so now that most of us have come to a semi truthful understanding that the witnesses are wrong about evolutionist, there is a certain question that i have always had.
now if you were to ask any jw, they'd recite a complete fallacy from scientist regarding this.
but what is you guys input of this.
"All those methods are assumptions" is true but so is your very existence but I'll bet you take that assumption as correct. "I think therefore I am" some physicists would question even that assumption! Something that has been repeatedly scrutinized by scientists as the various dating techniques have been is a pretty good bet to rely on.
Edited to add "the perceived results of those measurements are assumptions."
yep, he told her that he wants to go a friends b-day...keep in mind it's not until december.
well anyway i told her i didn't mind if he did and i would take him.
yep, enter cult mode.....i hate this freaking cult.
Doc:They are all negative. No Jew had a pet dog as they were unclean. If we apply JW logic about birthdays ("the only 2 BDs in the Bible were negative events"), then we cannot own dogs for pets either, because nothing good is said about dogs.
I have never heard that reasoned out that way before. MMM It's a valid point to make in the context of the birthday celebration prohibition. Don't give them any ideas! LOL
i dont know if you are aware but i was informed recently that jw governing body member tony pants morris was in a safari park in africa.
he stumbled across a skinny hungry looking lioness with cubs nearby.
not seeing a way to escape, he got on his knees and started praying, pleading for help.
the warwick gallery #1 and gallery #2 are still up.. i have #3 backed up: http://imgur.com/a/klnlg.
also pulled: .
wallkill photo gallery 2.
GodZoo I grew up with lots of aboriginal people who would call a house like that luxurious. I kid you not.
the warwick gallery #1 and gallery #2 are still up.. i have #3 backed up: http://imgur.com/a/klnlg.
also pulled: .
wallkill photo gallery 2.
in this video the popular saudi cleric sheik yahya al-jana discusses the joys of paradise, saying that men will have the strength of a hundred men in paradise and will be busy tearing hymens, while the virgins of paradise, whose breasts are like pomegranates, become virgins every time again.. the cleric also explains it is mostly men who enter paradise noting that women in general are bad because they refuse to wear the veil, they wear tight clothes in shopping malls, put on perfume and jewelry, and use filthy social media platforms.
source.... this is what young men from conservative muslim families are raised on.
is it any wonder islamic countries treat women appallingly?.
blondies highlights from the10-11-2015 wt study (august 15, 2015), pages (14-18) .
for pictures see this link.
opening comments.
Ah, to be alive back then....... Witness things like the birth of electronic information exchange. "What hath God wrought!"........ Flying machines ect, ect,..... to see it all turned into a fulfillment of prophesy by a cult, ah those were they days......
Just imagine how the governing body will turn the tide on the spread of electronic information in the internet age. I can hardly wait! No doubt things are speeding up as the day draws near. We are witnessing history here folks.
Edited to add: My remarks were in reference to the writings in The Harp of God book.
so now that most of us have come to a semi truthful understanding that the witnesses are wrong about evolutionist, there is a certain question that i have always had.
now if you were to ask any jw, they'd recite a complete fallacy from scientist regarding this.
but what is you guys input of this.
Syd:That the methods verify each other only demonstrates that they've been calibrated against each other. Or that they've chosen fudge factors that agree with other fudge factors.
That's not exactly how scientific proofs come into existence and why they are widely held as being true. Take for example the Fermat's Last theorem. All laid out in the link. This is how the scientific process works. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/FermatsLastTheorem.html The dating techniques outlined by others here work the same way.and are open to refinement to proof or open to be discredited not on a whim or someones say so or for financial gain but based on proof.
I first read about Fermat when I was a child and I was and still am fascinated by him. The only assumptions we now have are weather or not he really had the proof to begin with and just didn't have the room to write it down at the time. As far as scientific proofs go you will get just as much adulation and praiseworthy esteem heaped on you if you can prove one of science's key precepts is false as you will get if you can corroborate one as being true. Read over the link and think about it. That's all I ask.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh4bi60alzu.
first person to say, "this scishow episode is a monsanto conspiracy," is a rotten egg..
Further food at the proper time for thought people.
http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2015/10/monsanto-stock-decline-layoffs
presidential hopeful ben carson of course.
this isn't another gun control debate, i just thought it might be fun to have a topic where we can dump all the hysterical quotes from the candidates.. it's a deep and plentiful mine folks!
.
Heres an older one but a goodie for sure
"A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof. And when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven." Jean Chretien, Canadian Prime minister. The guy was unfluent in both official languages.
Sometimes I get the feeling in this country it doesn't matter who you vote for!
