Added: 3 years ago
From: antybu86
Views: 2,720
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (91)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Has your creationist propaganda machine been slowed down by your 10 year prison sentence for tax fraud? Let your son carry on the illogical arguments! He doesn't even need any education, training, or to perform a single second of actual research!

  • Newtonist would have been a better title then Gravitiest.

  • Is it just me or does the narrator sound like Egon from Ghostbusters.

  • I think Eric Hovind is worse than his father.

  • Evolutionism is not science. There is no proof of macro-evolution. There is no proof of chemical evolution, planetary evolution, organic evolution, & other evolution. The only 'evolution' that occurs is micro-evolution which is simply natural selection and variation. This is the only thing that scientists witness. Nobody witnessed the other evolution. plants & animals can't gain new genes by mutation. They lose their current genetic information by mutation.

    "Too slow to see"? That's faith

  • wow...the post you just stated couldn't be anymore wrong. First of all, evolution does not explain the origin of life or the universe, it explains the diversity of life. Secondly, Micro-evolution, is variation within the same species while macro-evolution is analysis of evolution in separate gene pools(this means a species becoming it's own species). This has been observed so many times such as Darwin's finches, the Californian Salamanders, hawaiian drosophila(flies), etc.

  • yup, an epic statement of ignorance...

    @RockSmith: Don't forget about the nylon consuming bacteria, those are pretty substantial... Unless there was nylon in the "garden of eden" *rolls eyes*

    Oh, and 1:06 please!

  • hehehe...your stupid *points and laughs*

  • If you're daft and scientifically illiterate enough to believe the flood story is true, then you're bowing to a genocidal maniac! This act alone makes God far worse then the worst kind of human dictators...I can see why you fear him, and I can see why you confuse that fear with love.

  • So Noah travelled the planet collecting millions of separate species...Including Kangaroos from Australia - a country undiscovered then?

    This isn't bad education, it's willful ignorance.

  • Gen. 7:2 - "There went in two and two UNTO Noah." Noah didn't gather any animals, can't you read? God led them in.

    Australia!? Talk about "willful ignorance"!! Can't you see that a GLOBAL flood would change the ENTIRE face of the earth? God's ORIGINAL creation was vastly different from what we live on today. The extra water required? SUB-TERRAINNIAN WATER CHAMBERS, baby!

    I love you man, but get your facts straight before making a straw-man argument.

  • Fantastically mental response...You tell me to get my facts right with a straight face? You have no facts at all!

    There is no evidence for a great flood at all...In fact it couldn't have happened...The human race couldn't have replenished, especially from the same gene pool....And for the millions upon millions of animal species!...It doesn't bare thinking about..There may have been some old guy on a boat during a localized flood who took his farm with him, but a global flood never happened.

  • @rogan71 and just what would you expect to find after a hypothetical world flood?

    -a drastically different landscape from the time when "it was good"?

    ...check

    -billions of dead animals buried in rock layers all over the world?

    ...check

  • Results of several ice ages, and sea animals found as fossils do not prove a flood...You clearly have no scientific understanding about modern dating methods or geology, or biology...The world is constantly changing. Floods happen frequently as do all natural disasters...We now know they are not acts of God because we moved out of the bronze age...And to put trust in such a genocidal God sounds more like terrorism to me...

  • @DoKtaTre

    Considering that Australia is geologically ancient and that there is absolutely NO evidence of a "global flood" your laughable "facts" are nothing of the sort. Also, there are both plants and animals found in Australia that are found nowhere else on earth...

  • Excuse me, the "facts" to which I was referring were those of the BELIEF of Creationism, did you miss that as you were butting in? Also, what would you expect on an island which wasn't always an island? As the water would come to fill in the low spots, dry land would appear in places all around--where there is currently water today. Besides that, Noah built a boat big enough for hundreds of different KINDS (genuses) of animals, don't you think there would've been men "lost at sea" who SETTLED

  • @DoKtaTre

    I didn't realise that commenting on a public forum could possibly be considered "butting in"!

    The belief of creationism has no facts whatsoever, and if you accept the myth of Noah you also accept the incest that myth entails.

  • @erehwon80 Oh! MY worldview implies incest...but yours DOESN'T!? If everything is the long, long -since descendant of the original macro-molecule,...what-the-hel­l do you take me for?

  • @DoKtaTre

    You believe that twice, all of the people decend from a single family! Is your understanding of genetics that poor?

    You have a "world view", I accept or reject things based upon evidence...

    Evolution has it, creation doesn't!

  • @erehwon80 Furthermore sir, todays genetics isn't at all appliable to the genetics of ancient man. You see, before so much sin (from EVERY person) had accumulated, there weren't many defects in DNA. The reason that incest is wrong is because of the law God gives in Deutoronomy...HUNDREDS (maybe a thousand?) of years after Noah...even further from the garden.  Incest babies typically have defects, as BOTH the mother & father genes had a similar defect -- which is the physical evidence of sin.

  • @DoKtaTre

    So what you're saying is that incest was acceptable up until the time of Moses...? That is absolutely disgusting!

    Your knowledge of genetics is woefully poor. Incest leads to defects, not sin!

  • Right...So if we take the Bible literally, Noah was 500 when he had his three sons, and 600 when he started building the ark, presumably with his three 100 year old sons...And between them and their collective 900 years they repopulated the planet! It takes some serious retardation of the education system to still produce mouth-breathers that believe in this!

  • @rogan71

    It is pretty disturbing that people actually believe that nonsense...

    How did all of the animals and plants from around the world know to travel to the middle east to be "saved"? Especially animals like the Koala, and the Eucalypts they feed upon!

    I never get reasonable responses to that question, and I always get the fundies attempting to defend the incest that the "global flood" myth entails.

  • It's willful ignorance based on fear...Confused with hope. None of us want to die, and none of us want to see our loved ones die... Religion is just a reaction to this.

    I think they would be worthy of our pity...If they weren't so annoying.

  • @rogan71

    Yeah, ignorance is one thing; the level of wilful ignorance that some of these creationists display is something else again..

  • @erehwon80

    You could too, but then you'd have to admit there's a God and that [gasp] someone has to be accountable to every idle word you've ever said. Know what? Christ is WILLING to accept that accountability. All you need to do is ask with a sincere and believing heart (mind)

  • @DoKtaTre

    Considering the majority of Christians accept evolution and reject young earth creationism, and I haven't seen any evidence of any deity, including yours; I will stay as I am thank you.

  • @erehwon80 This seems to be turning into the EXACT conversation I'm having with proudtobeacommie below. Perhaps there are a large percentage of Christians who believe in evolution but Christ said in Mt. 7:13-14 that STRAIGHT&NARROW is the path to heaven and FEW will find it. A parallelism to the "no true Scotsman," of course, but Christs words ARE eternal. He'll accept you, man; the world wont (like you not being receptive to me), but He loves you just that much. Seek & tou WILL find (I promise)

  • @DoKtaTre

    People accept evolution, they don't "believe" in it!

  • It's still a bloody No True scotsman.

    And what if this 'straight and narrow' path actually involves accepting Evolution? by your logic, that would make you not a true christian.

  • "I can answer that right now sir...That'd be "No", no for me."

  • Nature 441, 1103-1108 (29 June 2006) | doi:10.1038/nature04789; Received 5 November 2005; Accepted 7 April 2006; Published online 17 May 2006

    That's a journal article from Nature regarding Human speciation.

    I do know both sides of the story. The Creation side happens to be demonstrably stupid, thus to teach it would be a failing of the school system.

    I can imagine when people are lied to, using god in place of evidence, they do come to believe in god. Emotions arguments ftl.

  • @Eye2EyeIIIV so what about all those christians includion THE FUCKEN CATHOLIC POPE that accept evolution as a fact??

  • @Mysio

    The Pope is a puppet of Satan. I don't follow him, I follow Jesus.

    Popes = present-day Caesars

  • @Eye2EyeIIIV

    Oh dear.

    A christian using the No True Scotsman Fallacy on other Christians.

    Guess what, fuckwit, It's the same basic religion.

  • Oh REALLY, (I chose to spare you unecessary name-calling)!? CHRISTIANITY is based on 2 primary, FUNDAMENTAL principles: love God, & love your neighbor. Catholicism led the CRUSADES, quite possibly the darkest time in history. This is very ANTI-Christian.

    Christ said, "the road to heaven is straight & narrow." This defines MOST people (even those who call themselves "Christian") as not being TRUE Christians. Sorry, but the "no true Scottsman fallacy" isn't a fallacy IN THIS CASE.

  • Wow. that's even worse than eye2eye. you've just extended the no true scotsman to a majority of christians.

    You are a judgemental asshole.

    And the name calling? meh. I lost patience with eye2eye, and you are clearly as much of a prick as he is.

  • I'm just repeating what Jesus said in Matthew 7:13-14, therefore making it...NOT a fallacy (in this one, particular case)

  • Nope, it's still a fallacy. It becomes especially evident since there are 'many' denominations of Christinary, upwards of 1000, I believe.

    In this regard it means there is no single meaning to what a 'true' Christian. To claim whatever you might believe in particular to be 'true' is arrogant and presumptious.

    So it's still a No true scotsman.

  • I agree. 'Tis definitely a parallelism to the "no true Scotsman" tale. However, the argument I'm making is:

    CHRISTians are to follow the teachings of CHRIST, right? Well, Christ said the path is STRAIGHT & NARROW and that "only a few find it."

    Say what you want, but Christs words are His words and those I live by, my friend.

  • ...You could too, but then you'd have to admit there's a God and that [gasp] someone has to be accountable to every idle word you've ever said. Know what? Christ is WILLING to accept that accountability. All you need to do is ask with a sincere and believing heart (mind)

  • No thanks, I'm quite happy being a Free Thinker. Nor do I need or wish to be accountable to "christ" since I am accountable for My actions to myself and to those around me and to society.

  • A No True Scotsman by implication. amusing.

    Arrogant too.

    Over 1000 different denominations, whom no doubt also follow the words of "christ" and you have the hubris to claim your particular interpretation is the real one.

    You are obviously one high and mighty bastard to think in that manner.

  • @Eye2EyeIIIV so plz tell me how do I discern puppets of satan from true belivers. I dont see any difference :D

  • I shall reveal the secret.....You can tell the puppets of Satan by anyone who calls themselves Christian....

    True Believers are the one who worship the Flying Spaghetti Monster

  • @Proudtobeacommie hmm "puppets of satan" sounds like a good name for death metal band.

  • Yes, yes it does.

    Servants of the Noodle doesn't sound too bad either :P

  • I do see you're being sarcastic, but the honest answer is prayer...try it.

  • To say that evolution is "observable as gravity" is LUDICROUS. Experiments & observations are done all over the world on it, and it is actually scientific -- people always get the same results! The chair my body is sitting on right now, is being held down by gravity. But you don't see that in evolution, you have to IMAGINE it. By definition, Science is things we can observe, and study, and test, and demonstrate. Evolution is only could have, might have, hope so.

  • Only because of your ignorance.

    Callaghan, C. A. 1987. Budd, A. F. and B. D. Mishler. 1990. Boraas, M. E. 1983 Dobzhansky, Th., and O. Pavlovsky, 1971 Stanley, S., 1979

    Those are all instances of peer reviewed, observed instances of speciations.

  • People, like you, don't know what "ignorance" is anymore, and you are destroying the real meaning and appliance for that word.

    PS: Your position proves exactly my point "evolutionism (there is no G-d - Man is incharge) is the foundational philosophy for Communism.

  • I know exactly what ignorance is. You are living proof of what ignorance is.

    Proof of this? you used the word 'evolutionism' No such word.

    No, the foundational philosophy of Communism is that there is a struggle between the Working Class and the Capitalist class, and that to achieve a greater society, the means of Production should be owned by the people.

    Whether there is not good is neither here nor there to Communism.

    You are as much of a liar as Hovind is.

  • sorry? "peer reviewed, observed instances of {WHAT!}?"

    Despite BELIEF (pity-ous hope) that evolution is true...JUST SO YOU CAN **FEEL** "FREE" the simple fact is that one day you'll be judged, my friend. Christians are merely trying to save you from the repercussions of your actions, and anyone or thing that tells you otherwise is a lie straight from the adversary. Jesus is waiting for you to accept HIM, worry not of being accepted yourself.

  • Erm no! Evolution = A mountain of peer reviewed evidence that has stood up to constant scrutiny for 150 years, but gains momentum with new evidence being unearthed daily...If you deny it then you must also deny every shred of knowledge that has been attained the same way...ie everything known about the universe. Just because you don't understand it, or refuse to, it's not going to go away....Facts have a habit of coming back round....All you have is faith as a placebo that makes you feel better

  • @rogan71 "Erm"

    That's an awful lot of anger for someone who has nothing to loose -- if your worldview is correct. Where is this anger coming from?

    I Suppose you'll say something like, "think o' the chilen!: which is the only thing evolutionists ever say in protest to Creation science. U realize that isn't even compatible with the very BASIS of evolutionary theory: survival of the fittest? If they aren't 'fit enough' (inteligent, whatev) 2 think like u, do u stil want them in your genepool?

  • Where did you get anger from? I'm not angry if people are ignorant, I'm just sorry for them.

    As for the rest of your comment, I can't make any sense of it!

    What are you talking about?

  • I'm saying that evolutionists are always INCONSISTENT with their own proposed world-view

  • EVOLUTION ISN'T A WORLD VIEW! Any more than understanding physics is a world view....It isnt a philosophy. Evolution is a fact, not an opinion. It has nothing to do with God...It is simply is observable science. Your points about social darwinism have got nothing to do with it, and your actual understanding of evolution is on the level of a 5 year old - with some creationist chestnuts thrown in to make your argument seem credible...

  • Creationists always try and find fault in what they don't understand about scientific methods...Then take random pieces of scripture and use the same science they were disputing to prove how scripture proves something to be scientifically accurate....You can't have it both ways. If you don't believe in science then scripture cannot be proven scientifically.

  • You don't 'believe' in evolution...You except it on the evidence, or not...But not understanding the evidence is inexcusable. You are willfully ignoring of facts and clear data from every known science that exists, and concentrating on the tiny parts of it that are yet unknown to science...This is a clear case of seeing what you want and ignoring what you don't want to know....I took the time to read the Quran, but you won't take any time to learn anything beyond your very limited knowledge.

  • As I'm sure you can read, then you do not need me to repeat what they are peer reviewed instances of.

    I don't believe in Evolution, I merely accept that it is the most accurate and factual scientific theory.

    Implied threats of hell are a weak argument.

    If I am ever judged, it will be by those people who know Me and based on My actions, not on my beliefs.

  • The only "evolution" that has ever been observed in history has only been VARIATIONS within the kinds. Sure variations happen, BUT they have limits. The Darwinist, by the way, does not WANT to admit that there are any limits and that's where the problem comes in.

  • So, you've basically just admitted Evolution occurs. Congratulations, your scientific knowledge advances a few decades...you are still way behind the rest of the world.

    Erm....Please define what a 'kind' is

    also. "Darwinists" do admit there is limitations. that's why they have never looked for a Crocoduck.

  • Please don't give it a fancy name - it's STILL a dog - it just LOOKS different.

  • What the fuck are you talking about?

  • speciation/variation is NOT the same as molecules-to-man evolution. There has NEVER been even one observed instance of an animal becoming an ENTIRELY seperate GENUS than that of its' biological parents...THAT'S where Creationists' draw the line

  • CONT:

    Evolution branches out as it goes down so after time nothing is following a linear line...Even us. Evolution is evident in our own bodies, as with the vetsigial organs of millions of different creatures, like flightless birds of blind fish with eyes....I don't see how the logic and proof for this can escape you, but thinking a billion varieties of speciation occurred after Noahs flood makes sense? In a few thousand years? That's not even stupid....You not even trying!

  • So did Eric do like daddy and get himself a fake diploma so he could call himself a scientist?

    Eric Hovind is full of laughs. He and his father are both the epitome of creationist stupidity.

  • At first, I thougt "creation in common sense" was a joke, because he used the word "kind" without even remotely saying what "kind" is, and then he confirmed evolution when he tried to disproove it...

  • Hilarious. They wouldn't dare get a scientist on this show. Any evidence would destroy them.

  • Comment removed

  • You sir are full of win. I am glad someone is debunking that crap.

  • Can you call me a big banger aswell please? it would make me feel really good.

  • Gravity-ist... LOL

  • Hey what does "antybu" mean anyways?

  • first two letters of my first, middle, and last name put together

  • Hmm, lemme guess.

    Anthony Tyberius Buford! :)

  • Not even close.

  • Antonio Tyfus Buchanan... nvm, I'll stop.

  • Even when it was possible to grab 2 of all "kinds" together within 4400 years, in the end of that period they probably had to start all over again. Most of these animals would allready be dead, eaten by other animals before they got the chance to reproduce, died for other reasons since they're probably taken out of their natural enviroment. Don't even start on how to get all the insects together...what a hell. Creationists, ye gotta love 'm.

  • Sort of irrelevant to your point, but I believe Huntington's disease is primarily inherited, as it is autosomal dominant. I'm sure some independent mutations occur because it is attached to a single gene, but I doubt it approaches the magnitude of the inherited trait.

    Correct me if I'm wrong.

  • that elephant picture is FREAKY!

    Why is it that common sense is so rare?

  • Hilarious how the idea of things evolving over billions years is preposterous, but the idea that things could evolve over 4400 years, NOW THAT IS POSSIBLE. I enjoyed the point they made about selective breeding, as if humans guiding the selections takes the same time as it does in nature.

  • Is this Kent Hovind's son?

  • Yes.

  • yes

  • What happened to the "COMMON SENSE" as the title of this video.

  • Dude, I subscribe to your vids and everything, but you sound like you are whispering in the microphone in the library or something. please fix this.

    If you need help you can ask me.

    zero@zerospeaksDOTcom

    zerospeaksDOTcom

  • Check if the more recent vids are any better. If you still think they're too low, let me know.

    Thanks for the constructive criticism. I do honestly appreciate it.

  • Sounds like they admitted evolution does take place, but they relabeled it "variation" to save face.

    The lizards they are referring to are called Italian wall lizards. In 35 years on that island, they evolved a cecal valve that allowed them to digest vegetation better.

  • Interesting. I had never heard of those lizards before this video (after all, those guys do use real scientific stories - they just distort them for their own purposes).

  • Normally, the response is "Yes. but they're still lizards!"

  • Epic Win.

  • Haha, love it. I've never seen creationists argue in favour of evolution. But I guess they have to argue for some kind of evolutionary explosion dwarfing the cambrian one to keep their daffy noah's ark nonsense.

    "If they can do that in 35 years, imagine what they can do with 4400".

    Now imagine 4000000000...

  • I always find it odd when somebody tries to use science to prove the bible. I just think, "there's a story about a guy living inside a fish for 3 days! Don't even bother with the science of that."

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more