Human nature is ugly sometimes. What can you do?
Posts by TD
-
9Why is it when one person attack you on a forum thread eveyone likes to pile on?
by mickbobcat ini have noticed this on many many forums.
so i don't have this forum in mind for this topic.
so you may have noticed this also, but many times on threads once someone does an attack or a negative comment about someone, or the way they write or anything else on the thread, everyone else seems to just pile on by reaction not thought.
-
-
-
42
What are some of the weird teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses, past and present?
by Vanderhoven7 ini just picked up a few from mark jones as follows:.
i see is that the vast majority of jws don't seem to understand what their religion actually teaches.. the more controversial or embarrassing doctrine - although still official doctrine that has never been rescinded - is just not talked about anymore in the magazines.
there are dinosaurs living on venus.https://www.reddit.com/r/exjw/comments/2fowhx/dinosaurs_on_venus/.
-
-
TD
This falls into the category of teachings that they simply shut-up about and never mentioned again:
--That Adam had both "male" and "female" qualities prior to the creation of Eve and that the "rib" was simply a metaphor for splitting him physically and psychologically into two halves.
This was taught as recently as the 1960's.
-
31
McFree v. Watchtower!
by Atlantis inmcfree v. watchtower.
a us federal judge has ruled against watch tower pennsylvania, denying their dmca subpoena to identify the creator of the jehovah's witness parody videos known as "dubtown.. .
see last page (page 20).
-
-
TD
"Jehovah hates whole beards. Beard fractions are a conscience matter"
(Wiping the coffee off my monitor....)
-
19
Has the Watchtower ever admitted in writing that blood transfusions could save a person's physical life?
by Vanderhoven7 inhae anyone come across a quotation to that effect?.
-
-
TD
Vanderhoven7
I think this is one of the better sources you can find to make your point. It's a reprint of an article that appeared in the August 1988 issue of Discover magazine.
The article, written by Doctor Elisabeth Rosenthal, describes in step by step detail the unnecessary death of a JW from refusing blood.
https://culteducation.com/group/1267-jehovah-s-witnesses/11522-vital-signs.html
-
19
Has the Watchtower ever admitted in writing that blood transfusions could save a person's physical life?
by Vanderhoven7 inhae anyone come across a quotation to that effect?.
-
-
TD
Vanderhoven7
Years ago, I spoke with a representative of United Blood Services and he gave me several easily verifiable examples (i.e. The stories had appeared in local newspapers) where transfusion was absolutely necessary.
One was an Apache Junction woman who had ignored the pain of an ectopic pregnancy and had collapsed on her front lawn with a ruptured fallopian tube. By the time help arrived, she had bled out internally. No pulse, no respiration. The resuscitation and subsequent surgery required 42 units of blood.
Another was a DPS motorcycle officer who had been in a bad accident. She needed a number of emergency surgeries in a short period of time. There was a valley wide blood drive in her behalf.
Maybe it was something along these lines I said? I'm not sure.
-
19
Has the Watchtower ever admitted in writing that blood transfusions could save a person's physical life?
by Vanderhoven7 inhae anyone come across a quotation to that effect?.
-
-
TD
It's implicit in the acknowledgement that refusing transfusion could cost you your life.
They actually glorified that idea in the infamous May 22nd 1994 Awake!
(The one with the pictures of the JW children who apparently have died)
-
30
I just turned 75 and here is a giant steaming pile of my "Wisdumb"
by Terry inbirthday wisdom magnum opus.
i was born 2 years after the end of wwii.. everything was in black and white.. harry truman was president.. mahatma gandhi was the spiritual leader of india.. .
by the time i was 5, a new-fangled invention called television.
-
-
TD
Happy birthday, Terry!
Here's to many more!
-
141
My Prediction Regarding New Space Telescope That Will See Back to 100 Million Years From the Big Bang
by Sea Breeze ina new space telescope launched a few days age that will supposedly be able to see to within 100 million years of the big bang.
wow... only 100 million years from the big bang.
that is pretty early given the 12 billion year age of the universe assigned by scholars who adhere to naturalism.
-
-
TD
With all due respect. You haven't explained anything.
Sure I have
#1 I've explained the actual mechanism of seeing into the past. --That it is purely a function of speed and distance.
When we look at our sun, we are looking about 8 minutes into the past. When we look at Proxima Centauri, we're looking about 4.24 years into the past. When we look at Sirius, we're looking about 8.6 years into the past.
It's about 11.4 years for Procyon A and about 260 years for the Spica binary and about 6197 years for Cygnus X1 and about 775,000 years for ULAS J0744+25.
When we look at the Andromeda galaxy, we're looking about 2.54 million years into the past. When we look at the Southern Pinwheel, we're looking about 15 million years into the past.
It's about 23.16 million miles for the Whirlpool galaxy and about 31 million years for the Sombrero Galaxy and about 52 million years for the Eye of Sauron.
#2 I've explained that this is a limitation inasmuch as it is entirely dependent on how far away any given object is . Non-technical writers are waxing poetic about the JWST being a "time machine" as if it's going to give us a panoramic view of the entire cosmos in its early stages, which is very, very misleading.
#3 I've explained that if we want to look farther back in time, then we need to look at objects that are farther away from us.
#4 I've explained the Hubble- Lemaître Law, which is that galaxies are moving away from Earth at speeds proportional to their distance. Or to look at it another way, the galaxies that are farthest away from us are the ones that are moving the fastest.
#5 I've explained the Doppler effect vis-à-vis the speed and distance of those galaxies. --That the extreme speed coupled with the expansion of the universe has stretched the wavelength of the visible light into lower frequencies. --Hence the need for an infrared telescope.
#6 I've explained that since light is the medium here, then we are limited to bright objects. (i.e. Stars and galaxies)
NASA expects to "see" the universe as it was 100 million years ago or so with this new telescope..
This sounds a lot like the "time machine" notion of what the JWST is capable of. (i.e. --That it's going to give us a panoramic view of the early cosmos, complete with diaphanous hydrogen and planetary nebulae.
You've linked to a number of NASA articles now and every single one of them has said exactly what I've been saying, which is that the JWST is going to show us the first bright objects in the universe, which are the stars and galaxies farthest away from us.
Staring with my first post on your thread I've also said very clearly that red shift is the mechanism of observing the earliest objects in the universe which is why (For the second time now) the JWST has been designed from the ground up as an infrared telescope.
--And these have been your responses:
"BTW, red-shift won't prevent the "time-machine" from functioning according to NASA."
"You should contact NASA right away and let them know about your theory about how Red Shift will prohibit them from observing galaxies being formed."
"Your references to red-shift cannot change this fact."
"If you think what NASA is trying to do is impossible because of red-shift, you should call them right away and explain it to them so they can stop misleading the public all over the internet right now."
Either I'm the world's worst communicator or you've got some serious reading comprehension problems. Or maybe astronomy is just not your thing.
Either way, there is a huge disconnect here.
-
141
My Prediction Regarding New Space Telescope That Will See Back to 100 Million Years From the Big Bang
by Sea Breeze ina new space telescope launched a few days age that will supposedly be able to see to within 100 million years of the big bang.
wow... only 100 million years from the big bang.
that is pretty early given the 12 billion year age of the universe assigned by scholars who adhere to naturalism.
-
-
TD
I think Freddy was a closet sci-fi nerd.
The whole heart and brain / emotion and logic thing they trotted out in the early 70's was eerily similar to the Spock character in the series Star Trek, which had aired just a few years prior.
-
141
My Prediction Regarding New Space Telescope That Will See Back to 100 Million Years From the Big Bang
by Sea Breeze ina new space telescope launched a few days age that will supposedly be able to see to within 100 million years of the big bang.
wow... only 100 million years from the big bang.
that is pretty early given the 12 billion year age of the universe assigned by scholars who adhere to naturalism.
-
-
TD
You should contact NASA right away and let them know about your theory about how Red Shift will prohibit them from observing galaxies being formed
Red shift is the mechanism which enables the observation of objects in the very distant past. The JWST is an infrared telescope for exactly that reason.
Look, I've made an honest effort to explain myself here.
Perhaps you could reciprocate? Perhaps you could flesh out the OP with a description of what you think the JWST "should" see which would confirm the big bang theory if it were true.I don't know what you mean by "big mess."