Anna

I don't know about you, but I have not noticed any discussions about the overlapping generation among the friends. And in my very close circle of friends, most have admitted they have not payed much attention to it, and some even say they do not believe it. Have you found anything similar?

Still conjecture I'm afraid....
Yes, I am aware, I was only being brief. I understand the reasoning behind it. But still, we cannot say that this is what Jesus had in mind....

Hey AnonymousBrother. Great to see you back!!! And hopefully coming back to the States will be a good move, too. I've heard you tell of your retirement planning talk in the past. Although you are right about the math supporting it, there are congregations where such talk will not be so welcome, of course. I imagine you raised a few eyebrows when you first talked about "100 years" more in this old system of things. That's going to be seen as "apostate" talk in some circles.
But even this idea that the math can support "100 years" potentially produces exactly the problem we had in 1975. We all acknowledge that the end can come at any time, that's a given. But the "overlapping generation" math, even when using maximum ages of 120, and an "anointing" acknowledged as early as age 15, doesn't extend forever. (Could stretch to 2124.) But what happens if you were asked to give that same talk 50 years from now? The math would only support a maximum that's closer to 50 years. And what happens 90 years from now? The math would only support a number closer to 10 more years. That's the same thing that started in 1966, when the system was expected to go on for only 10 to 15 more years.
Brother Splane once laughed about persons who might be sitting at the JW Broadcasting desk years down the road after he's gone, so I know he's thought of the possibility. According to the "Watchtower," as I'm sure you already know, Brother Russell started to lose faith in 1914 near the end of 1913 and early in the year 1914, and he also began speculating about how people might look back and laugh "100 years from now" on what he had been predicting. 
On the Long Island Rail Road a few years ago, I spoke to a "Harold Camping" guy who, along with his wife, had quit their jobs because it was May 20, and only ONE day before their BIG day. I told him about our religion and 1874, 1878, 1881, 1914, and 1925 and 1975, and how you have to consider what you will do if the end doesn't come as expected. I asked if he had thought about the kind of counseling members of his faith might need on May 22 if it doesn't happen. He spoke to me about how this new date was not wrong, and it would show a grave lack of faith to be considering the possibility that it wouldn't happen. I told him about Mt 24:36; Acts 1:7, and 1Th 5:1, and that Harold Camping was wrong about his "end date" on a previous occasion, and this man was completely prepared to handle those objections. He had a whole CD of information he was giving out that explained May 21, 2011 and had a good explanation for what went wrong on a previous prediction. I gave him my number and told him I'd be happy to talk to him on May 22.
At least Russell had been able to imagine people laughing at him 100 years down the road (2014). And many brothers that I knew were not taking 1975 very seriously either. This included my father, who even got in trouble for kind of letting that slip in a circuit assembly talk. Although my mother was a great believer in 1975, my father had a serious talk with me about 1975, confiding some of his objections about the fact that I was quitting school early to begin regular pioneering. He was of the opinion that we can believe it and be excited about it, but that it could be an embarrassment and reflect badly on Jehovah and his organization if we didn't count the cost, and consider all the possibilities before making a decision that we might "kick ourselves" for, looking back. 

If you mean 99.9 % didn't leave the Truth, you may be right. But if you mean that only 0.1% were disappointed, then you are blatantly wrong.

I don't see why. Unless all those things were spoken in riddles. Which they weren't. 

Wow, big change! Welcome back
I have a friend who moved to China a year ago, "under cover".

I don't know about you, but I have not noticed any discussions about the overlapping generation among the friends. And in my very close circle of friends, most have admitted they have not payed much attention to it, and some even say they do not believe it. Have you found anything similar?

Hey! Was that in the outline?

Lol!
I've always liked what one father said to his daughter (quoted in one WT): "plan ahead as if Armageddon won't come in your lifetime, but live your life as if it will come tomorrow"
I apologise to those who have heard me say this numerous times before.

Lol!
I've always liked what one father said to his daughter (quoted in one WT): "plan ahead as if Armageddon won't come in your lifetime, but live your life as if it will come tomorrow"
I apologise to those who have heard me say this numerous times before.

Once the cat is out of the bag, you can't put it back in, no matter how hard you try.

If you mean 99.9 % didn't leave the Truth, you may be right. But if you mean that only 0.1% were disappointed, then you are blatantly wrong.

Wow, big change! Welcome back
I have a friend who moved to China a year ago, "under cover".

Not here. In Asia things are more dedicated. How the "next phase" is calculated is not that important. They can mostly talk about it, but pay less attention to the details than the result: "Wait. Not time yet."
I'm moving back to the US in a couple of weeks (been in Asia 24 years). But even then, the congregation I will be attending aren't that fixated on "how" just "when" (sorta speak).

It wasn't. It was an assignment to show biblical references for proper planning.
Supposed to last 6 minutes. Took about 10 (my wife is not native speaker). No one complained and the elders just said "I never thought of it that way."
Amazing what you can do with Scriptures and a little math . . .

Lol!
I've always liked what one father said to his daughter (quoted in one WT): "plan ahead as if Armageddon won't come in your lifetime, but live your life as if it will come tomorrow"
I apologise to those who have heard me say this numerous times before.

Trying to squash a rumor is like trying to unring a bell.

No.
But, you do not have to try, either.
People should have better things to do than chase cats.
I gave a talk about the "overlapping generations" when it was "new".
Pointed out not to ignore things like retirement plans, etc., because this overlapping stuff could easily drag on another 100 years--likely longer as medical tech advances.
Jehovah has his own time frame.
We were told to be ready at any time for the fan to be hit. We weren't told to jump the gun. As many seemed want to do.
Of course, not having been a witness back then, I cannot say about general moods and such. But I have seen many nowadays starting down the "before next decade" path. I tell them not to plan their lives around a date, and just be ready to run for the hills at any time, because the fan could be hit *tomorrow* or *one hundred years* from now.

Once the cat is out of the bag, you can't put it back in, no matter how hard you try.

I think you might be right! Enjoyed your post by the way
P.S. I think everyone heard about Armageddon Ernie in the UK, I did too!!

It is quite weird really. Cognitive dissonance perhaps?
Just recently I listened to one of the old recordings. The "infamous" talk given by District overseer Charles Sinutko, where the phrase “stay alive till 75” apparently got coined. It was entitled “Serving with everlasting view in mind” I am sure you know which one I am talking about. Br. Sinutko begins his talk by asking “do we know what 1975 means to us? Well we don’t have to guess what the year 1975 means for us. The WT May /1 1967 is very explicit; the end of 6000 years of human existence…and…possibly …the time when God executes the wicked” Unfortunately that word possibly got completely destroyed by what he says at the end of his talk, at around mark 20:20, when referring to the Society he says; “they know what’s coming, and don’t wait till 75, the door is going to be shut before then!”.  I can only imagine what those in attendance were thinking. It must have been hard for them not to “be looking forward to a date!”.
He of course wasn't the only person with a leadership role  to have voiced things this way. There were many, many others, as you personally know. Also, there is no doubt in my mind that those of the FDS, at least Fred Franz, really believed the end would come in 1975, although never officially taught, but merely insinuated. Logically, there is no reason to believe otherwise.

Don't really know first hand what F Franz believed, but I remember the talk he gave about it post '75 because I was sitting in the front row. (No notes I remember...long talk). I am sure he, like a lot of others, certainly hoped for a 1975 event.
The funny thing is there are those who were swayed about 1975 and there are those who were not. Yet both camps seem to have a problem accepting the other now. Those who were swayed seem to be a bit "once bitten, twice shy" and accuse the others of "cognitive dissonance". Those who were not swayed get a bit self-righteous and say "well I didn't fall for it, can't see how anyone else did! But then, you know what these Americans can be like....". And then there's those that weren't even there......................You know what?  "there's now't so queer as folk".
I had a shepherding call in 1973 from a couple of elders, one of whom proudly told me he had cancelled his insurances (life or endowment or something) because he was so sure the imminent end made them not worth paying for. I actually could just about afford my fare to work at the time, so his "exhortation" to simplicity rather fell on deaf ears as I actually had nothing at all left at the end of my working week as my wage at the time only covered my living expenses.
Soon after, a prominent elder from Bethel (who took my book study group) said that he was not a member of the "1975 Armageddon school of thought" because it was actually not a scriptural teaching. I had great respect for that brother at the time and was very glad to hear him say this as I was not comfortable with the view that some, (and it was only some), had over this matter. They were usually a particular type of brother (in my opinion), greeting each other at the kingdom hall, always slightly over-excitedly saying embarrassing things like "it won't be long now" as they shook my hand vigorously, often holding it with two of theirs. 
Another characteristic of some of these ones I remember was their obsessive recording of assembly talks on those little cassette recorders that many had in those days. They were always out of their seats at assemblies, fiddling with safety pins,  as they spiked the speaker wires, fighting for the plum, accessible spots on the stadium ledges, so they could get in and out in time to change tapes that often did not last long enough to get a whole talk on one side. (60 minute tapes used to get wound round the mechanism some how). Then there was the batteries running out, mid-talk! One brother, in haste, actually dropped his recorder down the side of the stadium into a narrow void where the seating structure was. He was so upset over this that it was like his Armageddon had come there and then! These brothers also indulged in swapping these recordings, often getting prized tapes of American COs giving talks at assemblies, and really stirring up the pot in a much more direct and vigorous manner than we were used to. (I think those Americans probably were responsible for the hysteria you know, apart from "Armageddon Ernie" of course).
Ah well, those were the days..."Things ain't what they used to be, and never were". (Will Rogers?)
 

Their mistake was to publish their speculation in their quest for understanding, if that is what you think it was. You do not publish something like that to an audience who has been eagerly waiting, for the end, tongues hanging out, since 1914. You only publish it if you are convinced of it yourself. Otherwise you would be a foolish, not discreet slave.

It appears that with the internet it's too late and the "cat is out of the bag" never to be captured again!

Their mistake was to publish their speculation in their quest for understanding, if that is what you think it was. You do not publish something like that to an audience who has been eagerly waiting, for the end, tongues hanging out, since 1914. You only publish it if you are convinced of it yourself. Otherwise you would be a foolish, not discreet slave.