JW Insider

"Millions now living will never die!"  (WT publications: 1918-1925) "If you are a young person, you also need to face the fact that you will never grow old in this present system of things." (WT publication: Awake! 5/22/1969) These two prophecies are nearly equivalent, and were both made for very similar reasons, although under different circumstances.

We are all presumably looking forward to it, but if we are participating in service activities or increasing our service activity because of a belief that it will happen in a specific century, then we are also serving with a date in mind.
Back to this point again for a minute. This is similar to saying: It doesn't matter that we were teaching a falsehood, at least a lot of these little ones were stumbled.
Do we really thing that God wanted to test us with false doctrines?
13 When under trial,+ let no one say: “I am being tried by God.” For with evil things God cannot be tried nor does he himself try anyone.

Actually, it probably did not. The emphasis on the years surrounding 1975 came especially from Fred Franz, the primary source of that emphasis. He was not cleansed from the organization, and with Knorr's failing health in 1976, Franz even became the President of the WTS. Recall that Franz joined the WTS way back just before 1914, when the emphasis on serving for a date was at its peak. The WTS even printed cards so followers could count down their last year on earth, by checking off every single day until October 1, 1914. Then when that failed, the next big thing was to promote the dates 1915, then 1918, then 1925. After that the organization claimed that it learned to stop setting dates.
“Ever since the 1870's, Bible Students had been serving with a date in mind - first 1914, then 1925. Now they realized that they must serve for as long as Jehovah wishes.” Watchtower 1993 Nov 1 p.12
Those who were not looking for a date included the portion of the Writing Department who had worked on the Aid Book, the first major publication that admitted that our chronology was not based on facts but only on assumptions. All of those brothers on the Aid Book team were dismissed from the Writing Department, two of them disfellowshipped, and another disfellowshipped later. Two major contributors (besides R.Franz) were sent back to their congregations with only an offer of a special pioneer stipend.
There were others in the Writing Department and Governing Body who questioned our beliefs surrounding 1914, including Schroeder, Swingle, Chitty and Sydlik. Sydlik also knew my own belief about 1914, and told me that now would be a good time to "watch our tongue." Schroeder didn't get into trouble because he was the head Inquisitor to root out "apostasy" where one of his major questions was about whether one questioned 1914. (Even though he himself questioned 1914.) Although some members of the Writing Department and one member of the Service Department  knew that I also questioned 1914, I never admitted this to Brother Schroeder, even though I saw him nearly every day.)
But the persons who were taking the most prominent lead in promoting the period surrounding 1975 were F.W.Franz and two persons in Writing who hitched themselves closely and loyally to F.W.Franz. As far as I can tell it included NO ONE ELSE ON THE GOVERNING BODY, even those who called F.W.Franz, the Oracle. The next more prominent persons promoting the idea that we should be serving more and more with a date in mind were the leading members of the Service Department (including Correspondence). These were also the ones who promoted the talks by District Overseers on the topic of 1975 because their "job" was to "effect a greater urgency and increase in the service activities: placements, studies, hours.) They watched the numbers from month to month, and were guided by what types of appeals, encouragement, goals, requirements, reasoning, etc., appeared to have the most effect on those numbers:
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/201974163
Should we not today be imitating his example, especially since we have such a short time left now in which to complete the Kingdom-preaching? Yes, the end of this system is so very near! Is that not reason to increase our activity? . . . Yes, since the summer of 1973 there have been new peaks in pioneers every month. Now there are 20,394 regular and special pioneers in the United States, an all-time peak. That is 5,190 more than there were in February 1973! A 34-percent increase! Does that not warm our hearts? Reports are heard of brothers selling their homes and property and planning to finish out the rest of their days in this old system in the pioneer service. Certainly this is a fine way to spend the short time remaining before the wicked world’s end.
This is the definition of "serving with a date in mind." These brothers, including the infamous Charles Sunutko, were guided by this thinking that came out of the Service Department which came out of F.W.Franz. These were the loyal ones, serving with a date in mind. These were NOT the ones who were punished in any way, precisely because they did NOT question.
 

I am witness to some elders comments about 1975. That what i was heard was between 1977 and 1980.
In short, they have explanation why nothing had happened in 1975. Because time gap between creation of Adam and Eve is The Answer :))))  
So, obviously they waiting for Armageddon in 1975 :))

This "Concept" is not fixed, not fixed even from Bible aspect. For in Your sight a thousand years are but a day that passes, or a watch of the night. - Psalm 90.
From this Bible based "Concept" 1000 years is as 4 hours not 24 hours or 1 full day (Jew Concept, 12 hours of day light and 12 hours of night). This would mean how One Day is 6000 years. And not 7000 years as in some Calculations WT Society explained (as time was passed Length of  "Creation Day" had various calculation - 1000 years, 7000 years and as "Contemporary Light of Today" explained, that is: Unknown Period of Time)
Well, basically, if we want to take in consideration all this changes in JW Organization on Doctrines about Time and Periods, you based your "Concept" on WT Society "Concept", ..... and this is untrustworthy.  

We are all presumably looking forward to it, but if we are participating in service activities or increasing our service activity because of a belief that it will happen in a specific century, then we are also serving with a date in mind.
Back to this point again for a minute. This is similar to saying: It doesn't matter that we were teaching a falsehood, at least a lot of these little ones were stumbled.
Do we really thing that God wanted to test us with false doctrines?
13 When under trial,+ let no one say: “I am being tried by God.” For with evil things God cannot be tried nor does he himself try anyone.

We are all presumably looking forward to it, but if we are participating in service activities or increasing our service activity because of a belief that it will happen in a specific century, then we are also serving with a date in mind.
Back to this point again for a minute. This is similar to saying: It doesn't matter that we were teaching a falsehood, at least a lot of these little ones were stumbled.
Do we really thing that God wanted to test us with false doctrines?
13 When under trial,+ let no one say: “I am being tried by God.” For with evil things God cannot be tried nor does he himself try anyone.

Actually, it probably did not. The emphasis on the years surrounding 1975 came especially from Fred Franz, the primary source of that emphasis. He was not cleansed from the organization, and with Knorr's failing health in 1976, Franz even became the President of the WTS. Recall that Franz joined the WTS way back just before 1914, when the emphasis on serving for a date was at its peak. The WTS even printed cards so followers could count down their last year on earth, by checking off every single day until October 1, 1914. Then when that failed, the next big thing was to promote the dates 1915, then 1918, then 1925. After that the organization claimed that it learned to stop setting dates.
“Ever since the 1870's, Bible Students had been serving with a date in mind - first 1914, then 1925. Now they realized that they must serve for as long as Jehovah wishes.” Watchtower 1993 Nov 1 p.12
Those who were not looking for a date included the portion of the Writing Department who had worked on the Aid Book, the first major publication that admitted that our chronology was not based on facts but only on assumptions. All of those brothers on the Aid Book team were dismissed from the Writing Department, two of them disfellowshipped, and another disfellowshipped later. Two major contributors (besides R.Franz) were sent back to their congregations with only an offer of a special pioneer stipend.
There were others in the Writing Department and Governing Body who questioned our beliefs surrounding 1914, including Schroeder, Swingle, Chitty and Sydlik. Sydlik also knew my own belief about 1914, and told me that now would be a good time to "watch our tongue." Schroeder didn't get into trouble because he was the head Inquisitor to root out "apostasy" where one of his major questions was about whether one questioned 1914. (Even though he himself questioned 1914.) Although some members of the Writing Department and one member of the Service Department  knew that I also questioned 1914, I never admitted this to Brother Schroeder, even though I saw him nearly every day.)
But the persons who were taking the most prominent lead in promoting the period surrounding 1975 were F.W.Franz and two persons in Writing who hitched themselves closely and loyally to F.W.Franz. As far as I can tell it included NO ONE ELSE ON THE GOVERNING BODY, even those who called F.W.Franz, the Oracle. The next more prominent persons promoting the idea that we should be serving more and more with a date in mind were the leading members of the Service Department (including Correspondence). These were also the ones who promoted the talks by District Overseers on the topic of 1975 because their "job" was to "effect a greater urgency and increase in the service activities: placements, studies, hours.) They watched the numbers from month to month, and were guided by what types of appeals, encouragement, goals, requirements, reasoning, etc., appeared to have the most effect on those numbers:
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/201974163
Should we not today be imitating his example, especially since we have such a short time left now in which to complete the Kingdom-preaching? Yes, the end of this system is so very near! Is that not reason to increase our activity? . . . Yes, since the summer of 1973 there have been new peaks in pioneers every month. Now there are 20,394 regular and special pioneers in the United States, an all-time peak. That is 5,190 more than there were in February 1973! A 34-percent increase! Does that not warm our hearts? Reports are heard of brothers selling their homes and property and planning to finish out the rest of their days in this old system in the pioneer service. Certainly this is a fine way to spend the short time remaining before the wicked world’s end.
This is the definition of "serving with a date in mind." These brothers, including the infamous Charles Sunutko, were guided by this thinking that came out of the Service Department which came out of F.W.Franz. These were the loyal ones, serving with a date in mind. These were NOT the ones who were punished in any way, precisely because they did NOT question.
 

I think that these last two posts of yours are informative and thought provoking. I can't say whether I completely agree with your conclusions because I can't figure out your actual position on some of the material you included. But I thought the input was useful at any rate.
I agree that even us non-experts, like you and me and others, are not qualified as experts, nor are any of us completely qualified under the directions of scripture. But I don't think that should stop you or me or others from wanting to stick our two cents in. A discussion forum means any of us should be able to stick in our two cents because a discussion forum is exactly where those opinions belong. You don't have to be an expert, and I'm sure that like me, you aren't, and yet your opinion should matter.

True miracles can happen in the daily life of a devout Christian.  There is no record kept by those who served Christ and the Father faithfully over the last 2,000 years to say they never saw a "miracle".   These are an individual's "powerful signs" personally received.  Acts 2:17

More complicated stuff!
I presume you are trying to make a case for the need to speed up action in the case of Child Abuse crimes??? If that is the case, then it is a worthy cause, regardless of context. And one I agree with wholeheartedly, across the board.
However, I don't think I could really comment on your hypothetical generalities unfortunately.  Specific cases from a host of backgrounds where they have been brought to light in a legal context, appear to have been commented on extensively in the public domain by those qualified to do so. Where there are genuine reasons for criticising the handling of such cases and these have been dealt with, then presumably these instances have then been handled as appropriately as possible by the correct authorities? Any exposure of mishandling in specific cases then serves to inform all parties presumably.
Quite how you have managed to morph a discussion on baptism questions into one on handling of Child Abuse allegations would be an interesting study in itself, but not one I have the inclination to unravel at this point of time.
Anyway, if the topic manages to get back on track and any further points meriting discussion appear, I will be back. But for now, excuse me if I turn to other areas of interest. 

I have never dealt with the reasons for the aversion that exists between Croats and Serbs. Neighboring countries with very similar language but different Christian religions. Two small nations with big appetites. The 1991 conflicts arose and were caused by old, unresolved accounts in their relationships dating back to about 1941 (especially) and before. 
How much and in what measures Foreigner Powers was involved in conflict it is hard to say for me. They had, for sure, interests. And some of actors had their expectations in relation to West or East.
They, Croats and Serbs, who was involved in conflicts in WW2 period as soldiers of regular armies and paramilitary groups and/or supporters of domestic governments and in this or that as supporters or in alliance with out side powers, done many crimes for sure. Tito was united many Yugoslav nations in resistance to domestic and foreign aggression and violence. But, obviously he had power and way how to unite all of them in one goal, freedom and own state. After his dead, and changes in east block, fall of Wall, awaking of people who want separate states, which is one of possibility made by YU Constitution everything went in that direction. Why leaders of YU Republics didn't that wisely and without conflicts and suffers and many deaths ....?    

There is a LOT of information that is not being conveyed to the public. I was quite busy with reading into all this even some documents that had been released.
Hid death was oddly convenient, but the problem is, this angers people like me and the truther community, for now there would be no answer for his crimes, and the names we want, most of them, will be unknown, promptly it lets those in connection to him off the hook. Ms. Maxwell, Epstein's partner, is nowhere to be found, as it has already been meme'd and joked that she left planet earth. Epstein was about 6ft tall and it was said he hung himself off a bunk bed, with knees to the floor, however, this would be deemed impossible for the bed-sheets were as thin as paper and could not hold someone of his height and size, which was claimed, more so, before his apparent death, one of the inmates that was jailed with him had been removed. Screaming was also heard from Epstein's room, and it is now said, someone who is hanging himself, how was he able to scream.
There was also a delay on the autopsy of his body, and the person who is said to have discovered his body was none other than Mark Epstein (whose wealth is also a mystery), the brother of the late wealthy convicted pedophile.
Also there is talk about Naomi Campbell whereas Epstein's sex slave (Virginia Roberts Giuffre) was seen at a Birthday Party, perhaps the only underage girl there at the time as some are saying, and there is a picture:

That being said, I was reading unsealed Epstein Docs before the claim of "Camera's Malfunctioning" was coined: https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/340226_a6ab3f919e2741919ec645fe1ede1d7c.pdf
That being said, still looking into this myself due to the fact everyone is all over this now, and ironically no one batted an eye years ago regarding this person.

Thought you were married.

One of my sons, a lawyer, who also teaches and tutors, actually tried to make a timeline for this death using all the initial reports and adjustments ("corrections") to those initial reports. There is an amazing amount of misinformation that gets put out these days on anything, especially due to the "wealth" of information and misinformation available, along with versions of information that get screenshots made while still in flux. Times for the initial cell event ranged from 3:30 to 6:30 and 7:30, with the first publicized official news report not being put out until nearly 8:30, and many early reports got some interesting adjustments throughout the day. 4chan evidently had one or two claims that were timestamped prior to the official news reports, so that these would have to have come from someone in the prison, inmate, guard, first emergency medical team, etc. One reported a military person in the vehicle that picked Epstein up. There is room for a thousand conspiracies here. 
This is so true. Even Trump reportedly kicked him out of Maro a Lago for being a pedophile. And Trump distanced himself from Epstein's pedophile lifestyle even while running around with him in his group of "nightlife musketeers" in the 80's and 90's, as someone called Trump and Epstein, before this last expose broke. Although Trump does laugh it off at the time as if not taking the criminal implications seriously enough. But this was true of so many, in spite of real evidence that's been put out there for many years now. Then there are the crazier sounding conspiracies of genetic experimentation, etc., that even the NYT reported on.
I know a lot of people think first of Trump and/or the Clinton's. But there are state governors, and high level politicians, on his list. Woody Alan, Kevin Spacey, Prince Andrew. (And I saw Kevin Spacey murder to avoid political scandal on an HBO series, and even though that was just TV -- it was TV that many Washington politicians admitted that they just "loved.") Although Trump could just have been protecting himself, he definitely drew a distinction between the types/ages of women he liked as opposed to Epstein. Clinton's first move in this last phase of the scandal was to lie about how many times he was on the plane.
Also, I looked at the passenger manifests signed by the pilot of Epstein's Boeing 727 "Lolita Express." Trump is only there once, I saw Clinton's name there at least a dozen times just on the first skim. I also saw names of famous lawyer and law professor Alan Dershowitz, model Naomi Campbell, etc., and the names of dozens of very rich men. What was disconcerting too, was that there was never an unnamed male, and all famous males and females are named (hundreds of "GM" for Ms. Maxwell) -- but there are dozens of entries like "+ 3 [unnamed] females," "+ "2 females" etc. Another of the persons involved was the man that Trump put in charge of Trump University. Trump's business manager at Maro a Lago is reported to have warned Trump about a meeting there where Trump told him to prepare the place for a private party with lots and lots of VIP's, and then he found out it would only be Trump, Epstein, and 26 "calendar girls" if I remember the number right. The business manager was surprised that the only VIP's were Trump and Epstein and he says he warned Trump that this wouldn't look right.
I've barely touched the surface here. There are dozens of angles on this, and the case is going to be ripe for more conspiracies.

Thought you were married.

I do not have any parking spaces at my house for Hillary's broom.
 

Thought you were married.

One of my sons, a lawyer, who also teaches and tutors, actually tried to make a timeline for this death using all the initial reports and adjustments ("corrections") to those initial reports. There is an amazing amount of misinformation that gets put out these days on anything, especially due to the "wealth" of information and misinformation available, along with versions of information that get screenshots made while still in flux. Times for the initial cell event ranged from 3:30 to 6:30 and 7:30, with the first publicized official news report not being put out until nearly 8:30, and many early reports got some interesting adjustments throughout the day. 4chan evidently had one or two claims that were timestamped prior to the official news reports, so that these would have to have come from someone in the prison, inmate, guard, first emergency medical team, etc. One reported a military person in the vehicle that picked Epstein up. There is room for a thousand conspiracies here. 
This is so true. Even Trump reportedly kicked him out of Maro a Lago for being a pedophile. And Trump distanced himself from Epstein's pedophile lifestyle even while running around with him in his group of "nightlife musketeers" in the 80's and 90's, as someone called Trump and Epstein, before this last expose broke. Although Trump does laugh it off at the time as if not taking the criminal implications seriously enough. But this was true of so many, in spite of real evidence that's been put out there for many years now. Then there are the crazier sounding conspiracies of genetic experimentation, etc., that even the NYT reported on.
I know a lot of people think first of Trump and/or the Clinton's. But there are state governors, and high level politicians, on his list. Woody Alan, Kevin Spacey, Prince Andrew. (And I saw Kevin Spacey murder to avoid political scandal on an HBO series, and even though that was just TV -- it was TV that many Washington politicians admitted that they just "loved.") Although Trump could just have been protecting himself, he definitely drew a distinction between the types/ages of women he liked as opposed to Epstein. Clinton's first move in this last phase of the scandal was to lie about how many times he was on the plane.
Also, I looked at the passenger manifests signed by the pilot of Epstein's Boeing 727 "Lolita Express." Trump is only there once, I saw Clinton's name there at least a dozen times just on the first skim. I also saw names of famous lawyer and law professor Alan Dershowitz, model Naomi Campbell, etc., and the names of dozens of very rich men. What was disconcerting too, was that there was never an unnamed male, and all famous males and females are named (hundreds of "GM" for Ms. Maxwell) -- but there are dozens of entries like "+ 3 [unnamed] females," "+ "2 females" etc. Another of the persons involved was the man that Trump put in charge of Trump University. Trump's business manager at Maro a Lago is reported to have warned Trump about a meeting there where Trump told him to prepare the place for a private party with lots and lots of VIP's, and then he found out it would only be Trump, Epstein, and 26 "calendar girls" if I remember the number right. The business manager was surprised that the only VIP's were Trump and Epstein and he says he warned Trump that this wouldn't look right.
I've barely touched the surface here. There are dozens of angles on this, and the case is going to be ripe for more conspiracies.

If you fill to near capacity a 40,000+ seat stadium for a volunteer event, put on by volunteers, surely those of the local media will be impressed. Not the Phoenix New Times reporter! who is “weirded-out” by aspects of the gathering that most would find commendable, and barely mentions the event anyway, as she immerses herself in the narrative of Jehovah’s Witnesses’ harshest detractors. Plainly, the packed stadium photos and the gist of the article do not match.
I could be wrong, but I think most will recognize this piece as a hit job, and it might even motivate some to go there to investigate, where they will see that the tone of it is nonsense. “Three days of music-video presentations, prayers, songs, addresses, symposiums, and dramatic readings from the Bible,” according the event program, will intrigue some as a refreshing rarity. 
Are they so “cultish” as the reporter charges? Stadium and hospitality personnel often cannot praise JWs enough, rarely encountering such orderly and pleasant people. A reporter in Miami wishes that the Marlins could fill their own stadium to capacity as have Jehovah’s Witnesses. A shock jock in Rochester a few years back waxed ecstatic over Witnesses when he found that they categorically reject violence. “These are my people!” he gushed on-air. Another stadium is said to accept as payment-in-full the thorough annual scouring that the Witnesses give the facility. Others reporters, such as this millennial in New Orleans, wrote it up that, while they certainly are different in beliefs, still they are just ordinary folk come together for religious instruction.
Not everyone will be as shocked and disdainful as the Phoenix reporter that there are still some people who dress up. Not everyone will gasp in disapproval at counsel that we ought watch who we hang out with. If the New Times reporter felt “conspicuous in pants,” well—that’s hardly the fault of the attendees. She could have chosen to be not conspicuous had she been concerned about it. When I invite people to conventions, I observe: “You are perfectly welcome to come just as you are. But if you don’t have one of these [I flip my tie], everyone will assume you are a visitor, and they may just come to preach to you.” Householders smile at the heads-up.
The blatant ill will and bias of the New Times article is evident even in trivial matters, such as the reporter’s disdain that “attendees listened rapturously,” as though they should be expected to nod off. In fact, some of them do after lunch on long afternoons, and it was worse before the days of efficient air conditioning. Don’t attendees of concerts or rallies also listen rapturously? Why come if you do not?
Not all will smirk at the “lowest rate of retention on all religions” that Witnesses suffer. Many will realize that it is more than offset by the high rate of participation from those that stick. After all, there are many faiths where members might not actually leave, but how would you know if they did? The high participation rate actually accounts for the lower retention rate, for inevitably some will tire of it and opt for something less strenuous. Similarly, not everyone will be shocked that should you do a 180 and ardently attack what you once embraced, relations with the family may suffer. Of course they will. It is not brands of automobiles that we speak of.
But the bulk of the article deals disapprovingly with how Witnesses have grappled with the same child sexual abuse plague that has shown itself pandemic throughout society—be it in segments religious or irreligious. The recent Epstein “suicide” only underscores that the evil reaches into the highest echelons of society, some members of whom appear desperate to cover their tracks. If, in the opinion of the ARC, “children are not adequately protected from the risk of child sexual abuse in the Jehovah’s Witness organisation,” frequent news reports make clear that they are not “adequately protected” anywhere. Even the Boy Scouts of America, that iconic institution that has taught generations of boys responsibility, did not succeed in purging all pedophiles from its midst, and is at risk of going under for it.
Arguably, as Jehovah’s Witnesses have attempted to police their own, they have faltered in coordinating such internal “policing” with the actual police. Still, this must be countered by the consideration that few faiths make any attempt at all to look into wrongdoing within the ranks. When a member is nabbed for child sexual abuse, it is as much of a surprise to the minister as anyone else. Moreover, with some groups, the minister is the perpetrator—not just the one who investigates the sin.
Jehovah’s Witnesses live, work, and school in the general community. They are politically neutral, and as such, are pacifist. The same Pew source that tells of their “low retention rate” also says of them: “Jehovah’s Witnesses are among the most racially and ethnically diverse religious groups in America.” Just how sinister can they be? In Russia, Jehovah’s Witnesses were declared “extremist” and banned in 2017 for entirely separate reasons, the topic of child abuse having never once arisen—and their woes are exacerbated by the same critics attempting to take them down in the West with diatribes that are embraced by the New Times.
One almost senses that the reporter’s discomfort at being offered help three separate times by three separate attendants to find a seat might stem from an uncomfortable sense that they have somehow discerned her intention to accept their hospitality and then lambaste them on the media. Charges against Jehovah’s Witnesses that she has showcased here—which are certainly not nothing—are dealt with in the free ebook TrueTom vs the Apostates! which includes 10+ chapters on the core charge of child abuse.
As society increasingly becomes disillusioned with God, it is inevitable that participatory religion will be regarded as cultish. What Jehovah’s Witnesses think of articles such as in the New Times is immaterial. Historically, they rise to fight the battles laid before them. They are used to presenting their faith through its most appealing lens. Let them become used, if need be, to presenting it through its least appealing lens, for both are to be expected of imperfect persons attempting to apply Bible standards in a world that increasingly shrugs them off.

I agree completely. I gave Anna a big up-vote on her comments because she pointed this out when she said: "then technically and legally the JW lawyer did not lie, but allowed others to assume something else, therefor it could be said that he was misleading."
I understand that the entire point was to mislead, and I hope everyone will see that this simply means that the Society's representative here knows that we should not be proud of our current practice. Therefore we are ashamed.
I know these things always take too long, but we (mostly the WTS leaders) have been shown to be ashamed about our stance on things before, and it has resulted in changes. I think we can now be almost 100 percent in agreement with our current stated stance on CSA procedures, for example. We have been shamed into admitting that corporal punishment of a violent nature against children is wrong. I think we will soon stop saying, as Brother Herd has said, that shunning our disfellowshipped children is analagous to casting out demons.
Also, I know it's another controversial topic that many will strongly disagree with, but in the last few years I have also come to realize that we are wrong to have a policy of "disfellowshipping" children, by allowing them to die, when their temporary life on earth could very likely be lengthened through blood-related medical treatments. In one recent case I know about, it has been clear that if those medical treatments can lengthen a child's temporary physical life on earth, we are to tell the parent that no matter what their own conscience says, their conscience is not allowed to allow the child to receive the treatment. The Biblical principle of pulling a small lamb out of a pit even on the Sabbath is too strong for me to think we should impose the WTS's rule on our own conscience and then on a child's conscience so that they are disfellowshipped through death. It's a way in which we practice having no natural affection, and is related to our acceptance of Brother Herd's comments. 

I'm guessing that this person is on the right track:
https://nsidc.org/cryosphere/icelights/2012/04/are-icebreakers-changing-climate
Meier decided to crunch some numbers and find out. While his numbers are an estimate, he said, they provide a helpful comparison of just how much icebreakers might contribute to summer ice loss. Meier said, “In late June, when the sun’s energy is strongest, the total sea ice extent is around 10 million square kilometers or 3.9 million square miles. An icebreaker cruising through the ice for 1,000 kilometers (620 miles) and leaving an ice-free wake of 10 meters (33 feet) would open an area of water 10 square kilometers (3.9 square miles) over the entire cruise. In contrast, the Arctic sea ice cover decreases by an average of over 9 million square kilometers or 3.5 million square miles each year during its melt season—an area larger than the contiguous United States.  In total, researchers estimate that the number of icebreakers traversing the Arctic at any given time is usually less than three. So, Meier said, “The actual contribution is miniscule—only one part in a million of the total ice cover.”

I'm guessing that this person is on the right track:
https://nsidc.org/cryosphere/icelights/2012/04/are-icebreakers-changing-climate
Meier decided to crunch some numbers and find out. While his numbers are an estimate, he said, they provide a helpful comparison of just how much icebreakers might contribute to summer ice loss. Meier said, “In late June, when the sun’s energy is strongest, the total sea ice extent is around 10 million square kilometers or 3.9 million square miles. An icebreaker cruising through the ice for 1,000 kilometers (620 miles) and leaving an ice-free wake of 10 meters (33 feet) would open an area of water 10 square kilometers (3.9 square miles) over the entire cruise. In contrast, the Arctic sea ice cover decreases by an average of over 9 million square kilometers or 3.5 million square miles each year during its melt season—an area larger than the contiguous United States.  In total, researchers estimate that the number of icebreakers traversing the Arctic at any given time is usually less than three. So, Meier said, “The actual contribution is miniscule—only one part in a million of the total ice cover.”

Just another opinion here, but I can't see any connection. Breaking the ice with one of these nuclear powered ice-breakers touches such a minute fraction of the ice and does virtually nothing to the temperature of the water, or the ice.
Also, nuclear power is about the most efficient type of power for producing green energy with no additional greenhouse gases added to the atmosphere. Of course, due to a couple near disasters and real disasters (3 Mile Island, Chernobyl, Fukushima) the "Green" crowd will usually fight against this form of "green" energy."

Just another opinion here, but I can't see any connection. Breaking the ice with one of these nuclear powered ice-breakers touches such a minute fraction of the ice and does virtually nothing to the temperature of the water, or the ice.
Also, nuclear power is about the most efficient type of power for producing green energy with no additional greenhouse gases added to the atmosphere. Of course, due to a couple near disasters and real disasters (3 Mile Island, Chernobyl, Fukushima) the "Green" crowd will usually fight against this form of "green" energy."