norge.freeshell.org (192.94.73.8)/192.94.73.8.tar/192.94.73.8/pub/sdf/historical/usenet/corey

Text File | 2003-01-08 | 11KB | 228 lines

Newsgroups: talk.origins
From: [e-mail] (Corey Carroll)
Subject: Confused ex-Jehovah's Witness.
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: sdf Public Access UNIX, Dallas--unrestricted free shell access
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1992 03:15:08 GMT
Lines: 215


Dear talk.origins readers,

I am a humble 20 year old student of electronics at a community
college who reads Usenet and talk.origins.  I have an account
on a local public access Unix system.  I do not consider myself
a professional scientist in any way, but I do like to think of
myself as an 'amateur' scientist, enjoying reading about all
facets of scientific research.

Being brought up as a Jehovah's Witness, I have naturally been
told that evolution is untrue, and creation is true.  Of
course, evolution is a plot of Satan to keep people away from
God.  This organization has a book, "Life - How did it get
here?  By Evolution or Creation?", which I found very
convincing in the argument for creation.  After reading
talk.origins for a while and remaining silent, however, I'm
not so sure. :)

Basically, at the beginning of the book, the Jehovah's
Witnesses claim NOT to be 'scientific creationists', in the
sense that they believe that the six-day period in Genesis was
NOT a literal 24-hour 6 day period, but untold millenia, with
a 'day' being symbolic of a long time period.  Other than
that, they believe in special creation, the creation of Adam
and Eve, Noah's flood, and they discount biological evolution.

After reading the last FAQ, I see this book tends to
generalize and simplify terms.  No distinction is made between
the fact of evolution, and the theory of evolution, namely,
that scientists are sure that evolution happened, but they
aren't completely sure HOW it happened.  Big difference.


I get a feeling that evolutionists don't necessarily make a
claim as to HOW life initially came into existence.  Perhaps a
creator DID create the first life forms.  I find life coming
from non-living matter very hard to accept, but this is only
because I've been prejudiced to believe that life is 'complex'
and shows evidence of a 'designer'.

After further thinking on this subject, I see a big flaw with
creationism.  If a God was needed to create DNA to start with
for natural selection to take place, surely God is as complicated
or more complicated than DNA.  But how did God get here?  I think
this is a dumb explanation to the origin of life.  If you say
something like "God has always been here", then I might as well say,
"Life and the universe have always been here."

First of all, after giving an account of Genesis 1-3, the book
goes to show that the fossil record does not document
intermediate life forms.  One of the major charts in the book
is this (p.55) :

Orthodox evolutionary theory   The creation pattern
anticipated a fossil record    anticipated a fossil
that contains :                record that contains :

1. Very simple life forms      1. Complex life forms
   gradually appearing            suddenly appearing

2. Simple forms gradually      2. Complex life forms multiplying
   changing into complex          'after their kinds'
   ones                           (biological families), though
                                  allowing for variety

3. Many transitional 'links'   3. No transitional 'links'
   between different kinds        between different biological
                                  families

4. Beginnings of new body      4. No partial body features;
   features, such as limbs,       all parts complete
   bones, organs

Anyway, this book seems to imply that there should be
innumerable fossil links between different 'kinds'.  But after
reading t.o., it seems that there would only be a few due to
the rarity of a fossil being preserved.  But it seems to me
that there should be SOME transitional links.  Can anyone send
me evidence of these through email or posting here?

Next, the book claims that all 'ape-men' are frauds, and
particularly harps on Piltdown man, Ramapithecus,
Australopithecus, and Homo erectus.  Of course, man is superior
in every way to chimps and apes (sounds just a little biased,
don't you think?  Homo sapiens says 'I'M the superior species.'
I wonder what the dinosaurs would have said?).

Then, the book goes on to show that mutations could not have
caused evolution.  It claims that most all mutations are
harmful.  It says , quoting Peo Koller, "The greatest portion
of mutations are deleterious to the individual who carries the
mutated gene.  It was found in experiments that, for every
successful or useful mutation, there are many thousands which
are harmful" (p.100-101).

In particular, it mentions the experiments on fruit flies, and
concludes "Experiments with fruit flies produced many
malformed mutants, but they always remained fruit flies"
(p.104).

Nowhere in the book can I find a firm definiton of 'kind'.
However, their other reference book , _Insight on the
Scriptures,_ claims that a kind is "a division of life-forms
wherein each division allows for cross-fertility within its
limits . . . the boundary between 'kinds' is to be drawn at
the point where fertilization ceases to occur."  The book
draws a distinction between species and kind, saying "In
biologic terminology, however, it [species] applies to any
group of interfertile animals or plants mutually possessing
one or more distinctive characteristics.  Thus, there could be
many such species or varieties within a single division of the
Genesis 'kinds'."

Then, the book says that there is "no support for theories
maintaining that new 'kinds' have been formed since the
creation period.  The unchangeable rule that 'kinds' cannot
cross is a biologic principle that has ever been successfully
challenged" (p.152, vol.2).

Anyways, back to the Creation book.  After discussing
mutations, the book goes on to show how grand the universe is,
and how it must have had a designer.  The next chapter's
titles are "Our Awesome Universe", "Evidence From a Unique
Planet", "The Amazing Design of Living Things",
"Instinct - Wisdom Programmed Before Birth", and "The Human
Miracle".

Then, the book goes on to show that people believe evolution
because they are forced to by the weight of authority.  "The
student is rarely given opposing arguments" (p.179).  It
claims that scientists who believe in evolution are as
dogmatic as people who believe in creation (so what's the
point?).  It says that since there is much disagreement as to
how evolution happened, it cannot be a reliable theory.  It
mentions "Do debates still rage about the earth orbiting the
sun, about hydrogen and oxygen making water, about gravity's
existence?" (p.181)

Anyways, the book is well laid out, with lots of pretty
pictures, and it DOES contain references, numbering into the
hundreds.  However, the book is written on the equivalent of an
8th-grade reading level.  Oh well.  No arguments are made such as
"evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics",
however, and this book does not deal with the flood (I'll post
that in future articles).  But my main problem is the way this
religion accepts EVERY verse in the Bible as LITERAL, with no
room for flexibility.  At the beginning of the book, it
asserts that one cannot possibly believe in biological
evolution or organic evolution and believe in God and
religion.  But, as someone once said and posted here, "When
science and the bible appear to conflict, it is the
_interpretation_ of the bible that is in error."



As a side note.  I wrote this file out about a month and a half
ago.  Since then, I have kept up with talk.origins, and I noticed
a posting of a book _Evolution and the Myth of Creationism_.  Since
then, I have read the book (except for the appendixes on genes and
Darwin), and I have come to the opinion that there is more evidence
for evolution than there is for creationism.  This book was a
WONDERFUL book for me to read!  In the same way some people have an
experience of being 'born again', I was thrilled to learn an alternate
explanation to how things got here!  It was almost a religious
experience for me!  It was so simple and so obvious!  The book
pointed out MANY things that the Witnesses' Creation book didn't
even MENTION.  I see how they twist things now to LOOK like
evolution is a science 'in serious trouble'.

As of now, I am reading a book called _The Blind Watchmaker_.  I
recommend it for anyone who is still having trouble over the old
argument that if there was a watch in the forest, there was a
watchmaker, therefore the universe had a greater watchmaker.  It
gives possible explanations as to how things like wings or eyes
or behaviors could have developed over the millenia.  It also gives
possible explanations to the origin of life and abiogenesis.  I'm in
Chapter 7 right now, and it is an EXCELLENT book.  Any more suggestions
for reading?

Oh, and here's a funny sidepoint.  I've been arguing with my parents
now about evolution for a few months.  Yesterday was the killer day
when I announced my beliefs.  They aren't throwing me out of the house
(thank God..:) , but I AM moving out as soon as possible with my brother.
I can't stand this insanity.  When I tried to explain evolution to my
father, all he could say basically was "That's STUPID!"  A real sign
of an intelligent , rational conversation.  Plus, he even quoted
scriptures from the Bible to me about how I was being fooled by the
philosophies of man!  One scripture said something like "they being
fooled by every WHIM of man..."  Well, evolution ain't no WHIM, it's
a theory that's been around for over a century with good evidence,
and I told him for sure that I wasn't being 'tricked' or 'brainwashed'.
See, he expects me to read the Witnesses' Creation book and become
a believer, and never talk about it again!  The first time I started
reading talk.origins and talking to my teachers about evolution,
he gave me complete bullshit!  He even called one of my teachers
the DEVIL!  He didn't know what I did on the computer, but I eventually
told him I was reading posts from UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS about evolution,
and boy, that really blew a fuse!  He even threatened to unplug my
computer!  If this isn't close-mindedness and fear of the unknown,
I don't know what is.  He's given me complete HELL about the whole
thing, and I'm mad as hell.

Well, that's all I have to say for now.  I'm going to later post some
things the Creation book said that were completely wrong (in my opinion)
and show some calculations that I have come up with about the flood..
Later






--

[e-mail]                       ..!uunet!convex!egsner!sdf!corey