It is simply fallacious to say that datasets counting affiliation entirely differently can validly be directly compared. (Obviously, anyone can superficially compare any two things but it will give misleading results if the different metrics are not taken into account.) Not interested in watching the video. It is true that the number of congregations can give a helpful indication of growth/decline though.
Posts by Jeffro
-
169Are the statistics out yet?
by slimboyfat inisn’t it about time they released the report for the service year?
or have they stopped publishing it?
did they released selected figures at the annual meeting as they usually do, such as the memorial attendance or record number of pioneers?
-
-
-
169
Are the statistics out yet?
by slimboyfat inisn’t it about time they released the report for the service year?
or have they stopped publishing it?
did they released selected figures at the annual meeting as they usually do, such as the memorial attendance or record number of pioneers?
-
-
Jeffro
slimboyfat:
It’s because you cast doubt on Watchtower figures
Still misrepresenting what I said. 🤦♂️ They use different metrics, counting only a subset of adherents. It doesn’t mean the figures from Watch Tower are ‘in doubt’. They just can’t be directly compared with datasets that count membership differently. I never said that secular measures of JWs can’t be compared with secular measures of other denominations. I never said other denominations aren’t losing more members.
-
169
Are the statistics out yet?
by slimboyfat inisn’t it about time they released the report for the service year?
or have they stopped publishing it?
did they released selected figures at the annual meeting as they usually do, such as the memorial attendance or record number of pioneers?
-
-
Jeffro
Sigh. 🤦♂️ When you said “The JW numbers look “bad”… until etc”, no one had mentioned secular stats. The subject was the stats as published by JWs. Comparing the stats published by the Watch Tower Society with other measures is ‘apples and oranges’, quite independent from your obsession with the separate fact that other denominations are in greater decline generally (shifting the goalposts). At no point did I ‘deny’ anything. (At least you managed not to lie about what I had responded to this time though unlike your false attribution on page 6.)
I have already demonstrated that the way JWs count membership inflates their stated growth rate, which in any case has been especially poor for 2022, particularly given the pressure to remain.
Also, the type of ‘growth’ JWs have in most secular countries based on secular measures is like having an interest rate on savings that doesn’t keep up with inflation.
-
169
Are the statistics out yet?
by slimboyfat inisn’t it about time they released the report for the service year?
or have they stopped publishing it?
did they released selected figures at the annual meeting as they usually do, such as the memorial attendance or record number of pioneers?
-
-
Jeffro
slimboyfat:
Jeffro you seem to have two basic responses to JW growth.
You really are getting tedious.
The first is to deny that it exists and say the Watchtower data are wrong.
No. I didn't say that at all. I said, correctly, that the way JWs count 'publishers' increases their stated growth rate at the expense of higher membership figures.
The second is to say that even if the data are correct (the Australian census, for example) it doesn’t count because: disfellowshipping
I didn't say anything 'doesn't count'. I said, correctly, that growth of JW membership in countries specifically considered has been under the population growth. I also said, correctly, that people of other denominations are more free to leave without repercussions whereas there is significantly more pressure for JWs to remain affiliated. And I also said, correctly, that although some other small denominations such as Christadelphians use the similar term 'disfellowship' (for whom it means exclusion from 'breaking bread', which corresponds to 'communion'), they do not actually employ shunning (ergo a false equivalence on your part) for simply ceasing membership (rather than for other specific ‘serious sins’).
and North Korea.
If you don't understand analogies, that's a 'you' problem. 🤷♂️
If you believe that Watchtower growth doesn’t count then why are you interested in tracking it anyway? If you can dismiss all favourable comparisons of JW growth with others groups as either factually wrong, or inconsequential if true, then there is no way the data can ever contradict your starting assumptions.
Strawman argument.
-
169
Are the statistics out yet?
by slimboyfat inisn’t it about time they released the report for the service year?
or have they stopped publishing it?
did they released selected figures at the annual meeting as they usually do, such as the memorial attendance or record number of pioneers?
-
-
-
141
My Prediction Regarding New Space Telescope That Will See Back to 100 Million Years From the Big Bang
by Sea Breeze ina new space telescope launched a few days age that will supposedly be able to see to within 100 million years of the big bang.
wow... only 100 million years from the big bang.
that is pretty early given the 12 billion year age of the universe assigned by scholars who adhere to naturalism.
-
-
Jeffro
Thanks for adding a ‘shifting the burden of proof’ fallacy. 😂
-
141
My Prediction Regarding New Space Telescope That Will See Back to 100 Million Years From the Big Bang
by Sea Breeze ina new space telescope launched a few days age that will supposedly be able to see to within 100 million years of the big bang.
wow... only 100 million years from the big bang.
that is pretty early given the 12 billion year age of the universe assigned by scholars who adhere to naturalism.
-
-
Jeffro
🤦♂️ Offering an argument from incredulity only makes my point for me. 😂
-
141
My Prediction Regarding New Space Telescope That Will See Back to 100 Million Years From the Big Bang
by Sea Breeze ina new space telescope launched a few days age that will supposedly be able to see to within 100 million years of the big bang.
wow... only 100 million years from the big bang.
that is pretty early given the 12 billion year age of the universe assigned by scholars who adhere to naturalism.
-
-
Jeffro
Sea Breeze:
All very predictible, if you are a creationist.
This is typical creationist arrogance. Because scientists make predictions based on incomplete evidence, they are not always exactly correct, so they keep looking. But creationists sit back, reveling in their own ignorance, claiming that if scientists don’t know every exact detail, that the only alternative is, essentially, ‘a magical sky friend did it’. (Did what exactly… well… whatever it was that was done. 🤦♂️) False dichotomy, argument from ignorance, argument from incredulity, magical thinking… and not a speck of evidence.
-
141
My Prediction Regarding New Space Telescope That Will See Back to 100 Million Years From the Big Bang
by Sea Breeze ina new space telescope launched a few days age that will supposedly be able to see to within 100 million years of the big bang.
wow... only 100 million years from the big bang.
that is pretty early given the 12 billion year age of the universe assigned by scholars who adhere to naturalism.
-
-
Jeffro
Sea Breeze:
But it doesn't contradict a creationist model at all.
A ‘creationist model’ makes no specific predictions. It has no criteria. Anyone can just say anything is ‘consistent’ with vague magical thinking.
-
141
My Prediction Regarding New Space Telescope That Will See Back to 100 Million Years From the Big Bang
by Sea Breeze ina new space telescope launched a few days age that will supposedly be able to see to within 100 million years of the big bang.
wow... only 100 million years from the big bang.
that is pretty early given the 12 billion year age of the universe assigned by scholars who adhere to naturalism.
-
-
Jeffro
Sea Breeze:
The experts are saying that there is hardly an empty space to be found.
Wow. Almost as though there was less space between things before the universe had expanded to the extent that it has now. 🙄