Macro evolution is a myth. Earthquakes are increasing. Fact.

[George]

So I've got myself involved in an ongoing debate with a Jehovah's Witness. On the last meeting he turned up with another Witness, who was a supposedly a 'member of the scientific community,' to give me a more scientific vewpoint.

As usual it was both interesting and incredibly frustrating but there were two things in particular that this guy said that I suspect to be just plain lies:

1) (Context - I'd said that I wasn't a scientist but evolution made sense to me and I would trust the scientific consensus that evolution is both theory and fact) He said that although micro evolution is true, macro evolution is a myth. Scientific consensus had supported evolution 20 years ago but since then new evidence has come to light and this is no longer the case.

2) (Context - increaced war, disease, natural disasters). He said that seismologists would confirm there have been more earthquakes in the last century than any other century previous. I said that this may be more to do with increased recording of quakes rather than actually more quakes. He said that this wouldn't come into it as they could use new technology to look back and tell how many quakes there were hundreds of years ago. He said that increased earthquakes were a scientific fact that could not be argued with.

Any evolutionary biologists or seismologists here? Wanna give me your thoughts..

[pinkocommie]

Squid knows his stuff, evolution wise, and has posted a lot of great content in previous posts.  He'd be the guy I'd ask.

[Asmodean]

Macroevolution has mountains of evidence to support it. That said, why divide evolution in two in the first place?

[RosaRubicondior]

Your suspicions were correct.  They lied on both counts.

The question you now need to ask them is why they are trying to trick you into believeing something they don't believe themselves.  Have they asked you for any money yet?

[George]

No requests for money yet!

The best bit is:
At the end of our discussion I was asking him about his scientific background. He said he worked in medicine and was part of the peer review process for new drugs.
Turns out he's a sodding homeopathist!
 

[Squid]

1) (Context - I'd said that I wasn't a scientist but evolution made sense to me and I would trust the scientific consensus that evolution is both theory and fact) He said that although micro evolution is true, macro evolution is a myth. Scientific consensus had supported evolution 20 years ago but since then new evidence has come to light and this is no longer the case.

This is utter crap.  It is very unlikely that this person is "part of the scientific community" , the vagueness of the claimed association makes it suspect.  

*edit* I finally read the follow up posts and saw "Turns out he's a sodding homeopathist!", I guess that supports my claim


Also, macroevolution is NOT a myth and the past 20 years have provided us with even more solid evidence to support it.  Even more controversial speciation types such as sympatric speciation have found ample evidence to support it.  This guy is a liar.  In my experience when someone makes such a claim as this they will start rambling about gradualism and punctuated equilibrium and how PE replaced gradualism and it was a post hoc answer to cover up the gaps and so forth - this will automatically show they do not know what they're are talking about.

As for the earthquakes I can't say for sure, not up to date on my seismology.  However, I'm sure, like much in nature, the frequency of such waxes and wains.  So while it is increasing now (if in fact it is) there's no saying that it won't decrease again in the future.  I'm simply confused as to what earthquakes have to do with the validity of evolutionary theory.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I think the "earthquake" trope is a veiled reference to the end-times, with the corollary (not that they would know what that is, in all likelihood) that conversion soon is imperative.

[Will]

Macroevolution has mountains of evidence to support it. That said, why divide evolution in two in the first place?

Whole milk is real, but skim milk is a myth pushed by an international conspiracy of dairy farmers.

[Asmodean]

Macroevolution has mountains of evidence to support it. That said, why divide evolution in two in the first place?

Whole milk is real, but skim milk is a myth pushed by an international conspiracy of dairy farmers.

Which means milk is not milk, which means pizza is not pizza which means my woman is actually a male...   Never pondered that dilemma from that perspective...

[The Magic Pudding]

2) He said that this wouldn't come into it as they could use new technology to look back and tell how many quakes there were hundreds of years ago.

Wow that is impressive, a machine that can measure past earthquakes.
All the way back to when the earth was created, 6,000 years ago.

[Asmodean]

2) He said that this wouldn't come into it as they could use new technology to look back and tell how many quakes there were hundreds of years ago.

Wow that is impressive, a machine that can measure past earthquakes.
All the way back to when the earth was created, 6,000 years ago.

Clever, those Japanese  

There is a way to know of past earthquakes though - at least the big ones.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Yes, big ones leaves scars in the form of exposed strata, and the oxidation can be measured.  Also, they can be inferred from things like shifting river courses.

[Parsifal]

The Jehovah's Witnesses are the bunch who refuse to take blood transfusions and prefer seeing their children die?

Not quite on this topic, but I have to share this story.  When I was a final year student, I was visited by a very kind JW lady who, concerned about my soul, wanted to talk about things more important to me than my final exams.  Now, when I was a baby, I'm told by my parents, I ate a whole bag of rat poison.  Fortunately, they saw me doing it, rushed me to hospital where I was saved by, among other things, a complete blood transfusion.  I still have the scars on my ankles where the needles went in.  So, I listened to the lady's story, and then the following conversation ensued:

Me: Does God have a plan for everyone?
Lady: Yes, definitely
Me: Even for me?
Lady: of course, especially for you
Me: And, can I assume I won't die before I have fulfilled God's plan in my life?
Lady: yes
Me: So God's plan for me is still not done.
Lady: No
Me: JWs are opposed to blood transfusions, right?
Lady: Yes
Me: Why?
Lady: (explaining the reasons about blood being dirty etc etc)
Me: So, if you're in a situation where the only thing that can save you is a blood transfusion, you have to refuse it, and die, and presumably, this will only happen once God's plan for you has been fulfilled.
Lady: Yes, I'm impressed, you really understand these things well.
Me: I had a blood transfusion when I was a baby, without which, I would have been dead already, and, according to you, should have been dead already.  Now, explain that to me in view of your statement that God's plan for me is still not finished.

The lady left.

[karadan]

The Jehovah's Witnesses are the bunch who refuse to take blood transfusions and prefer seeing their children die?

Not quite on this topic, but I have to share this story.  When I was a final year student, I was visited by a very kind JW lady who, concerned about my soul, wanted to talk about things more important to me than my final exams.  Now, when I was a baby, I'm told by my parents, I ate a whole bag of rat poison.  Fortunately, they saw me doing it, rushed me to hospital where I was saved by, among other things, a complete blood transfusion.  I still have the scars on my ankles where the needles went in.  So, I listened to the lady's story, and then the following conversation ensued:

Me: Does God have a plan for everyone?
Lady: Yes, definitely
Me: Even for me?
Lady: of course, especially for you
Me: And, can I assume I won't die before I have fulfilled God's plan in my life?
Lady: yes
Me: So God's plan for me is still not done.
Lady: No
Me: JWs are opposed to blood transfusions, right?
Lady: Yes
Me: Why?
Lady: (explaining the reasons about blood being dirty etc etc)
Me: So, if you're in a situation where the only thing that can save you is a blood transfusion, you have to refuse it, and die, and presumably, this will only happen once God's plan for you has been fulfilled.
Lady: Yes, I'm impressed, you really understand these things well.
Me: I had a blood transfusion when I was a baby, without which, I would have been dead already.  Now, explain that to me in view of your statement that God's plan for me is still not finished.

The lady left.

Awesome!  

[George]

2) He said that this wouldn't come into it as they could use new technology to look back and tell how many quakes there were hundreds of years ago.

Wow that is impressive, a machine that can measure past earthquakes.
All the way back to when the earth was created, 6,000 years ago.

Funnily enough although JW's believe that we humans have only been around for around for a few thousand years and don't believe in evolution, they don't put an age onto the earth itself. When I asked them about this they said that the bible doesn't say when the earth was created and it could have happened anytime!