Creationists' theory in detail

[Newtonian]

lt

Then you are on a wild goose chase, because the gaps in the fossil record diminish every day and are easily explained by the fact that most creatures do not end up fossilized. So your pile of "evidence" is ever diminishing. On the other hand, the evidence for evolution grows every single day. So you see where this is going.

Atheists are wrong again. The atheist scientists cannot explain the Cambrian Explosion. They are done in so many ways with the fossil evidence.

Fundies are always wrong. Science explains the Cambrian Explosion

With what observational proof Hollie?

We do not agree with creationists on some of their beliefs so I don't know if you would but us in the fundie species classification. From our literature:

Evolution — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Excerpt:

"The Bulletin of Chicago’s Field Museum of Natural History pointed out: “Darwin’s theory of [evolution] has always been closely linked to evidence from fossils, and probably most people assume that fossils provide a very important part of the general argument that is made in favor of darwinian interpretations of the history of life. Unfortunately, this is not strictly true. . . . the geologic record did not then and still does not yield a finely graduated chain of slow and progressive evolution.”—January 1979, Vol. 50, No. 1, pp. 22, 23.

A View of Life states: “Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet.”—(California, 1981), Salvador E. Luria, Stephen Jay Gould, Sam Singer, p. 649.

Paleontologist Alfred Romer wrote: “Below this [Cambrian period], there are vast thicknesses of sediments in which the progenitors of the Cambrian forms would be expected. But we do not find them; these older beds are almost barren of evidence of life, and the general picture could reasonably be said to be consistent with the idea of a special creation at the beginning of Cambrian times.”—Natural History, October 1959, p. 467.

Zoologist Harold Coffin states: “If progressive evolution from simple to complex is correct, the ancestors of these full-blown living creatures in the Cambrian should be found; but they have not been found and scientists admit there is little prospect of their ever being found. On the basis of the facts alone, on the basis of what is actually found in the earth, the theory of a sudden creative act in which the major forms of life were established fits best.”—Liberty, September/October 1975, p. 12.

Carl Sagan, in his book Cosmos, candidly acknowledged: “The fossil evidence could be consistent with the idea of a Great Designer.”—(New York, 1980), p. 29."

From our more recent "Origin of Life" brochure after noting scientists acknowledgement of the "Cambrian Explosion" explains here:

Has All Life Descended From a Common Ancestor? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

The relatively sudden appearance of these diverse life forms is causing some evolutionary researchers to question the traditional version of Darwin’s theory. For example, in an interview in 2008, evolutionary biologist Stuart Newman discussed the need for a new theory of evolution that could explain the sudden appearance of novel forms of life. He said: “The Darwinian mechanism that’s used to explain all evolutionary change will be relegated, I believe, to being just one of several mechanisms—maybe not even the most important when it comes to understanding macroevolution, the evolution of major transitions in body type.”33

Reference 33:
33. Archaeology, “The Origin of Form Was Abrupt Not Gradual,” by Suzan Mazur, October 11, 2008, (www.archaeology.org/online/ interviews/newman.html), accessed 2/23/2009.

I note your “quote” here:Natural History, October 1959, p. 467., is a publication of the Watchtower Bible Society and not a peer reviewed document, rather a document with a predefined agenda.

"Natural History" is not a publication of Jehovah's Witnesses and I gave you a number of other references. Yes, we quoted those sources - however you have not responded on those quotes.

For example:

Archaeology, “The Origin of Form Was Abrupt Not Gradual,” by Suzan Mazur, October 11, 2008, (www.archaeology.org/online/ interviews/newman.html), accessed 2/23/2009.

On peer review - did you realize many scientific discoveries were found by those who thought 'outside the box?' Not to mention you have not given evidence the sources quoted are not peer reviewed.

Susan Mazur is a reporter.

And Archaelogy.org?

The link is now in archive:

The Origin of Form Was Abrupt Not Gradual - Archaeology Magazine Archive

Interview with New York Medical College cell biologist Stuart Newman

archive.archaeology.org

Did you actually read the link? It involves many branches of scientific research - note also this excerpt:

"The impetus for the Extended Synthesis, a graft onto, or a major departure from, the Modern Synthesis (depending on who is describing it), was the overwhelming data generated in recent years that just didn't fit the old formula. Phenomena like self-organization, epigenetics and plasticity intruded in ways that were complementary to, and sometimes contradictory to, natural selection. Then there was niche construction to consider--where organisms invent their habitats (burrows, bird nests, bee hives, etc.) rather than being selected by their fitness to pre-existing ones. And also punctuated evolution, abrupt transitions in the fossil record, and the even more puzzling episodes of stasis."

Epigenetic variation is just one example of micro-evolution not macro-evolution. For example, methyl and acetyl links to histones on the chromatin (formerly thought to be the inert backbone of the chromosome. It is c. 100,000 times faster than point mutations on the DNA.

From our literature on epigenetic research:

How Long Can You Live? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Excerpt:

"What is epigenetics?

Living cells contain genetic information, which is needed for the production of new cells. Much of this information is found in the genome, a term that refers to all the DNA in a cell. In recent times, however, scientists have delved deeper into another array of mechanisms within the cell—the epigenome, a word that can mean “above the genome.” Epigenetics is the study of this amazing group of mechanisms and their chemical reactions.

The molecules that make up the epigenome look nothing like DNA. Whereas DNA resembles a twisted ladder, or double helix, the epigenome is essentially a system of chemical marks, or tags, that attach to DNA. What is the role of the epigenome? Like a conductor directing an orchestra, the epigenome directs the way genetic information in the DNA is expressed. The molecular tags turn sets of genes on or off in response to both the needs of the cell and environmental factors, such as diet, stress, and toxins. Recent discoveries involving the epigenome have caused a revolution in the biological sciences...."

But what observed mechanism can you point to as evidence of macro-evolution?

29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: Part 1

This article directly addresses the scientific evidences in favor of macroevolutionary theory and common descent. It is specifically intended for those who are scientifically minded but, for one reason or another, have come to believe that macroevolutionary theory explains little, makes few or...

www.talkorigins.org

talkorigins is an evolutionist website which is generally on the opposite side from creationist websites in evolution vs. creation debate. I cannot respond to such a long link. However, do you also consult creationist websites? I have found that in most debates there is some truth on both sides but that both sides incorrectly state the other side has presented no evidence. It is not easy to find the actual truth between those two sides - it involves in depth research and a subjective examination of the actual observations of (some) scientists.

I am glad you responded on a specific example in the fossil record - I will therefore switch to your more recent post until you specify some point in the talkorigins website.

I’m not sure what an “evolutionist” website is. The term “evolutionist” is, more often than not, a term used by the fundamentalist Christian / “intelligent design” folks. TalkOrigins is a science related website that presents a science-based analysis with clear footnotes and references to what they present.

I generally find it rather easy to find the truth. Creation based websites invariably have the same “statement of faith” that precludes them as honest participants in the exploration of life sciences and the natural world. Their agenda is that all knowledge must conform to a biblical rendition of history. Very clearly, much of our biological world and the universe we understand is in clear and sharp contrast to biblical tales and fables.

The development of the scientific method and the consensus it brings, combined with the academic and intellectual freedoms of the Renaissance and the Age of Enlightenment, left less and less room for literal interpretations of any creation tales and fables. ID / creationism has no plausible means to investigate its claims of supernatural creation. ID / Creationism doesn't even present a tentative hypothesis or a beginning of a framework to explain how magic and supernaturalism answers anything. So what useful role can "it happened by supernatural means" have in advancement of knowledge?

Talkorigins is an evolutionist website - not sure why you do not understand this.

But you are correct about some creationist websites. Years ago when I was studying articles by the Creation Research Society (CRS) I tried to join, until I realized you have to believe in the trinity doctrine to join - Newton rejected the trinity doctrine, and so do we. Many creationists interpret the creative days in Genesis as being 24 hours in length - we reject this as well. These are inaccurate religious interpretations of the Bible and lead to conclusions that are disproven by science. Some evolutionist doctrines are due to inaccurate interpretations of scientific evidence.

 

[Hollie]

No chain of evidence proving 'evolution' is a fact, so no need to keep lying about that to school kids, either, but of course irrational 'rationalists' insist on it.

Well, other than the fossil record.

True, the fossil record records gaps which are consistent with Divine Creation. As posted by others, the 'Cambrian Explosion' of many distinct life forms is an example.

Gaps in the fossil record do nothing to support supernatural creation by your gods or anyone else’s gods.

Firstly, the Cambrian explosion is expressed in geologic timeframes. The length of the Cambrian explosion is still ambiguous, but five to ten million years is a reasonable estimate; starting about 550 million years ago. 550 million years vs, 6 days is a little bit of what we might call a discrepancy. Even the shortest estimate of five million years is hardly sudden and nothing suggests a timeframe of 6,000 years ago.

Fossilization is rare. Supernaturalism makes things easy. One can shout out “the gawds did it”, and magically, anything is possible. You’re demanding that science meet a standard of demonstration not required of the gods. I’ll require fossilized remains of the gods in order to accept the existence of the gods, any of them.

 

[Newtonian]

^ Perfect example of bias.

Yes, bias is a problem. To find the truth one must study the Bible and Science objectively - putting in the background our pre-conceived beliefs.

Of course, it is not wrong to be biased for the truth:

John 17:17
(ISV) "Sanctify them by the truth. Your word is truth.

 

[ding]

^ Perfect example of bias.

Yes, bias is a problem. To find the truth one must study the Bible and Science objectively - putting in the background our pre-conceived beliefs.

Of course, it is not wrong to be biased for the truth:

John 17:17
(ISV) "Sanctify them by the truth. Your word is truth.

No. To find truth one must not have a preference for an outcome or the consequences to one’s self.

Because that’s what the Bible teaches.

 

[Hollie]

lt

Then you are on a wild goose chase, because the gaps in the fossil record diminish every day and are easily explained by the fact that most creatures do not end up fossilized. So your pile of "evidence" is ever diminishing. On the other hand, the evidence for evolution grows every single day. So you see where this is going.

Atheists are wrong again. The atheist scientists cannot explain the Cambrian Explosion. They are done in so many ways with the fossil evidence.

Fundies are always wrong. Science explains the Cambrian Explosion

With what observational proof Hollie?

We do not agree with creationists on some of their beliefs so I don't know if you would but us in the fundie species classification. From our literature:

Evolution — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Excerpt:

"The Bulletin of Chicago’s Field Museum of Natural History pointed out: “Darwin’s theory of [evolution] has always been closely linked to evidence from fossils, and probably most people assume that fossils provide a very important part of the general argument that is made in favor of darwinian interpretations of the history of life. Unfortunately, this is not strictly true. . . . the geologic record did not then and still does not yield a finely graduated chain of slow and progressive evolution.”—January 1979, Vol. 50, No. 1, pp. 22, 23.

A View of Life states: “Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet.”—(California, 1981), Salvador E. Luria, Stephen Jay Gould, Sam Singer, p. 649.

Paleontologist Alfred Romer wrote: “Below this [Cambrian period], there are vast thicknesses of sediments in which the progenitors of the Cambrian forms would be expected. But we do not find them; these older beds are almost barren of evidence of life, and the general picture could reasonably be said to be consistent with the idea of a special creation at the beginning of Cambrian times.”—Natural History, October 1959, p. 467.

Zoologist Harold Coffin states: “If progressive evolution from simple to complex is correct, the ancestors of these full-blown living creatures in the Cambrian should be found; but they have not been found and scientists admit there is little prospect of their ever being found. On the basis of the facts alone, on the basis of what is actually found in the earth, the theory of a sudden creative act in which the major forms of life were established fits best.”—Liberty, September/October 1975, p. 12.

Carl Sagan, in his book Cosmos, candidly acknowledged: “The fossil evidence could be consistent with the idea of a Great Designer.”—(New York, 1980), p. 29."

From our more recent "Origin of Life" brochure after noting scientists acknowledgement of the "Cambrian Explosion" explains here:

Has All Life Descended From a Common Ancestor? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

The relatively sudden appearance of these diverse life forms is causing some evolutionary researchers to question the traditional version of Darwin’s theory. For example, in an interview in 2008, evolutionary biologist Stuart Newman discussed the need for a new theory of evolution that could explain the sudden appearance of novel forms of life. He said: “The Darwinian mechanism that’s used to explain all evolutionary change will be relegated, I believe, to being just one of several mechanisms—maybe not even the most important when it comes to understanding macroevolution, the evolution of major transitions in body type.”33

Reference 33:
33. Archaeology, “The Origin of Form Was Abrupt Not Gradual,” by Suzan Mazur, October 11, 2008, (www.archaeology.org/online/ interviews/newman.html), accessed 2/23/2009.

I note your “quote” here:Natural History, October 1959, p. 467., is a publication of the Watchtower Bible Society and not a peer reviewed document, rather a document with a predefined agenda.

"Natural History" is not a publication of Jehovah's Witnesses and I gave you a number of other references. Yes, we quoted those sources - however you have not responded on those quotes.

For example:

Archaeology, “The Origin of Form Was Abrupt Not Gradual,” by Suzan Mazur, October 11, 2008, (www.archaeology.org/online/ interviews/newman.html), accessed 2/23/2009.

On peer review - did you realize many scientific discoveries were found by those who thought 'outside the box?' Not to mention you have not given evidence the sources quoted are not peer reviewed.

Susan Mazur is a reporter.

And Archaelogy.org?

The link is now in archive:

The Origin of Form Was Abrupt Not Gradual - Archaeology Magazine Archive

Interview with New York Medical College cell biologist Stuart Newman

archive.archaeology.org

Did you actually read the link? It involves many branches of scientific research - note also this excerpt:

"The impetus for the Extended Synthesis, a graft onto, or a major departure from, the Modern Synthesis (depending on who is describing it), was the overwhelming data generated in recent years that just didn't fit the old formula. Phenomena like self-organization, epigenetics and plasticity intruded in ways that were complementary to, and sometimes contradictory to, natural selection. Then there was niche construction to consider--where organisms invent their habitats (burrows, bird nests, bee hives, etc.) rather than being selected by their fitness to pre-existing ones. And also punctuated evolution, abrupt transitions in the fossil record, and the even more puzzling episodes of stasis."

Epigenetic variation is just one example of micro-evolution not macro-evolution. For example, methyl and acetyl links to histones on the chromatin (formerly thought to be the inert backbone of the chromosome. It is c. 100,000 times faster than point mutations on the DNA.

From our literature on epigenetic research:

How Long Can You Live? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Excerpt:

"What is epigenetics?

Living cells contain genetic information, which is needed for the production of new cells. Much of this information is found in the genome, a term that refers to all the DNA in a cell. In recent times, however, scientists have delved deeper into another array of mechanisms within the cell—the epigenome, a word that can mean “above the genome.” Epigenetics is the study of this amazing group of mechanisms and their chemical reactions.

The molecules that make up the epigenome look nothing like DNA. Whereas DNA resembles a twisted ladder, or double helix, the epigenome is essentially a system of chemical marks, or tags, that attach to DNA. What is the role of the epigenome? Like a conductor directing an orchestra, the epigenome directs the way genetic information in the DNA is expressed. The molecular tags turn sets of genes on or off in response to both the needs of the cell and environmental factors, such as diet, stress, and toxins. Recent discoveries involving the epigenome have caused a revolution in the biological sciences...."

But what observed mechanism can you point to as evidence of macro-evolution?

29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: Part 1

This article directly addresses the scientific evidences in favor of macroevolutionary theory and common descent. It is specifically intended for those who are scientifically minded but, for one reason or another, have come to believe that macroevolutionary theory explains little, makes few or...

www.talkorigins.org

talkorigins is an evolutionist website which is generally on the opposite side from creationist websites in evolution vs. creation debate. I cannot respond to such a long link. However, do you also consult creationist websites? I have found that in most debates there is some truth on both sides but that both sides incorrectly state the other side has presented no evidence. It is not easy to find the actual truth between those two sides - it involves in depth research and a subjective examination of the actual observations of (some) scientists.

I am glad you responded on a specific example in the fossil record - I will therefore switch to your more recent post until you specify some point in the talkorigins website.

I’m not sure what an “evolutionist” website is. The term “evolutionist” is, more often than not, a term used by the fundamentalist Christian / “intelligent design” folks. TalkOrigins is a science related website that presents a science-based analysis with clear footnotes and references to what they present.

I generally find it rather easy to find the truth. Creation based websites invariably have the same “statement of faith” that precludes them as honest participants in the exploration of life sciences and the natural world. Their agenda is that all knowledge must conform to a biblical rendition of history. Very clearly, much of our biological world and the universe we understand is in clear and sharp contrast to biblical tales and fables.

The development of the scientific method and the consensus it brings, combined with the academic and intellectual freedoms of the Renaissance and the Age of Enlightenment, left less and less room for literal interpretations of any creation tales and fables. ID / creationism has no plausible means to investigate its claims of supernatural creation. ID / Creationism doesn't even present a tentative hypothesis or a beginning of a framework to explain how magic and supernaturalism answers anything. So what useful role can "it happened by supernatural means" have in advancement of knowledge?

Talkorigins is an evolutionist website - not sure why you do not understand this.

But you are correct about some creationist websites. Years ago when I was studying articles by the Creation Research Society (CRS) I tried to join, until I realized you have to believe in the trinity doctrine to join - Newton rejected the trinity doctrine, and so do we. Many creationists interpret the creative days in Genesis as being 24 hours in length - we reject this as well. These are inaccurate religious interpretations of the Bible and lead to conclusions that are disproven by science. Some evolutionist doctrines are due to inaccurate interpretations of scientific evidence.

I’m not clear by what you mean it’s an “evolutionist website”. There are volumes of pages that examine biology, paleontology, earth history and related science matters.

As a supernaturalist, yes, you can interpret the Bibles in any way you wish. The splintering of Christianity into dozens of sects / subjects is due to interpretation, none of those interpretations making a “better” case than the competing sect / subdivision.

Evilutionists, of course, have the Scientific Method and peer review to examine hard data. Scientists studying fossil remains vs. “christianists” arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a needle carry different standards.

 

[Newtonian]

No chain of evidence proving 'evolution' is a fact, so no need to keep lying about that to school kids, either, but of course irrational 'rationalists' insist on it.

Well, other than the fossil record.

True, the fossil record records gaps which are consistent with Divine Creation. As posted by others, the 'Cambrian Explosion' of many distinct life forms is an example.

Gaps in the fossil record do nothing to support supernatural creation by your gods or anyone else’s gods.

Firstly, the Cambrian explosion is expressed in geologic timeframes. The length of the Cambrian explosion is still ambiguous, but five to ten million years is a reasonable estimate; starting about 550 million years ago. 550 million years vs, 6 days is a little bit of what we might call a discrepancy. Even the shortest estimate of five million years is hardly sudden and nothing suggests a timeframe of 6,000 years ago.

Fossilization is rare. Supernaturalism makes things easy. One can shout out “the gawds did it”, and magically, anything is possible. You’re demanding that science meet a standard of demonstration not required of the gods. I’ll require fossilized remains of the gods in order to accept the existence of the gods, any of them.

Letting the Fossil Record Speak — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Thus, at the start of what is called the Cambrian period, the fossil record takes an unexplained dramatic turn. A great variety of fully developed, complex sea creatures, many with hard outer shells, appear so suddenly that this time is often called an “explosion” of living things. A View of Life describes it: “Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet.” Snails, sponges, starfish, lobsterlike animals called trilobites, and many other complex sea creatures appeared. Interestingly, the same book observes: “Some extinct trilobites, in fact, developed more complex and efficient eyes than any living arthropod possesses.”⁠20

20. Are there any fossil links between the Cambrian outburst of life and what went before it?


20 Are there fossil links between this outburst of life and what went before it? In Darwin’s time such links did not exist. He admitted: “To the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these assumed earliest periods prior to the Cambrian system, I can give no satisfactory answer.”⁠21 Today, has the situation changed? Paleontologist Alfred S. Romer noted Darwin’s statement about “the abrupt manner in which whole groups of species suddenly appear” and wrote: “Below this [Cambrian period], there are vast thicknesses of sediments in which the progenitors of the Cambrian forms would be expected. But we do not find them; these older beds are almost barren of evidence of life, and the general picture could reasonably be said to be consistent with the idea of a special creation at the beginning of Cambrian times. ‘To the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these assumed earliest periods prior to the Cambrian system,’ said Darwin, ‘I can give no satisfactory answer.’ Nor can we today,” said Romer.⁠22

References 20-22 - (chapter 5)

References Listed by Chapter — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

20. A View of Life, pp. 638, 649. [ by Salvador E. Luria, Stephen Jay Gould, Sam Singer, 1981]

21. The Origin of Species, Part Two, p. 90. [by Charles Darwin, 1902 edition]

22. Natural History, “Darwin and the Fossil Record,” by Alfred S. Romer, October 1959, pp. 466, 467.

 

[Hollie]

^ Perfect example of bias.

Yes, bias is a problem. To find the truth one must study the Bible and Science objectively - putting in the background our pre-conceived beliefs.

Of course, it is not wrong to be biased for the truth:

John 17:17
(ISV) "Sanctify them by the truth. Your word is truth.

That’s really dishonest. Preconceived beliefs and a built-in bias are a requirement of the “statement of faith”. Here’s one example, but they’re all same.

Foundational Principles

www.icr.org

It’s literally an announcement of bias and preconditions.

 

[Newtonian]

^ Perfect example of bias.

Yes, bias is a problem. To find the truth one must study the Bible and Science objectively - putting in the background our pre-conceived beliefs.

Of course, it is not wrong to be biased for the truth:

John 17:17
(ISV) "Sanctify them by the truth. Your word is truth.

No. To find truth one must not have a preference for an outcome or the consequences to one’s self.

Because that’s what the Bible teaches.

Really? Can you quote a Scripture to support your assertion as to what the Bible teaches?

1 Thessalonians 5:21
(ABP+) [2all things G3956 1Prove]!G1381 [2theG3588 3goodG2570 1Hold to]!G2722
(KJV+) ProveG1381 all things;G3956 hold fastG2722 that which is good.G2570
(ESV) but test everything; hold fast what is good.
(NW) Make sure of all things; hold fast to what is fine.

 

[Hollie]

No chain of evidence proving 'evolution' is a fact, so no need to keep lying about that to school kids, either, but of course irrational 'rationalists' insist on it.

Well, other than the fossil record.

True, the fossil record records gaps which are consistent with Divine Creation. As posted by others, the 'Cambrian Explosion' of many distinct life forms is an example.

Gaps in the fossil record do nothing to support supernatural creation by your gods or anyone else’s gods.

Firstly, the Cambrian explosion is expressed in geologic timeframes. The length of the Cambrian explosion is still ambiguous, but five to ten million years is a reasonable estimate; starting about 550 million years ago. 550 million years vs, 6 days is a little bit of what we might call a discrepancy. Even the shortest estimate of five million years is hardly sudden and nothing suggests a timeframe of 6,000 years ago.

Fossilization is rare. Supernaturalism makes things easy. One can shout out “the gawds did it”, and magically, anything is possible. You’re demanding that science meet a standard of demonstration not required of the gods. I’ll require fossilized remains of the gods in order to accept the existence of the gods, any of them.

Letting the Fossil Record Speak — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Thus, at the start of what is called the Cambrian period, the fossil record takes an unexplained dramatic turn. A great variety of fully developed, complex sea creatures, many with hard outer shells, appear so suddenly that this time is often called an “explosion” of living things. A View of Life describes it: “Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet.” Snails, sponges, starfish, lobsterlike animals called trilobites, and many other complex sea creatures appeared. Interestingly, the same book observes: “Some extinct trilobites, in fact, developed more complex and efficient eyes than any living arthropod possesses.”⁠20

20. Are there any fossil links between the Cambrian outburst of life and what went before it?


20 Are there fossil links between this outburst of life and what went before it? In Darwin’s time such links did not exist. He admitted: “To the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these assumed earliest periods prior to the Cambrian system, I can give no satisfactory answer.”⁠21 Today, has the situation changed? Paleontologist Alfred S. Romer noted Darwin’s statement about “the abrupt manner in which whole groups of species suddenly appear” and wrote: “Below this [Cambrian period], there are vast thicknesses of sediments in which the progenitors of the Cambrian forms would be expected. But we do not find them; these older beds are almost barren of evidence of life, and the general picture could reasonably be said to be consistent with the idea of a special creation at the beginning of Cambrian times. ‘To the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these assumed earliest periods prior to the Cambrian system,’ said Darwin, ‘I can give no satisfactory answer.’ Nor can we today,” said Romer.⁠22

References 20-22 - (chapter 5)

References Listed by Chapter — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

20. A View of Life, pp. 638, 649. [ by Salvador E. Luria, Stephen Jay Gould, Sam Singer, 1981]

21. The Origin of Species, Part Two, p. 90. [by Charles Darwin, 1902 edition]

22. Natural History, “Darwin and the Fossil Record,” by Alfred S. Romer, October 1959, pp. 466, 467.

I haven’t gone through all your references and I need to do that because so often, the creation ministries will edit, purge or simply falsify the “quotes” they use.

Beginning with the JW doctrines, they immediately make an error. There was no “sudden, dramatic turn”. As I noted earlier, the Cambrian explosion was an “explosion” lasting millions of years.

How do the JW’s resolve that with a 6,000 year old planet?

 

[Newtonian]

It’s a shame that your brand of religion don’t attract their adherents via promises of free thinking and individualistic expression, they use fear. I have no reason to believe Anyone is going to hell for not obeying a religious doctrine. I’m curious why you feel a need to hate (and hate with a passion), those who don’t share your all-consuming fear?

Even if I do not agree with evolution, I can understand someone's argument for it or explanation. However, you do not understand what has been explained to you over and over by me and others. You just had Newtonian, a new member, explain his JW version. Even then, you didn't get it. His religion may be different and it's more worthwhile for me to discuss religion with him than you. Why? Because it just does not register for you. Atheists will have to repent their atheism first in order to discover and understand God. It takes faith first. In the atheist's case, I would say they would have to repent their atheism first and then pray to God sincerely to reveal himself.

You just want to see it the way you do and that is just not true. Nothing can be further from the truth. You can criticize my religious doctrine of Christianity for stating those who do not recognize Jesus as the Savior and follow him may not be saved. He is the only way for us flesh and blood to enter heaven. Atheists won't be saved. The other religious believers may or may not be saved. I'm not Jesus the judge, so I don't know. What I think happens is one could be misled after death. Satan is the great masquerader of light. He has placed a false teacher inside the church. I understand that you won't agree with it and won't understand it and that's fine. It's a matter between the other believer and me.

So how do I know what's true? It's not from TalkOrigin. It's from knowing science, scientific evidence, the scientific method and using it to compare what evolution states and what the Bible states. You know this, but others may not. My source for evolution is from my alma mater -- Understanding Evolution. The Bible is the English Standard Version from biblia.com that I use here.

ESV - good to know - I will make it a point to quote that translation when responding to you. Thank you for mentioning me in a respectful manner. And, yes, Jesus will judge us - we should not judge others:

Matthew 7:1
(ESV) “Judge not, that you be not judged.
(NW) “Stop judging that you may not be judged;

If you read the posts from most of the Christians in these various forums, they are the most judgemental of the bunch.

We distinguish between true Christians who actually follow what Jesus taught and false Christians aka Christendom.

You do realize you are judging others by saying they are judgmental?

 

[Newtonian]

No chain of evidence proving 'evolution' is a fact, so no need to keep lying about that to school kids, either, but of course irrational 'rationalists' insist on it.

Well, other than the fossil record.

True, the fossil record records gaps which are consistent with Divine Creation. As posted by others, the 'Cambrian Explosion' of many distinct life forms is an example.

Gaps in the fossil record do nothing to support supernatural creation by your gods or anyone else’s gods.

Firstly, the Cambrian explosion is expressed in geologic timeframes. The length of the Cambrian explosion is still ambiguous, but five to ten million years is a reasonable estimate; starting about 550 million years ago. 550 million years vs, 6 days is a little bit of what we might call a discrepancy. Even the shortest estimate of five million years is hardly sudden and nothing suggests a timeframe of 6,000 years ago.

Fossilization is rare. Supernaturalism makes things easy. One can shout out “the gawds did it”, and magically, anything is possible. You’re demanding that science meet a standard of demonstration not required of the gods. I’ll require fossilized remains of the gods in order to accept the existence of the gods, any of them.

Letting the Fossil Record Speak — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Thus, at the start of what is called the Cambrian period, the fossil record takes an unexplained dramatic turn. A great variety of fully developed, complex sea creatures, many with hard outer shells, appear so suddenly that this time is often called an “explosion” of living things. A View of Life describes it: “Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet.” Snails, sponges, starfish, lobsterlike animals called trilobites, and many other complex sea creatures appeared. Interestingly, the same book observes: “Some extinct trilobites, in fact, developed more complex and efficient eyes than any living arthropod possesses.”⁠20

20. Are there any fossil links between the Cambrian outburst of life and what went before it?


20 Are there fossil links between this outburst of life and what went before it? In Darwin’s time such links did not exist. He admitted: “To the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these assumed earliest periods prior to the Cambrian system, I can give no satisfactory answer.”⁠21 Today, has the situation changed? Paleontologist Alfred S. Romer noted Darwin’s statement about “the abrupt manner in which whole groups of species suddenly appear” and wrote: “Below this [Cambrian period], there are vast thicknesses of sediments in which the progenitors of the Cambrian forms would be expected. But we do not find them; these older beds are almost barren of evidence of life, and the general picture could reasonably be said to be consistent with the idea of a special creation at the beginning of Cambrian times. ‘To the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these assumed earliest periods prior to the Cambrian system,’ said Darwin, ‘I can give no satisfactory answer.’ Nor can we today,” said Romer.⁠22

References 20-22 - (chapter 5)

References Listed by Chapter — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

20. A View of Life, pp. 638, 649. [ by Salvador E. Luria, Stephen Jay Gould, Sam Singer, 1981]

21. The Origin of Species, Part Two, p. 90. [by Charles Darwin, 1902 edition]

22. Natural History, “Darwin and the Fossil Record,” by Alfred S. Romer, October 1959, pp. 466, 467.

I haven’t gone through all your references and I need to do that because so often, the creation ministries will edit, purge or simply falsify the “quotes” they use.

Beginning with the JW doctrines, they immediately make an error. There was no “sudden, dramatic turn”. As I noted earlier, the Cambrian explosion was an “explosion” lasting millions of years.

How do the JW’s resolve that with a 6,000 year old planet?

You did not read the quote or you would have realized that we referenced "10 million years" for the Cambrian explosion - reposting this clip from above:

"A View of Life describes it: “Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet.”"

I guess you also forgot we believe the earth (actually the date of shield rock) is about 4 billion years old - I will repost that for you as well:

How Science Affects Your Life — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

"Scientists estimate that the earth is about 4 billion years old and that the universe was born some 13 to 14 billion years ago. The Bible sets no date for the creation of the universe. In no place does it affirm that the earth is only a few thousand years old. The very first verse in the Bible reads: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” (Genesis 1:1) That general statement allows scientists to determine the age of the physical world according to sound scientific principles."

 

[Hollie]

It’s a shame that your brand of religion don’t attract their adherents via promises of free thinking and individualistic expression, they use fear. I have no reason to believe Anyone is going to hell for not obeying a religious doctrine. I’m curious why you feel a need to hate (and hate with a passion), those who don’t share your all-consuming fear?

Even if I do not agree with evolution, I can understand someone's argument for it or explanation. However, you do not understand what has been explained to you over and over by me and others. You just had Newtonian, a new member, explain his JW version. Even then, you didn't get it. His religion may be different and it's more worthwhile for me to discuss religion with him than you. Why? Because it just does not register for you. Atheists will have to repent their atheism first in order to discover and understand God. It takes faith first. In the atheist's case, I would say they would have to repent their atheism first and then pray to God sincerely to reveal himself.

You just want to see it the way you do and that is just not true. Nothing can be further from the truth. You can criticize my religious doctrine of Christianity for stating those who do not recognize Jesus as the Savior and follow him may not be saved. He is the only way for us flesh and blood to enter heaven. Atheists won't be saved. The other religious believers may or may not be saved. I'm not Jesus the judge, so I don't know. What I think happens is one could be misled after death. Satan is the great masquerader of light. He has placed a false teacher inside the church. I understand that you won't agree with it and won't understand it and that's fine. It's a matter between the other believer and me.

So how do I know what's true? It's not from TalkOrigin. It's from knowing science, scientific evidence, the scientific method and using it to compare what evolution states and what the Bible states. You know this, but others may not. My source for evolution is from my alma mater -- Understanding Evolution. The Bible is the English Standard Version from biblia.com that I use here.

ESV - good to know - I will make it a point to quote that translation when responding to you. Thank you for mentioning me in a respectful manner. And, yes, Jesus will judge us - we should not judge others:

Matthew 7:1
(ESV) “Judge not, that you be not judged.
(NW) “Stop judging that you may not be judged;

If you read the posts from most of the Christians in these various forums, they are the most judgemental of the bunch.

We distinguish between true Christians who actually follow what Jesus taught and false Christians aka Christendom.

You do realize you are judging others by saying they are judgmental?

Ahh, the “true Christians” judgement. With all of the other sects / subjects of Christianity insisting they are the “true Christians”, thus demonstrating you are a heretical sect, It falls to me to be the final arbiter of who is and who is not the “true Christian”.

When it involves coming to conclusions about all religious ideologies, I do make judgments. I make assessments about the internal components of the ideology which has an external result that affects many. I do judge, it's necessary and required to do so in order to discern how to proceed with both things and people. I make judgements every day abiout the world around me and how I respond to it.

 

[Hollie]

No chain of evidence proving 'evolution' is a fact, so no need to keep lying about that to school kids, either, but of course irrational 'rationalists' insist on it.

Well, other than the fossil record.

True, the fossil record records gaps which are consistent with Divine Creation. As posted by others, the 'Cambrian Explosion' of many distinct life forms is an example.

Gaps in the fossil record do nothing to support supernatural creation by your gods or anyone else’s gods.

Firstly, the Cambrian explosion is expressed in geologic timeframes. The length of the Cambrian explosion is still ambiguous, but five to ten million years is a reasonable estimate; starting about 550 million years ago. 550 million years vs, 6 days is a little bit of what we might call a discrepancy. Even the shortest estimate of five million years is hardly sudden and nothing suggests a timeframe of 6,000 years ago.

Fossilization is rare. Supernaturalism makes things easy. One can shout out “the gawds did it”, and magically, anything is possible. You’re demanding that science meet a standard of demonstration not required of the gods. I’ll require fossilized remains of the gods in order to accept the existence of the gods, any of them.

Letting the Fossil Record Speak — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Thus, at the start of what is called the Cambrian period, the fossil record takes an unexplained dramatic turn. A great variety of fully developed, complex sea creatures, many with hard outer shells, appear so suddenly that this time is often called an “explosion” of living things. A View of Life describes it: “Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet.” Snails, sponges, starfish, lobsterlike animals called trilobites, and many other complex sea creatures appeared. Interestingly, the same book observes: “Some extinct trilobites, in fact, developed more complex and efficient eyes than any living arthropod possesses.”⁠20

20. Are there any fossil links between the Cambrian outburst of life and what went before it?


20 Are there fossil links between this outburst of life and what went before it? In Darwin’s time such links did not exist. He admitted: “To the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these assumed earliest periods prior to the Cambrian system, I can give no satisfactory answer.”⁠21 Today, has the situation changed? Paleontologist Alfred S. Romer noted Darwin’s statement about “the abrupt manner in which whole groups of species suddenly appear” and wrote: “Below this [Cambrian period], there are vast thicknesses of sediments in which the progenitors of the Cambrian forms would be expected. But we do not find them; these older beds are almost barren of evidence of life, and the general picture could reasonably be said to be consistent with the idea of a special creation at the beginning of Cambrian times. ‘To the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these assumed earliest periods prior to the Cambrian system,’ said Darwin, ‘I can give no satisfactory answer.’ Nor can we today,” said Romer.⁠22

References 20-22 - (chapter 5)

References Listed by Chapter — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

20. A View of Life, pp. 638, 649. [ by Salvador E. Luria, Stephen Jay Gould, Sam Singer, 1981]

21. The Origin of Species, Part Two, p. 90. [by Charles Darwin, 1902 edition]

22. Natural History, “Darwin and the Fossil Record,” by Alfred S. Romer, October 1959, pp. 466, 467.

I haven’t gone through all your references and I need to do that because so often, the creation ministries will edit, purge or simply falsify the “quotes” they use.

Beginning with the JW doctrines, they immediately make an error. There was no “sudden, dramatic turn”. As I noted earlier, the Cambrian explosion was an “explosion” lasting millions of years.

How do the JW’s resolve that with a 6,000 year old planet?

You did not read the quote or you would have realized that we referenced "10 million years" for the Cambrian explosion - reposting this clip from above:

"A View of Life describes it: “Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet.”"

I guess you also forgot we believe the earth (actually the date of shield rock) is about 4 billion years old - I will repost that for you as well:

How Science Affects Your Life — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

"Scientists estimate that the earth is about 4 billion years old and that the universe was born some 13 to 14 billion years ago. The Bible sets no date for the creation of the universe. In no place does it affirm that the earth is only a few thousand years old. The very first verse in the Bible reads: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” (Genesis 1:1) That general statement allows scientists to determine the age of the physical world according to sound scientific principles."

I read one of the “quotes”, a “quote” attributed to Charles Darwin and right on queue, it was one sentence taken out of an entire paragraph. That is a pattern of behavior so typical of the creation ministries. It’s as dishonest a tactic as I can imagine but when the creation ministries are pressing their “statement of faith”, faith and integrity go out the window and edited “quotes” are used. I haven’t gone through the other “quotes” yet.

 

[Newtonian]

It’s a shame that your brand of religion don’t attract their adherents via promises of free thinking and individualistic expression, they use fear. I have no reason to believe Anyone is going to hell for not obeying a religious doctrine. I’m curious why you feel a need to hate (and hate with a passion), those who don’t share your all-consuming fear?

Even if I do not agree with evolution, I can understand someone's argument for it or explanation. However, you do not understand what has been explained to you over and over by me and others. You just had Newtonian, a new member, explain his JW version. Even then, you didn't get it. His religion may be different and it's more worthwhile for me to discuss religion with him than you. Why? Because it just does not register for you. Atheists will have to repent their atheism first in order to discover and understand God. It takes faith first. In the atheist's case, I would say they would have to repent their atheism first and then pray to God sincerely to reveal himself.

You just want to see it the way you do and that is just not true. Nothing can be further from the truth. You can criticize my religious doctrine of Christianity for stating those who do not recognize Jesus as the Savior and follow him may not be saved. He is the only way for us flesh and blood to enter heaven. Atheists won't be saved. The other religious believers may or may not be saved. I'm not Jesus the judge, so I don't know. What I think happens is one could be misled after death. Satan is the great masquerader of light. He has placed a false teacher inside the church. I understand that you won't agree with it and won't understand it and that's fine. It's a matter between the other believer and me.

So how do I know what's true? It's not from TalkOrigin. It's from knowing science, scientific evidence, the scientific method and using it to compare what evolution states and what the Bible states. You know this, but others may not. My source for evolution is from my alma mater -- Understanding Evolution. The Bible is the English Standard Version from biblia.com that I use here.

ESV - good to know - I will make it a point to quote that translation when responding to you. Thank you for mentioning me in a respectful manner. And, yes, Jesus will judge us - we should not judge others:

Matthew 7:1
(ESV) “Judge not, that you be not judged.
(NW) “Stop judging that you may not be judged;

If you read the posts from most of the Christians in these various forums, they are the most judgemental of the bunch.

We distinguish between true Christians who actually follow what Jesus taught and false Christians aka Christendom.

You do realize you are judging others by saying they are judgmental?

Ahh, the “true Christians” judgement. With all of the other sects / subjects of Christianity insisting they are the “true Christians”, thus demonstrating you are a heretical sect, It falls to me to be the final arbiter of who is and who is not the “true Christian”.

When it involves coming to conclusions about all religious ideologies, I do make judgments. I make assessments about the internal components of the ideology which has an external result that affects many. I do judge, it's necessary and required to do so in order to discern how to proceed with both things and people. I make judgements every day abiout the world around me and how I respond to it.

I'll give you an example so you understand what I meant: Jesus taught us to love our enemies (Matthew 5:44) - thus we do not go to war. False Christians are willing to slaughter their enemies in war.

Isaiah foretold that God's people would learn war no more (Isaiah 2:2-4) The 'Isaiah wall' at the UN quotes part of this account - but they have failed (so far) to unite nations to the point they stop warring against one another.

 

[Newtonian]

No chain of evidence proving 'evolution' is a fact, so no need to keep lying about that to school kids, either, but of course irrational 'rationalists' insist on it.

Well, other than the fossil record.

True, the fossil record records gaps which are consistent with Divine Creation. As posted by others, the 'Cambrian Explosion' of many distinct life forms is an example.

Gaps in the fossil record do nothing to support supernatural creation by your gods or anyone else’s gods.

Firstly, the Cambrian explosion is expressed in geologic timeframes. The length of the Cambrian explosion is still ambiguous, but five to ten million years is a reasonable estimate; starting about 550 million years ago. 550 million years vs, 6 days is a little bit of what we might call a discrepancy. Even the shortest estimate of five million years is hardly sudden and nothing suggests a timeframe of 6,000 years ago.

Fossilization is rare. Supernaturalism makes things easy. One can shout out “the gawds did it”, and magically, anything is possible. You’re demanding that science meet a standard of demonstration not required of the gods. I’ll require fossilized remains of the gods in order to accept the existence of the gods, any of them.

Letting the Fossil Record Speak — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Thus, at the start of what is called the Cambrian period, the fossil record takes an unexplained dramatic turn. A great variety of fully developed, complex sea creatures, many with hard outer shells, appear so suddenly that this time is often called an “explosion” of living things. A View of Life describes it: “Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet.” Snails, sponges, starfish, lobsterlike animals called trilobites, and many other complex sea creatures appeared. Interestingly, the same book observes: “Some extinct trilobites, in fact, developed more complex and efficient eyes than any living arthropod possesses.”⁠20

20. Are there any fossil links between the Cambrian outburst of life and what went before it?


20 Are there fossil links between this outburst of life and what went before it? In Darwin’s time such links did not exist. He admitted: “To the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these assumed earliest periods prior to the Cambrian system, I can give no satisfactory answer.”⁠21 Today, has the situation changed? Paleontologist Alfred S. Romer noted Darwin’s statement about “the abrupt manner in which whole groups of species suddenly appear” and wrote: “Below this [Cambrian period], there are vast thicknesses of sediments in which the progenitors of the Cambrian forms would be expected. But we do not find them; these older beds are almost barren of evidence of life, and the general picture could reasonably be said to be consistent with the idea of a special creation at the beginning of Cambrian times. ‘To the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these assumed earliest periods prior to the Cambrian system,’ said Darwin, ‘I can give no satisfactory answer.’ Nor can we today,” said Romer.⁠22

References 20-22 - (chapter 5)

References Listed by Chapter — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

20. A View of Life, pp. 638, 649. [ by Salvador E. Luria, Stephen Jay Gould, Sam Singer, 1981]

21. The Origin of Species, Part Two, p. 90. [by Charles Darwin, 1902 edition]

22. Natural History, “Darwin and the Fossil Record,” by Alfred S. Romer, October 1959, pp. 466, 467.

I haven’t gone through all your references and I need to do that because so often, the creation ministries will edit, purge or simply falsify the “quotes” they use.

Beginning with the JW doctrines, they immediately make an error. There was no “sudden, dramatic turn”. As I noted earlier, the Cambrian explosion was an “explosion” lasting millions of years.

How do the JW’s resolve that with a 6,000 year old planet?

You did not read the quote or you would have realized that we referenced "10 million years" for the Cambrian explosion - reposting this clip from above:

"A View of Life describes it: “Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet.”"

I guess you also forgot we believe the earth (actually the date of shield rock) is about 4 billion years old - I will repost that for you as well:

How Science Affects Your Life — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

"Scientists estimate that the earth is about 4 billion years old and that the universe was born some 13 to 14 billion years ago. The Bible sets no date for the creation of the universe. In no place does it affirm that the earth is only a few thousand years old. The very first verse in the Bible reads: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” (Genesis 1:1) That general statement allows scientists to determine the age of the physical world according to sound scientific principles."

I read one of the “quotes”, a “quote” attributed to Charles Darwin and right on queue, it was one sentence taken out of an entire paragraph. That is a pattern of behavior so typical of the creation ministries. It’s as dishonest a tactic as I can imagine but when the creation ministries are pressing their “statement of faith”, faith and integrity go out the window and edited “quotes” are used. I haven’t gone through the other “quotes” yet.

It is not misrepresenting Darwin. The reference gave you the source so you could read the context.

Darwin actually did not reject creation - this is also from his "Origin of the Species" -

Life—How Did It Start? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

"In considering questions related to the origin of life, popular opinion or emotion sway many. To avoid this and to reach accurate conclusions, we need to consider the evidence with an open mind. It is interesting to note, too, that even evolution’s best-known advocate, Charles Darwin, indicated an awareness of his theory’s limitations. In his conclusion to The Origin of Species, he wrote of the grandeur of the “view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one,”⁠3 thus making it evident that the subject of origins was open to further examination."

Reference 3 -

"3. The Origin of Species, by Charles Darwin, Mentor edition, 1958, p. 450."

Most sources quote excerpts not the entire context btw. It is up to us to read the context.

 

[Newtonian]

Hollie - no rush - take your time. I am going offline for awhile and I still need to go back in this thread to where I went offline last time. Hope you enjoy your day and shelter in place.

 

[james bond]

It’s a shame that your brand of religion don’t attract their adherents via promises of free thinking and individualistic expression, they use fear. I have no reason to believe Anyone is going to hell for not obeying a religious doctrine. I’m curious why you feel a need to hate (and hate with a passion), those who don’t share your all-consuming fear?

Even if I do not agree with evolution, I can understand someone's argument for it or explanation. However, you do not understand what has been explained to you over and over by me and others. You just had Newtonian, a new member, explain his JW version. Even then, you didn't get it. His religion may be different and it's more worthwhile for me to discuss religion with him than you. Why? Because it just does not register for you. Atheists will have to repent their atheism first in order to discover and understand God. It takes faith first. In the atheist's case, I would say they would have to repent their atheism first and then pray to God sincerely to reveal himself.

You just want to see it the way you do and that is just not true. Nothing can be further from the truth. You can criticize my religious doctrine of Christianity for stating those who do not recognize Jesus as the Savior and follow him may not be saved. He is the only way for us flesh and blood to enter heaven. Atheists won't be saved. The other religious believers may or may not be saved. I'm not Jesus the judge, so I don't know. What I think happens is one could be misled after death. Satan is the great masquerader of light. He has placed a false teacher inside the church. I understand that you won't agree with it and won't understand it and that's fine. It's a matter between the other believer and me.

So how do I know what's true? It's not from TalkOrigin. It's from knowing science, scientific evidence, the scientific method and using it to compare what evolution states and what the Bible states. You know this, but others may not. My source for evolution is from my alma mater -- Understanding Evolution. The Bible is the English Standard Version from biblia.com that I use here.

ESV - good to know - I will make it a point to quote that translation when responding to you. Thank you for mentioning me in a respectful manner. And, yes, Jesus will judge us - we should not judge others:

Matthew 7:1
(ESV) “Judge not, that you be not judged.
(NW) “Stop judging that you may not be judged;

I grew up in the same environment that football star Tom Brady grew up. He grew up in San Mateo while I grew up in San Francisco. We both played sports. His was baseball and football and mine was baseball and basketball. Obviously, he was more successful in his career. My point is even though we both rebelled against the Catholicism (too much guilt) as young teens, there were kids who stayed with Catholicism and became Catholics as adults. Instead of going to Catholic high school, I went to a public one because my family moved. Anyway, when I was a kid I knew there was a God. Not from what the Catholics taught, but from nature. Nothing could be as beautiful and complex as what nature produced and how it was all interrelated. Thus, I always believed in God in some way, but didn't get baptized as Catholic. It would've been a venial sin just not going to church every week. That's the deal my Mom made me that I could get baptized if I could go to church every week for a month. Long story short, I became a Christian in 2012. Before that, I learned and believed in evolution from the UC Berkeley website.

What started bothering me was the MSM telling you the Earth and universe were billions of years old in science articles before 2007. Why? If it was a fact, then there was no need to repeat 4.5 billion years old and 13.7 billion years old. Then a lot of articles came out against evolution from 2007 - 2011 in the general news, too. I became born again Christian in 2012 and started to read the Bible then. I didn't understand longevity nor why it listed all those people and the begots. Usually, the first thing we encounter is the why did God kill the Canaanites, all the men, women, and children? It's the typical Christian story about reading the Bible, but I ended up comparing the two when I was able to understand both and be able to do it.

My greatest atheist story came after the debates between Dr. Lawrence Krauss and Christian apologetic Dr. William Lane Craig. In it, Krauss was asked what would convince him there was a God. He said if the star realigned themselves to spell out, "I am here." About a week later, an atheist said the greatest thing I've ever heard an atheist state and that was it would not be enough for the stars to do that because the people in the southern hemisphere would not see it. Krauss worked at Arizona State University, so this was true. Furthermore, all of the atheists in the past, present, and future would not see it. Thus, it wasn't proof to him or good enough evidence. This guy was a regular citizen and atheist. He made the front page of the local paper in San Francisco with his comments. After that, I thought the only way to convince the atheists was pain and suffering after death. However, it wasn't until 2019 that I learned this was already answered by God in the Bible. It would be when Jesus came a second time that "every eye will see." It's allegorical, but we understand that everything will be settled here on Earth with the atheists and agnostics. If I was an atheist, that would convince me right there .

 

[BreezeWood]

no bond, I am not a sinner what separates the two of us - a hopeless sinner who needs a messiah.

you know yours is disinformation you are willing to sin to do it - that truly is the difference.

You said that you were a trespasser before that. See what I mean by low religion IQ? Thus, you are wrong and I would say that you were wrong in that you are a sinner. We are all sinners. You lied about not being a sinner. That's a sin. Even those with low religion IQ know that, so yours must be very low.

I think I'm clear for the most part and would think most people think you're the one with disinformation. To explain it in clearer terms, your posts are just a jumbled mess of words or garbage. It's a reflection of your IQ and others have made negative comments to you to that effect. Nobody takes your evolution and science explanations seriously.

Thus, you are wrong and I would say that you were wrong in that you are a sinner. We are all sinners.

speaking of iq your book of forgeries is written for your mentality, laziness -

the apple for them was to realize the difference between good vs evil their mission was then to triumph one over the other to have knowledge while in the garden and became the same for all beings to make for their lives by their own accord, failure is to face extinction.

your religion, the desert religions abdicate their responsibility and turn it back to the Almighty from noah's time you are doomed or simply fodder the metaphysical has no need for. the only warning you will be given.

 

[Newtonian]

It’s a shame that your brand of religion don’t attract their adherents via promises of free thinking and individualistic expression, they use fear. I have no reason to believe Anyone is going to hell for not obeying a religious doctrine. I’m curious why you feel a need to hate (and hate with a passion), those who don’t share your all-consuming fear?

Even if I do not agree with evolution, I can understand someone's argument for it or explanation. However, you do not understand what has been explained to you over and over by me and others. You just had Newtonian, a new member, explain his JW version. Even then, you didn't get it. His religion may be different and it's more worthwhile for me to discuss religion with him than you. Why? Because it just does not register for you. Atheists will have to repent their atheism first in order to discover and understand God. It takes faith first. In the atheist's case, I would say they would have to repent their atheism first and then pray to God sincerely to reveal himself.

You just want to see it the way you do and that is just not true. Nothing can be further from the truth. You can criticize my religious doctrine of Christianity for stating those who do not recognize Jesus as the Savior and follow him may not be saved. He is the only way for us flesh and blood to enter heaven. Atheists won't be saved. The other religious believers may or may not be saved. I'm not Jesus the judge, so I don't know. What I think happens is one could be misled after death. Satan is the great masquerader of light. He has placed a false teacher inside the church. I understand that you won't agree with it and won't understand it and that's fine. It's a matter between the other believer and me.

So how do I know what's true? It's not from TalkOrigin. It's from knowing science, scientific evidence, the scientific method and using it to compare what evolution states and what the Bible states. You know this, but others may not. My source for evolution is from my alma mater -- Understanding Evolution. The Bible is the English Standard Version from biblia.com that I use here.

ESV - good to know - I will make it a point to quote that translation when responding to you. Thank you for mentioning me in a respectful manner. And, yes, Jesus will judge us - we should not judge others:

Matthew 7:1
(ESV) “Judge not, that you be not judged.
(NW) “Stop judging that you may not be judged;

I grew up in the same environment that football star Tom Brady grew up. He grew up in San Mateo while I grew up in San Francisco. We both played sports. His was baseball and football and mine was baseball and basketball. Obviously, he was more successful in his career. My point is even though we both rebelled against the Catholicism (too much guilt) as young teens, there were kids who stayed with Catholicism and became Catholics as adults. Instead of going to Catholic high school, I went to a public one because my family moved. Anyway, when I was a kid I knew there was a God. Not from what the Catholics taught, but from nature. Nothing could be as beautiful and complex as what nature produced and how it was all interrelated. Thus, I always believed in God in some way, but didn't get baptized as Catholic. It would've been a venial sin just not going to church every week. That's the deal my Mom made me that I could get baptized if I could go to church every week for a month. Long story short, I became a Christian in 2012. Before that, I learned and believed in evolution from the UC Berkeley website.

What started bothering me was the MSM telling you the Earth and universe were billions of years old in science articles before 2007. Why? If it was a fact, then there was no need to repeat 4.5 billion years old and 13.7 billion years old. Then a lot of articles came out against evolution from 2007 - 2011 in the general news, too. I became born again Christian in 2012 and started to read the Bible then. I didn't understand longevity nor why it listed all those people and the begots. Usually, the first thing we encounter is the why did God kill the Canaanites, all the men, women, and children? It's the typical Christian story about reading the Bible, but I ended up comparing the two when I was able to understand both and be able to do it.

My greatest atheist story came after the debates between Dr. Lawrence Krauss and Christian apologetic Dr. William Lane Craig. In it, Krauss was asked what would convince him there was a God. He said if the star realigned themselves to spell out, "I am here." About a week later, an atheist said the greatest thing I've ever heard an atheist state and that was it would not be enough for the stars to do that because the people in the southern hemisphere would not see it. Krauss worked at Arizona State University, so this was true. Furthermore, all of the atheists in the past, present, and future would not see it. Thus, it wasn't proof to him or good enough evidence. This guy was a regular citizen and atheist. He made the front page of the local paper in San Francisco with his comments. After that, I thought the only way to convince the atheists was pain and suffering after death. However, it wasn't until 2019 that I learned this was already answered by God in the Bible. It would be when Jesus came a second time that "every eye will see." It's allegorical, but we understand that everything will be settled here on Earth with the atheists and agnostics. If I was an atheist, that would convince me right there .

Yes, it is allegorical - Jesus said:

John 14:19 (NW)
In a little while the world will see me no more, but you will see me,+ because I live and you will live.

I was brought up Lutheran. When I was 9 I stopped going to the Lutheran church because of an incident at Sunday school when I forgot my pledge and was accused by the teacher of lying and stealing from God. I told my mother I would never go back - she respected my conscience.

So, at age 9 my mom started studying with Jehovah's Witnesses (a neighor who was a sister). My mom told her that if she could show from her Scofield Reference KJV that the trinity was false. She showed my mom John 14:28 and she studied. Later my mom studied with me - I gave my mom a hard time for months on the creation vs. evolution issue - I could not understand why so many intelligent scientists believed in evolution. So my mom helped me do the research and we found that Professor Dubois, who taught Java Man was a missing link, actually had put together bones from different places to assemble his skeleton - that helped me appreciate their basis for belief was flawed.

I studied 4 years before being baptized 9/13/60.

So, I have always been interested in scientific research - not just evidence of creation.

Romans 1:20 (NW)
For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made,+ even his eternal power+ and Godship,+ so that they are inexcusable.

This verse involves all branches of scientific study - e.g. the actual power/energy involved in the origin of our universe (astronomy/astrophysics).

 

[Newtonian]

no bond, I am not a sinner what separates the two of us - a hopeless sinner who needs a messiah.

you know yours is disinformation you are willing to sin to do it - that truly is the difference.

You said that you were a trespasser before that. See what I mean by low religion IQ? Thus, you are wrong and I would say that you were wrong in that you are a sinner. We are all sinners. You lied about not being a sinner. That's a sin. Even those with low religion IQ know that, so yours must be very low.

I think I'm clear for the most part and would think most people think you're the one with disinformation. To explain it in clearer terms, your posts are just a jumbled mess of words or garbage. It's a reflection of your IQ and others have made negative comments to you to that effect. Nobody takes your evolution and science explanations seriously.

Thus, you are wrong and I would say that you were wrong in that you are a sinner. We are all sinners.

speaking of iq your book of forgeries is written for your mentality, laziness -

the apple for them was to realize the difference between good vs evil their mission was then to triumph one over the other to have knowledge while in the garden and became the same for all beings to make for their lives by their own accord, failure is to face extinction.

your religion, the desert religions abdicate their responsibility and turn it back to the Almighty from noah's time you are doomed or simply fodder the metaphysical has no need for. the only warning you will be given.

Apple? How about Android?