@SB: you once again come with assumptions that do not pass any logic. The only dinosaur bones we have are the ones that were preserved through some process. Obviously you are not going to find anything that either wasn’t preserved or wasn’t preserved sufficiently long. They are not randomly selected, they are the only selection we have. It’s similar to saying you have a string of numbers, someone (time in this case) eliminates all the non-prime numbers and you then conclude non-prime numbers don’t exist despite the fact you can easily deduce the rest of the series from the examples.
Anony Mous
JoinedPosts by Anony Mous
-
42
God and Unicorns
by Sea Breeze inatheist scientists now agree that "elasmotherium sibiricu" lived with humans.
all they had to do was read their bible to know that.
job 39:9 “will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib?”.
-
-
-
42
God and Unicorns
by Sea Breeze inatheist scientists now agree that "elasmotherium sibiricu" lived with humans.
all they had to do was read their bible to know that.
job 39:9 “will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib?”.
-
-
Anony Mous
Again, your source is a creationist blog post that is based solely on a supposed paper, although the links to the supposed paper point to a non-existent page on another young earth creationist website, likely taken down out of embarrassment.
It’s like pointing to JW.org for the evidence on WTBTS eschatology.
Even so, I’m going to assume they found trace amounts of C14 (as in fractions of percent modern carbon), which if you understand half-life is actually to be expected and at those levels make carbon dating useless as it is almost impossible to accurately measure. But it at the same time disproves the young earth model.
Half-life, the time it takes for an element to lose half its radioactivity and thus this follows a simple formula, 50% you’re at 6000 years (the half in half life) and about the age the Bible would make the earth out to be, 25% you’re now at 20,000 year, more than twice the Biblical age of the Universe, at the edges of accurate carbon dating (50,000 years) you’re at about 1%. At these points the science starts breaking down, you’re starting to have issues with both sample and background contamination - basically anyone who touched the sample or dust from the air or leftovers from previous experiments (you’re blowing up the sample to measure which leaves residue) is introducing fresh carbon.
If you want a young earth, you need everything to have about 50% modern carbon, diamonds don’t have that, your claim is debunked. Again, diamonds aren’t made out of C14, they’re made out of stable isotopes of carbon. C14 is radioactive, C12/13 is not.
-
42
God and Unicorns
by Sea Breeze inatheist scientists now agree that "elasmotherium sibiricu" lived with humans.
all they had to do was read their bible to know that.
job 39:9 “will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib?”.
-
-
Anony Mous
You make no sense. The earth’s atmosphere has changed since diamonds were formed, earth’s atmosphere changed since yesterday. Diamond cannot be carbon dated because it does not contain much carbon-14, carbon-13 and carbon-12 however, which composes most diamonds have no known half life, they are stable isotopes. This is what makes natural diamonds so rare and expensive.
Again, this stuff is so easily debunked.
-
42
God and Unicorns
by Sea Breeze inatheist scientists now agree that "elasmotherium sibiricu" lived with humans.
all they had to do was read their bible to know that.
job 39:9 “will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib?”.
-
-
Anony Mous
Dude, rhino’s are still around. A unicorn is not a rhino, ask my daughter. Still this particular specimen went extinct 30,000 years ago, about 20,000 years before the first writing, about 25,000 years before the predecessor to the modern Bible even started to be written.
Your posts, as always, are based on very poor understanding of the science, in this case differences between DNA, RNA and the nucleotides they are composed of and which, if any, remnants are recovered. Complete DNA strains that are thousands or millions of years old is ludicrous, it’s lazy reporting at best, but scientifically dishonest if anyone calling themselves having a doctorate wrote it in a book. Things decompose even when they are frozen, sometimes slower, sometimes faster, but useful DNA strains break down very quickly, the individual components (eg. the equivalent to sugar) does not. You can often recover evidence of DNA/RNA components without it being useful/complete DNA/RNA. Likewise some organisms can survive really long, perhaps even indefinite in some circumstances, that doesn’t prove anything. But I’m not giving you yet another biology lesson, finish high school biology before engaging in these kinds of arguments.
If you want to make a point based on science that still adjusts claims in the scale of millions of years, it would not prove anything described happened in the last 8000 years which is the age of the earth as described in the Bible. So if you want to take the Bible literally (there are genealogy in the Bible that go from the 7th day of creation to 32AD) you can’t take the things you like from science that you mistakenly believe support your literal Bible interpretation. Job specifically was written ~2500 years ago, these beasts weren’t there, rhinos were and it is possible that is what they were talking about based on stories from traveling merchants, but you’d think a book written by a literal god would be a bit more specific.
-
168
Moral responsibility.
by nicolaou inno subtlety here, it's going to be obvious where i'm going with this.
please consider the following scenario.. you're seated on a railway platform bench waiting for your train.
a high speed intercity is about to hurtle through without stopping when you see a small child running to the platforms edge!
-
-
Anony Mous
@lriddle: depending on your interpretation of Jesus, if he were god and truly had the best in mind for his followers, he would’ve not been as cryptic with that particular message.
If I as a parent know or am capable of getting to know that a war or earthquake is coming, would it be moral for me to say: hey kids, I know when and where a war is coming, I just won’t tell you when or where maybe in your lifetime, maybe a few generations from now, but better be ready, make sure to worship me for telling you. Also, I could stop all the war, you’ve seen me raise the dead but I won’t because I just want to see if you love me enough.
That is some serious psycho abusive bullshit. Any parent that does that would be rightfully disowned by his children once they get to a certain age of understanding, I have done it to mine and I know others here on this forum have done the same for a lot less abusive psycho bullshit.
-
168
Moral responsibility.
by nicolaou inno subtlety here, it's going to be obvious where i'm going with this.
please consider the following scenario.. you're seated on a railway platform bench waiting for your train.
a high speed intercity is about to hurtle through without stopping when you see a small child running to the platforms edge!
-
-
Anony Mous
@Seabreeze: you can’t just handwave the question about God’s internal moral consistency away by claiming he is somehow morally superior.
We know it is wrong to steal, kill, lie etc.
Wouldn’t know that from reading only the parts in the Bible that talk about God himself which is what we are talking about. God steals, kills and lies over and over again. I personally prefer the Jewish interpretation that G-d is neither good nor bad, he just represents all of us (humanity) and has both sides (Sheitan and YHWH) in the same person and the stories in the Bible are a warning more than a guidance.
There are other books, besides the Bible, many that pre-date it or didn’t resolve from Western culture that prescribe very similar morality. If many things evolved many times independently, it seems only fair to conclude that it thus is an inherent morality and not an external one.
-
10
R & F JW's ARE agents of the org....
by BoogerMan in....despite the cult's denials.. w51 6/15 p. 378 par.
23 the spirit, the organization, and the word - his theocratic organization recognizes your authority from his word, the bible.
so it uses you as one of its representatives in the field and it co-operates with you, supplies your needs, and renders you assistance..
-
-
Anony Mous
Specifically going back to the earlier post:
- Witnessing from door-to-door
You are not necessarily an agent of the WTBTS when you participate in these activities. However the group leader may be considered as such, especially if they use the Kingdom Hall or WTBTS instructions (such as the old ‘brown brother’ - reasoning from the scriptures) which is basically a manual on how to do it in a WTBTS-approved way. Hence why they got rid of such associations. Likewise keeping track of return visits on organization-printed official papers, is an organized and sanctioned activity by the WTBTS so in that function you are an agent. However, if you then go and murder a householder, that obviously does not mean that you were doing so as an agent of the WTBTS but the regular day-to-day activity of organizing, leading and keeping track is (or was, since they’ve gotten rid of much of that).
- or using literature trolleys
That’s very clear, the trolleys aren’t purchased by the volunteers because they think it will perform or assist a specific function of their volunteerism (something like a handbag or briefcase would perform that function). They are purchased and stocked by the WTBTS (and/or the local congregation) with a function the WTBTS desires it to have. Given the ownership is not by the volunteer, if the cart were to fall and hurt someone (including but not limited to the volunteer), the congregation and/or WTBTS could be liable. Again, if someone were to shove the cart into an old lady with the purpose to hurt them, that falls outside the WTBTS’ foreseeable use case and liability (unless of course, they instruct the user to do this).
- Writing letters to neighbours
Again, less clear. It all depends on who, how and where. That’s why the WTBTS gives clear instructions that this is voluntary and not sanctioned and gives guidance to make sure that they don’t get involved. But if someone were to say put the Kingdom Hall address on there, or organizes it IN a Kingdom Hall, and it is known and sanctioned or remains uncorrected by the ‘agents’ (elders) despite their full knowledge, that changes the things.
- Social activities
As with the writing activities, it depends on who, how and where. Many parties in JW-land requires sanctioning or chaperoning by the elders and sometimes even higher ups get involved (when it comes to larger/younger parties). At the point it becomes a requirement to have a JW official (in the US, the presiding overseer, secretary and treasurer, but also circuit overseers and others are at the very least corporate agents) present, it becomes a sanctioned activity and part of the WTBTS legal liability.
And yes, the WTBTS will claim and fight to make this otherwise, but these are legal standards with some fuzzy boundaries. In some jurisdictions these borders are clearer than others and in some jurisdictions, liability can be shared between parties. But places like the US, the liability may be (rightfully) inherited solely by association. Hence why becoming an elder is fraught with risks, you are an agent to the organization and share in its culpability.
-
10
R & F JW's ARE agents of the org....
by BoogerMan in....despite the cult's denials.. w51 6/15 p. 378 par.
23 the spirit, the organization, and the word - his theocratic organization recognizes your authority from his word, the bible.
so it uses you as one of its representatives in the field and it co-operates with you, supplies your needs, and renders you assistance..
-
-
Anony Mous
There has been some legal decisions in the recent past both in various countries that JW elders etc are indeed agents of the organization. Just because they’re volunteers or don’t have certain rights within the corporation, doesn’t mean they’re not part of it, if you participate in something the corporation organized and you follow within their rules and regulations of such enterprise, you are by definition an agent.
On the other hand, just because you visit a church, doesn’t make you an agent of the church, but once you get into being responsible for running the events, you can be viewed as doing things with either explicit or implicit authorization of the church.
It is how for example RICO cases are pursued in the US, just because you’re not an employee of the mafia, doesn’t mean you’re not functioning as an agent for it nor does it shield them from liability for the requests made by the organization.
-
168
Moral responsibility.
by nicolaou inno subtlety here, it's going to be obvious where i'm going with this.
please consider the following scenario.. you're seated on a railway platform bench waiting for your train.
a high speed intercity is about to hurtle through without stopping when you see a small child running to the platforms edge!
-
-
Anony Mous
@Seabreeze: you say things like this - He has absolutly zero obligation to any of us for anything good at all
The question was not whether he has the obligation to us, but rather to himself and his own morality. In the original question, the person standing by has no legal obligation but is yet condemned for his moral action or inaction.
God in many scriptures not only condones or is inactive when evil happens, he often instigates and demands it or outright causes it. Basically to stick with the original illustration, he throws the baby on the train tracks and punishes you when you try to save it (eg. Uzzah) and when you don’t save it (James 4:17)
-
28
Rainbow 🌈 Law Makers will turn on Religion NOT the UN
by JohnTron7 init should be starting to become more clear to people what i've stated for years on this site.
the threat against religion that becomes pivotal will come from lgbtq politicians forcing through " hate crime" bills aimed at religions.
in the past i have had a " maybe" statement from only one commenter.
-
-
Anony Mous
Recent polls suggest that the kids are a lot less interested in all this social j́ustice crap. It has always been for kids to be counter culture, now that it is your 40 year old teacher and the mainstream media and companies taking the positions, it’s not cool anymore.