"How is that different than what we all did with the WT's "research" at one time?" - Perry
Perry this is yet another one of those comments from you that demonstrates your utter lack of knowledge on these subjects... Why?
The reason is that someone who accepts the consensus of the scientific community and communicates that with other people (like Cofty does) is standing on the shoulders of many a scientist who has either researched these topics directly or cross referenced the original research with their own related research or been given insight to their own fields of research in unrelated fields (from reading or hearing about the original research) or has simply read the research and agreed that the methods used allow for the conclusions given.
Whereas the WTBTS literature is sourced from 1 source: the Governing Body. There is no review process involved to ensure that you are getting an accurate portrayal of the 'facts' they have given you.
Also Cofty makes the valid point that if this chemistry professor really wants to learn (rather than simply engage in logical fallacies) they would speak to the relevant researchers. This ploy to ask him to speak to this professor smacks of Kent Hovind's challenge to prove evolution. Hovind set the list of what he considers to be evidence in such a way as to make the challenge impossible. So on the surface it appears a reasonable proposition (and is touted as such by people like you) but when you look at it you see it is dishonest. This professor is the same because he expects to have all his questions answered rather than discuss all the evidence for evolution (why can't this professor explain what all the evidence shows if evolution is not true).
However, it is quite clear that these challenges are not meant to be legitimate ways of getting to the truth but rather quite clever ways of keeping people like yourself riding high on your wave of theological truths. I'm also sure that it doesn't harm their book and DVD sales either...
