...you want fries with that?
gravedancer
JoinedPosts by gravedancer
-
25
Woman forced to drink own breast milk at airport!
by seawolf init's on o'reilly tonight!
it's on where i live now.
http://www.newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2002/8/6/92628.
-
-
-
60
Is it really so? Is there an inner circle here?
by Celtic inbefore some of you jump down my throat thinking i'm stirring muddied waters, i'm not, but, a question has been on my mind here more often than not, who exactly is the membership made up of here, within this community, of an inner circle so to speak?
you scratch my back, i'll scratch yours etc pile of poo.. personally, i've had enough of clicky groups and cliches to last me a lifetime, so, who are these guys that try to keep others excluded from their small brained 'in club'?.
celtic mark - cornwall uk
-
-
gravedancer
Celtic,
There is no inner circle....you have the shape wrong.
-
5
Common Parent
by gravedancer ini was driving home today and i had a thought (a totally new experience i admit).
i think i can reconcile some of the answers to the thought but for some discussion here it is:.
assumptions and logic chainthe population of humans is growingthe population of humans has gorwn over timewe could study history and create a growth curve over time to extrapolate a consistent growth ratefrom that we could take the current human population of the planet and work backwards to the start of mankind.
-
-
gravedancer
FD - thanks for responding. I never meant to imply that she was the only living woman at the time...
Its an interesting thought though:
How could someone else have preceded her as Mitochondrial Eve? Where would the current title holder have obtained her MDNA from?
I have studied the theory but still have some issues making sense of it.
-
5
Common Parent
by gravedancer ini was driving home today and i had a thought (a totally new experience i admit).
i think i can reconcile some of the answers to the thought but for some discussion here it is:.
assumptions and logic chainthe population of humans is growingthe population of humans has gorwn over timewe could study history and create a growth curve over time to extrapolate a consistent growth ratefrom that we could take the current human population of the planet and work backwards to the start of mankind.
-
-
gravedancer
Jan,
Thanks for the chat earlier tonight. As we discussed Mitochondria Eve lies at the core of my answer.
What does this mean? The premise of Mitochondria Eve is that we can all be traced back to a single woman about 200,000 years ago (probably in Africa).
What are Mitochondria?Mitochondria power cells. Mitochondria are considered separate from the cell because they have their own DNA which is unaffected by other genetic exchanges.
What are Mitochondrial DNA and why are they important?
We are conceived by the combination of our parental genetic material (in equal proportion from each parent). Our paren'ts were conceived in the same manner from their parents contributing genetic material in equal proportions...and so on...in essence making us a "soup" of genetic material through multiple repeated patterns.
However, the Mitochondrial DNA remain relatively consistent through the female line. Male sperm cells have only enough mitochondria to power them to the egg....but not enough to enter and mix with the mitochondria from the female egg. Thus the only possible way for mitochondria to change in makeup is through mutation (a slow drawn out process)What does this have to do with "Eve"?
By comparing the Mitochondrial DNA from different groups, from different regions we can construct a "molecular clock". For example if we pattern the Mitochondrial DNA (MDNA) from someone in Africa and then compare it to the MDNA of someone say from Europe we can ascertain when the Europeans left Africa. The sampling as part of the survey to construct this theory occurred from hunderds of groups from all over the planet. When the data was analysed it pointed to a common ancestor living in Africa about 200,000 years ago.This points to a glut in human genetics at which point the earthly population was so tiny that the genetics of one woman could affect all future population. She must have had genetic advantages which enabled her offspring to survive while all other offspring from other parents died over time thus leaving her MDNA as the consistent fabric across time.
She may not have been the last Mitochondrial Eve....
-
5
Common Parent
by gravedancer ini was driving home today and i had a thought (a totally new experience i admit).
i think i can reconcile some of the answers to the thought but for some discussion here it is:.
assumptions and logic chainthe population of humans is growingthe population of humans has gorwn over timewe could study history and create a growth curve over time to extrapolate a consistent growth ratefrom that we could take the current human population of the planet and work backwards to the start of mankind.
-
-
gravedancer
I was driving home today and I had a thought (a totally new experience I admit). I think I can reconcile some of the answers to the thought but for some discussion here it is:
Assumptions and logic chain
- The population of humans is growing
- The population of humans has gorwn over time
- We could study history and create a growth curve over time to extrapolate a consistent growth rate
- From that we could take the current human population of the planet and work backwards to the START of mankind
Questions
- Well, are these assumptions correct?
- Which can be challeneged?
- If we challenged some of them how would we ammend them?
- If we acknowledge a START of mankind what does that mean?
- Who were the immediate ancestors of the first person?
- What about the first person would we classify to call them the first person vs a prehistoric being?
While the questions seemingly pose an issue to an evolutionist, such as mine, I am not so sure they do yet.
What are your thoughts?
-
-
-
gravedancer
Caught with her cookie in the handjar
-
19
Can Non-Jehovah's Witness Resurrect?
by ApostleJon ini have a question on resurrection after christ's 2nd coming... let say that some of my family has passed away without any knowledge of jw gospel or whatever in this case.
can they resurrect and join us in the paradise to live forever?
can they decide that they have nothing to do with jw but profess that they believes in christ and live in paradise with all of us?
-
-
gravedancer
Jesus never married so he won't be coming any time soon...and masturbation is not allowed ion heaven.
-
170
JWZone Thread on Bill Bowen - UPDATED!
by SYN inyes i know you're all getting p*d off with my jwzone threads, but i couldn't let this one go by!!!!!!
so, i'm just going to embed the thread here and let you guys comment...hehe...some jwzoners are going to get their heads bitten off in this thread!
edited by - syn on 8 august 2002 13:43:36.
-
-
gravedancer
Look at these people at JWZone...and you are pissed off right?
WHY? Do you see yourself? Not yourself TODAY....but yourself in days and years gone by when you were a dub? I bet most people here would have reacted exactly the same way, when we were dubs. When you are a loyal dub the organization can do no wrong. The governing body is powerful because of the strength of the belief their followers have....and for NO other reason.
I happen to agree that the penbdulum for many of us here has swung entirely too far the other way....and thats OK....but when we can see that and acknowledge that then we can grow and heal. While the pendulum is all the way opposite the JW side...we won't heal. We nurse wounds with moderation, even when we have amputated the limb violently first, before they heal.
Some among us are disgruntled with LIFE, not just JWs.
GD
-
48
Is Mutual Respect Possible?
by Sociologist inone of the most striking things about this and similar message boards concerning jehovah's witnesses is the strength of feeling jw-related discussions evoke.
as i dabble in sociology, i was wondering what you all thought about the following questions.
my objective is not to criticize persons belonging to other group but rather to attempt to grasp the dynamics of the conflicts at work here.. the questions:.
-
-
gravedancer
Well, unlike some of the oversensitive folk I believe you asked good questions.
(1) Why are many on both sides so fanatical? Presumably there must be humanly intelligent, morally decent, rational beings in both JW and ex-JW camps. And surely, objectively speaking, the Watchtower organization is neither 100% evil nor 100% perfect. Why is it apparently just as difficult for ex-witnesses to see anything positive in the organization as it is for current Witnesses to admit that there might be weaknesses?
Fanatics of any kind are damaged goods..and they are unable to act on rational thought. It applies equally well to JWs and XJWs. There are many here who think the WT can do no right. Unfortuantely, this thinking goes largely unchallenged since most of us do not want to provide any positive acknowledgement to the WT society. The fanatic XJWs are just the same as their fanatical JW kinfolk. Hatred from any side which consumes ones mind and thoughts can never be postive to oneself or to others. Do not confuse frustration with hatred.
(2) Is the participation of ex-JW's on this and similar web-sites typical of all who leave the JW religion? What percentage do you think become vocal opponents of the Watchtower, and what percentage just move on and get on with their lives? Why are so many now atheists or agnostics? Do many ex-JW's now belong to traditional Christian groups? (They appear to be a silent minority here.)
I am an atheist because I insist on proof and so far their is NO proof of anything other than evolution which makes sense to me. I will not live my life investing my time and energy so that I give up my freedom for some God who could not give a rats ass about humanity. If anything I am more frustrated by lack of rationality than by JW-think (since their is no difference). The reason the Christian groups are silent is because they are still clutching for mental/emotional straws.
3) The opposing camp emphasize what they perceive to be the weaknesses of Witnesses (arrogance in claiming only they are right, fanaticism, deceitfulness [at the very least "spin"] with regard to their beliefs, self-righteousness, excessive concern with appearances, manipulation, etc.). Obviously these qualities are not unique to JW's. Could it not be said that they are common, even typical of organized religion in general? Or to take it a step further, might it be said that they are basic to human nature? Is it reasonable for some JW's to paint all ex-witnesses as "evil apostates"?
Yes it is common for most religions to claim they are right? If other paths are acceptable then how can they exist without offering the easiest of lifestyles with the lowest of moral principles? In other words the only way they can control their believers is to claim to be THE right religion.
(4) A lot of what is written on this board is reminiscent of what you might hear from a disgruntled divorcee describing their former spouse's behavior. There would appear to be a lot of bitterness, sarcasm/irony, "demonizing" in general. Some comments I have read are frankly vulgar, others more sophisticated, but in all cases, the question arises: How objective is the picture they portray? After all, even ex-witnesses (who may have spent years in the organization) must surely have enjoyed SOME positive benefits from their adherence to the organization that justified their staying as long as they did. Aside from raising questions of the objectivity of those who write about their experiences with the organization, one wonders whether such an approach is conducive to good mental and emotional health. Clearly such an all-embracing shift in worldview would cause great emotional upheaval, but are there more mature ways of dealing with it?
Agreed...this place is set aside for many to "bitch". Many have legitimate complaints and they need to air them. You are dealing with human emotions, feelings and affected lives of people - why do you expect objectivity? I don't expect to find it here - perhaps you need to manage your expectations properly?
(5) Without questioning the sincerity of many current or former JW's, what is gained by constant efforts to criticize or condemn the other side? If ex-JW's have found something they like better, what is to be gained by attempting to induce them to stay, even if you think they are making a colossal mistake by leaving? On the other hand, if current witnesses are satisfied with their religion, then why try to disillusion them, even if you believe they are hopelessly mistaken? (Ex-JW's who are now atheists would presumably agree that in 100 years from now, everyone, JW or not, will be in the same situation [i.e. dead], so what difference could it possibly make?)
It is a dysfunctional way of dealing with pain. Most JWs are forced into dysfunctionality - just because they cast off the organization doesn't mean the effects and thinking patterns dissipate. I agree that if people are satisfied being JW's then leave them be. However, its not quite that simple is it since if one of their family members wants out they are threatened with isolation and shunning - and thus they "stay in", albeit unhappily. You cannot have it be only one way in a very high percentage of cases.
(6) To what extent are both sides willing to accept responsibility for their own decisions? It is easy to cry mental manipulation, brainwashing, etc, but in reality such a paradigm could hardly account for millions of people subscribing to this or that belief system. It would seem that people who believe the Watchtower (or any other religious or non-religious tenets) do so because they have CHOSEN to believe it; people who don't believe it have CHOSEN not to believe it. That is not to say that such choices are always made consciously; many are made by default. But would you agree that there is a strong tendency in both camps to say that the problem is all "out there," with the other side? How realistic is such a position?
You are surely not trying to broker a truce between fanatics on either side? You would be better served trying to perform your own vasectomy (its probably far less painful too). I totally diagree with the premise of choice in this case though (perhaps they started down the road by making a choice) however, they are kept in by fear. Although just a few days ago I sat here all alone wondering if life is better as a dub with a big social circle or as a liberated loner.....
GD
-
114
15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense
by JanH inscientific american runs an article rebutting some of the most common creationist arguments.
short and to the point.. this is the first page.
click for the following ones.. see http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleid=000d4fec-7d5b-1d07-8e49809ec588eedf&catid=2.
-
-
gravedancer
Evolutionists can't have it both ways.
The purpose of each of our lives is to preserve the human species. Motivated by our own intense desire to experience pleasure and promote our own survival, we will each try to be psychologically as far away from facing death (or discomfort which we instinctually associate with death).
Our sexual urges, desires, motivations, drives, CULTURES, attitudes, values are all setup for the purpose of self and group preservation. I have yet to find an instance where this is not true.