LOL! You're pulling our legs? They went out TODAY!?!? REALLY!
Sigh....
Anyway, as you may know, I've been accused of being a militant atheist before, but I can set my militancy aside for a moment and wish you a merry XMas!
Adam
Posts by adamah
-
17Hubby went out in service today.
by KariOtt ini can't believe hubby and sis in law actually went out in service today.
when he left this morrning i reminded him to inform those who didn't slam their doors on them that if they join your cult that this will be the last christmas, holiday and birthday they will be allowed to celebrate.
i thought it very inapproiate going out today to knock on doors trying to get converts..
-
-
-
26
What a great first Christmas!
by dazed but not confused inwhat a great day!.
once the kids were in bed, i set up my daughters new kitchen play set took me a little over 2 hours but was fun.
this morning we came down stairs and the joy on my kids faces and the wow!
-
-
adamah
Awwww, that's great.
It's funny how such things are taken for granted by some (or even pooh-poohed by others), and how such things actually mean so much... You're making memories that will last a lifetime for those kids.
PLUS, even if they don't realize it now, you're giving them the best gift in the World, too: a chance at attaining their full capabilities.
Adam
-
42
New here
by winnie12 inhey i'm new here, i've been reading up so much here and on other sites about tatt and it has really settled a nagging feeling of doubt within me.
truly i have been lied to and have been trapped in this cult.
i've been suffering with depression, anxiety, attempted suicide, hospitalization, anti depressants, loneliness all this while being in supposedly surrounded by "the happiest people" on earth.
-
-
adamah
Hi Winnie,
Welcome aboard!
You said-
On Monday one of the elders asked if I would like to be removed from the school because it could be adding undue pressure on me so I said yes. I want to just fade but I'm worried my mom's naivety may lead to her speaking with one of the elders about what I have told her. I'm trying to form some sort of plan. I still live at home but am planning to go to university out of the country and actually do something with my life. I'm glad to have my dad's support as he's not a jw.
Wow, it sounds like you couldn't have planned it any better, if you tried! If the elder volunteered to remove you from the school, that's a great thing, as you've clearly made it known that the KH is NOT conducive to your emotional or mental health.
It's really great that your father is not a JW (mine wasn't a JW, either), but does he know what's going thru your mind right now? He's likely going to be a great resource for you in the future, so it might be helpful to let him help you firm up your plans and to seek out his advice, since you're doing the right thing of taking the reins of your OWN life into your hands, and not just doing things that others want you to do (including your mother). Rather than jumping in the deep end by enrolling in college overseas, maybe better to start at the local junior college even for a semester, just to stay close to home.
BTW, part of going thru the teen years is the process of separating from your parents to become independent, and that's a hard process, whether you're a JW or not.
-
16
THE BIBLE ADVOCATES GENOCIDE?
by steve2 inhave biblical apologists satisfactorily explained the blood-drenched biblical passages in which jehovah orders his people to wipe out every living soul - young, old, men, women, child, infirm - in the territory they're told to invade?.
who needs bin laden when you've got jehovah?
or is jehovah excused because he's truly mightier, like, because he's the creator he can call the shots, no matter how much and who's blood is shed?
-
-
adamah
Of course, the explanation as to why genocide was allowed (or even required) it that Jews didn't consider Gentiles to be members of 'the tribe', and hence Mosaic Law applied only for how to treat one's fellow members of the Mosaic blood covenant (which was ratified in Exodus 24, with Moses splattering animal blood over the crowd, thus binding them to the Law in a covenant to be the chosen ones). So "Thou Shalt Not Kill" (as found in the 10 commandments, and elsewhere in the Torah) didn't apply to blood of the common public enemy spilled during war, and such blood spilled was even given a special term: 'war blood' (Hebrew words are 'deme milhamah', eg 1st Kings 2:5).
Spilling 'war blood' incurred no blood-guilt (damim) for the participants, or for the Jewish community as a whole.
Of course, Xians tried to rehabilitate OT Jehovah as the Father of ALL humanity to sell him to an international audience, a God was really concerned about the lives of ALL peoples of all Nations, regardless of the race, creed, or National origin. Mmmm, yeah, OK?
The funny thing is everyone knows the Philistines, the "bad guys" who always threatened the "good guys" (God's Chosen People) on their Southern coastal border? The Philistines likely were Aegeans, possibly from Crete:
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/456536/Philistine
Philistine, one of a people of Aegean origin who settled on the southern coast of Palestine in the 12th century bc , about the time of the arrival of the Israelites. According to biblical tradition (Deuteronomy 2:23; Jeremiah 47:4), the Philistines came from Caphtor (possibly Crete). They are mentioned in Egyptian records as prst, one of the Sea Peoples that invaded Egypt in about 1190 bc after ravaging Anatolia, Cyprus, and Syria. After being repulsed by the Egyptians, they occupied the coastal plain of Palestine from Joppa (modern Tel Aviv–Yafo) southward to the Gaza Strip. The area contained the five cities (the Pentapolis) of the Philistine confederacy (Gaza, Ashkelon [Ascalon], Ashdod, Gath, and Ekron) and was known as Philistia, or the Land of the Philistines. It was from this designation that the whole of the country was later called Palestine by the Greeks.
Adam
-
13
Evidence
by ekruks ini am wondering, if brave persons are bringing forth details of painful abuse cases years later, when they have grown up to be adults.... what evidence do the courts convict on?
conti was the only victim in the case?
i doubt there were eye-witnesses, and it's too late to get dna evidence.
-
-
adamah
ekruks, Conti's lawsuit is not a CRIMINAL matter, but a CIVIL case.
The evidentiary requirements you refer to (eg DNA evidence) are those needed to prove a criminal case in court, but since since's suing in civil court for damages, the standards for evidence are much lower.
Granted, it's easier to sue for damages in a civil case if the facts have been proven in criminal court, but it's not impossible to prevail if no criminal charges had been filed.
Adam
-
60
Anybody have ideas about the double slit experiement with particles, how they react based on a human mind observing them?
by EndofMysteries inhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfpeprq7ogc.
that's just crazy, that if the particles are being monitored and data recorded, they act exactly as we 'think' they should act.
however if they are not being monitored and no way to watch them, then they act completely different and more random.
-
-
adamah
BTEB, the funny thing about that photo is two humans had to agree to stage it (one to take the photo, one to get in the box), using the cat as the unwitting participant!
I bet if we could read cat's mind, it'd be wondering WTF the humans were up to, this time.... I suspect our pets already KNOW the answer, but are playing dumb, being more amused by our struggling to comprehend, and laughing their asses off behind our backs.
(And yet another hypothesis where no one can prove it's NOT the case, so everyone else MUST accept it to be so.)
BTW, if anyone's got 50 minutes to spare, here's an interesting old video with Richard Feynmann explaining the double-slit experiment in a lecture at Cornell in 1962:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUJfjRoxCbk
Physics is interesting stuff, and it's almost impossible to get caught up in incorrect models of thought when trying to apply macroscopic experience to the , eg many people think of electricity as the flow of electrons within a matrix of copper atoms. We use the phrase, 'electrons flow down the wire' (at least, for DC circuits).
While some electrons may leave one atom for a neighboring atom to displace the prior occupant(s), the flow of electricity largely occurs via transfer of the energy (which causes greater activity) to adjacent electrons, and it's the energy which passes down the line; it's not due to the electrons themselves flowing, as if electrons were riding on the white-water rapids of stationary copper atoms, but a transfer of energy contained in them. That's an insight that took a few years of studying electronics in college in a JC to get, since many people don't think about it; however, it's rather important to understanding what waves actually are.
The spontaneous collapse of the probability wave function is interesting, but again, it's a case where terminology is critical, eg nothing "collapses" per se, but only that certain outcome is observed, or becomes fixed. The interference patterns observed in the study may appear like the classic interference patterns seen where water waves interact to form peaks and troughs, but that's the problem with analogies: they ALL break down, since an overlap of commonalities in one area doesn't mean in ALL characteristics. People may not even be aware of when they're carrying assumptions inappropriately from one model to another.
Adam
-
60
Anybody have ideas about the double slit experiement with particles, how they react based on a human mind observing them?
by EndofMysteries inhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfpeprq7ogc.
that's just crazy, that if the particles are being monitored and data recorded, they act exactly as we 'think' they should act.
however if they are not being monitored and no way to watch them, then they act completely different and more random.
-
-
adamah
Yeah, I'm not a physicist either, and entanglement blows my mind. The subatomic level seems to operate by its own rules as the macroscopic world, and I simply accept that photons demonstate wave-like and particle-like properties, even simultaneously (i.e. they're not mutually exclusive, as Heisenberg's uncertainty principle requires for position and momentum).
BTXB said-
Great. Now you tell me. Do you realize how much poison and radioactive material you could have saved me?
Well, it's easier just to take an unwanted cat to the pound, than going through the pretenses of conducting physics experiments...
Here's an old photo of Schrödinger's cat reacting to the proposed experiment:
-
31
They made me throw away a windchime!!!
by quellycatface ini had a lovely mirrored windchime in my house.
my study conductor told me it attracted deemunz and i threw it in the trash.
i've since bought another.. what's the reasoning behind that idiocy??
-
-
adamah
WT says-
However, it is the custom in some countries to put up wind chimes with the thought that they will keep evil spirits from entering the home. Obviously, a Christian would not make use of wind chimes for such a purpose.
Of course not. Instead, a Christian would be advised by an elder to get RID of wind chimes with the thought that they might allow evil spirits to enter the home!
What a bunch of superstitious nuppitys....
-
60
Anybody have ideas about the double slit experiement with particles, how they react based on a human mind observing them?
by EndofMysteries inhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfpeprq7ogc.
that's just crazy, that if the particles are being monitored and data recorded, they act exactly as we 'think' they should act.
however if they are not being monitored and no way to watch them, then they act completely different and more random.
-
-
adamah
BTXB said-
Keyboard Cat beat me out of a gig playing in the dark corner of a coffee shop, so of course I'm bitter. Given the chance, I might try a two slit experiment on that feline to check it's wave/particle properties.
Well, there's a physics lab in Switzerland looking to run Schrödinger's cat thought experiment as a real-life experiment: perhaps KC is looking to supplement the tip jar income with a day-gig?
BTW, many people don't understand that Schrödinger's cat is a thought experiment, an argument taken to it's most extreme conclusion to make a point:
Schrödinger did not wish to promote the idea of dead-and-alive cats as a serious possibility; on the contrary, the paradox is a classic reductio ad absurdum. [2] The thought experiment illustrates quantum mechanics and the mathematics necessary to describe quantum states. Intended as a critique of just the Copenhagen interpretation (the prevailing orthodoxy in 1935), the "Schrödinger's Cat" thought experiment remains a typical touchstone for limited interpretations of quantum mechanics. Physicists often use the way each interpretation deals with Schrödinger's cat as a way of illustrating and comparing the particular features, strengths, and weaknesses of each interpretation.
The observer effect is of relevance to the issue, and according to this article, a physicist has proposed a way to test the model currently in use:
Cats that are both dead and alive, atoms that “know” when you are staring at them and parallel worlds that harbour any and every possibility: quantum theory has always thrown up some bizarre ideas. Now, for the first time, it may become possible to test one of its very strangest.
Quantum theory is the most successful framework for understanding the universe that we have, providing predictions that are borne out to a stunning degree of precision. But there’s a problem: no one actually knows how to interpret it. Albert Einstein, one of its architects, spent much of his life plotting its overthrow, because of the peculiar picture of reality – or “spookiness”, as he liked to put it – that it revealed.
One such odd feature is that, according to quantum physics, the act of observation changes the universe. An unobserved event, according to quantum lore, has neither happened nor not happened: it exists as a mathematical object called a wave function, which describes all possible versions of realities, and which only breaks down into one or other when we make an observation. A molecule may actually exist in what is called a “superposition”, which means an impossible coexistence of apparently contradictory possibilities, being both a dot-like particle and a wave that ripples over a distance some 1,000 times greater.
To come up with a more tangible example of just how odd this view of reality is, Erwin Schrödinger devised a thought experiment in 1935 starring a cat that is neither dead nor alive. Only when we take a peek inside the box does the wave function “collapse” into one actuality: there is either a dead cat, or a live one.This model of reality is known as the “Copenhagen Interpretation” – but not all physicists accept it. Some claim that the very act of observation causes the universe to split: I see a live cat, but in another universe, a different me sees a dead one. This is the so-called “Many Worlds” interpretation, which dates back to 1957.
If we’re honest, most scientists simply ignore this issue – first, because they’re as baffled as the rest of us, and second, because however you interpret it, the current mathematics of quantum theory gives the right answer, and it has long been assumed that there is no experiment that can determine which, if either, interpretation was right. Hence the third interpretation: “Shut up and calculate!”
However, in recent years, proposals have been made to explain what really goes on, by introducing a mechanism for collapse into quantum mechanics, rather than simply assuming that it happens. Recently, one of the biggest names in physics, the Nobel prize-winner Steven Weinberg, posted a blueprint online of models that can explain why molecules and cats never let us witness a superposition, but instead “collapse”.
The earliest and most well-known of these new models is known as the Ghirardi–Rimini–Weber-and-Pearle theory, or GRWP, which was proposed in the 1980s. In this theory, wave function collapse is a consequence of the vast numbers of atoms in a measuring apparatus interacting with whatever is being observed. This mission to upgrade quantum mechanics has been continued by others.
Now, there is finally a prospect of lifting this debate beyond dry philosophy by actually testing the GRWP proposal, with the help of a clever experiment devised by Markus Arndt’s team at the University of Vienna (in collaboration with Klaus Hornberger in Duisburg). Using ultra-precise instruments known as matter wave interferometers, the team hopes to spot tell-tale signs that can reveal if one of the modified versions of quantum theory is correct and test how real the wave-function collapse is.
The interferometers are named because when two wave functions meet, they can interfere with one another – cancelling out where a peak meets a trough and reinforcing where peaks align. If wave function collapse is linked to millions of atoms being present, as GRWP says, this interference pattern should be less pronounced or even vanish when there are sufficiently big clusters of atoms. “Nature will decide who is right,” says Arndt.
If his experiment challenges (or refutes) GWRP, it would be the simplest outcome and back the “shut up and calculate” pragmatists. But if it suggests that GRWP is correct, it could provide the first real evidence that the universe does not split into parallel worlds: that the possibilities of a living and a dead cat do indeed collapse into one reality when we look at it.
Any such experimentally verified deviation from traditional quantum predictions would mark a revolutionary turning point in physics – spurring the debate over what the wave function really means and cracking open a door to reveal a deeper level of reality. Let’s just hope ours is one of the universes in which the experiment works.
Sam, you do realize that a wind-up merchant is just another way to say troll?
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=wind-up
It refers to someone who posts on message board s and newsgroups with the intention to cause as much disruption as possible by goading others.
The thing is, you do say nonsense and intentionally repeat falsehoods (eg your intentional misquoting of Einstein's words about science and religion, despite repeated explanations), as if to goad a response to correct you so your willful ignorance isn't perpetuated by others. That's not helpful for anyone, esp in a climate where there's so much crapola in the air already from JW lies. Granted, you may kiss-up to people and conclude your posts with "luv you to bits", but it strikes many as insincere, when a better way to show your 'luv' would be to change your profession from a wind-up merchant to something more honorable.
Whatever your motivations, admitting to being a troll seems like a rather-questionable strategy to get people to take you seriously...
Adam
-
60
Anybody have ideas about the double slit experiement with particles, how they react based on a human mind observing them?
by EndofMysteries inhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfpeprq7ogc.
that's just crazy, that if the particles are being monitored and data recorded, they act exactly as we 'think' they should act.
however if they are not being monitored and no way to watch them, then they act completely different and more random.
-
-
adamah
BTXB said-
Would this qualify as an experiment proving the power of observation?
Hey now: don't be hatin' on keyboard cat!
You're likely just jealous of what clearly is an immensely gifted feline, a talented tickler of the ivories! Your hatred and jealousy drives you to make that unfounded allegation (likely due to past painful interactions with cats who clawed you as a child, and you harbor animosity and ill-will, to this day).
For two, you cannot PROVE that the video is faked, so therefore, it MUST be true!
For three, what kind of fiend would stage and post faked videos to YouTube? I can't think of ANY possible motivation, so it MUST be true!
So with those THREE completely insurmountable knock-out blows thus delivered in defense of keyboard cat, I now rest my carcass, and bid you a fond farewell....
