Midget-Sasquatch

Joined

• started 18 topics
• posted 1,723 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Midget-Sasquatch

• 
  109

  Evidence for evolution, Installment 5: Lake Tanganyika, etc

  by seattleniceguy in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hey gang!

  i apologize for my absence of a few weeks.

  i have been very busy with work lately, and i hate to write something that i haven't been able to research properly, so i haven't posted anything in this series for three weeks now.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Midget-Sasquatch

  yes they are still gulls though arent they....and salamanders
  

  and thats not right before my eyes

  They're still gulls yes, but that doesn't negate the fact that in the here and now, we have an observable process that has resulted in two different species. That is speciation - one pivotal facet of the evolutionary process. In the small time frame you were asking for evidence, thats all one can really expect to see. Anyone could confirm ring species by going to the spots their found.
  

  If you're asking for macro-evolutionary changes before your eyes, then like Abbadon so nicely put it, you're asking to be shown something in a sliver of the time span thats required - like asking to see the development of a fertilized ovum into a fully gestated human baby in only a day or two.

  If you're keen on experiments that can be done in the comfort of one's own lab, I suggest reading about Richard Lenski's work on E.Coli and changing environments. Mind you thats not about showing speciation, but adaptation - another important facet of the evolutionary process.

  So there are two empirically observable facets of the theory, making it hard to deny its plausibility over large spans of time.
• 
  25

  What does it MEAN, to be Baptised....

  by LittleToe in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  a few years ago, while i was still a jw, i started a topic on baptism:.

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/14060/1.ashx.

  i wasn't aware of the in's-and-out's of the subject, just that i felt that my own baptism as a jw was somehow invalid, and wanted to do it properly.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Midget-Sasquatch

  A serendipitous thing happened to me today. I had read all these great posts this morning and was later cajoled to go to the sunday meeting. When I wasn't daydreaming and actually flipping through the bible, I came across Ezekiel 36:25-26. These verses made me think about that second Essene quote that Narkissos posted.

  It made me think that maybe baptism (on top of the mystery religion parallels that paul was fond of) is also about being given a fresh heart, thats brought alive by allowing ourselves to be washed inside by God.

  P.S. I think all of us here agree that the ritual itself on the outside does nothing. Whether there's anything really happening internally, and what that exactly is, is useful to discuss though, at least to try and help us understand people's motives.
• 
  109

  Evidence for evolution, Installment 5: Lake Tanganyika, etc

  by seattleniceguy in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hey gang!

  i apologize for my absence of a few weeks.

  i have been very busy with work lately, and i hate to write something that i haven't been able to research properly, so i haven't posted anything in this series for three weeks now.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Midget-Sasquatch

  real life examples of evolution happening under our noses

  go on then

  I think that ring species can help you understand how the process of speciation, is not only possible, but actually happening. For example, there are races of gulls distributed across the globe (picture a ring of them), with nearly all of the races being able to interbreed with the races adjacent to them, except for the races at either terminus....they can't interbreed with each other. They are considered different species because they are reproductively isolated. Thats right before our eyes, with "links" and all. You can even check out ring species of salamanders. SNG - Great line of evidence , as always, and I love the added photos.
• 
  10

  Designer babies Ok'd in UK

  by Brummie in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  just heard the tail end of the news that producing a "designer baby" for the sole purpose of using its bone marrow/organs to aid other suffering children is now lawful in england!

  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2928655.stm.

  geeesh, what next?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Midget-Sasquatch

  On a gut level, I'm wary of this because its hard to predict how the parents will treat the resulting "selected" child. Is he/she just a means to an end or will they be shown real love and given as much support and time, as the other child(ren)?

  If the latter, then I don't see why not. It'll be like a sibling serving as donor for another sibling. I don't think organ harvesting is even being considered here (plainly inhumane)...the process will be strictly regulated.
• 
  40

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

  by Satanus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  .

  .

  s

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  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

  1. social
  2. entertainment

  .

  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?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  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

  1. jw
  2. 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.".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  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

  1. jw
  2. 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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  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

  1. jw
  2. 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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  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

  1. jw
  2. 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:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  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.