cofty, this jw lady sent us a message with a question on a point she is trying to verify.. .
her question: (isn't the watchtower teaching a form of "evolution" right now and my jw family just don't realize it?).
hold on sandra, grampa (atlantis), says that (cofty) is pretty much an expert on evolution and can answer your question more accurately than we can.
Something else I should have mentioned - probably the most important point - is that individuals don't evolve.
Evolution explains the change in a gene pool over time. In other words, if there was a sufficiently strong selection pressure so that some humans left more offspring than others, the population would change but the original ancestors would not.
The individual JW who survived 'the big A' would be identical in a thousand years time.
cofty, this jw lady sent us a message with a question on a point she is trying to verify.. .
her question: (isn't the watchtower teaching a form of "evolution" right now and my jw family just don't realize it?).
hold on sandra, grampa (atlantis), says that (cofty) is pretty much an expert on evolution and can answer your question more accurately than we can.
If a persons body and mind change gradually to a higher form than what existed previously, then this is evolution according to my understanding. Do I have the correct understanding? Is the Watchtower teaching a form of evolution?
Only if we allow them to equivocate about the meaning of the word evolution.
Scientists don't think it terms of 'higher' forms of life. Archaea that live in hydrothermal vents under the ocean are amazingly 'designed' to exploit that environment. They are not 'lower' life forms, just different.
Evolution only cares that an organism is good enough to survive long enough to pass on genes to the next generation. There is no such thing as 'perfection'. What would a 'perfect' human be like? We have so many sub-optimal features in our anatomy and in our genome that can't be fixed without going back to square one. Natural selection has no goal or objective to create a 'perfect' anything. Many life-forms have remained unchanged for billions of years.
The other key point about evolution is that it explains how millions of types of living things arose from a common ancestor. It is about the history of life on earth. The Watchtower reject this truth and so it isn't reasonable to claim that they accept evolution of life.
Sorry I missed the thread and took a while to get back to you.
cofty, this jw lady sent us a message with a question on a point she is trying to verify.. .
her question: (isn't the watchtower teaching a form of "evolution" right now and my jw family just don't realize it?).
hold on sandra, grampa (atlantis), says that (cofty) is pretty much an expert on evolution and can answer your question more accurately than we can.
Sorry I completely missed this thread yesterday. Looks like it has been answered but will have a look later.
i intend for this to be one of a series of bite-sized ops on the evidence for evolution.. introduction to dna genes are sequences of dna made up of words (codons) each of which are three letters (bases) long.
there are only four letters in the genetic alphabet (acg&t) each word or codon is the recipe for one amino acid.
there are 20 different amino acids in living organisms.
There are two books that I would recommend
So specifically, in your own words and without copy-paste, what points do you find interesting about these books?
Why do you think the scientific criticisms of these books are invalid?
i intend for this to be one of a series of bite-sized ops on the evidence for evolution.. introduction to dna genes are sequences of dna made up of words (codons) each of which are three letters (bases) long.
there are only four letters in the genetic alphabet (acg&t) each word or codon is the recipe for one amino acid.
there are 20 different amino acids in living organisms.
creatures that are similar morphologically will also be similar in terms of cytochrome c
There is no possible explanation for that apart from evolution by unguided natural selection from a common ancestor.
All your bluster only illustrates how much you don't understand your problem.
QUESTION - Why should a chimp and a human have DNA sequences of Cytochrome C that are almost the same but very different from the sequence of yeast even though the function is IDENTICAL? So identical that they can be swapped in the lab.
Do you understand that the ONLY thing that matters is the physical shape of protein and that the shape can be be obtained in trillions of different ways? Do you get what an enzyme is and how it works and how it is constructed from amino acids?
I get the feeling that this is like playing chess with somebody who doesn't know how the pieces move.
one of this things that constantly reminds me of the extent and the reach the organization has into our lives, is the fact we all need pseudonyms to have a conversation or to make a comment in this even here in this place.
even when people have left the society (by however it has occurred), its rare to see somebody change their online presence to their personal name.. now i'm not expecting people to do that of course, fore we are all free to do what we like (which is the real beauty of this forum) but the fact that it doesn't occur that often, shows how much we've all been effected by being told over and over again, "not to be critical of god's organization".
of course there could be an number so side issues at play here; with some people not wanting to burn their bridges in an attempt to keep what reputation they have left intact and sadly a small minority others, do enjoy the anonymity to just talk trash ... but if a person can not feel free to stand up and respectfully make a critical comment or ask a thorny question without fear of repercussion from their religion, then doesn't it show that there is no real freedom in that faith.
We all have a life beyond the cult and I just don't want this to be part of the search results if somebody Google's my real name.
It shows how much people have been spoiled by the cultic geneius of WT leadership - Venus
Don't be so dramatic. They are fucking imbeciles.
so in my lunch break at work today i walked in the park, just chilling out when a woman approached and offered me a leaflet.
didn't have to read it i knew straight away who she was.. me: my family are involved with jws.
the new world was supposed to come in the mid-seventies but it didn't.
Well done Xan.
If every ex-JW did the same it could really make a difference. I'm hoping to get the chance to talk to one or two in Edinburgh today. Problem is most of them recognise me now.
i intend for this to be one of a series of bite-sized ops on the evidence for evolution.. introduction to dna genes are sequences of dna made up of words (codons) each of which are three letters (bases) long.
there are only four letters in the genetic alphabet (acg&t) each word or codon is the recipe for one amino acid.
there are 20 different amino acids in living organisms.
Okay Hooby I've been giving this some thought today to try to work out what your objection is. I think it is simple - you don't like the metaphor of a 'tree' and you are confusing the metaphor with the reality.
Let me put it this way. Forget the tree and nothing is lost from the OP. Imagine that Darwin had never lived and nobody had every thought about evolution. Imagine there were no fossils and nobody had observed homologies or comparative embryology or biogeography or any of the other many many lines of evidence.
Imagine that scientists had simply been studying ubiquitous proteins like Cytochrome C to learn more about their structure and function.
They found that every cell in every living thing from the yeast used to make your beer to elephants all rely on this protein. They find that in every case it is structurally identical - so identical that you can swap them around from any species to any other species and it works perfectly.
They do the sums and work out that there are more ways to create this specific shape than there are stars in the known universe, so they look in detail at the DNA code of this protein in various species. They discover something amazing. The code for cytochrome C in humans is almost identical to that in chimps, a little less similar in apes and a little less similar in new world monkeys. The same pattern is seen in every species and yet all of them work interchangeably.
Comparative genetics DOES NOT depend on an assumption of common ancestry it proves common ancestry. It is the smoking gun. It is the same sort of technique used to prove paternity in legal battles.
Now we can compare the relationships previously discovered using fossils and comparative anatomy with the evidence from DNA and use that to confirm or improve what was known previously.
I hope that helps. If you have any questions feel free to ask but don't leave it ten months and then ignore this answer.
i intend for this to be one of a series of bite-sized ops on the evidence for evolution.. introduction to dna genes are sequences of dna made up of words (codons) each of which are three letters (bases) long.
there are only four letters in the genetic alphabet (acg&t) each word or codon is the recipe for one amino acid.
there are 20 different amino acids in living organisms.
Actually your 'brief point' made no sense at all.
i intend for this to be one of a series of bite-sized ops on the evidence for evolution.. introduction to dna genes are sequences of dna made up of words (codons) each of which are three letters (bases) long.
there are only four letters in the genetic alphabet (acg&t) each word or codon is the recipe for one amino acid.
there are 20 different amino acids in living organisms.
The topic is Protein Functional Redundancy NOT bullshit epistemology.
