hawkaw

Joined

• started 169 topics
• posted 3,451 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by hawkaw

• 
  43

  The Watchtower Saw It Coming!

  by Englishman in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  this article made me smile:.

  march 15, 1986.. allow no place for the devil!.

  "ephesians 4:26, 27.. a vicious wild beast is on the prowl.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hawkaw

  Wow ... I am still trying to absorb this article.

  hawk
• 
  38

  Archaeologists in Ethiopia discover 12 fossils around 4 million years old

  by hawkaw in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsarticle.jhtml?type=sciencenews&storyid=7815576&section=news&src=rss/uk/sciencenews

  ethiopia archaeologists make important fossil find sat mar 5, 2005 12:03 pm gmt

  addis ababa (reuters) - archaeologists studying human origins in eastern ethiopia have discovered 12 fossils that appear to be older than the famous fossil "lucy," the team leader said on saturday.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hawkaw

  A participant on this thread mailed me and seriously attempted to convince me that the fossil and other records, that clearly show that mankind is far older than the time scale allowed by the Bible, was actually planted around the earth by 'Satan' in an attempt to 'confuse' mankind.

  If that person actually took the time to review a lot of what science is about, that person would realize that science is NOT a cult. That person needs to realize that the Book of Genesis is not the be all or end all either. That person needs to start opening his/her mind and to start critically thinking and reading.

  I strongly urge all members/participants to review the links I have provided. Clearly and slowly read and think about the information provided. Remember the definitions of theory and law as they relate to science that I have provided you.

  People, a lot of you came out of a dangerous cult unlike little old me. You are free now and likely now have the knowledge to practice proper critical thinking and reading skills. Science gives you independent tools and explanations of real life observations to allow you to move forward in life. Since the 1990s, the Internet has provided the general population with awesome access to the scientists tool box so they can fully understand actual processes such as the theory of relativity and the theory of biological evolution. Understand them and use them in your life and don't fall for misrepresentations of Young Earth Creationists.

  hawk
• 
  38

  Archaeologists in Ethiopia discover 12 fossils around 4 million years old

  by hawkaw in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsarticle.jhtml?type=sciencenews&storyid=7815576&section=news&src=rss/uk/sciencenews

  ethiopia archaeologists make important fossil find sat mar 5, 2005 12:03 pm gmt

  addis ababa (reuters) - archaeologists studying human origins in eastern ethiopia have discovered 12 fossils that appear to be older than the famous fossil "lucy," the team leader said on saturday.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hawkaw

  Hooberus is nothing more than a Young Earth Creationist who does not practice science.

  In his above-noted post Hooberous has provided links to improper science or people who are twisting tools in science improperly.

  If people take the time and actually read how scientists actually date things they will realize the stance taken by YEC is completely wrong - and all in the name of saving a literal reading of Genesis. In the above-noted url links that I have provided to you on this thread the following is stated that sums up my feelings about the web sites that hooberous has provided and the games the YEC play such as hooberous.

  Let's compare real science to "scientific" creationism.
  

  1. Real scientists, as did Darwin, usually spend some time pointing out the possible weaknesses they see in their theories. This is done not only to highlight areas which need further study but in order to strike a balanced presentation that will not mislead the reader. Truth is the overriding goal. Creationists usually minimize or ignore the weaknesses in their theories unless the cat is out of the bag. Inserting their views into the public educational system is usually their goal.

  2. Real scientists publish scientific literature, which can be very unorthodox, in refereed journals. This serves as a clearing house for ideas as well as a common testing ground.

     Creationists, who apparently have nothing worth saying to the scientific community, invariably write for the layman. They have found it necessary to publish their ideas in special "creationist journals" because none of the hundreds of legitimate scientific journals find their work acceptable. Creationist journals mostly serve as a rallying point for the faithful, rarely as a means for criticizing their fellow believers.

  3. Real scientists are quick to criticize their colleagues if they suspect an error. (Remember the cold fusion flap?) Catching errors improves their status in the scientific community even as it improves the level of science.

     Creationists have a fortress mentality, and they are quick to circle their wagons. To admit error is considered bad form among creationists, and most of them must literally be smoked out before admitting any errors whatsoever. With no effective mechanism for weeding out error, errors are passed down like the family jewels. Today, one can buy many creationist books containing errors that should have been eliminated 20-30 years ago!

  4. Real scientists are quick to test promising new ideas (however unorthodox) and those which don't pan out quickly disappear from the literature. Fame and fortune await any scientist who successfully advances a novel idea.

     Creationists are largely concerned with protecting their dogma, not advancing new ideas that might question that dogma. Rejection is the likely lot of any creationist who questions the central dogma. Creationist arguments having serious errors, including arguments based solely on obsolete data, circulate indefinitely in the creationist literature.

  5. Real scientists are often involved in meaningful laboratory and field work. They are looking for new data which might clarify, overturn, or confirm their views.

     Creationists spend most of their time combing through books and technical journals for quotes with which to snipe at evolution, geology, astronomy, and other areas of science which challenge their central dogma. When they're not doing that, they can usually be found out on the stump drumming up support among the uneducated public. [emphasis added]

  6. Real scientists base their theories on the available evidence. They are not immune to the effects of prejudice, but they all understand that the facts dictate the conclusion. Conclusions are subservient to the data; data are not subservient to conclusions.

     Creationists take their science straight from the Bible. Many creationist leaders have publicly stated, often in print, that any evidence at variance with their literal interpretation of the Bible should be rejected out of hand. Their a priori conclusions dictate what data are acceptable. That's not science!

  7. No self-respecting scientist would ever think of signing an oath of allegiance to Darwinism as a condition for employment. Evidence is "king" in good science, and there is no room for competing loyalties.

     Many creationist societies actually require a "loyalty oath," which is tantamount to an admission that their minds are closed! Such minds are slammed shut and rusted tight!

  8. All good scientists admit that they might be wrong, that absolute certainty is not part of science. Scientists long ago recognized that our knowledge of the physical world is largely a product of inductive reasoning. In principle, inductive reasoning can yield a high degree of confidence, but it can never confer 100% certainty. The uncertainty of inductive reasoning follows from the fact that any set of observations can be explained, in principle, by an infinite number of hypotheses! One can never rule them all out no matter how much data one has. Thus, the proper scientific attitude includes a touch of humility no matter how great one's success.

     Except for trivial details, creationists cannot conceive of the possibility that they are in error as that would take down their concept of biblical inerrancy. Since "scientific" creationism is really a branch of Bible apologetics, there is no room for compromise. "Scientific" creationism is there to defend the faith, not to probe the unknown.

  9. Real scientists are often found in the great universities, where real science is done and advanced. None of those institutions take creationism seriously.

     Creationists are usually associated with creationist societies. Those few "universities" where creationism is featured have either failed to get full accreditation or have done so only through the pulling of political strings. What discoveries have they made? Name their Nobel laureates!

  10. Scientists build upon previous knowledge accumulated over the years, and only rarely participate in great, revolutionary breakthroughs.

      Creationists fancy that they are in the process of overthrowing modern biology, geology, astronomy, anthropology, linguistics, paleontology, archaeology, oceanography, cosmology, physics, and numerous other branches of science. Some creationists (the flat-earth societies) would add the "grease-ball" theory of round-earth geography to that list. Anything that doesn't conform to their interpretation of the Bible is suspect and in need of revision.
• 
  8

  Do you think that JW's will publish an updated Rev book to downplay the UN

  by booker-t in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  with all the scandal about the un do you feel that the gb will have to print a "new" and updated book on rev to disregard the un being the beast of rev so the new jw's coming in won't even be aware that for over 100 years the jw's taught that the un was a disgusting beast and part of satan's organization?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hawkaw

  I am more than happy to assist the WTS writers if they ever do decide to change their ways .... snicker
• 
  38

  Archaeologists in Ethiopia discover 12 fossils around 4 million years old

  by hawkaw in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsarticle.jhtml?type=sciencenews&storyid=7815576&section=news&src=rss/uk/sciencenews

  ethiopia archaeologists make important fossil find sat mar 5, 2005 12:03 pm gmt

  addis ababa (reuters) - archaeologists studying human origins in eastern ethiopia have discovered 12 fossils that appear to be older than the famous fossil "lucy," the team leader said on saturday.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hawkaw

  You are welcome toreador and thank you for the kind words.

  I urge Barney and others who think like him to take a few minutes out of his life and actually read the definition of theory and law within science that I posted for him.

  I also urge him to carefully consider how scientists use isotopes to date objects and rocks. Once one understands that there is a specific process and that more than one isotope is used to confirm the first isotope (as well as using the correct isotope for the time period), one realizes this science is very conclusive..

  I also urge him to carefully review some of the links I have posted. Here let me take a quote from one of those posted links that I provided above that shows the elegant proof that the earth is old!

  (Dalrymple, 1991, p.377) - Nuclides currently produced by natural processes are tagged with a "P"

  Nuclide	Half-life (years)	Found in nature?
  V-50	6 x 10 15	Yes
  Nd-144	2.4 x 10 15	Yes
  Hf-174	2.0 x 10 15	Yes
  Pt-192	1 x 10 15	Yes
  In-115	6 x 10 14	Yes
  Gd-152	1.1 x 10 14	Yes
  Te-123	1.2 x 10 13	Yes
  Pt-190	6.9 x 10 11	Yes
  La-138	1.12 x 10 11	Yes
  Sm-147	1.06 x 10 11	Yes
  Rb-87	4.88 x 10 10	Yes
  Re-187	4.3 x 10 10	Yes
  Lu-176	3.5 x 10 10	Yes
  Th-232	1.40 x 10 10	Yes
  U-238	4.47 x 10 9	Yes
  K-40	1.25 x 10 9	Yes
  U-235	7.04 x 10 8	Yes
  Pu-244	8.2 x 10 7	Yes
  Sm-146	7 x 10 7	No
  Pb-205	3.0 x 10 7	No
  U-236	2.39 x 10 7	Yes-P
  I-129	1.7 x 10 7	Yes-P
  Cm-247	1.6 x 10 7	No
  Hf-182	9 x 10 6	No
  Pd-107	7 x 10 6	No
  Mn-53	3.7 x 10 6	Yes-P
  Cs-135	3.0 x 10 6	No
  Tc-97	2.6 x 10 6	No
  Np-237	2.14 x 10 6	Yes-P
  Gd-150	2.1 x 10 6	No
  Be-10	1.6 x 10 6	Yes-P
  Zr-93	1.5 x 10 6	No
  Tc-98	1.5 x 10 6	No
  Dy-154	1 x 10 6	No

  Look again at the table above. Notice how every single nuclide with a half-life greater than 80 million years is found in nature; every single nuclide with a half-life less than 80 million years is not found in nature unless it is currently being produced by nature. Does that tell you something?

  You're looking at prime evidence in favor of an old Earth! Those radioactive nuclides with half-lives below a certain value have, in the turning of the ages, decayed away to nothing. The only survivors are those which can be created by nature.

  Could this be a chance arrangement? Not likely. The odds against being able to draw a line anywhere which divides the nuclides in the above table so that all the nuclides above that line are found in nature by chance while all those below are not, is 536 million to one! (To be fair, we don't count those nuclides that nature can create.) Actually, in testing for a 10,000 year-old Earth, we should extend the table downwards to include nuclides with a half-life of 1000 years or more. They should all be present if the earth is only 10,000 years old. If you do extend the table, you will find that none of those nuclides, save those made by natural processes, are found in nature. The odds (based on an eligible list of 56 nuclides) against that are 72 quadrillion to one! Any takers?"
• 
  38

  Archaeologists in Ethiopia discover 12 fossils around 4 million years old

  by hawkaw in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsarticle.jhtml?type=sciencenews&storyid=7815576&section=news&src=rss/uk/sciencenews

  ethiopia archaeologists make important fossil find sat mar 5, 2005 12:03 pm gmt

  addis ababa (reuters) - archaeologists studying human origins in eastern ethiopia have discovered 12 fossils that appear to be older than the famous fossil "lucy," the team leader said on saturday.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hawkaw

  Here is another fairly good article on dating and how us little old geoscientists et. al. use the techniques.

  http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/Wiens.html

  Later

  I have to get back to work before fri finds out!
• 
  38

  Archaeologists in Ethiopia discover 12 fossils around 4 million years old

  by hawkaw in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsarticle.jhtml?type=sciencenews&storyid=7815576&section=news&src=rss/uk/sciencenews

  ethiopia archaeologists make important fossil find sat mar 5, 2005 12:03 pm gmt

  addis ababa (reuters) - archaeologists studying human origins in eastern ethiopia have discovered 12 fossils that appear to be older than the famous fossil "lucy," the team leader said on saturday.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hawkaw

  Barney indicated that science is all guess work etc.

  In another thread I also posted this: The terms " hypothesis ", " model ", " theory " and " law " have different meanings in science than in colloquial speech. Scientists use the term model to mean a description of something, specifically one which can be used to make predictions which can be tested by experiment or observation . A hypothesis is a contention that has not (yet) been either well supported nor ruled out by experiment. A physical law or a law of nature is a scientific generalization based on empirical observations.

  Most non-scientists are unaware that what scientists call "theories" are what most people call "facts". The general public uses the word theory to refer to ideas that have no firm proof or support; in contrast, scientists usually use this word to refer only to ideas that have repeatedly withstood testing. Thus, when scientists refer to the theories of biological evolution , electromagnetism , and relativity , they are referring to ideas that have survived considerable experimental testing. But there are exceptions, such as string theory , which seems to be a promising model but as yet has no empirical evidence to give it precedence over competing models.

  Especially fruitful theories that have withstood the test of time are considered to be "proven" in the scientific sense ? that it is true and factual but of course can still be falsified. This includes many theories, such as universally accepted ones such as heliocentric theory and controversial ones such as evolution , which are backed by many observations and experimental data. Theories are always open to revision if new evidence is provided or directly contradicts predictions or other evidence. As scientists do not claim absolute knowledge, even the most basic and fundamental theories may turn out to be incorrect if new data and observations contradict older ones.

  Newton 's law of gravitation is a famous example of a law falsified by experiments regarding motions at high speeds and in close proximity to strong gravitational fields. Outside of those conditions, Newton's Laws remain excellent accounts of motion and gravity. Because general relativity accounts for all of the phenomena that Newton's Laws do, and more, general relativity is currently regarded as our best account of gravitation.

  Taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

  Many an article was written by some of Barb Anderson's former collegues at Awake! that purposely mis-use or demonize science - just like a lot of Young Earth Creationists do. The fact is science is not a "cult" and helps us, in a very independent way, understand processes and mechanisms.

  Alan F. is one of the best to help guide a lot of you guys through this stuff. He has been trying for many a year to make a lot of people aware of the flaws in the Watchtower articles and with Young Earth Creationists. On another thread, I posted a link to some common inappropriate work done by Young Earth Creationists and how they are refuted by the actual science.

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/85513/1.ashx

  Try clicking and reading a few of those links that I give on this site and on the above noted post in this thread. They deal with a wide variety of subjects on the age of the earth to evolution. And as always, just don't take my word or the word of these internet sites for it. Apply those "critical thinking and reading" skills that you have learned since you took the rose coloured glasses off. You will be amazed and interested.
• 
  38

  Archaeologists in Ethiopia discover 12 fossils around 4 million years old

  by hawkaw in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsarticle.jhtml?type=sciencenews&storyid=7815576&section=news&src=rss/uk/sciencenews

  ethiopia archaeologists make important fossil find sat mar 5, 2005 12:03 pm gmt

  addis ababa (reuters) - archaeologists studying human origins in eastern ethiopia have discovered 12 fossils that appear to be older than the famous fossil "lucy," the team leader said on saturday.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hawkaw

  C14 would not be used to date something that is 3.8 to 4 million years old.

  Seeing there was some concern over what specific type of dating should be used I originally posted something with respect to Young-Earth Creationist arguments. Click on the below links to understand when certain isotopes are used and what other isotopes are used to confirm the original isotope when it comes to dating. Below there is some good information on other improper YEC arguments:

  http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood.html

  In the above link, David Matson takes you through the following (feel free to click on one or all of the following and read):

  Specific Young-Earth Arguments

  It only takes one proof Shrinking sun Accumulation of cosmic dust The existence of short period comets No fossil meteorites Lunar recession Moon contains U-236 and Th-230 Poynting-Robertson effect on space dust Star cluster expansion Saturn's rings Cooling rates of Jupiter and Saturn Decay of Earth's magnetic field Volume of lava on Earth Mineral in ocean water Helium in Earth's atmophere Erosion of Earth's continents

  Thickness of topsoil Erosion of Niagara Falls Oil and gas well pressure Mississippi River delta Slowing of Earth's rotation sediment transport Stalactite formation rates Sahara Desert Amount of salt in the oceans Number of people on Earth Oldest coral reef Oldest tree Oldest historical record Dates in the Bible Stories from ancient cultures

  • Hovind attacks radiocarbon dating

    Atmospheric Carbon-14 equilibrium Carbon-14 decay rate Initial carbon-14 unknown

    System might not be closed Carbon-14 accurately measured Curve based on too few measurements

  • Hovind attacks the geologic column

    Calibration with carbon-14 Geologic column assumes evolution Column invented to discredit Bible and does not exit

    Polystrate fossils and missing/out-of-order layers Choice of method determines age

  • Some additional topics examined

    Woodmorappe's collection of bad dates Water and vapor and Noah's flood Coal and oil

    Mammoths: were they quick-frozen? A couple of ice age problems The distance to Supernova SN1987A and the speed of light

  • Miscellaneous topics

    If the universe is young don't bother with evolution FROGS+TIME = PRINCE Structures cannot evolve by chance Evolution is merely a theory Evolution is a religion

    Only one proof needed for young-earth Each proof is described in detail Evolutionist typically try to debunk only one argument Burden of proof on evolutionists

  Take care

  hawk
• 
  23

  UN & wife

  by tepic in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  when i looked up the un website & found the wt as a ngo i told my wife.

  she implied that it was an apostate site.

  i told her 'i typed in united nations' , how are apostates going to hijack the un site?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hawkaw

  Go to your nearest library that carries the UN's information and look up a DPI Directory.

  Click on the below link and read. My list of url links will get you to the library section where you can figure out which library houses whatever.

  http://www.geocities.com/osarsif/index2.htm

  You can also write Directly to the UN DPI or the UN's library and they will mail you the exact same letter.

  A couple of minor points. The WTS is always considered an NGO and has never joined the UN. ONly countries join the UN. An NGO is basically a not for profit private corporation.

  What the WTS did, as an NGO, was in 1991 they volunarily applied to the the UN's Department of Public Information to become an "associated non govenmental organization" with the UN's Department of Public Information. As part of the application, the WTS had to voluntarily agree to supporting the UN's charter (which allows for war - eg. Korean conflict and 1991 Gulf War) and to diseminate UN information to people. In 1992 the DPI committee agreed to accredit the WTS as an "associated NGO" with the Watchtower. The DPI considers this a "partnership".

  This basically violated the 1991 WT rag article titled "Their Refuge is a lie" where the WT explained that the Catholics are part of Babylon the Great by showing 24 catholic NGOs were associated with the UN's DPI.

  Know your stuff inside out before you go at your wife.

  hawk
• 
  18

  Super Volcanoes and How They can Change the World

  by hawkaw in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  howdy folks.

  as i geoscienists i am also interested in these old large scale eruptions such as the toba eruption that occurred some 74,000 years ago.

  below geologists discuss the potential for an eruption at yellowstone, another site where we had a super eruption.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hawkaw

  If any one is interested in the Global Volcanism Program feel free to click here:

  http://www.volcano.si.edu/

  Hope everyone finds this science interesting.

  hawk