Posts by FrightMare

11

The Serpent Ate the Fruit

by Black Man in

jw
friends

i remember in one of my bethel entrants school classes, the instructor commenting on the events that went down in genesis chapter 3 and commenting that one of the reasons why the serpent was so persuasive was because he "evidently" partook of the tree of the knowledge of good and bad.

because he had taken such a course, he could persuasively convince eve to do the same.

i can't remember what source material he used to support this assertion.

FrightMare

The insight book further expounds on this point.

The WT will always depicts the serpent on the tree of knowledge of good and bad in its illustrations, never near it, or slithering on the ground. Their rendition seems very likely to me. The woman could not have been easily convinced by an animal talking to her. I mean, think about it, even a 5 year old child knows that serpents don't talk.

But the serpent was showing Eve by example that the tree was not harmful as God said it was, but rather, it was beneficial. Just look at the results, look what it did to a mere serpent, imagine what it could do for a human!

8

Donations my Ass

by FrightMare in

jw
friends

i think we should all objurgate those who boast about donating to the sep 11th fund, red cross, or any other loser fund.. that dumb ass mayor giuliani is the worst thing that could happen to ny, he absolutely fettered the rescue work to a grinding halt.

the hard working, almost indefatigable rescue workers could have accomplished something with the billions of pounds of rubble, if only that asshole epicene giuliani knew what he was doing, and was capable of coordinating and directing a massive rescue mission.. all the dollars you are pulling out of your pockets are now wasted because of that ass.

there are no survivors left (because of that ass).

FrightMare

I think we should all objurgate those who boast about donating to the sep 11th fund, red cross, or any other loser fund.

That dumb ass mayor Giuliani is the worst thing that could happen to NY, he absolutely fettered the rescue work to a grinding halt. The hard working, almost indefatigable rescue workers could have accomplished something with the billions of pounds of rubble, if only that asshole epicene giuliani knew what he was doing, and was capable of coordinating and directing a massive rescue mission.

All the dollars you are pulling out of your pockets are now wasted because of that ass. There are no survivors left (because of that ass). Your dollars will not bring the victims back to life. All you're doing is paying for rich bitches to have and rent buildings for mega bucks once again. Don't put your money to waste on these bastards.

41

Is evolution a fact or theory?

by sleepy in

jw
friends

is evolution a fact or a theory?.

i suppose it depends on what you mean.. evolution in the sense of change from one generation to the next seams to be fact.. is well observed that offspring from a given creature will differ from the parent in different ways and thus after many generation can come to be quite different.. also that the genes of a creature can be affected by radiation from the sun and be alter in a novel way producing new and unique features in its offspring ( as long as the mutation is in the sperm or the egg).. that we came about via changes in the genes that eventually created a very different creature than that existed many generations ago , is that a fact?.

this requires that not only that there are changes between generation but also that these changes could be directed by different environments to such a degree that only certain specialised features could survive and reproduce offspring whilst other creatures have died out and only remain in fossilised form.. what evidence is there that such environments can and have existed?

FrightMare

I take my philosophical starting point as roughly in accordance with Searle, but a bit more "hard AI" in some ways. In other words: Conciousness is not a thing, but a function of the brain, in the same way that the circulation of blood is not a thing, but a property of the vasculature and heart. It is thus neither an object, nor a non-material entity, but a property which an object posesses. In this view point, the "problem" of qualia is not an insurmountable puzzle for conciousness, but simply a description of part of the concious state. The major difference between conciousness and all other visceral functions is that we view (erroneously) a combination of language and entirely subjective states to discuss the visceral function, forgetting that language and subjective states are the visceral function. It is a cognitive trap that is subtle and elusive.
Penrose, and all the other "spooky" theorists of conciousness avoid several facts:

1. Conciousness is made of parts, and lesion studies show that in humans. Concious experience is not bound into a seamless whole: things are at the edge and the center of experiance depending on circumstances, and circumstances will also cause things to intrude that are not objectively real (hallucinations) and cause objectively real phenomena to drop out of sight (Chronic pain is no longer noticed except as irritability).

2. The brain has a specific architecture, and lesions in the brain cause specific syndromes. These syndromes are best explained by the activity of neurons in those areas, and their anatomical connections. These lesions can also alter the capacity of objects to enter the concious arena, and the capacity of the brain to perform tasks employed by the concious mind (ie they limit the sphere of conscious experiance). Hence, any theory of consciousness must explain these two facts in detail.

The microtubular theory proposes that somehow the thalamic 40hz scanning frequency is necessary for the coherence function of the microtubular arrays. This does not address in any way adequately the fact that much of our concious experience appears to be mediated by overlapping circuits between cortical areas: the function of many thalamic nuclei are more plausibly scanning, switching and weighting of functional importance of cortical and subcortical circuits, rather than a spooky source of quantum coherence. If the theory is so modified as to say that the actions of the thalamic mechanism is reflected by neuronal activity, then all you have to do is remove the quantum coherence bit, and you have the same explanation as the usual neurobiological one, but simply lacking the quantum stuff, and since the necessity of invoking quantum coherence on neurobiological grounds is not clear at all, the whole thing becomes somewhat pointless.

In brief, the only sensible neurobiological approach to conciousness is NOT that it is a manifestation of an event or a thing: it is first and foremost a subjective state. But that is a surprisingly subtle and tricky point: it is a subjective state in an organ that appears to have as its function the generation of particular subjective states, in the same way that blood circulation is a phenomenon in an organ whose function seems to be the maintenance of a particular pattern of circulation. If it were otherwise, then the heart (with its pacing, and its intrinsic microtubules) would be "conscious", and so would the bowels (with their truly substantial innervation and intrinsic pacers). But they don't manifest signs of experiancing subjective states in the same way that brains do, even though they surely have both microtubules and a complex architecture and intrinsic pacing. So........

What does this have to do with evolution? Once you work out what conciousness actually is, then that defines the scope of both its consequences and origins. So all of this it has to do with the idea of specified complexity but it also bears directly and simply on the notion of Intelligent design. Let us now consider the simple idea that conciousness is a prerequisite for the activity of intelligence. Hence conciousness is a prerequisite for design. Now, conciousness is a subjective state of a material brain of some sort (that's our definition). That is the only way we know of it, or can define in it any scientific terms (that's a scientific fact). It is thus impossible in the strongest terms to speak of ID without implicitly assuming a material brain of one form or another. I think we all know what that implies for theists of any type: that if G-d is the designer, G-d has a material brain. If G-d had a material brain, then He would be a natural phenomenon (by definition). Seems to me only a very naive person would accept the notion of ID as scientific evidence of Divine intervention.

12

What's that Smell?

by FrightMare in

jw
friends

"could a being create the fifty billion galaxies, each with two hundred billion stars, then rejoice in the smell of burning goat flesh?

" - ron patterson

FrightMare

You theists say that without God there is no way to explain our existence. So you are postulating the existence of an infinitely good being. This being is capable of creating the universe.

You still haven't explained why it did so.

A rational being creates something as a response to a stimulus in an attempt to better its situation. God is infinitely good. I can postulate the existence of God without the universe. God plus the universe is no better than God alone. Therefore I have trouble producing a reason for God to create the universe.

Hence the problem. A being capable of creating the universe has no reason to do so.

12

What's that Smell?

by FrightMare in

jw
friends

"could a being create the fifty billion galaxies, each with two hundred billion stars, then rejoice in the smell of burning goat flesh?

" - ron patterson

FrightMare

"Could a being create the fifty billion galaxies, each with two hundred billion stars, then rejoice in the smell of burning goat flesh?" - Ron Patterson

46

Jay Dubs right about 1914

by FrightMare in

jw
friends

please study this chart very, very carefully: http://www.sru.edu/depts/artsci/ges/d-3-2.htm.

why has such an unprecedented boom in population and technology occurred during the specific time the bible points to the 'last days', 1914?

FrightMare

On top of all this, virtually everyone in the world realizes that 1914 was one of the biggest turning points in our modern history. Mere coincidence?

The London Star observed: "Some historian in the next century may well conclude that the day the world went mad was . . . [in] 1914."

"It is indeed the year 1914 rather than that of Hiroshima which marks the turning point in our time."-René Albrecht-Carrié, The Scientific Monthly, July 1951.

"Everything would get better and better. This was the world I was born in. . . . Suddenly, unexpectedly, one morning in 1914 the whole thing came to an end."-British statesman Harold Macmillan, The New York Times, November 23, 1980.

"Ever since 1914, everybody conscious of trends in the world has been deeply troubled by what has seemed like a fated and predetermined march toward ever greater disaster. Many serious people have come to feel that nothing can be done to avert the plunge towards ruin."-Bertrand Russell, The New York Times Magazine, September 27, 1953.

As regards economic consequences, Ashby Bladen, a senior vice president of The Guardian Life Insurance Company of America, writes: "Before 1914 the monetary and the financial systems were compatible. . . . If one takes August 1914 as marking the dividing line between them, the contrasts between the nineteenth and the twentieth centuries are striking. In many aspects of human affairs there has been a complete reversal of trend. . . . One major reason was the severance of the linkage between the financial system and money with intrinsic value that began in 1914. . . . The breaking of the linkage was a momentous event. . . . 1914 marked a radical, and in the end catastrophic, transformation of that system."

"The modern era . . . began in 1914, and no one knows when or how it will end. . . . It could end in mass annihilation."-The Seattle Times, January 1, 1959.

"The whole world really blew up about World War I and we still don't know why. . . . Utopia was in sight. There was peace and prosperity. Then everything blew up. We've been in a state of suspended animation ever since."-Dr. Walker Percy, American Medical News, November 21, 1977.

"In 1914 the world lost a coherence which it has not managed to recapture since. . . . This has been a time of extraordinary disorder and violence, both across national frontiers and within them."-The Economist, London, August 4, 1979.

Historian Edmond Taylor expresses something that many historians agree on: "The outbreak of World War I ushered in a twentieth-century 'Time of Troubles' . . . Directly or indirectly all the convulsions of the last half century stem back to 1914."

The World Book Encyclopedia states: "World War I and its aftermath led to the greatest economic depression in history during the early 1930's. The consequences of the war and the problems of adjustment to peace led to unrest in almost every nation."

The German reference work Meyers Enzyklopädisches Lexikon, says that "the effects of World War I were literally revolutionary and struck deep in the lives of almost all peoples, economically as well as socially and politically."

8

Ya Gotta Love Richard Dawkins

by FrightMare in

jw
friends

richard: .

our leaders have described the recent atrocity with the customary cliche: mindless cowardice.

"mindless" may be a suitable word for the vandalising of a telephone box.

FrightMare

RICHARD:

Our leaders have described the recent atrocity with the customary cliche: mindless cowardice. "Mindless" may be a suitable word for the vandalising of a telephone box. It is not helpful for understanding what hit New York on September 11. Those people were not mindless and they were certainly not cowards. On the contrary, they had sufficiently effective minds braced with an insane courage, and it would pay us mightily to understand where that courage came from.

It came from religion. Religion is also, of course, the underlying source of the divisiveness in the Middle East which motivated the use of this deadly weapon in the first place. But that is another story and not my concern here. My concern here is with the weapon itself. To fill a world with religion, or religions of the Abrahamic kind, is like littering the streets with loaded guns. Do not be surprised if they are used.

10

Welcome, Frightmare!

by Stephanus in

jw
friends

saw your provocative style on one of the pro-witness boards and wondered how long before you wandered over here; after all, you can say just about whatever you want here without fear of having a controversial (read "interesting") thread terminated and removed by zealous followers of joe-hover.

glad to see you've become apostate because of your decision to associate with apostates.

it won't be long now...

FrightMare

well, to be totally honest, I did steal that kent/superman transformation photo from someone on WOL cuz I liked it. However, I will be replacing it soon with someone I actually resemble, The Incredible Hulk.

10

Welcome, Frightmare!

by Stephanus in

jw
friends

saw your provocative style on one of the pro-witness boards and wondered how long before you wandered over here; after all, you can say just about whatever you want here without fear of having a controversial (read "interesting") thread terminated and removed by zealous followers of joe-hover.

glad to see you've become apostate because of your decision to associate with apostates.

it won't be long now...

FrightMare

You will find I have a mercurial temper, beware!

I attend no other witness-related board, so I'm not quite sure of what you're referring to. I've been trying to register to witnessesonline.com but those assholes won't let me in.

I'm here to shatter the intellectual taliban that many people possess, and the rigid orthodoxy of thought that has been passed down to them.

To the dogmatic, I am your worst nightmare! Sleep well.

46

Jay Dubs right about 1914

by FrightMare in

jw
friends

please study this chart very, very carefully: http://www.sru.edu/depts/artsci/ges/d-3-2.htm.

why has such an unprecedented boom in population and technology occurred during the specific time the bible points to the 'last days', 1914?

FrightMare

Ok, I used my wife's WT-Cd-rom to look up some of this stuff, but it's really a novel argument that the society has never used before. This scripture in itself can cause nightmares to atheists, and tremors to those who were lulled sound asleep by apostates thinking that the end was no where near.

Here's my musing:

Amazingly, almost 2,000 years ago, the apostle John foretold through inspiration that God would "Bring to ruin those ruining the earth."--Revelation 11:18. At first glance, this scripture might not seem so prophetic. But think about what John was saying. He was indicating that there would be a time when man would cause damage to the earth. How was John to know this if he had not known of any causing ruin to the earth in his lifetime? Mankind in the first century had very little technology to ruin earth with, he lacked all of the modern technology we know of today. How could John look into the future, almost 2,000 years in advance and know that man would one day have the power to cause devastation to our planet? There's no doubt that the earth is being ruined. More than 1,600 scientists, including 104 Nobel laureates, from around the world endorsed a warning, issued by the Union of Concerned Scientists: "Human beings and the natural world are on a collision course. . . .No more than a few decades remain before the chance to avert the threats will be lost. . .it may so alter the world that it will be unable to sustain life in the manner that we know ...Our tampering with the interdependent web of life could trigger widespread effects, including collapses of biological systems whose dynamics we imperfectly understand." Quoted in the book State of the World 1988, environmental consultant Norman Myers gives this frightening message: "No generation in the past has faced the prospect of mass extinction within its lifetime. No generation in the future will ever face a similar challenge: if this present generation fails to get to grips with the task, the damage will have been done and there will be no 'second try.'" Ozone depletion, water pollution, deforestation, loss of soil productivity, and the extinction of many animal and plant species are just an example of just some of the things that have occurred in the 20th century to our planet. Yet the apostle John had no knowledge of

most of these problems during his lifetime. How could he look into the future and know what would occur? More specifically, how was he able to pinpoint the 20th century and beyond as the time when it would occur? (Or at least the witnesses were able to)