Posts by Disillusioned JW

33

Does the Governing Body already know that Jehovah (the name) came from Babylon the Great?

by Chevelle in

i'll start by stating the obvious... according to the watchtower, the catholic church is a huge part of babylon the great which is led by satan and his demons.

raymundus martini, a catholic monk (who "represents" babylon the great to some extent), woke up one day in the 13th century and decided to alter yhwh so it can be easily pronounced.

hence the spanish-ish version of yhwh was created... jehova... (sounds something like this in spanish: heh-o-va).

Disillusioned JW

Beth Sarim, the WT Society includes the text of the Aid to Bible Understanding in the WT's online library.

100

American Healthcare: How your system works

by Diogenesister in

canada has universal healthcare.

the consensus is that america never will.

can anyone explain why, please?

Regarding the requirement to have health insurance in the USA (at least one with really low level coverage which covers preventative care, such as getting free vaccinations and certain free health screenings), when Donald Trump was president the Republicans in congress passed legislation which removed the penalty for not having health insurance (though technically the law still requires people to have at least very minimal health insurance coverage).

I agree with SydBarrett that the really bad thing about employer provided health insurance is the situation of when a person becomes unemployed. That is why I want the USA federal government to provide single payer universal health insurance (but with the option for people to choose a non-government health insurance plan if they prefer). I have been unemployed a number of times and thus without health insurance a number of times, until my very liberal state government passed a state law providing a free insurance plan (like medicaid, or as an extension of medicaid) to very low income people (and to those with no income at all, including to the homeless). For a while I was covered by that state health insurance plan at no charge to me (but each month I had I to inform the state government what my income was for the month). My state recently (by way of a ballot measure which the voters passed) amended the state constitution to declare that everyone in the state is entitled to access to affordable health care.

Fortunately currently I am employed (for six years now with the same company) with a really great medical insurance plan (with really low deductibles) in which my employer pays 90% of the premium costs (otherwise the premium I would have to pay would be way too expensive for me). In the plan my out of pocket maximum (including deductibles and co-pays) is only $650/year when I go to an in-network provider.

78

Top AI inventor Geoffrey Hinton reluctantly concluded that AI will probably humanity fairly soon

by slimboyfat in

geoffrey hinton, major inventor of artificial intelligence: .

“if you take the existential risk seriously, as i now do—i used to think it was way off, but now i think it’s serious, and fairly close—it might be quite sensible to just stop developing these things any further, but i think it’s completely naïve to think that would happen.

there’s no way to make that happen.

Disillusioned JW

To this discussion there is a relevant portion of an article at https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/18/world/asia/g7-ukraine-artificial-intelligence.html called "Ukraine and China Will Dominate G7 Summit, but a New Threat Lurks: A.I. - The leaders are expected to hold their first talks on a common regulatory approach to generative artificial intelligence." It says in part the following.

"But at some point over three days of discussions, the G7 leaders are also expected to venture into new territory: the first conversations among the world’s largest democratic economies about a common approach to regulating the use of generative artificial intelligence programs like GPT-4.

... But as the new artificial intelligence language model from OpenAI made nations around the world focus for the first time on the possibilities for disinformation, chaos and the physical destruction of critical infrastructure, Mr. Biden’s national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, began calling counterparts to seek a common discussion.

... American officials say that in the case of chatbots, even a vague foundational discussion may help in establishing some shared principles: that the corporations that bring products using the large-language models will be primarily responsible for their safety, and that there must be transparency rules that make it clear what kind of data each system was trained on. That will enable lower-level aides to discuss details of what those first regulations would look like, the officials said."

53

New World Translation is not much different other translations

by Abraham1 in

key scripture 2 timothy 3:16 should have been translated as “every scripture inspired of god is also profitable for teaching” like many other serious translations (such as american standard version ; douay-rheims bible etc) as it is what the greek text says.. this is in harmony with the contents of bible and also with the writer paul himself who knew after his departure ‘even from his own number men will arise and distort the truth.’ (acts 20:29-30) for example, verses such as romans 7:19 is such distortion.

such verses cannot originate from real paul who was “holy, righteous and blameless.” (1 thessalonians 2:10) hence paul had the freeness of speech to tell others to be “blameless” like him (1 thessalonians 5:19-23; ephesians 5:24) there are many things in the scriptures which are not inspired such as words of satan, words of job’s wife and his false friends, words of judas, lot’s daughters …etc.

apostle peter never disowned jesus because if he had done so, his contemporaries would have interrupted him when he rebuked jews, saying: “you disowned the holy and righteous one and asked that a murderer be released to you.“ (acts 3:14) his listeners would have asked him “what right do you have to reprove us for ‘disowning jesus” when you yourself have done it first?” all such verses or accounts were later adoptions.

Disillusioned JW

Actually the Wescott Hort text wasn't pro0duced till decades after the first edition of the Emphatic Diaglott. They both made use of some of the same Greek manuscripts, but the Greek texts they publish are not exactly the same. In the early 1900s Russell made use of a critical text by Tischendorf, in based upon that text the WT's Berean KJV Bible editions recommended readers to cross out various verses (and parts of verses) from their copies of the Berean KJV Bible.

Wescott and Hort did not provide a literal translation in the publication of their Greek text. The interlinear English translation in the WT's Kingdom Interlinear Transaltion was was translated by the WT.

63

Evolution is a Fact #27 - Monkeys, Typewriters, Shakespeare, 747s etc.

by cofty in

most creationist arguments can be summarised as "complexity, complexity, complexity - therefore god".

we have all heard the illustrations about the odds of (insert favourite example) evolving, being less than 10,000 monkeys typing macbeth by pure chance.

evolution is not like that.

Disillusioned JW

I didn't know that any monkeys perform mathematical functions. Please provide a source for information about monkeys doing math.

63

Evolution is a Fact #27 - Monkeys, Typewriters, Shakespeare, 747s etc.

by cofty in

most creationist arguments can be summarised as "complexity, complexity, complexity - therefore god".

we have all heard the illustrations about the odds of (insert favourite example) evolving, being less than 10,000 monkeys typing macbeth by pure chance.

evolution is not like that.

Disillusioned JW

Update: It looks like there are no food sources and no minerals which emit UV rays.

78

Top AI inventor Geoffrey Hinton reluctantly concluded that AI will probably humanity fairly soon

by slimboyfat in

geoffrey hinton, major inventor of artificial intelligence: .

“if you take the existential risk seriously, as i now do—i used to think it was way off, but now i think it’s serious, and fairly close—it might be quite sensible to just stop developing these things any further, but i think it’s completely naïve to think that would happen.

there’s no way to make that happen.

Disillusioned JW

slimboyfat your title for this topic seems to be missing a word in between the words "probably" and "humanity". Did you intend your title to say "... probably kill humanity ..." or ".... probably destroy humanity ..."? If not, what did you intend to say in between the words "probably" and "humanity"?

It is possible that AI could eventually kill many humans within 10 years. It is also possible that some human (or group of humans) might specifically program AI to do such (such as for militaristic purposes or for terrorism purposes). The human (or humans) might do so on a targeted basis, and later the human (or humans) might loose control of the AI. That would especially be the case if the AI has a computer virus component to enable it to rapidly replicate, mutate, and spread by evolution (though a non-biological evolution) under the mechanism of natural selection.

78

Top AI inventor Geoffrey Hinton reluctantly concluded that AI will probably humanity fairly soon

by slimboyfat in

geoffrey hinton, major inventor of artificial intelligence: .

“if you take the existential risk seriously, as i now do—i used to think it was way off, but now i think it’s serious, and fairly close—it might be quite sensible to just stop developing these things any further, but i think it’s completely naïve to think that would happen.

there’s no way to make that happen.

Disillusioned JW

LV101 go ahead and fantasize all you want of the conspiracy claims you mentioned. But as for me, I don't believe those particular conspiracy theories at all.

63

Evolution is a Fact #27 - Monkeys, Typewriters, Shakespeare, 747s etc.

by cofty in

most creationist arguments can be summarised as "complexity, complexity, complexity - therefore god".

we have all heard the illustrations about the odds of (insert favourite example) evolving, being less than 10,000 monkeys typing macbeth by pure chance.

evolution is not like that.

Disillusioned JW

Note also that https://ehs.lbl.gov/resource/documents/radiation-protection/non-ionizing-radiation/ultraviolet-radiation/ says the following.

"UV-A (315–400 nm)

...The most significant adverse health effects have been reported at wavelengths below 315 nm, known collectively as actinic ultraviolet."

Evolution thus protects our retinas from most of the dangers of UV ways while providing us humans the ability to see from a small portion of the UV spectrum of the sun's light. Now isn't evolution truly amazing!

63

Evolution is a Fact #27 - Monkeys, Typewriters, Shakespeare, 747s etc.

by cofty in

most creationist arguments can be summarised as "complexity, complexity, complexity - therefore god".

we have all heard the illustrations about the odds of (insert favourite example) evolving, being less than 10,000 monkeys typing macbeth by pure chance.

evolution is not like that.

Disillusioned JW

cofty, there might be a benefit for humans also. Humans have created night vision cameras to help them detect heat signatures of humans, nonhuman animals, and heat from human-made sources, in order to see those entities at night. If a human could naturally see heat signatures of dangerous wild animals and of enemy soldiers at night, that could help the human to be safe. Seeing part of the UV spectrum might also help a human.For example help the human to find certain food sources and certain useful minerals which emit UV rays.

After writing the above an internet search and found the following fascinating articles.

https://wonderopolis.org/wonder/Why-Can%E2%80%99t-We-See-Ultraviolet-Light says the following.

"Is UV light invisible to everyone? Actually, no. People with a condition called aphakia can see UV light waves. Those with aphakia are missing an eye lens, often due to surgery or genetics. The lack of this lens enables them to see beyond the visible spectrum of light, but it also causes blurry vision and farsightedness.

Additionally, some animals can see UV light. Scientists have known for a long time that bees have this ability. Many birds and reptiles can, too. Until recently, experts believed that UV light was invisible to all mammals. However, a recent study found that most mammals probably can see these waves of light, including dogs, cats, and reindeer. It found that the lenses in their eyes allow UV light to pass through.

How about the other end of the spectrum of visible light? Red light has the longest wavelength commonly visible to humans. Light with longer wavelengths than red is called infrared. Scientists once believed no one could see infrared light. However, experts today think many humans can do so, especially if more than one infrared photon hits the eye at once.

How do you think the world might look different if you could see UV light? Would you see a deeper shade of violet? Maybe it would be a whole new color altogether!"

See also https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20150727-what-are-the-limits-of-human-vision . Besides mentioning the ability of seeing UV when the lenses are removed it also says the following.

"A study in 2014 pointed out that, in a manner of speaking, we all can see infrared photons, too. If two infrared photons smack into a retinal cell nearly simultaneously, their energy can combine, converting them from an invisible wavelength of, say, 1000 nanometres to a visible 500 nanometres (a cool green to most eyes). "

It also says the following. "Jameson knows what she's talking about, given her work with "tetrachromats", people who possess apparent superhuman vision. These rare individuals, mostly women, have a genetic mutation granting them an extra, fourth cone cell. As a rough approximation based on the number of these extra cones, tetrachromats might see 100 million colours. (People who are colour-blind, or dichromats, have only two cones and see perhaps 10,000 colours.)

... In ideal lab conditions and in places on the retina where rod cells are largely absent, cone cells can be activated when struck by only a handful of photons. Rod cells, though, do even better at picking up whatever ambient light is available. As experiments first conducted in the 1940s show, just one quanta of light can be enough to trigger our awareness. "People can respond to a single photon," says Brian Wandell, professor of psychology and electrical engineering at Stanford. "There is no point in being any more sensitive." What are the limits of your vision? "

Regarding infrared vision see also https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/12/141201161116.htm .

https://www.newscientist.com/lastword/mg24432591-000-super-seers-why-some-people-can-see-ultraviolet-light/ says the following.

"Richard Swifte Darmstadt, Germany

The human retina is sensitive to the ultraviolet (UV) spectrum down to about 300 nanometres, but the lens of the eye filters it out. This adaptation perhaps arose to protect the retina from the more damaging UV. It also avoids the increased blurry effect of having too wide a spectral range, since different wavelengths focus at different distances from the lens.

Artificial lenses are designed to block UV. But people born without a lens, or who have a lens removed and not replaced, sometimes report seeing ultraviolet as a whitish-violet light. One example is the Impressionist painter Claude Monet, who developed bad cataracts in later life and eventually had his left eye’s lens removed. His subsequent works heavily feature bluish colours, often thought to be the result of him seeing UV.

Brian Horton West Launceston, Tasmania, Australia

Normal colour vision ranges from wavelengths of around 380 nanometres (violet) to 750 nanometres (red). Most people can’t easily see light shorter than 380 nanometres because the lens of the eye absorbs it. If the lens is missing or removed, often due to cataracts, light below the violet range isn’t blocked and can be detected down to around 310 nanometres. Without the lens to focus light, these people are far-sighted and need corrective lenses to focus at short distances.

Insects can see ultraviolet light, and some other animals have vision in this range too.

Bob Butler Llangoed, Anglesey, UK

Some years ago, after being admitted to hospital with sepsis, I developed uveitis, an eye inflammation that could have caused permanent loss of vision. The lens of my right eye was removed and replaced with an artificial one. The new lens meant I could see better through this eye than I ever had before.

On leaving hospital, I decided I deserved a pint of bitter. Standing at the bar of my local pub, I noticed that their device for detecting counterfeit banknotes was emitting very bright bluish light. I mentioned this to the barman, who looked at me with a very quizzical expression but made no comment. I then realised that he couldn’t see the light: it was visible through my right eye alone.

It seems that the natural lens in the eye has a filtering effect as a protection against ultraviolet light. I owe the staff of the emergency eye clinic my thanks not only for saving my eyesight, but also for my ability to see UV light."

Since our bodies evolved to be what they are and since our lenses block UV why do human retinas have the ability to see UV (if the lenses get removed)? Perhaps the UV sensitivity came about as a by-product of having violet light sensitivity, and thus also didn't give removed from the gene pool as a result of non-use. [Natural selection can't directly select for something which is never used, though it can indirectly select for it if the feature is a by-product of something which natural selection selects for.] But after writing the above I found an article which claims we do see some UV after all (even with our lenses intact) [evolution is true], for note what https://publichealth.uga.edu/uga-study-finds-people-can-see-uv-light-opens-questions-about-consequences-for-eye-health/ says. It says the following.

'Yet, new research from the University of Georgia found that people can see ultraviolet light, and the health implications may be significant.'

In a study recently published in PLOS One, co-authors Billy R. Hammond and Lisa Renzi-Hammond show that 100 percent of the participants, all young adults, were able to detect an isolated UV peak at 315 nm.

“Every textbook that is written on vision, optometry, ophthalmology, introduction to psychology, sensation and perception all say the same thing, that humans cannot see ultraviolet light. We have now shown otherwise,” said Renzi-Hammond.

... Renzi-Hammond, who studies the intersection of vision and health at UGA’s College of Public Health, says that the team didn’t set out to rewrite the rules on visible light. However, she continued, knowing that the eye can detect UV presents previously unknown consequences.

“From a health perspective, there’s a risk to the retina,” she said. “If you can see the light, it’s getting back to your retina, and in a way that could potentially be damaging.”