Me and mine is fine, thank you Leolaia.
Me turning conservative is not going to happen Satunus, don't be silly.
Robdar, actually, had a rather bad patch but Ghillie is getting his groove back, thank you.
hi people,.
well, i kicked the jwd habit a few years back, but idle curiosity and a long daily commute got me sniffing around the other day, and after trying every possible password i have ever used i get back in.... it's been long time everyone... cannot believe that, give or take a tiny bit, everything (and everyone) is the same.
some new names, some missing... has anything major happened in dubbieland or xdubbieland?
Me and mine is fine, thank you Leolaia.
Me turning conservative is not going to happen Satunus, don't be silly.
Robdar, actually, had a rather bad patch but Ghillie is getting his groove back, thank you.
may you all have peace!.
hubby and i happened to catch an episode of "nova" last night.
fascinating stuff.
mmm... that should be ' evidentiary' instead of evidencary and 'discourteous' instead of discourious. God alone knows why I spell argument with an e, LOL, but I was rushing for a bus...
I am glad I am not the only one who can see the web of inflammatory contradictions made by someone hiding seemingly meaningless felicitations of peace. Actions speak louder than words; didn’t your Master say ‘judge a tree by its fruit’ slave Shelby? Harsh? Maybe, but I wasn’t the one “praying on the street corner...”
Four years ago you were doing just the same. Is it you who has learned nothing, or us in responding to this tired routine?
Now, if I remember correctly, having said you weren't being inflammatory when you were being inflammatory, passed judgement on a subject you plainly don't understand and refused to listen to the attempts people made to educate you, and been discourteous towards people, the next Act of the Apostle is blaming everyone else and playing the victim?
Do I get a prize if I am right?
may you all have peace!.
hubby and i happened to catch an episode of "nova" last night.
fascinating stuff.
You say; "it was not an attempt to discredit evolution".
You also say "... several scientist/anthropologist/paleontologist admissions that there is actually very little known about... and in evidence to support... evolution."
Which of those two statements is true dear?
Because making contradictory statements like that WILL cause an argment, and that contradicts you saying: "I didn't make the thread to start an argument".
Are you just stirring for the sake of it? Seems to me like you are just making a drama for the purposes of making a drama, and have ignored the responses made to you point regarding scientific and religious paradigms.
I and others addressed this directly and it is discourious of you to ignore this and deceitful of you to say otherwise.
To make it simpler:
1/ Religious beliefs are not founded on evidence. This is why you have to use this thing called 'faith' to believe in them. Religious beliefs tend to deny the truth of other religous beliefs, yet have no stringent evidencary proof of either their own beliefs or the false nature of other religious beliefs.
When a religion changes its beliefs it is not because of new evidence (it never had any anyway). It just means some theologian won an argument or because a political or socially expedient change was required.
2/ Scientific theories are based on evidence. They are the 'best fit' to the evidence. New evidence can be found. This may mean that the theory changes so it remains the 'best fit' to the evidence. Rarely will this make a major difference - new fossils get discovered all the time but not ONE has disproved evolution.
Pi and the mean force of gravity at sea level remain the same no matter who wins arguements or what society or politicians think.
With less clear cut areas where the evidence requires more interpretation, there are scientific arguements. But no reputable biological scientist doubts we share a common ancestor with chimpanzees, and to say "... several scientist/anthropologist/paleontologist admissions that there is actually very little known about... and in evidence to support... evolution." is a gross distortion.
But then, it seems you would not know 'evidence' if it bit you, eh?
"There is NO EVIDENCE that directly links human evolution. None."
"In the same vein, there IS evidence of a fairly global, if not fully global flood."
i'm an atheist, and i'd like to take some time to talk about why i hold a great deal of respect for the jehovah's witnesses, and some words of encouragement that may put an end to the ridicule and disrespect you seem to get from, well, all sorts of people.. .
i never gave this kind of criticism a second thought: i knew nothing about you, and i figured you were just another fringe group of christianity.
i now feel terrible about this, and i wish to apologize for my (admittedly never spoken) disrespect.
I have to ask; do you genuinely believe that or is this a trojan horse of an argument? Not that you'd tel me if it was, but your reply would be illuminating never-the-less.
you just want to slap her silly.
the end will come if these people get there man in the white house.. .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v17wgtvphgg.
Christian right is an oxymoron with added morons
may you all have peace!.
hubby and i happened to catch an episode of "nova" last night.
fascinating stuff.
Believing in evolution with the exception of human evolution is like believing in the internal combustion engine with the exception of the Chevy V8.
You seem to be profoundly unaware of how science works.
Since people made up various religious texts, others have been produced denying the veracity of those that proceeded them. However, none of them can prove themselves to be true or others to be untrue.
Scientific theories arise because of a burden of evidence supporting them. Sometimes new evidence causes refinement, revision. Please note I use 'theory' in the sense of 'gravity', not 'string'; the later is more if a hypothesis.
When new evidence appears, it can take a while and oft times some argument - not always dignified - until there is a consensus of what it means and how it impacts the understanding of whatever field of science it falls under.
I could go into detail about the decade-long bitchfest that is the 'out of Africa' and 'multi-regionalism' debate about our origins. For a long time the Afria lobby held the winning cards, but now new genetic methods are finding traces of H. neanderthalis and H. denisovius (sp?) ancestry in H. sap (us) X chromosomes, which kind of hints H. erectus evolved into the above regionalised humans before a further wave of H. erectus descendants (in this case H. sapiens) rolled out of Africa and displaced them with some admixture.
H. florensis is a sideshow, albeit an interesting one.
It in no way, shape or form puts into doubt that around 5 million years ago there were primates who were the ancestors of us AND chimpanzees.
There is proof of this in our bones, in our genes, and in the ground (i.e. fossils).
Feel free to question things though; however, given your level of education about evolution and you desire to believe in things not supported by evidence, you will be liable to error and rushing off to conclusions that fit your prexisting desire to not believe in human evolution.
If you really wanted, you could study the subject.
Anyway, I didn't make the thread to start an argument, truly. I only wanted to show that even "science" doesn't always agree... or know. Even when they say they do.
hi people,.
well, i kicked the jwd habit a few years back, but idle curiosity and a long daily commute got me sniffing around the other day, and after trying every possible password i have ever used i get back in.... it's been long time everyone... cannot believe that, give or take a tiny bit, everything (and everyone) is the same.
some new names, some missing... has anything major happened in dubbieland or xdubbieland?
AH debates with theists, those were the days... kinda like smoking too much weed... fun in its own way but doesn't really get much accomplished.
Mind you, I used to be an atheist... but now, I know I am god...
I definatey remember you Mouthy, and FlyingHighNow... weren't you in a film Keyser?
Saw a Louis Theroux documentary when he went (for the second time) to see the nutbags at Wetboro Baptist... he met up with two young women who have left since his first visit
.
One looked like she was doing Cult Decompresion 1.01 (kinda cool rock chick thing going on, mmmhmm), but had it by the numbers; it was all about the ego of the members, no sign of guilt, called it a cult. The other was still obviously mourning the loss of contact with her family, poor dear, and is still in shadows I think.
Reason I mention it is, that if you think about it, the JWs started off on a similar track with Rutherford, very confrontational... their coniving utilisation and subjegation of women, their compacent self-satisfaction and conviction of rectitude, their utter drabness... even the freaking KH's look like Westboro's church...
hi people,.
well, i kicked the jwd habit a few years back, but idle curiosity and a long daily commute got me sniffing around the other day, and after trying every possible password i have ever used i get back in.... it's been long time everyone... cannot believe that, give or take a tiny bit, everything (and everyone) is the same.
some new names, some missing... has anything major happened in dubbieland or xdubbieland?
Hi people,
Well, I kicked the JWD habit a few years back, but idle curiosity and a LONG daily commute got me sniffing around the other day, and after trying every possible password I have ever used I get back in...
It's been LONG time everyone... cannot believe that, give or take a tiny bit, everything (and everyone) is the same. Some new names, some missing... has anything major happened in Dubbieland or xDubbieland? What do you mean Armagedon came already? Shit, was I asleep or something?
Don't get me wrong, JWD (and Tash's place before, Hi RedHorseWoman, I think we're the only one's left from off there) helped me lots back in the day...
... but I gotta say, continual reinforcement of identifying myself as an xJW is something I was glad to get out of the habit of doing. I miss it as much as I miss being a pothead. But then some of you oldies probably have a more balanced approach to life and don't turn it up all the way and rip the knobs off, LOL.
Simon; iOS access to the Board; sort it out mate or Steve Jobs will smite you, yay, verily.
i'm this orthodox christian dating a disfellowshipped jw chick.
my priest says there's hope because she's been disfellowshipped and to give it 6 months.
one minute says she wants to become a citizen, the next minute i tell her that if she does that as an american i would expect her to salute the flag and especially vote if she naturalizes, and then she talks about going back to her own country!!.
SonoftheTrinity
Respect to you for taking advice as it's intended
I'm not meaning to be controlling but shouldn't a new citizen give at least the minimum, their vote, JW or not?
You might think so, but she needn't agree. Nor is it actually that important at this stage in her recovery.
You hit the money where you say you're used to debate and she isn't; what to you might be cheerful debate might to her be you telling her there's only one way. I debate like a propeller and know sometimes I can come across like 'this is right and nothing else is' even if I don't actually really think that.
I was brought up to believe that the people that didn't vote were what was wrong with this country, especially if they were naturalized and didn't vote. Being nice and respecting the laws isn't enough, getting your hands dirty by voting and marching in protests for whatever you believe in is how you keep your country free. I know people who come from other countries often have an even more cynical view of politics.
And you're perfectly free to have that opinion. She will not be as free to have that opinion for a while as she's been in a mind controlling cult where black pudding and voting were both BAD. Just because she's now out doesn't mean she can over come that programming easily or quickly
I try to engage her about these things and she won't debate me! Why don't JWs debate, without debate, there would be no civilization!!!
Her opinons in some area were never based on facts or reason.
An opinion that is not based on fact or reason is very hard to overcome with facts or reason.
without debate, there would be no civilization!!!
That statement gets me as close to kissing a practising male Orthodox Christian as I ever am likely to. I hear you brother!
(nothing against males or practising Orthodox Christians, just I don't normally agree with them so much I want to kiss them!
i'm this orthodox christian dating a disfellowshipped jw chick.
my priest says there's hope because she's been disfellowshipped and to give it 6 months.
one minute says she wants to become a citizen, the next minute i tell her that if she does that as an american i would expect her to salute the flag and especially vote if she naturalizes, and then she talks about going back to her own country!!.
You need to find someone who agrees with you, not someone who will do what you say.
Last thing she needs coming out of a controlling cult is a controlling life partner; you'd both be miserable.