It's been a while :-)

[**bustysinclaire**]

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/watchtower-no1-2018-jan-feb/bible-guidance-relevant/

A topic that is being offered for discussion this month. Some may find it interesting xxx

[astrologica]

Aarrgghh! Stephen Hawking suffered from a physical affliction..not a mental affliction. His mental capacity was astounding. He was a scientist so I would suggest that he couldn't accept the idea of a Creator, rather than didn't want to. 

We have a very good idea of what was in his mind, as he has written many books, given many interviews, and been open and honest even when dealing with difficult questions. He was an atheist..full stop.

[**bustysinclaire**]

---

@astrologicawrote:

Now that Satan has been brought into the proceedings, it sounds like even more of a fairy story. The old fairy story story of the feud between God and Satan. 

And it's a bit arrogant to be scornful of the late Christopher Hitchens. He was one of the great debaters and thinkers of his era. His quote regarding gullibility rings particularly true when applied to JW's.

---

Arrogant????  and scornful???  not at all xxx  He like everyone else is entitled to his opinion.  xxx

But whether he was a great thinker or dabater it doesn't matter at all, he was just a mere human being like us all.

[**bustysinclaire**]

---

@astrologicawrote:

Aarrgghh! Stephen Hawking suffered from a physical affliction..not a mental affliction. His mental capacity was astounding. He was a scientist so I would suggest that he couldn't accept the idea of a Creator, rather than didn't want to. 

We have a very good idea of what was in his mind, as he has written many books, given many interviews, and been open and honest even when dealing with difficult questions. He was an atheist..full stop.

---

My mistake astro, xxx so sorry xx

ALS, motor nurones disease, Brain. xxx

http://www.alsa.org/about-als/what-is-als.html

[suzieseaside]

Me: Perhaps it’s time that some doctrinal changes were made to deal with the massive woolly mammoth (or elephant) in the room?

You: Why? the woolly mammouth itself has never been denied, nor has the existance of the dinasaurs come to that. xx

It was a sort of joke BS.  The phrase 'elephant in the room' means ignoring / failing to address an obvious problem (in context here the problem of the supposed age of Adam)

I will have to read your long post properly, but my overall impression is that you use bits of science if it suits you but dismiss it as rubbish if it doesn't.  Further, I don't think that scientists are 'desperate' to disprove God, there is no need for most of them to have any hidden agenda.  Rather they want to understand the world around them but this doesn't mean having a go at God or religion.  They may believe in God or not, and that doesn't have to conflict with scientific truth because not every faith believes that Adam popped up in 4026 BCE and Eve was cloned from a rib.   

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@astrologicawrote:

Aarrgghh! Stephen Hawking suffered from a physical affliction..not a mental affliction. His mental capacity was astounding. He was a scientist so I would suggest that he couldn't accept the idea of a Creator, rather than didn't want to. 

We have a very good idea of what was in his mind, as he has written many books, given many interviews, and been open and honest even when dealing with difficult questions. He was an atheist..full stop.

---

Yes he was an atheist, as am I, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t numerous questions that currently can’t be answered  

Being a scientist doesn’t mean you have to be an atheist either - more aren’t than are.

It’s not just the beginning of life that can’t yet be explained let alone demonstrated - a far bigger question for me is consciousness. 

We know that certain parts of the brain for instance make certain muscles contract and relax, to move your arm for instance, what we don’t know is what part of the brain, if any, decides to move the arm in order, for instance, to create a work of art.

What part of the brain has made me decide to reply to this post?  Where does original thought come from?  How did Stephen Hawking come up with so many ideas?  The solutions to the ideas he had can be explained via the idea of a super computer solving a problem but that doesn’t explain the origin of the idea he had in the first place.

At what point in the evolution of man did self awareness, creativity and consciousness emerge?  Just because we have found fossils of early man doesn’t mean they had those attributes. 

Is our consciousness really just a computer program?  Does my self awareness really just exist as electrical discharges in the brain?

[**bustysinclaire**]

---

@suzieseasidewrote:

Me: Perhaps it’s time that some doctrinal changes were made to deal with the massive woolly mammoth (or elephant) in the room?

You: Why? the woolly mammouth itself has never been denied, nor has the existance of the dinasaurs come to that. xx

It was a sort of joke BS.  The phrase 'elephant in the room' means ignoring / failing to address an obvious problem (in context here the problem of the supposed age of Adam)

I did know what it meant susie xx thats why I answered how I did lol xx

I will have to read your long post properly, but my overall impression is that you use bits of science if it suits you but dismiss it as rubbish if it doesn't.  

No, that isnt the case at all, I just what I feel is relevant to what im try i ng to explain.  Just because I dont agree with something doesnt mean I find it rubbish, it is somebody's work and it is important to them.

[cee-dee]

My word, this thread has suffered some drastic pruning? Who's been busy?

[**bustysinclaire**]

I was trying to work out whats gone but my memorising abilities aint what they used to be xxxx. Whose ever posts they were will get to know,  I havent checked my emails xxx

[suzieseaside]

It was down to 12 pages an hour or so ago, from I think 13 or 14. Now down to 9! That's a lot of posts and I don't remember that many posts upsetting anyone. One or two temporarily perhaps ?

Who knows if anyone not contributing moans about it or whether the powers that be take offence easily.

[cee-dee]

I have 50 posts per page. There were 5 pages, down to 4 now so your count is likely to show a more drastic reduction than mine?

On the whole thread, I thought there was only one post which was a violation of the Board Usage Policy.

[margaret*e]

Thanks for your reply, but there's no link in the post.😮

[**bustysinclaire**]

---

@margaret*ewrote:

Thanks for your reply, but there's no link in the post.😮

---

Sorry hun, thought I'd done it. will try again. xx

https://www.ushmm.org/learn/timeline-of-events/1933-1938

[suzieseaside]

I'm on 20 posts per page and it was on P.13 I think, and now 9, so roughly 80 posts gone give or take a few either way depending on the position reached on the last page. 

Can't imagine why.  Waste of time composing thoughts. 

Better stick to trivia 

[jd.linklater]

There were 13 pages to this thread this morning, it's been dropping rapidly all day. Can't think who can be upset by anything that's been posted, glad I took the trouble to read it all a couple of days back.

[cee-dee]

After reading it all, did you conclude that there were any violations of the BUP?

[jd.linklater]

Not to my mind no but I think perhaps all the C&Ps may have been an infringement of this.

Repetitive, disruptive, or inappropriate threads or posts. Members should only post one thread per topic on the most relevant board for the issue or question. Topics or posts that are inappropriate or disruptive serve no value in the community and may be removed without notice.

[cee-dee]

I suppose those loooooooooong C & P posts could be construed as repetitive or disruptive but I think that's stretching the BUP a bit? Also, if they were so, why leave them so long? Over zealous springs to mind?

[**bustysinclaire**]

Going back to the op xx This is an example of why the relevance for today. https://a.msn.com/r/2/AAvdJEg?m=en-gb How worrying, and it isn't just STD's becoming immune to drugs is it. It does make you wonder what the future holds if there is no higher Authority, will science ever be a le to combat disease?

[cee-dee]

If there was "a higher authority" with any sense of decency, there wouldn't be any disease in the first place!

[upthecreekyetagain]

When scientists carry out an experiment things don’t always go as planned or foreseen - why should an experiment carried out by a ‘higher authority’ be any different?