Didja miss me?
So, I've been in ongoing discussion with some local 'Witnesses.
Any former members care to share insight?
The attached file is my most recent bit o'lit.
Basically, they gave me a ton of stuff that had the most recent medical reference at 1990. I called em out on it by showing them capabilities and differences in phones and laptops of 1990. Then I showed them pictures of phones vs. then and now. Laptops vs. them and now. The INTERNET vs. then and now, Technology..ect. I was patient explaining how our leaps in technology advance medicine. They admitted that the last time they were in a science classroom or really interested in current events of academia, it was when they were teens.
I was honestly reluctant to take em on. That's a whole gap in education to make up for.
They seem like nice people.
So..Here it is: This is their most recent publication. It's the official church word, and supposed to answer all my questions.
I have a lot.
Like.. am I on a list or in files of any sort?
My deadline is this Tuesday. That's when they will be back. Even if the entire file isn't properly debated by Tuesday, I'd like to see everyone's opinion on the first few points, if at all possible.
I won't lie. Any further advice is appreciated.
I opened it in the middle and read a bit about how fake evolution is, and felt a little sick. (shudders).
Why are you doing this to yourself?
Wow, where to begin. First up, just picking a part at random, they've mixed up the habitable zone around a star (also called the Goldilocks zone, the region where liquid water may well exist) with a 'habitable zone' in the galaxy itself. Then in the very next paragraph, they mention the actual habitable zone, but as a 'life doesn't freeze or fry' area.
Second up, same page. The sun is not a 'perfect powerhouse'. It's actually a little temperamental. There's evidence that one of the big extinctions in the past may have been caused by an overly energetic solar flare. For true stability, longevity and so forth, a red dwarf star would have been better.
Lots and lots of 'This is what suits us, so it must be the perfect setting.' nonsense. Like the bit about the days being the perfect length. Actually, Earth days used to be a lot shorter, the Earth's spin has been slowing down over the past few billion years.
Really, the whole thing so far is reminding me of Douglas Adams' puddle story.
"Imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, "This is an interesting world I find myself in — an interesting hole I find myself in — fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!" This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, it's still frantically hanging on to the notion that everything's going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for. We all know that at some point in the future the Universe will come to an end and at some other point, considerably in advance from that but still not immediately pressing, the sun will explode. We feel there's plenty of time to worry about that, but on the other hand that's a very dangerous thing to say." - Douglas Adams, Speech at Digital Biota 2, Cambridge, UK, (1998)
As in why do men have nipples?
Every time they find a "missing link" or transitional fossil, C, between A and B, you now have two missing links to find... the link between A and C and the link between C and B. So the more paleontologists find, the stupider they are, by this logic.
@Misty - first, let me say, as an author, "bit o'lit" - love that turn of phrase!
As for the JW propaganda, they're right, as far as they go. If conditions were otherwise, there would be no one here to write how perfect conditions were. However, 1) there are hundreds of other planets out there with conditions equally compatible with life, and we may one day learn that life evolved there as well, only in different forms than those that arose on earth, and 2), for several billion years, oxygen-breathing organisms would have very quickly died here on this "perfect" planet, and it was indeed perfect, for organisms that thrived on a nitrogen/hydrogen-rich atmosphere, and only after millions and millions of years of the natural deaths of these organisms, and the subsequent decay of their corpses (each of which released minute amounts of oxygen into the atmosphere, which built up over time), did the balance change sufficiently for oxygen-breathing organisms to evolve and replace those nitrogen/hydrogen-breathing organisms, who likely would have disagreed that the earth was created perfectly for them - at least not with their dying breaths.
They're using Bill O'Reilly arguments: "Tides come in, tides go out - you can't explain that!" Of course you can --
A little background:
These guys have visited me about a dozen times now. They come under the guise of the wife wanting help with their two large dogs. (I'm a dog lover and I have a small homestead with plenty of animals to practice with.) They've left me with a small hard book, a scary 'Creation By Kind; manuscript that was medically obsolete enough to be intellectually dishonest and a video on transfusion free medicine.
I told them I had no qualms with transfusion free medicine as long as you are an adult making that choice of your own will. That point has been set aside.
The other two pieces of material I addressed directly. The JW rebuttal was this link that I've posted.
What do you think the best method of return is? Shall we break down every paragraph of every page, fallacy by fallacy and misinformation by misinformation?
Dissection tools are at the ready. The elements in this PDF are of the 'Knows just enough to be wrong but not enough to know it' category.
Oh and welcome back, Misty! I can't say I missed you because you were gone before I showed up, but I've seen a lot of your stuff here whenever some older thread bubbles up to the top posts.
I dunno...is it the same guys? Or do they send new witnesses every time? Because if it's the same guys, I'd say no, you're probably not on a list, and they've just taken it as a personal challenge to "show you the light of the all-father" or whatever it is they worship. If it's different folk every time, then yeah, the church probably has you on a list of Non-Believers in the area that can be preached at.
Is there a Jehovah Witness Protection Program?
I found a site that carries atheist pamphlets to give out to JWs when they come to your door.