution) to begin with.

Well its a more parsimonious assumption to make, than Woodmorappe's ( a rate that started off higher and slowed over time). Just how did it slow down? At a uniform rate or in discontinous steps? Is that demonstrated by empirical evidence and if so whats the rate? Both sides make assumptions.

One side seems to have to make special assumptions at crucial points though to hold their view. There's no real evidence to support Woodmorappe's suggestion. If there is please point it out. Rather I think the evidence is that it varies between different pedigrees - which messes up the idea of a clock for each side.

Given that mtDNA may easily be capable of different speeds of rapid mutation, clock calculations may be difficult to accurately assertain, however Biblical creationists expect a generally rapid rate.

But they need one thats much faster than what is being empirically found. Again it cuts both ways. Lets say evolutionists may need to re-evaluate dates and mechanisms for evolution. It still doesn't topple the argument for evolution itself, because the evidence is from multiple lines, and different approaches (much empirical as well). It isn't really hinged on a specific date. The phylogenetic evidence is good. For the Genesis literalists though, the current evidence counters its historical validity.

The same fossil was used first for the human-chimpanzee split and then later for the alledged much older orangutan split. Then based on the Sivapithecus orangutan split date they calibrated the human-chimp date at around 5 million years ago. This shows just how subjective evolutionary fossil evidence can be.

Ahh, but don't forget that article from Nature that mentioned there was also studies done with relatively more isolated human populations. No question they were all humans. Using colonization dates, it did reasonably agree with the bandied date for the matrilineal MRCA. Thats why different lines of evidence are so useful.

48

Evidence for evolution, Installment 3a: Mitochondrial DNA and Neandertals

by seattleniceguy in

jw
friends

okay, everyone, buckle your seatbelts and put on your thinking caps.

in this week's installment in my continuing series, we'll be examining two (count 'em!

) pieces of the evidence and how they relate to each other.. you can check out my previous articles here:.

Midget-Sasquatch

First I want to also say that I find your posts refreshing. You're more objective than some others I've talked to in the past.

It should also be noted that the various evolutionary based studies have a large range, thus they do not appear to be pointing consistently.

You have a valid point about that large range, and IMHO its good to see that scientists are being kept on their toes so to speak. I probably wasn't clear enough, but what I was saying was that those different methods of clocking the rate were generally more supportive of a date that was older than the one date expected from creation-science advocates. Even if they all didn't point to one date in particular. How trustworthy is the clock then though?

Assuming a uniform rate of evolution between humans and chimps the pooled data rate "which is still faster by a factor of five than the rate given by the phylogenetic approach" should cause the chimp human split to be compressed to about 1 million years ago. This is very problematic for evolution, (ie: fossil dates, population genetics, etc).

Well it could very mean that the assumption of a linear and constant rate of mutation is wrong. Maybe the rates vary in time as well as between some pedigrees. Again, the whole idea of a constant molecular clock may not be feasible. (Thats where the calibration with the fossil record and its dating comes into the picture)

All in all, I don't think it would cause the downfall of the evolutionary view though. Mutations are the raw material afterall for natural selection to work on. Higher rates, mean more mutations, which does mean more of the deleterious and fatal ones, but along with that more of the neutral and a few of the beneficial variety to select from and that tends to increaseoverall diversity. It's been found that when E.Coli are in a starvation state, a mutator system is engaged that actually increases the rate of mutations in its DNA so that it can adapt quicker to the environment.

Based on this evolutionists are now moving the alledged human chimpanzee split claibration point back to older periods of time. This redating of the split creates an even greater discrepancy between evolutionary based estimates and pedigree mtDNA Eve studies.

I think you'd enjoy looking at chromosomal karyotyping. Its totally empirical. No "clocks" needed.

48

Evidence for evolution, Installment 3a: Mitochondrial DNA and Neandertals

by seattleniceguy in

jw
friends

okay, everyone, buckle your seatbelts and put on your thinking caps.

in this week's installment in my continuing series, we'll be examining two (count 'em!

) pieces of the evidence and how they relate to each other.. you can check out my previous articles here:.

Midget-Sasquatch

14

Is Generation Y hurting the WTS?

by Elsewhere in

jw
friends

the wts is pushing the "youth" message more than ever as their growth numbers start to stall.

is generation y the primary reason for this?.

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20050412-121457-4149r.htmgeneration y embraces choice, redefines religion.

Midget-Sasquatch

Most definitely.

I had the displeasure of going to the Special Assembly Day not too long ago. Two of the talks were given by a representative of the Canadian branch, an R. Jung, and he was pleading with youths to "give Jehovah a chance". Used those exact words a few times.

33

New discovery of a lost gospel

by Leolaia in

the lost gospel of judas, thought to be the same gospel mentioned by irenaeus (cf.

adversus haereses 1.31.1), is currently being prepared for publication.

http://paleojudaica.blogspot.com/2004/07/exciting-news-about-coptic-gospel-of.html.

Midget-Sasquatch

Thanks for making me notice that part of the quote where the contrast is with Satan. You're right that scheme isn't applied to the archons as far as I know.

What got me thinking differently was what Bart Ehrman wrote in his book Lost Christianities:The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew.

You see I rarely have any original ideas.

here's the excerpt from page pg 125:

Most Gnostics, however, took another line, claiming that Christ was a divine emissary from above, totally spirit, and that he entered the man Jesus temporarily in order to convey the knowledge that can liberate sparks from their material imprisonment. For these Gnostics, Jesus himself was in fact a human, even though some thought that he was not made like the rest if us, so that he could receive the divine emissary; some, for example, thought that he had a "soul-body: rather than a "flesh-body".

So thats what got me thinking "a different race" in that sense....but again it doesn't contrast well with Satan.... maybe the idea is more along the line of being of the seed/race of Seth/Saviour rather than of the Demiurge.