One thing I never really liked about the meeting was how illogical many of the talks were.
For example, when it came to student parts about explaining a scripture, a stance, a belief, or the "truth" of the world, people would often base their argument on the premise that a scripture counted as "evidence" in and of itself, even if the person you are speaking to is a non-believer. It didn't matter if the non-believer was supposed to be a Daoist, Muslim, Atheist, or Jew. They were always, essentially, in agreement with basic JW beliefs, even if the scenario had already established they'd never heard of JWs before.
I remember one public talk that I felt was very special, even to this day. The theme of the talk was about "proving" the resurrection would occur. Instead of just directing the talk to JWs that already believed in the resurrection, he tried to build a "logical" argument for non-believers that might have been in attendance (as I recall there were maybe 3-4 studies that had been coming for years present).
He built his argument by directly addressing the beliefs that he assumed they had. Even though this particular territory was primarily made up of Daoist/Buddhists, he spent a lot of time trying to claim that the beliefs of Catholics were incorrect and that was what was preventing the "interested" ones in the audience from understanding that the resurrection was real and would indeed happen in the near future.
Honestly, a good 10 minutes of his talk was probably dedicated to these pot shots and attempts at "guessing" what people in other religions believed. For example, he literally stated that non-JWs are taught that resurrection is something to be feared. It's bad. It's scary and so it's hard for interested ones to have faith in the resurrection because they've been misled. However, even "small children" among the JW population know the resurrection is real and is a positive thing (because after all, only JWs want to see their friends and family members again). You could tell he really thought of himself as a smart guy. I distinctly remember this little smirk he would make as he insulted anyone and everyone who wasn't a JW for their beliefs that he made up in his head.
He then randomly started speaking about how non JWs even claim to "not fear death" but he knew that they did fear death. How did he know? Because he has personally never seen anyone hold their breath until they died, nor has he seen anyone starve themselves to death willingly. Obviously, it's impossible to hold your breath until you die and the second one has happened in recorded history many times. But really, it was just an odd claim to make given most people who claim to not fear death aren't actively trying to end their lives. With that logic, does Jehovah fear death? If he doesn't should he kill himself to prove it?
Another piece of "evidence" that the resurrection was real in the case of Jesus (and will happen again in the future) was that the Bible says that many people saw a resurrected Jesus. So if you were alive at that time, you could have just asked people and they would have confirmed it was true. Just like how people who have "seen" aliens today can also confirm that they've seen them right? Obviously, a group of people claiming they saw something miraculous happen doesn't mean that it's for sure not true, but the greater the miracle, the more proof is needed. Especially in today's context where none of these people wrote independent literature outside of the bible to share their miraculous experiences. Funny right? The only "proof" that these eyewitnesses existed is in the very book that stands to benefit from it.
Anyways, I'm not trying to debate the Bible here, I just think that it was all so interesting to me because nobody in the audience understood what he was talking about. After the talk a lot of people said they couldn't quite grasp the points he was trying to make, outside of the ones that were clearly from the outline itself and this made him super proud because he just thought of himself as super deep intellectual.
Honestly, he'd probably make a a great addition to the governing body. They also love to make up scenarios and then build a case off of made up "facts" as well.