Originally posted by robbie carrobie He sounds as though he knows what he is talking about to me. Then again perhaps you are more an expert in his field than he is.
Evolution quite clearly is not his field. And yet, I am clearly more expert in the field of evolution than he is.
Originally posted by twhitehead If he had anything scientific and not religious, he would be in for a Nobel prize. Instead of submitting a scientific paper on the matter, he chose to talk to Awake. Basically, he's got nothing.
I don't think he claims to have anything making your assertion logically fallacious.
Originally posted by twhitehead Yes, its easy to bamboozle someone with no scientific knowledge whatsoever, especially when he is on record as not wanting to learn any more.
where does he state that he does not want to learn anymore.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie I don't think he claims to have anything making your assertion logically fallacious.
He claimed:
For me, such design simply could not have evolved.
Now either he is claiming to have something, or he just pulled that out of where the sun don't shine.
I think we both agree that he doesn't have anything that would stand up to scientific scrutiny - hence his choice to try and peddle it to uneducated folk like you.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie really? How do you know what he has studied so that you can make the claim that you know more about it than he does?
From the statement you quoted him making - it is obvious.
For me, such design simply could not have evolved.
Now either he is claiming to have something, or he just pulled that out of where the sun don't shine.
I think we both agree that he doesn't have anything that would stand up to scientific scrutiny - hence his choice to try and peddle it to uneducated folk like you.
Its a subjective reality, why you should have a problem with it I cannot say.
Originally posted by twhitehead From the statement you quoted him making - it is obvious.
No its not obvious, you have made a claim that you know more about evolution than him, you were asked how you came to that conclusion, surely you must have made a comparison of what he has studied and what you have studied or are we to assume that your statement is based on nothing but your own arrogance and your ignorance of what he has studied.
As suspected twithead has arrogantly made claims that he cannot substantiate, fabricated untruths and has shown himself to be a thoroughly disreputable character in the process. No surprises there.
Originally posted by FMF Talking of the JW org and blood, the Watchtower once quoted Brazilian surgeon Dr Américo Valério as saying transfusions were often followed by -- "moral insanity, sexual perversions, repression, inferiority complexes, petty crimes" and Dr Alonzo Jay Shadman claiming that a person's blood "contains all the peculiarities of the individual ... [including] hereditar ...[text shortened]... ce the impulse to commit suicide, murder, or steal are in the blood."
Do you agree with this?
I posted that linked about 2 years ago - you should have been a lawyer!
Originally posted by robbie carrobie I provide the following for the edification of our atheist friends.
For more than a decade, Frédéric Dumoulin has worked in the field of pharmaceutical research at Ghent University in Belgium. At one time he was an atheist. But later Frédéric became convinced that God created life. Awake! asked Frédéric—who is now one of Jehovah’s Witnesses—about ...[text shortened]... chemical, and electrical barriers. For me, such design simply could not have evolved.
jw.org
For your edification, here is an article by a former Jehovah's Witness turned atheist. 🙂
11 Jun '15 16:00
From atheist to Witness of the Most High
Back to Top