AlanF

Point being: it is grossly hypocritical and intellectually dishonest to rail against science for being unable to explain the origin of life -- which scientists freely admit -- yet refuse to consider the much worse problem of the origin of God.

I don't think so. I've met him in person several times.
What you've watched are Creationist distortions of such debates. And you know it. That's why you're afraid to give a link to any of them.
You have no wits to understand that it was Ben Stein who tricked him into saying that. And it was Stein and his lying Creationist movie makers who edited the film to make it seem like Dawkins came up with the idea on his own.
You were supremely fooled by the Creationist makers of Expelled -- just as you've been fooled by your Watchtower masters.

Holly Folk has no idea what she's talking about.
The fact is that JW leadership has always put protection of "Jehovah's name" -- actually the JW organization's own name -- above all other considerations. That's why it was only in 2001 that they issued a specific instruction to elders not to prevent any molestation victim from reporting to the police -- until then it was understood that reporting was to be discouraged. Victims and their family members were actually disfellowshipped for reporting against elders' instructions.

Holly Folk has no idea what she's talking about.
The fact is that JW leadership has always put protection of "Jehovah's name" -- actually the JW organization's own name -- above all other considerations. That's why it was only in 2001 that they issued a specific instruction to elders not to prevent any molestation victim from reporting to the police -- until then it was understood that reporting was to be discouraged. Victims and their family members were actually disfellowshipped for reporting against elders' instructions.

True Tom Harley said:
Too late.
Thanks for the compliment! I have the utmost admiration for Mencken and his writing.
Bryan's problem was the same as Christian apologists often have today: the Theory of Evolution has nothing to do with the fake 'science' of Social Darwinism. That was originated by one Herbert Spencer, who applied Darwin's notion of natural selection far beyond anything Darwin wrote about. Today it's considered pseudoscience.
Others jumped on Spencer's bandwagon and became popularizers of his ideas, despite the fact that it was a philosophical, not a scientific position. Creationists of all stripes have long beat their drums about this pseudoscience. A Wikipedia article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Darwinism) puts it well:
<< Creationists have frequently maintained that social Darwinism—leading to policies designed to reward the most competitive—is a logical consequence of "Darwinism" (the theory of natural selection in biology). Biologists and historians have stated that this is a fallacy of appeal to nature, since the theory of natural selection is merely intended as a description of a biological phenomenon and should not be taken to imply that this phenomenon is good or that it ought to be used as a moral guide in human society. While most scholars recognize some historical links between the popularisation of Darwin's theory and forms of social Darwinism, they also maintain that social Darwinism is not a necessary consequence of the principles of biological evolution. >>
As a discredited logical fallacy, Social Darwinism has no more connection with the Theory Evolution than the carpet bombing of German and Japanese cities had with the Theory of Gravity.
Bryan was a wise man in many ways. As an attempt to describe how nature actually is, science is not supposed to be a teacher of morals.
Since a great deal of criticism of Evolution is based on the fallacy that science ought to be a teacher of morals, all such criticism is fallacious and completely misses the point of science.
Again Bryan was correct. Morality is the bailiwick of philosophy, and sometimes religion -- not mere descriptions of nature.
Yes, it would. But remember that neither science, nor scientists for the most part, start wars: politicians start wars. And politicians use every available means to achieve their ends -- everything from stone-tipped spears to hydrogen bombs.
"Common sense"? In other words, you have no logical arguments. And you deliberately forget politics.
A self-contradictory statement. See below.
First, Wells was a science fiction writer, not a historian. While he wrote a popularized two-volume history series, it was not particularly well received by historians. Second, the statement you quote is a mere description of what happened to become popular belief -- which is in no sense valid science. No more so than today's Trump-inspired popular belief that the recent American election was stolen from him is valid history.
Since Wells became an atheist and came to accept Evolution, his statements about "de-moralization" and "loss of faith" can hardly be called "corrosive" from his point of view. On the contrary, as an atheist he would have considered such things as a net positive.
Even you admit that you have no valid, logical arguments. Only vague allusions to "common sense". Very much akin to the basis of almost all religious belief.
More ridiculously illogical claims. And fallacious, since you assume your conclusion.
He was basically wrong: far more young people today want nothing to do with religion of any kind than ever before.
An excellent statement of your fallacious 'reasoning'.
Yes, cheer yourself on!
The rest of your 'exposition' is the usual combination of "meh" and "not even wrong", so there's no point in my commenting.

Arauna! Arauna!! Lookie lookie lookie how fossils got to be up on Mount Everest -- as a result of the movement of Teutonic, Aryan and Gallic plates!
 
 

Such an idiot!
The point is that Dawkins does not believe in any sort of Panspermia. That was Stein's contribution.
Much like my saying: "Hey TTH! If pigs could fly, where might they nest?" And you answered with speculation. And then I said: "See! That idiot TTH thinks pigs can fly!"
 

Hard to get any goofier than this.

Actually with the help of swine (I knew the quote I posted went over your head.)

Oh dear not that old record again. The whole Watchtower / GB / JW org seems to pivot on that one false belief of 1914.
In scripture we read at Matthew 28 :18 - 20    English Standard Version
18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.” 
So there you have Jesus' words. 33C.E.  Not 1914. 
And when will your GB get baptism right ?  Once again the words of Jesus. "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit," NOT in the name of JW Org. 
 

LOL at the abysmal ignorance.

Yes, about 13,000 years old or less, according to Watchtower tradition. But birds and such are as much as 20,000 years old.

The catastrophic destruction of men and animals by an overwhelming flood in the days of Noah, 2370 B.C.E. -https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200001150
 According to WTJWorg and your explanation, Noah and his family and many other people of his time lived together with dinosaurs, tyrannosaurus and many other prehistorical animals?? 
That would mean how God decide to destroy some sort of  animals and to save other species. But how that is in harmony that all animals God created was good? So, dinosaurs didn't make God fell happy anymore, but he stayed good with crocodiles? :))
Fossils and deposits of dead animals speaks about past time, but dinosaurs and similar species are much much older then 4390 years. 

I'm perfectly aware of what a fascist is. And the attitude of the GB proves that WTS leaders are fascists at heart. That's why they define "apostasy" as disagreement with them -- not just disagreement with God, but with them.

One or more local floods most likely contributed to the Flood legend over a long period of time. As the story was retold, as happens with all legends, it got bigger and badder. It was a cool story to tell over the campfire, and as travelers went their way they told the story to those they met. Thus the story was propagated around the world.

If humans are incorrigible, what do animals have to do with it? The destruction of "evil animals" that were herbivores ... and some of them became carnivores after they came out of the Ark? :))
I am of opinion how that was local flood that affected all people and animals of that particular earth where Noah lived. 
... earth was corrupt in God’s sight - Gen 6. Here we see expression tat is not literal. Earth can not be corrupt but people are what God have in mind. In Joseph's days and famine Bible text say: .
Moreover, people of all the earth came to Egypt to buy from Joseph, because the famine had a strong grip on all the earth- Gen 41
Do you really think how people from China, India, North America, Africa, Australia etc. came to Egypt to buy grain?
 

That's right. ALL of the rationalizations for the reality of a global Flood 4,400 years ago evaporate in the face of physical facts.
But think about the implications of the use of supernatural powers. The world of mankind was so wicked that God decided to destroy it, along with nearly all animal life. That's using a hydrogen bomb to swat a fly. After all, didn't just one angel kill 185,000 Assyrians in one night? Why wipe out everything?
This doesn't even touch the fact that there is no physical evidence whatsoever for a recent global Flood. What kind of physical evidence should be present globally? Do a little research on the "MIssoula floods" that occurred some 12,000 to 18,000 years ago in the U.S. in Washington, Idaho and Oregon. The devastation from even those huge floods is small compared to what a global flood would have produced worldwide.

Anna said:
The beginning -- as I've explained several times -- no. The end -- as I've explained several times -- YES: 539 BCE.
You have no choice -- IF you believe the Bible. Once again: Jeremiah 25:12 and 2 Chronicles 36:20 decisively settle the issue: servitude of ALL the nations to Babylon ended when Cyrus conquered it and the Persian Empire came to power.
Don't you believe what the Bible says?
Daniel did NOT use desolation as the end of the 70 years. What Daniel said about the 70 years is AMBIGUOUS. About half the commentators I've read understand his words to mean that, now that Babylon had fallen, and based on Jeremiah's words in Jer. 29:10 and most likely 25:12 and chapter 27, the 70 years had just ended, and Jehovah would go about restoring the Jews to Judah.
The Watchtower and others get the cart before the horse, claiming that Daniel anticipated the soon-to-come fall of Babylon based on his 'understanding' that the 70 years were about to end. But that notion makes several assumptions that are not stated anywhere in the book of Jeremiah, because Jeremiah said nothing about 70 years of desolation. In other words, it's a fallacy of assuming the conclusion.
The beginning, yes. But not the end.
The Bible often uses a specific number to describe an approximate period. "70 years" works with the dates 609 to 539, 605 to 539, etc.
You've just argued away the Watchtower's arguments for the 70 years having an exact beginning and end.
No, because that view directly contradicts a number of Bible passages, as described above and elsewhere.
That's a big deal alright. And it comes about precisely because the WTS needs to maintain the 1914 date.

That's right. ALL of the rationalizations for the reality of a global Flood 4,400 years ago evaporate in the face of physical facts.
But think about the implications of the use of supernatural powers. The world of mankind was so wicked that God decided to destroy it, along with nearly all animal life. That's using a hydrogen bomb to swat a fly. After all, didn't just one angel kill 185,000 Assyrians in one night? Why wipe out everything?
This doesn't even touch the fact that there is no physical evidence whatsoever for a recent global Flood. What kind of physical evidence should be present globally? Do a little research on the "MIssoula floods" that occurred some 12,000 to 18,000 years ago in the U.S. in Washington, Idaho and Oregon. The devastation from even those huge floods is small compared to what a global flood would have produced worldwide.

Anna said:
The beginning -- as I've explained several times -- no. The end -- as I've explained several times -- YES: 539 BCE.
You have no choice -- IF you believe the Bible. Once again: Jeremiah 25:12 and 2 Chronicles 36:20 decisively settle the issue: servitude of ALL the nations to Babylon ended when Cyrus conquered it and the Persian Empire came to power.
Don't you believe what the Bible says?
Daniel did NOT use desolation as the end of the 70 years. What Daniel said about the 70 years is AMBIGUOUS. About half the commentators I've read understand his words to mean that, now that Babylon had fallen, and based on Jeremiah's words in Jer. 29:10 and most likely 25:12 and chapter 27, the 70 years had just ended, and Jehovah would go about restoring the Jews to Judah.
The Watchtower and others get the cart before the horse, claiming that Daniel anticipated the soon-to-come fall of Babylon based on his 'understanding' that the 70 years were about to end. But that notion makes several assumptions that are not stated anywhere in the book of Jeremiah, because Jeremiah said nothing about 70 years of desolation. In other words, it's a fallacy of assuming the conclusion.
The beginning, yes. But not the end.
The Bible often uses a specific number to describe an approximate period. "70 years" works with the dates 609 to 539, 605 to 539, etc.
You've just argued away the Watchtower's arguments for the 70 years having an exact beginning and end.
No, because that view directly contradicts a number of Bible passages, as described above and elsewhere.
That's a big deal alright. And it comes about precisely because the WTS needs to maintain the 1914 date.

Anna said:
No one is suggesting that the 70 years be ignored. The problem is what it applies to, and its beginning and its end.
Remember that all three things happened at various times from 609 through 538 BCE. Servitude of ALL Middle Eastern nations to Babylon began in 609 when Nabopolassar's forces under Nebuchadnezzar conquered the last remnant of the Assyrian army at the battle of Harran. More specific instances of servitude began, first in 605 when Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem and took Daniel and others captive, then in 597 when Jehoiachin and the majority of Jews were taken captive, again in 587 when Jerusalem was destroyed and most of the remaining Jews were taken, and finally in 582 when an unspecified group of Jews were taken. Each of these events is a deportation, a captivity and the start of an exile. Desolation occurred in connection with each event.
Why desolation? Because the Hebrew word chorbah does not exclusively mean "without inhabitant". Basically it means "ruined" which can be ruined physically or metaphorically. Thus, after Daniel and company were taken captive in 605, and Temple implements were taken, Jerusalem was properly described as "ruined" (chorbah) or "desolated" in at least a spiritual or religious sense. Such "desolation" ended when the Jews returned in 538 BCE.
Note, on the other hand, that servitude to Babylon ended in 539 BCE when Babylon was conquered and its kings Nabonidus and Belshazzar were "called to account" (Jer. 25:12; Dan. 5). At that point, one can say that servitude to the Persian Empire began and continued for a few months (2 Chron. 36:20).
Also note that captivity in Babylon ended about Nisan 1, 538 BCE when Cyrus issued his proclamation of freedom. But the "desolation" of Jerusalem ended some four months after the Jews set out to return to Judah, which was by Tishri (Sept/Oct), 538. And obviously, the four exiles ended either when the Jews began or ended their return journey, depending on how one defines "end of exile".
Thus, the periods of servitude, captivity, desolation and exile do not necessarily correspond.
Finally, since the Bible does not state the beginning of the 70 years, but only its end, no one can be dogmatic about it. A beginning in 609 results in exactly 70 years. A beginning in 607 or 605 gives approximately 70 years, just like the life span of a human is about 70 years. Some authors define the 70 years somewhat differently, but again no one can afford to be dogmatic.
As mentioned above, that assumes that the 70 years was an exact period. Since the Bible does not say, and there are many instances where some number is obviously approximate, we cannot be certain.
And of course, Jer. 25:12 and Dan. 5 are clear, beyond rational argument, that the 70 years ended in 539 BCE.
Of course -- but the time of servitude ended in 539 BCE when there was no longer a Babylonian Empire to be in servitude to.

Arauna is grossly ignorant of even Watchtower teaching, much less science generally. She seems to have got stuck in what the WTS was more or less teaching 40 years ago and more. By 1983 the WTS was condemning Young-Earth Creationism as "unscriptural" and unscientific. Today's YECs, following the completely nutty Walter Brown's "hydroplate theory", claim that all phenomena of plate tectonics were caused by a rapid movement of the tectonic plates just 4,400 years ago -- ludicrously and physically impossible.

You made far more than a mere spelling mistake -- you made a gross conceptual mistake. You proved -- contrary to your implied claims -- that you've never read one iota about plate tectonics, or even geology, from reputable sources.
There are billions of fossils. What planet are you living on?
Not suddenly. Over tens of millions of years. Read the book Your Inner Fish by Neil Shubin. It will give you a lot to chew on.
It didn't. Wings developed over many tens of millions of years. First in insects, later and independently in pterosaurs, still later in the dinosaurs that morphed into birds, and finally in bats.
And of course, the fossil record of these creatures completely disproves "the order of creation" stated in Genesis -- a subject you carefully avoid. Amphibians appear in the fossil record of some 365 million years ago -- some 130 million years before the first pterosaurs. Dinosaurs first appear some 230 million years ago -- some 70 million years before the first more-or-less birds like Archaeopteryx. True mammals first appear some 200 million years ago -- 150 million years before any bats. Yet Genesis says that ALL flying creatures were created before ANY land creatures.
It did not. I've corrected you several times on this. The Cambrian period began about 541 million years ago -- something like 90 million years after a great number of pre-cambrian creatures first appeared. Read about the Ediacaran fauna, for example. Once sufficient oxygen accumulated in the atmosphere, animals with little teeth and small shells appeared in the earliest Cambrian, then animals with bigger teeth and shells -- all over a period of some 20 million years. You've been misled by your Creationist sources. I suggest reading The Cambrian Explosion: The Construction of Animal Biodiversity by Erwin and Valentine as an antidote.
NO trilobites have been found in pre-cambrian strata. Obviously you can't even remember what your Creationist sources say. Trilobites appear some 20 million years AFTER the beginning of the Cambrian Period: https://www.amnh.org/research/paleontology/collections/fossil-invertebrate-collection/trilobite-website/the-trilobite-files/the-first-trilobites
Complete nonsense.
Utter nonsense. Prove it.
There's that defective memory again.
Yes, suggesting that you read reputable sources rather than nonsensical, dishonest Creationist crap is highly insulting.
Read the books I suggested.
Yes, your usual conspiracy theory garbage.
Ah, yes -- a perfect proof of conspiracy theory nonsense. And that you're reading Creationist nonsense.
Do the math and prove it.
That's rich, coming from someone too ignorant to know the difference between "Teutonic" and "tectonic".
Nowhere near as much faith as demonstrably false Bible and Watchtower stories.
Homework? LOL! Creationist sources -- condemned even by Watchtower writers -- is rather bad homework.
[Nonsensical blah blah blah deleted ]
More proof you don't know what you're talking about: the origin of life -- abiogenesis -- is NOT part of the Theory of Evolution. Despite what the Watchtower and Creationists would have you believe.
Nonsense. Point us to your sources for the math. Oh yeah, it's just more Creationist crap.
Oh? WHICH mathematicians? Members of the Creationist Discovery Institute like William Dembski, Michael Behe, Stephen Meyer, and David Berlinski? Committed Creationists all?
Ah yes. But not Discovery Institute members, who generally accept the old age of the earth and life, but nonsense from the Young-Earth Creationists. Again, you're so ignorant even of Watchtower teaching that you don't understand that the Society explicitly condemned YECism nearly 40 years ago. See Awake!, March 8, 1983, p. 12.
Not that I'm aware. Give it to me again. I probably already have it in my library.
Spare me.

Arauna is grossly ignorant of even Watchtower teaching, much less science generally. She seems to have got stuck in what the WTS was more or less teaching 40 years ago and more. By 1983 the WTS was condemning Young-Earth Creationism as "unscriptural" and unscientific. Today's YECs, following the completely nutty Walter Brown's "hydroplate theory", claim that all phenomena of plate tectonics were caused by a rapid movement of the tectonic plates just 4,400 years ago -- ludicrously and physically impossible.

Pangea, also spelled Pangaea, in early geologic time, a supercontinent that incorporated almost all the landmasses on Earth......Geologic time, the extensive interval of time occupied by the geologic history of Earth. Formal geologic time begins at the start of the Archean Eon (4.0 billion to 2.5 billion years ago) and continues to the present day. Modern geologic time scales additionally often include the Hadean Eon, which is an informal interval that extends from about 4.6 billion years ago (corresponding to Earth’s initial formation) to 4.0 billion years ago. - https://www.britannica.com/place/Pangea   https://www.britannica.com/science/geologic-time
This explains why ocean floor rocks are generally less than 200 million years old whereas the oldest continental rocks are more than 4 billion years old. - https://www.britannica.com/science/plate-tectonics/Seafloor-spreading
According to Britannica, and to my understanding of these information, Creation Days according to WTJWorg lasted very short compared to the millions of years described by Britannica. General attitude about length of 1 Creative Day is about 7000 years in WTJWorg publications. By that JW members are misinformed by WTJWorg about history of Earth and Life on Earth. 
Pangea was surrounded by a global ocean called Panthalassa, and it was fully assembled by the Early Permian Epoch (some 299 million to 273 million years ago).
 And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so. God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good.
In this Bible verses i see similarity about "Pangea", you speaking about, and "dry ground". Also about "gathered waters". Bible said how in Day 3 that happened. So, we again have problem with WTJWorg view about what was/is length of Creative Day. JW's publications never connected each Creative Day with millions of years. 
In light of what was said your statement or opinion or belief how: The flood was a destructive event with tsunamis, earthquakes, volcanos erupting and major movement of Teutonic plates is not supported with this Britannica quotes. Of course, Britannica don't bring exact, fixed numbers of years. But difference in view of length time with WTJWorg is drastic.  
Bible don't speaking nothing about elements you put in focus (tsunamis, earthquakes, volcanos erupting and major movement of Teutonic plates). Bible speaking only about water!
Also, Bible said that God said this: I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it. Everything on earth will perish....The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than fifteen cubits.
Nothing about anything else, but only about water as tool for destroying all life and to cover mountains.