skeptic2

Joined

• started 10 topics
• posted 318 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by skeptic2

• 
  15

  Roots of human family tree are shallow (agrees with the Bible)

  by Deputy Dog in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  looks like the bible is right after all.. from:.

  http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060701/ap_on_sc/brotherhood_of_man_1with the help of a statistician, a computer scientist and a supercomputer, olson has calculated just how interconnected the human family tree is.

  you would have to go back in time only 2,000 to 5,000 years and probably on the low side of that range to find somebody who could count every person alive today as a descendant.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  skeptic2

  Gill - I think you're referring to the idea of the Mitochondrial Eve, rather than Mitochondrial DNA.
• 
  15

  Roots of human family tree are shallow (agrees with the Bible)

  by Deputy Dog in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  looks like the bible is right after all.. from:.

  http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060701/ap_on_sc/brotherhood_of_man_1with the help of a statistician, a computer scientist and a supercomputer, olson has calculated just how interconnected the human family tree is.

  you would have to go back in time only 2,000 to 5,000 years and probably on the low side of that range to find somebody who could count every person alive today as a descendant.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  skeptic2

  "They have kept changing their theories so often through the years."
  Thats kind of how science works... it doesnt matter how much you like a particular idea, if new evidence comes to light that doesnt fit, then you have to modify your idea to fit the new evidence as well as old. That way you always have the best possible explanation given the facts. Science is not at all analogous to religion, and neither are scientists analogous to religious leaders. Most religious leaders start off with what they have decided through faith is the best possible explanation, then refute any evidence that disagrees.
• 
  15

  Roots of human family tree are shallow (agrees with the Bible)

  by Deputy Dog in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  looks like the bible is right after all.. from:.

  http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060701/ap_on_sc/brotherhood_of_man_1with the help of a statistician, a computer scientist and a supercomputer, olson has calculated just how interconnected the human family tree is.

  you would have to go back in time only 2,000 to 5,000 years and probably on the low side of that range to find somebody who could count every person alive today as a descendant.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  skeptic2

  A little off topic, but here are a some pictures of skulls from my favorite hominid homo sapiens
  Archaic Homo Sapiens from Broken Hill Mine, Kabwe, Zambia, Africa; 125,000 years old
  
  
  Archaic Homo Sapiens from Broken Hill Mine; 30,000 - 40,000 years old
  
  
  
  On the left more modern European Homo Sapiens, on the right Archaic Homo Sapiens from Qahzeh, Middle East, ~90,000 years old
• 
  15

  Roots of human family tree are shallow (agrees with the Bible)

  by Deputy Dog in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  looks like the bible is right after all.. from:.

  http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060701/ap_on_sc/brotherhood_of_man_1with the help of a statistician, a computer scientist and a supercomputer, olson has calculated just how interconnected the human family tree is.

  you would have to go back in time only 2,000 to 5,000 years and probably on the low side of that range to find somebody who could count every person alive today as a descendant.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  skeptic2

  Because of the small population size a few thousand years ago, people alive then have a far bigger genetic influence down the line than you or I could have given a similar amount of time.

  "But the book pointed out that all the fossils that have been found of ape/man could probably fit into the back of a Land Rover."
  Here is a good list of the major hominid fossils found to date: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/specimen.html
• 
  15

  Roots of human family tree are shallow (agrees with the Bible)

  by Deputy Dog in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  looks like the bible is right after all.. from:.

  http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060701/ap_on_sc/brotherhood_of_man_1with the help of a statistician, a computer scientist and a supercomputer, olson has calculated just how interconnected the human family tree is.

  you would have to go back in time only 2,000 to 5,000 years and probably on the low side of that range to find somebody who could count every person alive today as a descendant.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  skeptic2

  "Looks like the Bible is right after all."
  Deputy Dog - What are you referring to in the Bible that relates to the news article you posted?
• 
  15

  Roots of human family tree are shallow (agrees with the Bible)

  by Deputy Dog in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  looks like the bible is right after all.. from:.

  http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060701/ap_on_sc/brotherhood_of_man_1with the help of a statistician, a computer scientist and a supercomputer, olson has calculated just how interconnected the human family tree is.

  you would have to go back in time only 2,000 to 5,000 years and probably on the low side of that range to find somebody who could count every person alive today as a descendant.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  skeptic2

  "After reading this book and the comments made by people in it. I got the impression that they haven't the faintest idea how man got here."
  For the record, the impression you got is completely wrong, assuming by 'they' you mean anthropologists. If by 'they' you mean IDists or creationists, then your statement is probably correct.

  To find out more about the current state of knowledge concerning human evolution, without having to pay for a book, try http://www.becominghuman.org/. If you want a book, good ones are The Complete Idiots Guide to Human Prehistory and Cambridge Encyclopedia of Human Evolution.
• 
  8

  JW's book "Let your Kingdom come"(1981) argues against history and 586/607

  by booker-t in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i was given the book "let your kingdom come" by the jw's the other day that showed me why the jw's and wts are right about 607. in the appendix they bring up that historians argue against the 607 date but why jw's are right due to the bible and unreliable tablets.

  i was so confused after reading the appendix in the let your kingdom come book that i actually had a "headache" and put the book down.

  the jw's elder wants to come over and study this appendix with me trying to prove the 607 date is right.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  skeptic2

  booker-t
  has the elder come over yet?
  how did it go?
• 
  14

  skeptic2 introduction

  by skeptic2 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i've been reading these forums for a while.

  now i've posted, it would seem polite to introduce myself.

  i am not nor ever have been a jw, but my wife was interested throughout her life, and had some attendance as a teenager.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  skeptic2

  Thanks for all the kind comments.
• 
  14

  skeptic2 introduction

  by skeptic2 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i've been reading these forums for a while.

  now i've posted, it would seem polite to introduce myself.

  i am not nor ever have been a jw, but my wife was interested throughout her life, and had some attendance as a teenager.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  skeptic2

  Hi All,
  I've been reading these forums for a while. Now I've posted, it would seem polite to introduce myself.
  I am not nor ever have been a JW, but my wife was interested throughout her life, and had some attendance as a teenager.
  Last year she began attending the local KH, and got baptised during that time.
  Before, but mainly after, being baptised she began to notice many things that didn't agree with her expectations of the religion. The issues mounted, until it got to the point that she was motivated to buy Raymond Franz's Crisis of Conscience. With the help of that book and these forums, she recently disassociated. I'm sure she will post here too, when she feels ready.
• 
  8

  JW's book "Let your Kingdom come"(1981) argues against history and 586/607

  by booker-t in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i was given the book "let your kingdom come" by the jw's the other day that showed me why the jw's and wts are right about 607. in the appendix they bring up that historians argue against the 607 date but why jw's are right due to the bible and unreliable tablets.

  i was so confused after reading the appendix in the let your kingdom come book that i actually had a "headache" and put the book down.

  the jw's elder wants to come over and study this appendix with me trying to prove the 607 date is right.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  skeptic2

  The burden of proof is on those making the claim, and in this case that burden has certainly not been carried beyond reasonable doubt. It shouldn't fall to you to become an expert in this matter. If you are not able to refute what they're saying, it doesn't mean that they're right, don't fall into that trap!
  I don't know your history, and I understand these things are rarely simple, but why are the elders even coming over to discuss it in the first place?