Because you say so?
No...because the EVIDENCE says so.
Where is your evidence to the contrary?
how honest are the proponents of evolution?
idk but curious to see what type of response there is on a topic like this or does their study only seek to confirm their preconceptions and ignore uncomfortable facts?
Because you say so?
No...because the EVIDENCE says so.
Where is your evidence to the contrary?
how honest are the proponents of evolution?
idk but curious to see what type of response there is on a topic like this or does their study only seek to confirm their preconceptions and ignore uncomfortable facts?
how honest are the proponents of evolution?
idk but curious to see what type of response there is on a topic like this or does their study only seek to confirm their preconceptions and ignore uncomfortable facts?
Cold Steel:
1) It seems predicated on the assumption that there is no God, or intelligent designer.
Wrong. Evolution doesn't make an assumption one way or the other on the subject of God.
2) The idea that simple organisms can mutate into increasingly complex ones. I'd like to see some evidence this is possible. To think 1-cell organisms can mutate, without a great deal of outside help, into modern humans over a long period of time, is difficult for me to accept.
First off, you are somewhat correct. In a closed system, single-cell organisms cannot mutate without outside influence.
Here's a nice summary of your talking point.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3ShyXSHsbc&list=PLsmqeqKj7M-rZe1C9PUon8V-VQ1tZj5NF&index=8
One example of single-cell organisms changing to more complex multi-cellular organisms is during pregnancy. A fertilized egg is considered a single-cell organism. The cell then starts dividing during the development of the fetus. This isn't an example of "evolution" per se, however it is an example of how a single cell can change into a more complex organism.
3) That life and intelligence can evolve from a spontaneous action.
The "spontaneous life" question isn't one for the subject of evolution. It's one for the subject of abiogenesis. Both pertain to biology, however they are separate subjects. Evolution is the explanation of species evolving from a common ancestor. Abiogenesis is the study of how life began in the first place.
so i *finally* upgraded my old, heavy, tube tv to a new flatscreen, smart tv.
the install was much easier than i expected and i was very happy with my progress.
then i get to the set-up part of the installation.
the wts teaches, that from 1914 onward, a sign has been evident, which is proof of god's kingdom.
jw profess to see that sign.
a "sign" means evidence from god.
every cell in your body contains a big book of how to build another you.. although it's approximately 3 billion letters long only a small fraction of it contains instructions on making humans.. imagine trying to use a workshop manual but it reads like somebody messed up at the publishers.
there are a few paragraphs of meaningful text followed by pages of gibberish, another page or so of useful instructions then 9 more of random words.
some of it looks like copies of original text but full of typing errors.
Since there is basis to dispute evolution, it is not a fact.
What scientific basis is there to dispute evolution?
None whatsoever.
Ergo, evolution is a fact.
"our perception of reality has more to do with what is going on in here (our brain) than what's going on out there (in the world).".
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03g221y.
is it a dark square or a light square?
Planet earth is not flat. End...of...story.
The following image isn't from the perspective of a human. It is a photograph. Light rays bounced off an object (the Earth) and entered a lens to produce this photograph.
This has nothing to do with a "human perspective." It is a physical reality.
Any conversation to the contrary is "bollocks," to quote my distinguished JWN colleague Cofty.
when installing, it asks if you'd like to receive automatic updates via the internet.. in other words, "we will re-write our history without you knowing what was written previously.".
the corporation knows that many will never exchange their cd rom for the puerile online library, so doctoring their previous "truths" is the best solution.. a bit like the creed painted on the barn door in "animal farm.
" .
They have changed the online version of the Insight book. This isn't a baseless paranoia, Landy.
a new letter was posted in jw.org to the elders who are under the brazilian branch:.
january 25, 2016to all bodies of eldersref .
: clap when given a readmission addear brothers:we would like to inform you about a recent adjustment.
Not long ago it was dictated in a study article it was inappropriate for couples to hug, hold hands and otherwise to grab-ass during song and prayer.
Really? That's insane. Do you have a reference for this?