Arauna

Negating the main reason I used this example  in the first place..... typical evolutional thinking. Negate the real issue and answer a side issue.  

After he (Alan) sends the mathematicians out to the pasture, not wishing to deal with their evidence that squelches his theorizing, and (Shermer) lets them remain there, he (Shermer) brings them back when it suits his purpose to do so. 
Regarding SETI (search for extraterrestrial life) he declares that at present  the verdict is “unambiguously ambiguous.” He should say the verdict is that there is no life outside earth, for elsewhere he makes a big show of how science should say, “This is what we know about such-and-such at present.” Well, at present, we “know” that there is no extraterrestrial life. Shermer acknowledges not a trace of it has been found. Yet why does he waffle on the verdict, saying that the evidence is ambiguous? Because of the mathematicians that he previously vanquished! This time their probability comes in handy, and he relies upon “What are the odds, what with all the galaxies, and all the stars, and all the planets, and all the planets at just the right temperature, that life has not evolved there as it does here?”
The mathematicians may inwardly grumble that, “Well, you didn’t listen to us in the first case, why are you listening to us now?” but if so, they don’t say it. They are glad to be readmitted into the heady club. 

That is how these people think - they label someone - and then (in their mind) they have answered and dealt with the matter sufficiently !
They refuse to look into it...... because they are afriad they may have to let go of their 'religion'.
The book I mentioned before is a scholar and mathematician - 
The Devil's Delusion: Atheism and Its Scientific Pretensions is a 2008 book by David Berlinski. It discusses atheism and religion, defending the religious point of view. He is not religious himself but makes these arguments because he can!  I guess he does not know where to start to be religious.  He is born a Jew and does not know where to search for the biblical truth.... or just not interested....
 

When I mentioned to Alan that various mathematicians had ruled anything other than micro evolution undoable based on probability alone, he responded: “LOL! Those mathematicians are almost ALL creationists...”
Of course! The masters of that joined-at-the-hip branch of science, mathematicians, calculate all that is involved and declare the odds against it happening greater than all the atoms in the universe! Freed from this inconvenient truth, the evolution proponent continue merrily to build their castles in the sky.
You would think that if you demonstrate one position is impossible, that would mean that the competing position must be true. If your car keys are not in your purse, after you have turned it inside out and searched every square millimeter of it, they just might be in your ignition. This obvious logic doesn’t wash with evolutionists. This is due to the ballyhooed “fallacy of negation,” which uncovers for them that if you discredit one position, the observer is not forced to accept the other. 
The “fallacy of negation” is not rejected when it is in the evolutionist’s interests to embrace it, however. For example, on the other thread, notice how Alan maintains that not even finding the  “poop” of the wandering Israelites means that they were not there and did not wander. 
The rules of science that Shermer outlines have a number of “heads I win, tails you lose” aspects to them. He doesn’t put it that way of course, but he does concede that “science is not equipped to evaluate supernatural explanations of observations. Without passing judgement on the truth or falsity of supernatural explanations, science leaves their consideration to the domain of religious faith.” (quoted from the amicus brief to the 1987 Supreme Court) He does not go on to say (as Alan would) that because their consideration is left to “the domain of religious faith,” that means they are BS. Possibly he does not even think that, since he points out that many scientists believe in God, and he does not say (as Alan would) that they are deluded fools.
One of the “heads I win, tails you lose” components of science, with regard to the above mentioned “fallacy of negation” that can be suspended when it is in their interests to do so, is the stipulation that “a new theory needs evidence in favor of it, not just against the opposition.” Coupled with the above statement that science is not equipped to examine supernatural explanations, it means advocates of creation will never catch a break in their court.
Shermer appears modest enough (unlike Alan) to recognize this, as he reiterates that the inability of science to evaluate spirituality means no opinion is rendered as to the “truth of falsity” of spiritual [supernatural] matters.  It is a drawback of his system, and he seems to know it. He doesn’t condemn what he can’t measure. 
He is like the mechanic that shows up with a toolbox of wrenches, only to find that a screwdriver is needed, upon which he says “Sorry, I can’t fix the car.” Then his assistant Alan shows up with his toolbox also equipped with only wrenches. Upon learning that a screwdriver is needed, he declares screwdrivers are only the imaginary tools of superstitious morons.
 

Lol - that is my turf.  My eyes are so bad I cannot do the research like I used to..... I write from memory alone.

Of course! This will be on your grave marker.
It is like the cute story of when my 5-year-old walked away from the door and said, “Why did that lady say there is too much of me?” What she had actually said was, “You’re too much!”
But in your case, the 5-year-old’s reasoning is spot-on, proving that wisdom comes from the mouths of babes: There is too much of you.

It is impossible that a master taunter as yourself would not understand, knowing your political views, why I would refer to you as a “Proud Boy.” 
I want to see another Donald Duck explosion. Don’t let me down on this. You never have. Don’t start now.
I even entertain the theory that @JW Insiderkisses up to you (not to say that he does agree with your core chronology) more than he would otherwise simply because if he does not you will launch into such a tantrum of insults that you will screw up his thread that he has worked so hard to keep exclusively devoted to his topic of interest. I’m not completely sold on my theory, in fact I don’t know that I believe it at all, but it is still worth making the point to underscore how impossible it is to deal with someone of higher than average IQ coupled with the EQ of an infant.

True, there are no dates on tablets.  They usually refer to some great local event...most of these, in our time cannot be tracked.  I happened to take out a book with translations of tablets when I worked at the university.  Yes there are theories about stars etc.... but descriptions of these events are not that accurate..... so we can be  making mistakes.
I think these people will believe what they want to believe. They are forming camps now.  Propaganda is rife in these statements that there are  "dates" - without substantiation - and are often repeated and people start to believe the fallacies.
 

“Hi! Here’s a video that insults you! Please watch it. It only takes 10 minutes”
For crying out loud, Alan. If you don’t have a life, why should you assume that is true of everyone else?
Please contact your ally @Ann O'Maly, who counsels from the school guidebook. See if you can work on the point ‘Introduction that motivates.’ See if you can imitate her manner, while you’re at it. She makes points every bit as substantial as you without being personally nasty at every step.
Had you presented it in an adult way I might actually have taken a look at it.

You shouldn’t just dissolve into a mass of hurling insults, Alan. I actually take pleasure when you do that. It means I’ve “won” and like Cool Hand Luke you keep coming when you have nothing.
It’s like watching those old Donald Duck cartoons when a thoroughly frustrated Donald goes ballistic. I love that part.

HAHAHAHAHAHHA!!!!!
"Mah Big Daddy gon' kikyo ass!"

JW Insider
My suggestion, plain and simple is just read Albertz and form your own opinion of his historiography just as i have done!!!
Really i could not less about what you think.
No, it is not . Historical writing of history is not the same thing as historiography
I have done a post graduate course in Historiography and COJ does not present any such historiography in his tratise, GTR.
I do not care if you mistrust me for you have deviated from the true faith by your endorsement of NB Chronology, a mere string of beads over that strong cable of WT Bible Chronology..
scholar JW

JW Insider/Outsider
Furuli showed otherwise and has provided the explanation that you seek.
That strong cable of WT Chronology based on 4 prophetic witnesses is not reliant on such ancient artifacts susceptible to interpretation and fail to properly account for Neb's missing 7 years of regnal vacancy and the notorious 20 year gap and Jeremiah's 70 years.
Yes, you need imagination when trying to interpret the so-called 17 lines of secular evidence and trying to harmonize secular chronology with that strong cable of WT Chronology.
The gap is an historical reality when trying to sort out the muddle of NB Chronology and is well supported by the biblical evidence of 70 years along with the other three witnesses unlike the muddle of secular chronology.
Finally, some honesty appears on the horizon so you better stick to the Bible and not to COJ's deception- the Devil's work.
scholar JW

The babylonian empire fell - if you know the entire book of Daniel well - you will  know it gives us a summary of the march of world powers one after another.  The four beasts mentioned  are Babylon, medea-persia, Greece and Rome. 
The 70 years was the end of babylonian dominion - Babylon would NEVER have set Israel free so jehovah replaced them with medea-persia at the right time he had determined before. 70 years to be exact - to release Israel to go back.. 
Tyre suffered a blow under Babylon but its island was not destroyed - that only came later when Alexander the great destroyed it.  Babylon only became a wilderness much later when the salt deposits made the land infertile. 
You guys like to argue over the silliest details because you want to be right at all costs - to satisfy your egos. This has nothing to do with God or the bible....... you want to humiliate Jehovahs people who believe in him only and associate with his people.  
Your institutions - from whom you receive your mothers milk - will not save you.....  Only jehovah can save ...... and you have taken sides against him in favor of secular knowledge.   I prefer to drink His milk than your skewed secular interpretations of the bible. 

I do not believe scholars have any acceptance of the bible...... it is about being credible to peers who do not accept the bible.

Science works tolerably well in areas such as physics and chemistry. It is on less firm ground when it goes into biology, largely because it is so easily coopted by those with monied interests (which its devotees never seem to notice).
When it veers into matters of origin it is also on less firm ground.
When it turns into social matters, the ground becomes like Jello. And when it expands into such things as evolutionary psychology, it becomes downright silly.
You'd almost think the responsible players of science would distance themselves from the upstarts, so as to preserve the overall reputation of the word. 
Walking the dog, who has more emotional maturity than Prince Charming, yesterday, I came across one of those placards that has become common in the U.S. recently, listing a few unrelated items of what "this household believes."
One item is that they 1.) believe in love, not hate. Another is that they 2.) believe that "science is true." Now, I have nothing against science so long as it does not present itself as the be-all and end-all, but it strikes me that these two items do not exactly dovetail. Love is more closely associated with spiritual things, in our case with the sayings of Jesus. Science is more closely associated with survival of the fittest, hardly a recipe for love. 
So along come the evolutionary psychologists who will spin some completely made-up and silly narrative on how love evolved because natural selection found that animals without love yawned with unconcern as predators were devouring their offspring, so they died out, and only the loving animals survived.
Fortunately, it is perfectly possible to be a scientist and not drink all the KoolAid. Many scientists believe in God.
 

I do not believe scholars have any acceptance of the bible...... it is about being credible to peers who do not accept the bible.

As stated, since 2016 in Russia, there was already a plan in place. We seen the timeline of events, not just religion wise, but around Russia and the craziest election of Putin who was up very very high, as is with Alexi's movement being FF'd. There is more going on there than you realize, so it is more about trying to break your people. It is not only the adults, but the teenagers, and even the children for the Duma, the Church and the Kremlin are moving influence in these areas, even permitting bullying, and more. There are people who are against this but like others, they endure risk, some suffered from these risks already.
That being said, a bit of the grip is loosen because Russia is distracted by the COVID-19 pandemic, that is soon to be Endemic.

Bravo! true! and be proud of it!

That was the flood - not 50 millions of years.  That is where the marine fossils come from all over the earth - on all the highest mountains. 

You think a guided tour is a form of worship? How so?

Arauna said:
Rather, be ashamed of it.
Recognizable humans have existed as such for more than 2 million years. Their ancestors have existed for about three times that. A great deal of evidence indicates that a variety of human species have existed just in Europe and Asia during the last 60 thousand years and more -- Neanderthals, Denisovans, probably one other similar to them, and others more distantly related like Homo floriensis and perhaps even Homo erectus. The DNA of the first three is found in all non-Africans today, in percentages ranging from 1% to 5%. All of this is impossible within the Watchtower's 6,000 year timeframe for humanity.
Archaeological remains abound. Gobekli Tepi in Turkey is something like 12,000 years old and is obviously far older than 6,000 years, even to non-archaeologists. Some 74,000 years ago the giant volcano Toba in Sumatra erupted and killed perhaps all but a few thousand humans on earth due to drastic cooling of climate. Above the ash layers in India have been found human artifacts that indicate that another wave of migration out of Africa occurred within some 15,000 years of the eruption. On and on goes the evidence of humans living in Africa, Europe and Asia for tens of thousands of years, and in the Americas for at least 15,000 years.
The Bible and the Watchtower Society are out of sync with reality.

If this was true, then the scriptures I gave you held no meaning before the WT came along.  The "courtyard" had never been established on earth before Russell was "inspired" to teach that the great pyramid was God's testimony in stone.  It was never established before Rutherford taught that 1925 was the date of Armageddon.  
You have just attributed to the lies your past leaders kindled.  

You quoted a scripture where God says "Where, then, is the house that you could build for me"
And I showed that the GB / Watchtower / JW Org call their HQs, Bethel, meaning House of God.
So where is the lie ? 
I also showed that they do Bethel tours. This is not only in America but in UK too.  Once again where is the lie?
To call it a House of God and to do guided tours, is a form of worship. You cany deny it if you wish. 

YOU and Witness are the jealous ones - we work alongside the true anointed remnant