Jump to content
The World News Media

JW USA: A Witness responds to Lloyd Evans about JW and global climate change


Guest Indiana

Recommended Posts

  • Member
25 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Well TTH, if you will be in same situation to tell this words again, to someone else as advice/plead, Please, DO NOT. 

I regretted it almost the moment I sent it. Who am I to interject myself? Maybe I should have taken it back, but I usually do not delete things once I've put them out there. I try to dig myself out of the mess I've made later. Ideally, I think it through first. In this case, I shot myself in the foot.

28 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

It is very Interesting fact how i stopped to go on meetings from 1 January 2015 and not giving reports about field service. Not single telephone call for some 6 months

It is what it is. No one is saying that anyone is proud about it. That being said:

29 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Not single telephone call for some 6 months, to say simple hello or call for coffee - to show some "brotherly love" (which i probably would not accept anyway) 

Well, they're people too. Maybe if you "probably would not accept anyway" they somehow had a clue that would be the case. It isn't easy stepping into a situation that you know will be unpleasant, especially if you have many other things that are pleasant that you can occupy yourself with.

 

34 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

oh dear god, you are the people who will shun and ignore me, you are the people who told congregation to destroy my Letter and to stop have anything with me, and now you have nerve to warn me to not make some trouble to her. 

It may not be wrong to look at it that way, but that does not mean it is helpful.

It might be that if you do "make trouble" for her, she will go your way. Or it might be that she will break and/or that your marriage will blow up. Would you prefer that? Take it as real concern for her on their part, and even for you that you do not make what would have to have been a strained marital relationship 10 times worse.

 

42 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

You are not "extremist" in that sense. :)          

OK. It is a good word, I think. If you notice, my word to you was also a good word. I said that she probably loves you "with good reason."

Don't misunderstand. Spiritually speaking, I think you have traded in the diamonds for the turds, but that does not mean that I dislike you personally (though - I admit it - at times I have).

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 6k
  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The only way to learn the truth about whether "global warming" is real ... and whether it is a naturally occurring phenomena that mankind can do NOTHING about, or is caused by human interaction with t

It would have to be a small star sized chunk of iron .... probably not something you could get at an automobile scrap yard. Further, when a star collapses, it can go Nova, or Supernova, which is

@TrueTomHarley I still getting used to this theme. I think I will actually ask the @admin to go back to the default. 

Posted Images

  • Member
16 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Here you are, Srecko. You’ll be heralding this in no time at all, perhaps already.

The point is that your people divide up readily with regard to every new thing. Our people don’t. It would b the same with regard to climate change if our people were to join your people.

 

B618E25E-BC10-4363-A391-E4EE5071B99E.png

This does not surprise me, the whole gender thing. You should see what they are doing when it comes to indoctrinating children into something that they proclaim as normal when it is bad. Birth certificates I believe was effected too: http://newjersey.news12.com/story/39735791/gender-neutral-birth-certificates-to-be-available-in-nj-come-february

There is a fight coming, those who see the danger are prepared for it, but those who don't see the danger or go about the danger as if they can defeat it will only find themselves in absolute ruin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
4 minutes ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

If he was a scientist, maybe I would get a good answer for a debate.

The reason I am not "sympathetic" to you Billy, is that if you found someone who knew EVERYTHING about any particular subject ... and you knew NOTHING about that same subject ... you would debate him.

Sometimes ... you just need to sit down, shut up ... and listen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On ‎3‎/‎22‎/‎2019 at 6:15 PM, JW Insider said:

I have no problem if JTR is drawn into a discussion on the topic, because I'm sure he knows more than I do about it. 

He does not know more about it than you. He knows things about it that you do not.

And you do not know more about it than he. You know things about it that he does not.

It is due to the reality of news sources that do not cover the same facts, each ignoring what does not fit into its prevailing narrative.

I can best explain it by referring to a topic I have stronger feelings about. I am undecided about climate change. As stated, the biggest factor for it, in my view, is that the organization has said it is devoting so much more to disaster relief.

Not surprisingly, when a white police officer shoots a black suspect, the event is widely covered. Other shootings are not so widely covered. Sometimes they are barely mentioned. Thus comes the perception that white officers are racist and hostile to blacks. Yet a study of the Philadelphia police force during the Obama administration found the statistics revealed no significant aberrations with regard to race. In fact, the stats revealed that black officers were slightly more likely to shoot black suspects than were white officers. They were slightly more likely to experience "threat misperception," was the phrase. 

So a picture emerges via media that does not reflect the whole truth. It even serves to create a wrong impression. Does such a thing happen with regard to climate change? That recent year when major hurricanes hit Florida and Texas? It was pronounced significant evidence of global warming. Yet the total number of hurricanes that year was abnormally low. Do we see a weather version of  "If it bleeds, it leads?"

Everyone must do something to sort through the polarized information streams. My own strategy is that, whenever I follow anything on Twitter, I make it a point to also follow its polar opposite. In this way, there are two or three things popularly regarded as almost conspiracy theories that I have come to regard as quite likely. It is not the case that all the scientists are on the side of climate change. What happens is the same as what happens during physical warfare: efforts to dehumanize the enemy. The climate change scientists declare the other scientists not scientists at all, because if they were scientists they would come on board with climate change.

If you follow both sides on Twitter you find the 'conspiracy' side well argued, well researched, with abundant studies, data, facts to support statements made. They do not at all come across as the unhinged crackpots they are portrayed as. The pro side tends to be more like.....like....well, like Billy, who froths that the matter is "settled" and that only a science apostate would contradict "established science." I don't think that it is settled at all.

Recently a disheartening Pew report related that today's reality goes beyond people not agreeing on the facts. Today's reality is that people do not agree on what the facts are. With no common starting point they can be no agreement. It is very different to get to the bottom of anything, and usually one can identify a person's primary opinions by the news sources he takes in. They report on different things.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
55 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

He does not know more about it than you. He knows things about it that you do not.

And you do not know more about it than he. You know things about it that he does not.

Actually, TTH, since you do not know enough even to form an internal opinion, as you yourself admitted, you are particularly unqualified to render an educated opinion on whether I, or JWI is the most informed.

All "Global Warming" prognostications are based on  say 15 computer models, and information is adjusted, managed, and tweaked to make the models say whatever agrees with the source of funding.

JWI was, and is correct in his statement that I know more about the subject than he does ... and more to the point, I can PROVE my conclusions.

This would involve  charts, graphs, pocket calculators, and lectures on cosmology, orbital mechanics, physics heat transfer, and a dozen other subjects, that most people are never even exposed to .... much less have an understanding and a working knowledge of.

You are like a feather, blowing in the wind ... wishing that EVERYBODY was as uninformed, wrong, and wishy-washy as you are.

You cannot vote ...... on TRUTH.

dt190310.jpg

dt190315.gif

Global Warming  1989.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
6 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

JWI was, and is correct in his statement that I know more about the subject than he does ... and more to the point, I can PROVE my conclusions.

He probably just yielded to your intransigence. At any rate, despite all of your proof, you failed to convince him.

Actually, I tend to fall into your camp on this and would fall into it more firmly were it the core issue today. But it's not. People on both sides pound each other relentlessly over the issue and fail to convince. So I stop short of going the extra mile required to affirm in my own mind that it is as you say. I put my eggs in another basket.

It is certainly is a political issue, as you say, and as JWI says it is not. Rephrase it slightly, and even he will agree: it is certainly an issue that is politicized. Yes, I know of the sneaky globalist statements that they are using it to drive idealogical change. That makes sense to me. But it is not my main cause. I already have a main cause. 

If humans are not ruining the earth by climate change, it is not as though they are too responsible ever to ruin it. It is also not as though they are not ruining it, just by other means. These days, I must restrain myself from being a full-time zealot, not against climate change views, but against vaccine ones. I think it very likely that there are a host of ills to be laid at their feet and when those ills occur, they are more catastrophic and more immediate than climate change. 

It is the same story of demonization and misportrayal as with other contentious issues. Follow it via Twitter or somewhere else and you find that the "anti-vax" side - (they hate that label and charge, I think correctly, that it is deliberately assigned so as to portray them as loonies, since very few of them are anti ALL vaccines) come off as exceedingly well-informed and reasonable, not at all as the hysterical nuts portrayed by the other side.

Don't go against me on this, you calcified blockhead. I will not yield so readily on this one as I will on the climate.

7 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

You are like a feather, blowing in the wind ... wishing that EVERYBODY was as uninformed, wrong, and wishy-washy as you are.

You do not keep up, do you? No need to insult, "forcing" me to follow suit, We are now soul brothers, according to Billy. Act like it, please .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

When all is said and done ... you and Billy ARE my soul brothers, and I would defend you both with my life if necessary. 

We all take turns being wrong about many, many things, with the firm and profound belief that we are right.  It's part of being "big ugly bags of mostly water.

... just add gravel, and Portland Cement.

In the big red "Revelation" book, circa 15 or so years ago, it mentioned as an aside that Sir Isaac Newton may have been one of the Anointed. This sparked me reading two very large biographies on his life, and what impressed me the most was the fact that he never published anything without rigorous proof.

Rigorous proof means that the facts you use are checkable, and do not contradict known chemistry, physics, and science that makes the REAL world what it is.

If it cannot be expressed with HARD NUMBERS, and to "how many decimal places" ... it is NOT science .... it is ONLY opinion.

The things wars are fought over.

ALL agenda driven thinking, without exception always has been, , is now, and will always be faulty.

Tied to a bad idea.    .jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • An interesting concept, bible discipline. I am struck by the prevalence of ignorance about spiritual discipline on "Reddit." While physical and mental disciplines receive attention, the profound impact of spiritual discipline on a person's physical and mental well-being is often overlooked. Is it possible to argue against the words of the Apostle Paul? When he penned those words in Hebrews 12, he was recognizing that there are moments when an individual must be "rebuked" in order to be corrected. Even Jesus himself established a precedent when he rebuked Peter and referred to him as Satan for failing to comprehend what Jesus had already revealed to the apostles. Did that imply that Jesus had an evil heart? Not at all, it was quite the opposite; Jesus had a loving heart. His need to correct Peter actually showcased his genuine love for him. If he hadn't cared, he would have let Peter persist in his mistaken ways, leading to a fate similar to Judas'. There is a clear emphasis on avoiding the apostate translation and its meaning, yet many seem to overlook the biblical foundation for the reasons NOT to follow the path of the fallen brethren or those with an apostate mentality. Those individuals have embraced the path of darkness, where the illuminating power of light cannot penetrate, to avoid receiving the righteous discipline based on God's Bible teachings. They are undoubtedly aware that this undeniable truth of life must be disregarded in order to uphold their baseless justifications for the unjust act of shunning. Can anyone truly "force" someone or stop them from rejecting a friend or family member? Such a notion would be absurd, considering the fact that we all have the power of free will. If a Witness decides to distance themselves from a family member or friend simply because they have come out as gay, who is anyone within the organization to question or challenge that personal sentiment? It is unfortunate that there are individuals, both within and outside the organization, who not only lack a proper understanding of the Bible but also dare to suggest that God's discipline is barbaric. We must remember that personal choices should be respected, and it is not for others to judge or condemn someone based on their sexual orientation but should be avoided under biblical grounds. No one should have the power to compel an individual to change their sexual orientation, nor should anyone be forced to accept someone for who they are. When it comes to a family's desire to shield their children from external influences, who has the right to challenge the parents' decision? And if a family's rejection of others is based on cultural factors rather than religious beliefs, who can impose religious judgment on them? Who should true followers of Christ follow? The words of God or those who believe they can change God's laws to fit their lives? How can we apply the inspired words of Paul from God to embrace the reality of God's discipline? On the contrary, how can nonconformists expect to persuade those with a "worldview" that their religious beliefs are unacceptable by ostracizing individuals, when God condemns homosexuality? This is precisely why the arguments put forth by ex-witnesses are lacking in their pursuit of justice. When they employ misguided tactics, justice remains elusive as their arguments are either weak or inconsistent with biblical standards. Therefore, it is crucial to also comprehend Paul's words in 1 Corinthians 9:27. The use of the word "shun" is being exaggerated and excessively condemned by those who reject biblical shunning as a form of punishment. Eph 5:3-14 NIV 3 But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God's holy people. 4 Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking, which are out of place, but rather thanksgiving. 5 For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure or greedy person — such a man is an idolater — has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.  6 Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of such things God's wrath comes on those who are disobedient. 7 Therefore do not be partners with them.  8 For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Live as children of light 9 (for the fruit of the light consists in all goodness, righteousness and truth) 10 and find out what pleases the Lord. 11 Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them. 12 For it is shameful even to mention what the disobedient do in secret. 13 But everything exposed by the light becomes visible. The impact of the message becomes significantly stronger when we emphasize the importance of avoiding any association with unrighteousness and those who remain unrepentant. In fact, it becomes even more compelling when we witness how some individuals, who dismiss biblical shunning as a method of discipline, excessively criticize and condemn the use of the word "shun". Therefore, Jehovah's Witnesses do not shun people; instead, they choose to focus on the negative actions being committed, which is in accordance with biblical teachings. This should be construed as ex-Witness rhetoric. Now, let's consider why ex-Witnesses specifically target one particular religion. What justifications do they provide when other Christian denominations also adhere to the same principle grounded in the Bible? Chapter 1 - Preface Both must therefore test themselves: the one, if he is qualified to speak and leave behind him written records; the other, if he is in a right state to hear and read: as also some in the dispensation of the Eucharist, according to  custom enjoin that each one of the people individually should take his part. One's own conscience is best for choosing accurately or shunning. And its firm foundation is a right life, with suitable instruction. But the imitation of those who have already been proved, and who have led correct lives, is most excellent for the understanding and practice of the commandments. "So that whosoever shall eat the bread and drink the cup of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup."  It therefore follows, that every one of those who undertake to promote the good of their neighbours, ought to consider whether he has betaken himself to teaching rashly and out of rivalry to any; if his communication of the word is out of vainglory; if the the only reward he reaps is the salvation of those who hear, and if he speaks not in order to win favour: if so, he who speaks by writings escapes the reproach of mercenary motives. "For neither at any time used we flattering words, as ye know," says the apostle, "nor a cloak of covetousness. God is witness. Nor of men sought we glory, neither of you, nor yet of others, when we might have been burdensome as the apostles of Christ. But we were gentle among you, even as a nurse cherisheth her children."   (from Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 2) Divine promises 2. The manner of shunning, in the word escaping. There is a flying away required, and that quickly, as in the plague, or from a fire which hath almost burned us, or a flood that breaketh in upon us. We cannot soon enough escape from sin (Matt 3:7; Heb 6:18). No motion but flight becomes us in this case. Doctrine: That the great end and effect of the promises of the gospel is to make us partakers of the Divine nature. (from The Biblical Illustrator)  
    • Clearly, they are already demanding your exile. Yes! It's unfortunate that Pudgy spoiled a great discussion about science. I hope the discussion can continue without any more nonsensical interruptions. Just a suggestion since they are on your heels. Wow! You speak! It seems you have a lot to say! Now they are going to treat like, who do you think you are, mister big stuff! Are those aliens now going to imply that anyone who speaks out against the five or six key contributors to this site will be treated as though it is George just because those in opposition speak the language they hate to hear, the TRUTH? They are seeking individuals who will embrace their nonconformist values and appreciate what they can offer in shaping public opinion contrary to the established agenda of God and Christ. Their goal is to enhance their writing abilities and avoid squandering time on frivolous pursuits, mainly arguing about the truth they don't care for. They see it all as a mere game, even when leading people astray. They believe they have every right to and will face no biblical repercussions, or so they believe. They just want to have fun just like that Cyndi Lauper song. Be prepared to be belittled and ridiculed, all the while they claim to be angels. Haha! By the way, please refrain from using the same language as George. They appear to believe that when others use the same words, it means they are the same person, and they emphasize this as if no one else is allowed to use similar grammar. It seems they think only they have the right to use the same or similar writing styles. Quite amusing, isn't it? See, what I just placed in bold, now I'm George, lol! Now, let's leave this nice science thread for people that want to know more about science. I believe George left it at "Zero Distance."  
    • Nice little thread you’ve got going here, SciTech. It would be a shame if something were to happen to it.
    • It's truly disheartening when someone who is supposed to be a friend of the exclusive group resorts to using profanity in their comments, just like other members claiming to be witnesses. It's quite a ludicrous situation for the public to witness.  Yet, the "defense" of such a person, continues. 
    • No. However, I would appreciate if you do not reveal to all and sundry the secret meeting place of the closed club. (I do feel someone bad stomping on Sci’s little thread. But I see that has already happened.)
  • Members

    No members to show

  • Recent Status Updates

    • lauleb  »  misette

      merci pour ton travail très utile. tu es une aide qui fortifie
      · 0 replies
    • Pamela Dunston  »  T.B. (Twyla)

      Hi, TB
      I would like to get the weekly meeting and watchtower materials  and the 2024 convention 
      Attend the 2024 Convention—“Declare the Good News!”
      notebook, I just recently got a new computer, If don't mind my brother to add me on and allow me access to our study again.
       
      Thank you, so much
      Sister Dunston
      · 1 reply
    • SpiritualSister 24  »  DARLENE2022

      Hello, Darlene, I just love your name, I had a cousin named Darline, and had a classmate also named Darlene! It's a pleasure to know another Darlene! Especially a Spiritual Sister! There's some websites, Ministry Ideaz , JW Stuff.com, and Etsy that I use to order my yearly buttons for the Conventions! They always send me what I order, and their also Jehovah's Witnesses, that send us the merchandise we order!  You can check out these websites, and they might have what your looking for! I hope I have been helpful in assisting you, Darlene! Agape love, Shirley!😀
      · 1 reply
    • SpiritualSister 24

      2024"Enter Into God's Rest" Circuit Assembly! 
      · 0 replies
    • Janice Lewis  »  T.B. (Twyla)

      Hello Twyla, when will the weekly study material be available. I am a member.
      Janice Lewis     lewisjanice84@gmail.com
      Thank you
      · 1 reply
  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      159.9k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,685
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    josteiki
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.