page 21 of the watchtower’s 2010 brochure, “the origin of life” says of the biologist.
“francis crick … decided that dna is far too organized to have come about through undirected events”.. i cannot find this quotation being made in writing by crick himself.. the wts’s brochure refers to the book, “the search for extraterrestrial intelligence – a philosophical inquiry”, by david lamb but it is not clear to me that the brochure is saying this view by crick is being cited in lamb's book.. where will i be able to read this statement being made by francis crick?.
and while we are looking at that wts brochure, page 16 makes some interesting claims about teaspoons.
Anders,
If you email me, I am prepared to show you what I have done thus far, so that you could provide me with your considered criticisms and recommendations. I reckon I am about half way through and it will take me another 2 or 3 weeks before I come up for air.
https://jwstudies.com/contact_me.html
I never break confidences.
Doug
page 21 of the watchtower’s 2010 brochure, “the origin of life” says of the biologist.
“francis crick … decided that dna is far too organized to have come about through undirected events”.. i cannot find this quotation being made in writing by crick himself.. the wts’s brochure refers to the book, “the search for extraterrestrial intelligence – a philosophical inquiry”, by david lamb but it is not clear to me that the brochure is saying this view by crick is being cited in lamb's book.. where will i be able to read this statement being made by francis crick?.
and while we are looking at that wts brochure, page 16 makes some interesting claims about teaspoons.
Anders,
Brilliant. Thank you.
Thank you!
Doug
page 21 of the watchtower’s 2010 brochure, “the origin of life” says of the biologist.
“francis crick … decided that dna is far too organized to have come about through undirected events”.. i cannot find this quotation being made in writing by crick himself.. the wts’s brochure refers to the book, “the search for extraterrestrial intelligence – a philosophical inquiry”, by david lamb but it is not clear to me that the brochure is saying this view by crick is being cited in lamb's book.. where will i be able to read this statement being made by francis crick?.
and while we are looking at that wts brochure, page 16 makes some interesting claims about teaspoons.
There are two sentences in the brochure that relate to Francis Crick.
“Francis Crick, a scientist who helped to discover DNA’s double-helix structure, decided that this molecule is far too organized to have come about through undirected events. He proposed that intelligent extraterrestrials may have sent DNA to the earth to help get life started here.[26]” TOL, page 21
I can now see that the second sentence relates to Endnote 26, but I cannot see anything in Lamb’s book which relates to the first sentence. Thank you for making it possible for me to search Lamb’s book. That is invaluable. There is no appearance of “undirected” in the book and the appearances of the words “organized” and “events” are not relevant.
I can see Creationist sites making this same attribution to Crick, and perhaps he did write this, but theses sites do not give me the location where Crick wrote that statement. He was obviously a prolific writer.
====================
BTW. Does anyone know if this is the complete article (written in 1993 but ignored by Lamb):
page 21 of the watchtower’s 2010 brochure, “the origin of life” says of the biologist.
“francis crick … decided that dna is far too organized to have come about through undirected events”.. i cannot find this quotation being made in writing by crick himself.. the wts’s brochure refers to the book, “the search for extraterrestrial intelligence – a philosophical inquiry”, by david lamb but it is not clear to me that the brochure is saying this view by crick is being cited in lamb's book.. where will i be able to read this statement being made by francis crick?.
and while we are looking at that wts brochure, page 16 makes some interesting claims about teaspoons.
THANK YOU! THANK YOU!
I am so fortunate to have such good and knowledgeable friends.
Doug
page 21 of the watchtower’s 2010 brochure, “the origin of life” says of the biologist.
“francis crick … decided that dna is far too organized to have come about through undirected events”.. i cannot find this quotation being made in writing by crick himself.. the wts’s brochure refers to the book, “the search for extraterrestrial intelligence – a philosophical inquiry”, by david lamb but it is not clear to me that the brochure is saying this view by crick is being cited in lamb's book.. where will i be able to read this statement being made by francis crick?.
and while we are looking at that wts brochure, page 16 makes some interesting claims about teaspoons.
Page 21 of the Watchtower’s 2010 brochure, “The Origin of Life” says of the biologist
“Francis Crick … decided that DNA is far too organized to have come about through undirected events”.
I cannot find this quotation being made in writing by Crick himself.
The WTS’s brochure refers to the book, “The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence – A Philosophical Inquiry”, by David Lamb but it is not clear to me that the brochure is saying this view by Crick is being cited in Lamb's book.
Where will I be able to read this statement being made by Francis Crick?
======
And while we are looking at that WTS brochure, page 16 makes some interesting claims about teaspoons. It points to Endnote 21.. However, Endnote 21 does not contain many of the words at page 16
The following words do not appear in the article listed as Endnote 21: dense, information, teaspoonful, instructions, building, 350, humans, alive, today, seven, billion, people, living, earth, barely, make, film, teaspoon.
So where did the author get his ideas from?
Doug
after all he only had 3 and half years to perform his ministry so every day counted.
instead of witnessing to satan couldn't he have made better use of his time reaching as many people as possible?
just using some jdub reasoning on the matter..
My views on the 40 days testing of Jesus by Satan will initially appear radical. I believe it is a parable with messages to their local, immediate hearers.As with any Scripture, our minds have to be transported to the times when they were being written, taking note of every local aspect.
In the story of Jesus' 40-day testing, Jesus and Satan reason with one another in a very gentlemanly manner, using Scriptures in the same manner as any good duelling Jews would. (It was written by Jews about a Jew.)
https://jwstudies.com/Is_Awake_accurate_about_Messiah_s_anointing.pdf
Doug
after all he only had 3 and half years to perform his ministry so every day counted.
instead of witnessing to satan couldn't he have made better use of his time reaching as many people as possible?
just using some jdub reasoning on the matter..
smiddy3,
Going by the Synoptics, his ministry could have lasted 12 months or shorter. John's Gospel alone has Jesus going to Jerusalem on three annual occasions. I do not have any details at hand. I read this a short while ago and when I come across it again, I will share it with you.
Doug
after all he only had 3 and half years to perform his ministry so every day counted.
instead of witnessing to satan couldn't he have made better use of his time reaching as many people as possible?
just using some jdub reasoning on the matter..
What makes you think Jesus preached for three and a half years?
Doug
watchtower society “contradicts” the bible – where and why?.
god's word certainly warns anyone who would dare, or be so audacious to deliberately change, twist or distort his holy message of truth by saying:.
“5 every saying of god is refined.
The text of the Hebrew Scriptures was in a constant state of flux, to the point that no one knows what was originally written ('autographs'). Scribes were more than just copiers, they were not averse to changing (redacting) it to suit their own beliefs. By the time the Masoretes fixed the text, they set a corrupted text in concrete (Emanuel Tov).
No one knows what the writers of the NT originally wrote ('autographs').
There are differences between the various texts of the OT (LXX, Symmachus, MT, etc., etc.) and also with the texts of the NT (Erasmus' Textus Receptus; Westcott-Hort, Nestle-Aland, etc.).
There is any number of "the" Bible: Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Ethiopian, Syrian, Jewish (Tanakh), Protestant, etc., etc.
Those texts employed to justify the Bible as "God's Word" were written many centuries before any Bible existed. Besides, that's circular reasoning -- to use a text from within the Bible to "prove" the Bible.
Read:
Kloppenborg, John S., Newman, Judith H., editors. Editing the Bible: Assessing the Task Past and Present (June 15, 2012). Society of Biblical Literature
Müller, Reinhard; Pakkala, Juha; Romeny, Bas ter Haar. Evidence of Editing: Growth and Change of Texts in the Hebrew Bible (2014). Society of Biblical Literature
in my previous thread on “the origin of life”, i expressed my concern that endnotes [1]a, [2]a, and [7]a, are not referenced within the body of the text.
this is also true for endnotes [25]a, [39]a, [39]b, [39]c, and [51]a.. i have a hypothesis which, although strange, is feasible: each of these endnotes is an endnote (or footnote) of the prior endnote.
for example endnote [1]a is actually the endnote/footnote to endnote 1, not to the main text.
There are generic issues that affect the nature of the brochure. The WTS always starts from its position, with the conclusion it is determined to reach. It then seeks support, whether this is through the use of selective Biblical texts or even through the misrepresentation or mistranslation of Scriptural texts. I do not accept this practice, but nevertheless it is acknowledged that this was the process used by writers of the New Testament. These people, such as the Gospel writers and Paul, had come to conclusions about Jesus Christ and they then “searched the scriptures”. Matthew is notorious for the way Hebrew Scriptures texts were misapplied.
Because the WTS operates this way, in seeking support for a predetermined conclusion, they are vehemently opposed to Higher Criticism, which for me is the only way to understand the Biblical writings. A true scientist looks at all of the evidence and then creates hypotheses leading to conclusions (“theories”). That is the way Higher Criticism operates, termed “exegesis”. The WTS, however, does not do this, and I classify their methodology as “eisegesis” and as “begging the question” (look up the true meaning of that expression).
======
It seems to me that because the Biblical account links creation with fully formed beasts and humans, this forces the brochure’s inability to make the distinction between the creation of life and the subsequent development of living beings.
“The more that scientists discover about life, the less likely it appears that it could arise by chance. To sidestep this dilemma, some evolutionary scientists would like to make a distinction between the theory of evolution and the question of the origin of life. But does that sound reasonable to you?” (The Origin of Life?, page 12)
Yes, that sounds absolutely reasonable to me, Mister Watchtower. So are we now determining “truth” on what sounds “reasonable”?
The scientists discussed in the brochure accept Evolution. But each scientist has a different view on the mechanism that gave rise to the presence of life on planet Earth. Yes, it is most reasonable to separate the origin of life on Earth from the subsequent development.
======
Let us accept for one fleeting moment that life commenced on Earth because of the actions by a supernatural energy. Some give this energy the term “God”, or “Gods”. Questions that quickly flow include:
1. Who created this energy?
2. Is this supernatural energy comprehensible in human terms?
3. How many sources of supernatural energy exist? How do we know? Why?
