The naturalistic explanation for life is evolution. The non-naturalistic explanation is that we deal with a deceptive creator that want us to believe evolution happen. There exist no third explanation.
@jomen112 Jomen I think I would enjoy a little debate with you. I think you'd be surprised at how rational I am for a 'creationist'. I have actually researched several different religions to try to see things from all sides. I find the Pagan beliefs most intriguing, Mormons to be the most absurd and bizarre. Masons are another story all together. Any ways I'd enjoy a private conversation if you'd like.
@Caravandrums "watch hovind debate smarter people that don't constantly interrupt and avoid logical points" and "the grad student cant think for himself"
@llh413 yea but it by no means show a Christian God is real, or a Catholic God, or Allah, or one of the hundreds of Asian deities mentioned by Asian religions. All this show, at best, is that there may be a creator in the past that is eternal, but this creator could very well be a race of super-intelligent aliens who learn to master time travel (hence not affected by time). Anything is possible.
@llh413 "God is not in this universe, so time doesn't affect him. He doesn't have a beginning or an end."
Congratulation! Weather or not you realize it, you have just proven to yourself that god does not exists.
However, weather a god exists or not has no bearing on the fact that evolution has occurred. There exists no other naturalistic explanation for the evidence. The non-naturalistic explanation is that we deal with a deceptive creator that want us to believe evolution happen.
Anyway, weather or not I get your point, the reason people "bitch about who created god" is: if a creator can be self sufficient then it follows that a universe also can be self sufficient because if a universe can't be then a god can't be it either. That is why. Did that make sense to you?
intelligent educated people taliking to ignorant morons with the IQ of shoelaces- facepalm! when will these morons get it? there is no debate you dont get a choice wheteher not you accept facts! its like creationists are trying to argue that 2+2=5- it doesnt it and never will- 2+2 will always equal 4 and no amount of argueing can change it! evolution is a proven fact- deal with it!
@dancingnancy09 "its like [...] trying to argue that 2+2=5- it doesnt it and never will"
Actually your are only right in a restricted sense here and that is when talking about scalar numbers. It is pretty easy to show with, for instance, vector algebra how 2+2=5. But then again, 2 and 5 are not vectors and you (obvious) refer to scalar numbers. However with the theory of evolution creationist seams to be convinced that such double interpretation exists while in fact it does not.
No not clever, just educated. ;-) Besides that 1) flattering is not a valid argument :-) , and 2) I do agree fully with you (besides the part of ad hominem) so I have not missed your point I just wanted to extend your analogy a bit. Another example, excepts vector algebra, is adding stacks of sand: no matter how you add they always ends up to one. Which in an analogy can be taken as; no matter how you look at it, it will always conclude evolution in the end. :-)
@jomen112 yes I can see that- you are clearly very well educated- and also obviously very clever-and I could see that you were agreeing with me- however-you did miss point as I wasn't using an algebraic equation as a metaphor I was using a simple arithmatical sum as a metaphor- and as impressed as I am-and I am-I'm not really interested in your extensive and impressive knowledge of mathematics in relation to my anaolgy-nor am I intereted in discussing it you- thanks.
@preadator413 "God is awesome, it's sad people like Martin haven't been exposed to his glory."
Even if it is true that god is awesome, that does not imply in any way, or sense, that evolution did not take place. Besides that you, or me or anybody else here, do not know if Martin believe in a god or not. A belief in a god or a creator of the universe is not mutual exclusive with accepting evolution as a fact. Most religious people have no problem to merge these two concept as one.
I ve heard all this evolution crap in USSR. The special trained KGB forces were conducting the indoctrination mission - if you disagree, they (KGB) knew how to break your neck.
For 80 years USSR was officially pushing evolution on people's brains. At the end of 90s people got fed up with this nonsense. Millions went back to the churches, synagogs.
@narniafreak129 Whether it be the KGB or the Spanish Inquisition, forcing ideas upon people does not work in any meaningful way. Religion has throughout history been used to control and coerce populations through fear.... behave in the way we tell you or you'll burn in hell!! I guess the KGB just brought the pain and torture into this life time. It is possibly worth noting that many religious folk have no problem what so ever with the theory of evolution.
"this nonsense" gives you, and everyone else, medical treatments and a possibility to save your life when your time comes... god nor prayers wont help you - we know this because we have2 measured the effectiveness of prayers and they don't do better than chance. However medical science based on "this nonsense" do far better than chance.
The caller's premise is that there was no common designer - so of course he he'll keep hanging on to his bias no matter how Ken tries to help him see through tha madness of macro-evolutiuon . The self brainwashed caller keeps pointing to the similarities in ancestry - Ken is right to use examples of machinery etc - just because organisms reproduce dosen't mean the creator didn't infuse the DNA with the necessary programming to make them reproduce until they come to a dead end like the mule.
"no matter how Ken tries to help him see through tha madness of macro-evolutiuon"
a) Kent is a liar and fool. His degrees are unacredited, his arguments are based on deliberate falsehoods, and he is currently in jail for fraud (Felony level deception)
b) Macro-Evolution in 1 generation has been observed Donkey + Horse = Mule 62 Chromosomes + 64 Chromosomes = 63 Chromosomes
@whiteliketar It's not a premise. He's a student studying biological science. The science gives us evidence that living things evolve over time. You are aware that this has been proven with flies in a laboratory?
@whiteliketar "Ken is right to use examples of machinery"
No, Ken can not when it comes to evolution because as explain by martin machinery does not reproduce and can not *naturally* form *unique* sets.
"he he'll keep hanging on to his bias"
of course he will... all evidence points towards such "bias", unlike Ken we do not try to interpret the fact in term of our believes but let the fact form our believes. Do you see the difference in this and does such view make sense to you?
@jomen112 - ha ha - an atheist tries to worm his way into the lie that micro-evolution is macro-evolution - differnt dogs, different cats ,differnt birds - that's it its all around you/- Hovind is right jumping to macro is just the atheist imagination gone wild.
@whiteliketar I asked you a simple question but you failed, intentionally or not, to answer it in a straight forward manner. I take your answer as that you are aware of that the theory of evolution makes no distinction between the two, they are the same, and your reason to reject this is because *you* can not imagine how this can happen. Imo, that is a quite poor reason to reject anything at all.
@jomen112 - your beloved theory can't even get off the ground to begin with? should i say more? atheist imagination is your problem to resolve - sorry
@whiteliketar "your beloved theory can't even get off the ground to begin with? should i say more? atheist imagination is your problem to resolve - sorry"
Why do you have such a problem with evolution? Is you faith is so weak it needs evolution to be false -that is you somehow need evidence for good existence- in order to believe in good? Then you faith is very weak even hypocritical. A believer does not need evidence, nor deny them even if they contradicts god existence, in order to believe.
@whiteliketar "The caller's premise is that there was no common designer"
No it wasn't. No such assumption is made, or even needed, to come to the conclusion that evolution took place. Evolution follows, as a consequence, from the simple fact that living beings clusters into unique sets - and this regardless on what or how one measure it - they all give the same clustered sets. That is independent, and multiple, lines of evidence says the same very same things: evolution took place as a fact.
@whiteliketar "The self brainwashed caller keeps pointing to the similarities in ancestry"
Martin explain it NOT about similarities. Obvious you have not even cared to try to understand Martins argument. As it is now you only show a grave ignorance about the topic as you, evidently, do not, or do not want to, understand why and how evolution has been determined to taken place. Evolution is a fact and it can be proven. You can believe whatever you like but that does not make you right in anyway.
@whiteliketar "give me one example as i indicated below."
The point is; I don not have to.
It is all out there in the literature and free for anyone to find out. If you have read it, which I will grant you to have, then it leads me to believe you do not accept the evidence. Which is fine with me, but then be honest and say so. However you only claims things facts are not fact. Claims are not evidence. You have to show why you are right otherwise non will take you seriously.
@whiteliketar "just because organisms reproduce dosen't mean the creator didn't infuse the DNA with the necessary programming to make them reproduce until they come to a dead end like the mule."
That is true, but then again that something you just made up to explain an creator. If you can not show it then you do not know it.
But we can show IF life forms clusters of non overlapping unique sets THEN it that is the proof that evolution have taken place. Weather you accept it is another question.
@jomen112 - you have no idea what you are talking about - being specific and expert in explaining micro-changes dosen't get to you to where your imagiantion wants to take you. Hoving is right on - the student is brainwashed - sorry
@whiteliketar "you have no idea what you are talking about"
It goes with out saying that good manner includes to be able to respectfully disagree with others as bad manners works against yourself when declaring somebody ignorant with no support to back it up with, in particular when you poses as knowing better than virtual any expert in the field in question, this with out having show any credentials what soever on your side."
@jomen112 oh don't be a patsy - aan atheist talking about good manners is akin to a savage giving a lecture on the travails of cannibalism - people with more degrees than a thermometer kill, lie and steal every day and they are as infallible as anyone else - so put that in your pipe and smoke it - where is just 1 example of a modern day creature with plain macro -transition occuring in plain sight for all to see - let me guess. the changes are so small and u need another billion years
@whiteliketar "an atheist talking about good manners is akin to a savage giving a lecture on the travails of cannibalism - people with more degrees than a thermometer kill, lie and steal every day and they are as infallible as anyone else"
So not only do you spit on respect toward other human beings but now you also accuse me for being a liar, thief, murder and cannibal, and for what reason? Only because I disagree with you. I can only pity you...
@jomen112 i am not sure i want your pity - i just want you to come up with a modern day example of a creature in transition plain and simple. surely you have had your billions of years to find one example ....just one....please. lol that's what happens to atheist fairy tales - it all crumbles under proper scientific scrutiny ...the term empirical gives you nightmares ...dosen't it? the madness of atheism continues in full stride. lol
@whiteliketar "just want you to come up with a modern day example of a creature in transition plain and simple"
Why are do you want to switch topic from hierarchical clustering to transitional forms? What does that has to do with hierarchical clustering? But to answer your question: according to the theory of evolution every single living being that has lived, is living, and ever will live is a transitional form. Weather or not you accept this is completely irrelevant. Its a fact.
@jomen112 ha ha - attempting to solve the Gordian knot with the sword of Alexander wont help you on this one - no matter how you repeat like a parrot that macro is true and all around you. God's signature is on DNA - not your beloved chance plus billions of years - if is a fact show me a 'transitional ' where we can clearly observe this fantastic creature - you have had your billions of years - can't find one - can you?
@whiteliketar "explaining micro-changes dosen't get to you to where your imagiantion wants to take you"
Why would anyone need to talk about micro-evolution to prove evolution as a fact? The naturalistic mechanisms that drives evolution -as opposed to "god drives it magically"- is a separate issue from the fact that evolution has occurred - micro-evolutions has nothing to do with the fact that evolution have happen. It only explains how evolution happen, not that it did.
@jomen112 you ares till fumbling around in the Micro gets to macro fairy tale world of the atheist. you still are confusing self with your non-sequitur statments and they are coming faster by the second. Micro and variations within kinds have occured - just as the good book says. sorry
@whiteliketar "you ares till fumbling around in the Micro gets to macro fairy tale
world of the atheist"
I do not know if you do not want to, refuse to, or cant understand. I just informed you that HOW evolution progress is an entire separate issue from the fact that evolution HAS occurred - they are a independently of each other. Darwin proved evolution HAS happen 150 years ago. Since then we be trying to figure out HOW that was possible. We now KNOW the answer; micro evolution.
@jomen112 ha ha - the atheist biology professor has done a number on you ...hasn't he? trying to twist and bend the term micro evolution to suit your decimated logic will only suffice for brianwashed atheist mind. you don't even understand your own arguments or somehow you have got someone to hihack the term micro-evolution and mold it into your owm fertile extrapolation. i keep asking for a modern day example of a 'transitional'. can't find one? ....not enough time ....aaaawwwww
@whiteliketar "the atheist biology professor has done a number on you ...hasn't he?"
In fact no. I have research the data myself, that is investigated the facts, and came to the conclusion that it is a fact that evolution has occurred.
"you don't even understand your own arguments or somehow you have got someone to hihack the term micro-evolution and mold it into your owm fertile extrapolation."
If you mean I do not know the definitions you use for these words then that is true
@jomen112 - really? you have your own little experiment where you can see natural selection acting on a genetic mutation. Wow ! that's amazing ...why don't you publish this in science journals where we can oberve this new data? lol cats still produce cats and dogs - dogs - try some radiation on fruit flies and see what 'new species' you get. you poor brainwashed atheist. Pity is the only emotion that one can have for this type of brainwashing - this is bad...real bad.
@whiteliketar um...if you ever see a cat producing a non-cat that is observable within a human lifespan..let me know, that's proof AGAINST evolution, not FOR it. Your lack of understanding in evolution theory is shocking..you are demanding to see something that is actually against what evolution theory states. Please at least learn what you are criticizing before criticizing it. Same thing with a monkey: if you ever see a monkey giving birth to a human, that's proof AGAINST evolution.
@Casshyr - here we go again - overlaying micro-changes with the imagination of macro-madness whilst hiding behind time-I AM GOING TO ASK YOU ONE LAST TIME - showm me one ' transitional ' with its billions of years behind it where we can visible changes going on - I am giving you the benefit of time - take your billions of years and find one creature where we can clearly see these changes - quit hiding behind behind normal species and ducking behind time.
@whiteliketar Sure: example: Archaeopteryx lithographica. And I'm also going to give you ONE AST TIME to stop quoting from creationists articles. ONLY INFORMATION FROM PEER-REVIEW ACADEMIC JOURNALS count as scientific information. Just because Hovind put a contrary statement on his creationist blog that doesn't make it science. It has to be PEER-REVIEWED. Quit hiding behind creationists sites.
@whiteliketar "rying to twist and bend the term micro evolution to suit your decimated logic will only suffice for brianwashed atheist mind."
Do you mind to please answer the following simple question:
Do you concede that weather someone is dead IS A FACT and do you concede that HOW someone died is a complete different issue separated from the fact that some has died as a fact?
@whiteliketar "you still are confusing self with your non-sequitur statments and they are coming faster by the second. Micro and variations within kinds have occured - just as the good book says. sorry "
You only makes claims. Making a claim does not make you right or make facts go away.
Knowing is showing, so I will ask you to show the following simple things:
@whiteliketar "just because organisms reproduce dosen't mean the creator didn't infuse the DNA with the necessary programming to make them reproduce until they come to a dead end like the mule."
To further clarify what I said before. We already know how this works: we call it reproduction and genetics describes the mechanisms behind it. We have no evidence that DNA is magical infused in living things and create new "kinds". Again you claim things with no evidence to support them.
"This is where an understanding of evolution comes in. Unfortunately' it's tricky for those of us who are not scientists." Okay so you're calling everyone who is not a scientist or is not an evolutionist dumb? You should be banned from Youtube kid.
@RushAnthem69 "so you're calling everyone who is not a scientist or is not an evolutionist dumb?"
The theory of evolution is not a easy thing to grasp, but a subject for academical studies, it is a quite complex theory that involves advance mathematical models which explains a whole range of phenomena we observe in living system that otherwise would remain a mystery for us. To be humble is not an offense to anyone's intellect but to show appreciation towards real expert knowledge.
Lol DarwinsLobster is a damn tool, totally siding with the evolutionist, while Kent is not perfect. The evolutionist couldn't name where a platypus came from, 'a mammal' which mammal? Lol Dragonflys and the Platypus having a common ancestor, PUH-LEASE.
@RushAnthem69 "The evolutionist couldn't name where a platypus came from, 'a mammal' which mammal?"
Did you also take notice that Martin said we have not found a fossil example of the evolutionary line of Platypus and thus can not tell?
Or would you rather have Martin make up something else than mammal just in order to be able to produce an answer or can you accept the fact that sometime we must say "we don't know" because we do not have any facts to support our claims with?
@RushAnthem69 "Dragonflys and the Platypus having a common ancestor, PUH-LEASE."
I do understand why Kent Howind do not believe this to be the case but do YOU understand why Martin (yes, the "evolutionist" has a name and that is Martin) believe this to be the case?
(Note: you may not realize it but the hidden purpose to call people "evolutionist" is to depersonalize, dehumanize and demonize people. This is a classical trick and every time you use this word you are a tool.)
There are some people, and some claims, so far divorced from reality that 'engaging' with them as if they were legitimate points of view is actually damaging to society, as such engagement legitimizes those points of view as topics for discussion.
Say a presentation on 'Did the Holocaust Happen?' with Holocaust deniers presenting their arguments; The Holocaust occurred but just presenting the opposing arguments will convince a great many people that a genuine historical controversy exists.
@VideoAudioDisco09 "such engagement legitimizes those points of view as topics for discussion"
In a way I tend to agree with you, but not fully.
This is my line of thoughts; there are kids out there that lives in close communities in where the only opinion they have access to is that from the village "elders" - and they all think the same. However they may have access to internet and with that they may come in contact with opinions that may help them break lose from dogmas.
I have also said before that it is imperritive these gits are debunked publically, for no other purpose than to allow observers from the "I am an idiot too lobby" to have a fair chance to get the truth and ask the questions. It seems from reading deconversion stories the first step is to seek the truth and research scientific claims.
However they should be entertained with due respect as ridiculous imbiciles.
Hovind has practiced throughout the entirety of his career: Lazy acts of demagogic hucksterism and intellectual dishonesty. He has indulged in self delusion that he shamefully projects with unsupportable confidence to the gulible.
@MrRafaelblock "Sometimes it's hard to tell if Kent is trying to convince the caller or himself...."
Indeed our brains sometime plays trick with our self. I believe, but sure I can not be, that Kent honestly believes in what he says. However I also noticed to what me sounded like nervous laughter from Kent during the show and that he stops following a thread of argument as he seams to understand what he says at that moment does not hold. Cognitive dissonance is stressful indeed.
The definition of science is "knowledge attained through study or practice," or "knowledge covering general truths of the operation of general laws, esp. as obtained and tested through scientific method [and] concerned with the physical world."
The theory of evolution does not fit in the definition of science,it is rather developing hypothesis without any physical evidence.
@narniafreak129 "The theory of evolution does not fit in the definition of science,it is rather developing hypothesis without any physical evidence."
In order to know how you came to that conclusion we would also need to know how you define "The theory of evolution". Would you mind to tell that as well?
Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!
@narniafreak129 "Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!"
This is called a mantra, and we know by repeating something many time enough you can make anyone start believe in whatever. Also repeating yourself is a sign of either immaturity or low IQ or trolling, it is not conclusive but indicative. What is your case?
@Stevoukos It is possible that Kent is just willfully dishonest, like he was being willfully dishonest about paying taxes. He thinks he is a smooth talker who can make money by ripping people off. It is important to disprove such people to reveal them for the fakes they are.
@MunkyDrag0n "He thinks he is a smooth talker who can make money by ripping people off."
He is (was;-) in fact a smooth talker, because he did indeed mange to rip a lot of money from people (and he is funny to listen to as well) but his big mistake was to try to rip the government of tax and that he could not smooth talk himself out of. ;-)
What does one expect from Hovind. He is really just a High School graduate.
Hovind has a Bachelor of Religious Education from NON-ACCREDITED Midwestern Baptist College and Master's degree and PhD in Christian Education through correspondence from the NON-ACCREDITED Patriot University.
He should be debating High School students and not graduate student with ad hominem arguments.
Does anyone know where Kent Hovind taught High School as he is not qualified due to non accredited "diplomas"
@CarajilloDulce There are minimum requirements for a doctorate, no matter what school you're in. The school does not hand out the diplomas, the government does through the school.
@TheLightedDarkness The Patriot Bible University is totally unaccredited and therefore has absolutely nothing to do with the US government or any accreditation agency. You are right... for a proper doctorate there are minimum requirements, none of which Hovind managed. Read his dissertation.... it's a joke and contains absolutely no original research which is one of the things for which a doctorate is awarded. He's a fundamentalist preacher with a rather poor understanding of science.
@ahhhhjjjj Similarities does not show common ancestry, you don't know if a fossil had any kids at all, and therefore you cannot come down to such a conclusion that they came from another animal with those similarities
@TheOmegaJuice Meanwhile he has a Ph.D in Education and taught Science for 15 years, how about you?
@TheLightedDarkness Kents so called doctorate was issued by the Patriot Bible college and awarded for a dissertation citing 16 chapters but containing only 4, with no TOC, full of spelling mistakes, and containing absolutely no original research. He taught Intelligent Design.... scripture based Young Earth Evangelical Christian Fundamentalist theory in private baptist schools, and in 1 school he set up himself... religion, not science. Hovind is a preacher, not a science teacher.
@Carajillodulce. Even if there is no God. Which I believe there is. The evolution theory still has too much evidence against it. Your eyes refuse to look at it.
@acolony22 I am happy to examine, as I have done, the evidence against the theory of evolution. After all it's exactly that, a theory, and can be altered or replaced if a better and more complete theory is developed. Unfortunately you can't say the same thing about your scripture based religious fundamentalism.
@Carajillodulce. Because they are all taught the same stuff. Nobody ever teaches the things that threaten what their teaching. It's moronic. The vast majority of people believed the sun rotated around the earth. They were wrong. Majority is no evidence. It just shows how deep evolution has put it's claws. Until you look at the evidence instead of ignoring you will never fade in your theory. Study the ancient astronaut theory. Half of their stuff disproves evolution.
@acolony22 Well actually they do study religious theory.... in religious education class. All the info is out there to be studied. You are simply saying that all these geologists & scientists, or at least the vast majority, are unable to think for themselves; which is pretty rich coming from a religious fundamentalist. Take a look at all the Christian (& those of other religious persuasions) involved in those research fields who's beliefs do not find contradiction with the theory of evolution.
@acolony22 The only reason you attack the theory of evolution is because the time scales involved mean that your sect's YEEC fundamentalist doctrine cannot be true. The theory of evolution does not exclude a creator which is why the majority of Christians, Catholics, & adherents to other religions have no problem with it. The YEEC fundamentalist world view is however constrained by it's interpretation of scripture, & anything running contra to that must therefore be wrong regardless of evidence.
@acolony22 you state 'Study the ancient astronaut theory. Half of their stuff disproves evolution.'. If that was true the person who discovered that would win the noble peace prize and would be on the cover of every newspaper in the world. You're talking nonsense.
@Carajillodulce. I see. Every where I get my evidence is false and every where you get it is true. One good argument. I guess I can't beat that. So your saying every evolutionists I listen to is a liar or dumb? You sound like the mainstream media. Maybe you should run for president. You can be just as good as wonderful Obama. People, please make sure you leave good comments. You don't wanna seem stupid do you?
@acolony22 Well, if your so called evidence is so convincing then why do the vast majority of those people who have studied and researched, or are currently studying and researching geology, biology, paleontology, and other related disciplines not agree with you that dinosaurs and man coexisted? Why are there no fossilized remains of humans found in the same strata as those of dinosaurs? Surely there should be at least a few fossilized human bones found alongside those of the dinosaurs.
@Carajillodulce. The difference between me and you is that I know both sides. I grew up in the church. I've read the Bible plenty of times. I've watched countless hours of documentaries pertaining to evolution. I've studied it. I'm currently reading Why Evolution Is True by Jerry A. Coyne. The guy is really brilliant. Problem is he smashes the intelligent design but doesn't know what he's talking about. Every evidence he gives can be turned for creation.
@acolony22 Well having studied comparative religion and also having grown up in the Christian faith, and therefore obviously having read the bible I have a fair idea of what I'm talking about. There is plenty of evidence to show that the human footprints at Glen Rose are fakes but if you want to clutch at straws in order to maintain your belief that dinosaurs played along with humans so be it. You still can't find any real evidence that they lived together. Just religious fundamentalist nonsense
@Carajillodulce. So the fact that I just watched a special on the glen rose footprints on the history channel was a lie? Even though their were 6 evolutionists saying they were real. And one of the guys was there when they flipped massive limestone rocks and found the same stretch of footprints continuing a hoax? Haha. You truly do walk with and talk with your eyes closed and your ears shut don't you?
@acolony22 Watching documentaries is not really that reliable as a form of research I watched one in which Ron Wyatt claimed to have found the remains of Noah's Ark in Turkey. After further investigation it became clear that the whole story was a fabrication created by Wyatt and his YEEC fundamentalist friends.
@Carajillodulce. Who may I ask has carried out worse crimes that was a Christian? Maybe the Catholic church but any real Christian knows that the catholic church is not a real religion of God. So what Christians have killed more then ten million people? Please, tell me. You can't because your lying. That's disgusting. Your hate for God makes you become dishonest.
If there is no God then there is no laws. Seriously, if evolution is true then who gets to be the one who says what's wrong or right? Adolf Hitler was a huge follower of charles darwin (as was Joseph Stalin). These people did a lot of what they did because they thought there was no consequence for their actions. Sadly, they would be right according to evolutionists.
@acolony22 What, so you can't think for yourself and therefore need some imaginary "Sky Daddy" to keep you on the straight and narrow? Get a grip and stop whining about Hitler and Stalin.... far worse crimes have been carried out in the name of God than without it.
@Carajillodulce. Really? So fossilized footprints isn't enough? Must have fossilized remains? Okay, so every fossilized footprint must be thrown away. Like I said, just because you ignore something doesn't mean it's not there. Look at ALL the facts. I'm not asking anyone to look at the Creationists theory. I'm only asking you to question your own.
@acolony22 If man and dinosaurs lived together then where are the fossilized remains to show this? If one does "look at all the facts" one sees that the fossil record is not a scam, that dating techniques do not produce nonsense readings as they would if they didn't work, and that the geological column clearly shows layers of deposits which could not possibly have been laid down in such a way 4000 years ago by some imaginary biblical world flood.
Simply put, it can't explain these oddities. Instead evolutionists just ignore them hoping they go away, but us people with common sense realize the faults in evolution. Just because you ignore something doesn't mean it's not there. Quit listening to only evolutionists and do the research your self and you will see that it makes no sense, and in it's entirety, is completely unscientific.
@videoaudiodisco09. Please, the fossil record is a scam. What about the spheres that have etched lines in them found in 2.5 million old rock layer? Or the human footprints found next to dinosaur footprints in glen rose, Texas? Those TWO examples kill the evolutionary theory. Dinosaurs supposedly died millions of years before humans yet they are found together. How does the evolution theory explain these?
@videoaudiodisco09. Please, the fossil record is a scam. What about the spheres that have etched lines in them found in 2.5 million old rock layer? Or the human footprints found next to dinosaur footprints in glen rose, Texas? Those TWO examples kill the evolutionary theory. Dinosaurs supposedly died millions of years before humans yet they are found together. How does the evolution theory explain these?
@acolony22 Where have human and dinosaur remains been found together? If they lived together then they died together so their fossilized remains should be found together.
@acolony22 In your trips to the creation museum (sic) or to creationist websites I think you may have missed the fact that the Glen Rose human footprints were fakes. The family of George Adams admitted that they were a hoax created by their sculptor grandfather to boost the family's income. The other tracks were shown to be those of metatarsal dinosaurs. Now.. those fossilized remains of humans and dinosaurs that would clearly show how they lived (and according to creationists) played together?
@gmn545. I will check out the video. One thing is you didn't actually answer my question about the "big bang". I know what the "big bang" is. I want to know how two totally different things could makes themselves spontaneously.
@katnils. I will now destroy the "big bang" theory. The "big bang" is supposedly space-time rapidly expanding to make our universe. Then scientist tell us space-time was most likely made during the big bang. Okay? Now where's the problem here? So I'm supposed to believe that space-time expanding made the "big bang" but at the same time the "big bang" made space-time?
@katnils. First off the pope is not a real Christian nor does he even believe in God. The catholic church used to crucify Christians also. As well they gave money to Nazi regime. Evolution is dumb. Give me one or more examples that prove evolution. It's man greatest failure. Seriously give me one thing that proves evolution.
@acolony22 "nor does he even believe in God" You're saying the pope is an atheist? "The Catholic church used to crucify Christians also" Tortured, imprisoned & killed, yes...crucified? Who? "gave money to Nazi regime" Huh? They signed concordats, pressured by the surge of totalitarianism, yet you failed to mention the Vatican issued two encyclicals - Non Abbiamo Bisogno (1931) & Mit Brennender Sorge (1937) - AGAINST Hitler & Mussolini. "one thing that proves evolution" Endogenous retroviruses.
@acolony22 And for a good vid showing how endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) are solid evidence for evolution:
youtube. com / watch?v=TUxLR9hdorI
(remove spaces)
The big-bang - an expansion of spacetime from a point of singularity - is the initial cause of our universe. All evidence points towards it (e.g. Hubble's Law; cosmic microwave background radiation; general relativity). As to what caused the big-bang itself, that's currently unknown.
One thing that proves evolution. Have you been living in a closet?
The Evidence supports the Theory. For the last 150 years the experiments and observations have added to our knowledge and fit hand in glove with the Theory. Added to ths is the fossil record which has also grown at a great rate, more recently DNA has been the icing on the cake. It is one of the best evidenced theories in science. Much debate about speed and process but no serious doubts about the theory.
I think you will find that, the earth is not flat, nor the ceter of the universe and it moves.
More to the point religion will in the future be regaurded as the greatest con that man created and took so long to grow out of as a species. It has served a usful purpose in social cohesion and charity coordination but has also created the greatest evil and hinderance to advancment. Phase of development or mental disorded I am not sure but certainly a break with reality.
Hovind what a simpleton and con. He is a gifted orator and to the uniformed can sound plausable, particularly when as they say you preach to the converted. He can explain his side in few words, like anyone can explain the bible CRAP. However his opposition has to try to condence a staggering quantity of experiment, observation, validations and proofs, which can make them look cumbersome or even unsure but thats the beauty of have the facts and been right.
Hoving last of the great comedians, his stand up comody show is very funny, ioften show my friends clips and we have a great laugh. He really reminds me of the Irak minister of information Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf "There are no American Tanks in Bagdad" while one drove past in the back of shot.
Thats Hovind and co hanging on to ancient myths while science cruises past in the background.
-Does he believe his own crap? probably not, but it pays.
@Youngmurderer71 Yeh that must be a major problem for him that biologists can´t agree whether to classify his finger as a limb or a hammer. I wonder what he is doing with his finger to have this unique problem? Is this finger perhaps what he use to beat himself back to ignorance with whenever he is attacked by evidence and rational thoughts?
The atheists comments on here are like a train wreck, part of me is sad that parts of the human race are so so so ignorant, the other part cant stop coming back to see what new ignorance they have posted.
With so much public funds, taxpayers money went to prove evolutionism and there still no single credible theory? How much more public has to pay to these moronic scientists? They should be sued for treason of public funds.
@narniafreak129 seriously??? you havent heard or seen any of the evidence? have you been living under a rock?1 oh, wait- if you had, then you wouldve probably seen some evidence! lol brainwashed theist.....
@guineapiggyman what do you call evidence? It is clear that it is political issue, and has nothing to do with science, some people choose to believe in evolution because of lack of evidences. Being educated in USSR, I had enough exposure to the theory of evolution. The KGB led so called "scientific" studies which were falling apart with the single challenge of the physical evidence.
@narniafreak129 Brilliant. Let's stick are head head in the sand and say God created everything. Next time you're sick don't go to the doctors or hospital. Those science guys are wrong. Just pray you'll get better and see what happens.
the reason i came to the wrong conclusion is because the properties of liquid allowed it to conform to the shape of the glass and solid was not. the characteristic of the 2 matter, is different, and the characteristic of biological life and inanimate machienary is also different. biological life reproduce and therefore is able to subject itself to the laws of natural selection, on the other hand inanimate machienary has no ability to self improve. hovind is a liar.
an example would be, if i have a squared shape glass and i've been trying to find a rock in perfect composition to conform to the shape of the glass. if there was such rock, i would conclude that the rock was designed to fit perfectly inside the glass. but then i poured water inside the glass, and also did it fit to conform to the shape of the glass. there for i wrongly concluded that the water was designed for such purpose.
hovind often uses complex human made machine to compare with biological machine, to imply design element and strategies. this is a logical fallacy, due to the main different characteristic between biological life and inanimate machienary, which is the ability of reproducing and passing down gene's.
@InfiniteTurtles proves that some people in high places didn't like he was revealing truth and exposing them... i think kent hovind in jail gives him more creditability if anything. He's a good man but tried to fight the system unfortunately he wasn't aware at how corrupt these people are and the lengths they will go. He underestimated them, but is still a good man and will be respected when he comes out of jail, he was doing an amazing job before he went in its ashame it had to happen like this
@k12rising Kent Hovind is not somebody who has imprisoned for protesting a cause, he was just greedy and refused to pay his fair share towards taxation and he got caught out and imprisoned.
@k12rising Hmm, the internet is teeming with ppl "exposing the NWO" etc but they don't get busted. Mr Hovind boasted of "beating the IRS", which was a challenge he made and eventually lost. Don;t forget it was other Christians in Pensacola that raised concerns and advised ppl not to work for him. He also offered to raise the money from his followers to pay off his taxes and fines if the judge let him go free. That's hardly standing up for his principles and fighting the system!
Feel sorry for tyhe Graduate Student. Having to deal with this ignorant turd.
Kent does not understand and just keeps trying to give his tried and tested bulshit.
However he is dealing with someone who has a good knowledge of the subject and is lost, kent stuggles trying to sound plausable but even his ace in the hole fails on the grad, just shows how Kent has no clue.
Kent Hovind is a perfect example of somebody who is too stupid to realise that they are stupid, in fact he's so stupid that he actually thinks he's teaching this guy something!
The changes can be seen in the middle ear, which slowly evolves to suit their environment, as well as their third molars. Have fun.
windbreeezer 18 hours ago
* Sorry for lack of space b/w the words.
Pakicetid, Ambulocetus, Rodhocetus, Basilosaurus, Squalodon, Cethotherium, and finally the whales.
windbreeezer 18 hours ago
@whiteliketar here are the transitional ancestors of the whales, which are marine mammals. Google them. A bit of effort goes a long way in education.
PakicetidAmbulocetusRodhocetusBasilosaurus Squalodon CetotheriumWhales.
windbreeezer 18 hours ago
Martin is a complete moron.
1whitetyler 1 week ago
@1whitetyler So where does that leave (not a doctor) (not a science teacher) Kent Hovind on the intelligence scale.... sub-insect dung?
CarajilloDulce 1 week ago
The naturalistic explanation for life is evolution. The non-naturalistic explanation is that we deal with a deceptive creator that want us to believe evolution happen. There exist no third explanation.
jomen112 1 week ago
@jomen112 Jomen I think I would enjoy a little debate with you. I think you'd be surprised at how rational I am for a 'creationist'. I have actually researched several different religions to try to see things from all sides. I find the Pagan beliefs most intriguing, Mormons to be the most absurd and bizarre. Masons are another story all together. Any ways I'd enjoy a private conversation if you'd like.
RushAnthem69 1 week ago
@RushAnthem69 What is it that you want to debate?
jomen112 1 week ago
watch hovind debate smarter people that don't constantly interrupt and avoid logical points
Caravandrums 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Caravandrums "watch hovind debate smarter people that don't constantly interrupt and avoid logical points" and "the grad student cant think for himself"
You are a troll right?
jomen112 1 week ago
the grad student cant think for himself
Caravandrums 2 weeks ago
everybody always bitches about who created god? God is not in this universe, so time doesn't affect him. He doesn't have a beginning or an end.
llh413 3 weeks ago
@llh413 yea but it by no means show a Christian God is real, or a Catholic God, or Allah, or one of the hundreds of Asian deities mentioned by Asian religions. All this show, at best, is that there may be a creator in the past that is eternal, but this creator could very well be a race of super-intelligent aliens who learn to master time travel (hence not affected by time). Anything is possible.
Casshyr 2 weeks ago
@llh413 "God is not in this universe, so time doesn't affect him. He doesn't have a beginning or an end."
Congratulation! Weather or not you realize it, you have just proven to yourself that god does not exists.
However, weather a god exists or not has no bearing on the fact that evolution has occurred. There exists no other naturalistic explanation for the evidence. The non-naturalistic explanation is that we deal with a deceptive creator that want us to believe evolution happen.
jomen112 2 weeks ago
@jomen112 you didnt get the point. I meant that he is always at a constant.
llh413 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@llh413 "you didnt get the point"
Perhaps I did not, but then on the other hand you never stated what it was then.
Anyway, what do you mean with "he [god] is always at a constant" ? Constant like in 'unavailable' or 'evasive'/'elusive' or what?
jomen112 1 week ago
@llh413
Anyway, weather or not I get your point, the reason people "bitch about who created god" is: if a creator can be self sufficient then it follows that a universe also can be self sufficient because if a universe can't be then a god can't be it either. That is why. Did that make sense to you?
jomen112 1 week ago
intelligent educated people taliking to ignorant morons with the IQ of shoelaces- facepalm! when will these morons get it? there is no debate you dont get a choice wheteher not you accept facts! its like creationists are trying to argue that 2+2=5- it doesnt it and never will- 2+2 will always equal 4 and no amount of argueing can change it! evolution is a proven fact- deal with it!
dancingnancy09 3 weeks ago
@dancingnancy09 "its like [...] trying to argue that 2+2=5- it doesnt it and never will"
Actually your are only right in a restricted sense here and that is when talking about scalar numbers. It is pretty easy to show with, for instance, vector algebra how 2+2=5. But then again, 2 and 5 are not vectors and you (obvious) refer to scalar numbers. However with the theory of evolution creationist seams to be convinced that such double interpretation exists while in fact it does not.
jomen112 1 week ago
@jomen112 youre very clever and I'm very impressed- but it seems you have missed my point
dancingnancy09 1 week ago
@dancingnancy09
No not clever, just educated. ;-) Besides that 1) flattering is not a valid argument :-) , and 2) I do agree fully with you (besides the part of ad hominem) so I have not missed your point I just wanted to extend your analogy a bit. Another example, excepts vector algebra, is adding stacks of sand: no matter how you add they always ends up to one. Which in an analogy can be taken as; no matter how you look at it, it will always conclude evolution in the end. :-)
jomen112 1 week ago
@jomen112 yes I can see that- you are clearly very well educated- and also obviously very clever-and I could see that you were agreeing with me- however-you did miss point as I wasn't using an algebraic equation as a metaphor I was using a simple arithmatical sum as a metaphor- and as impressed as I am-and I am-I'm not really interested in your extensive and impressive knowledge of mathematics in relation to my anaolgy-nor am I intereted in discussing it you- thanks.
dancingnancy09 1 week ago
@dancingnancy09 "nor am I intereted in discussing it you"
Fair enough, we all need to make our priorities. Thanks for your replies thou.
jomen112 1 week ago
btw Vertebrate's not a kingdom.. nice one genius
IamZiing 2 months ago
@IamZiing 4:20
IamZiing 2 months ago
God is awesome, it's sad people like Martin haven't been exposed to his glory.
preadator413 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@preadator413 "God is awesome, it's sad people like Martin haven't been exposed to his glory."
Even if it is true that god is awesome, that does not imply in any way, or sense, that evolution did not take place. Besides that you, or me or anybody else here, do not know if Martin believe in a god or not. A belief in a god or a creator of the universe is not mutual exclusive with accepting evolution as a fact. Most religious people have no problem to merge these two concept as one.
jomen112 1 week ago
I ve heard all this evolution crap in USSR. The special trained KGB forces were conducting the indoctrination mission - if you disagree, they (KGB) knew how to break your neck.
For 80 years USSR was officially pushing evolution on people's brains. At the end of 90s people got fed up with this nonsense. Millions went back to the churches, synagogs.
narniafreak129 3 months ago
@narniafreak129 They went to the churchers and ushered in another dark age. god bless these simpletons for destroying our lives.
CannibalCorpse909 2 months ago
@narniafreak129 Whether it be the KGB or the Spanish Inquisition, forcing ideas upon people does not work in any meaningful way. Religion has throughout history been used to control and coerce populations through fear.... behave in the way we tell you or you'll burn in hell!! I guess the KGB just brought the pain and torture into this life time. It is possibly worth noting that many religious folk have no problem what so ever with the theory of evolution.
CarajilloDulce 2 months ago
"this nonsense" gives you, and everyone else, medical treatments and a possibility to save your life when your time comes... god nor prayers wont help you - we know this because we have2 measured the effectiveness of prayers and they don't do better than chance. However medical science based on "this nonsense" do far better than chance.
jomen112 1 week ago
The caller's premise is that there was no common designer - so of course he he'll keep hanging on to his bias no matter how Ken tries to help him see through tha madness of macro-evolutiuon . The self brainwashed caller keeps pointing to the similarities in ancestry - Ken is right to use examples of machinery etc - just because organisms reproduce dosen't mean the creator didn't infuse the DNA with the necessary programming to make them reproduce until they come to a dead end like the mule.
whiteliketar 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@whiteliketar
"no matter how Ken tries to help him see through tha madness of macro-evolutiuon"
a) Kent is a liar and fool. His degrees are unacredited, his arguments are based on deliberate falsehoods, and he is currently in jail for fraud (Felony level deception)
b) Macro-Evolution in 1 generation has been observed Donkey + Horse = Mule 62 Chromosomes + 64 Chromosomes = 63 Chromosomes
whiteowl1415 3 months ago
@whiteliketar It's not a premise. He's a student studying biological science. The science gives us evidence that living things evolve over time. You are aware that this has been proven with flies in a laboratory?
spmcd2011 3 months ago
@spmcd2011 fruit flies radiated?
whiteliketar 3 months ago
@whiteliketar "Ken is right to use examples of machinery"
No, Ken can not when it comes to evolution because as explain by martin machinery does not reproduce and can not *naturally* form *unique* sets.
"he he'll keep hanging on to his bias"
of course he will... all evidence points towards such "bias", unlike Ken we do not try to interpret the fact in term of our believes but let the fact form our believes. Do you see the difference in this and does such view make sense to you?
jomen112 1 week ago
@whiteliketar "tha madness of macro-evolutiuon"
Just curious about your believes; do you accept micro-evolution as a fact?
jomen112 1 week ago
@jomen112 - ha ha - an atheist tries to worm his way into the lie that micro-evolution is macro-evolution - differnt dogs, different cats ,differnt birds - that's it its all around you/- Hovind is right jumping to macro is just the atheist imagination gone wild.
whiteliketar 1 week ago
@whiteliketar I asked you a simple question but you failed, intentionally or not, to answer it in a straight forward manner. I take your answer as that you are aware of that the theory of evolution makes no distinction between the two, they are the same, and your reason to reject this is because *you* can not imagine how this can happen. Imo, that is a quite poor reason to reject anything at all.
jomen112 1 week ago
@jomen112 - your beloved theory can't even get off the ground to begin with? should i say more? atheist imagination is your problem to resolve - sorry
whiteliketar 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@whiteliketar "your beloved theory can't even get off the ground to begin with? should i say more? atheist imagination is your problem to resolve - sorry"
Why do you have such a problem with evolution? Is you faith is so weak it needs evolution to be false -that is you somehow need evidence for good existence- in order to believe in good? Then you faith is very weak even hypocritical. A believer does not need evidence, nor deny them even if they contradicts god existence, in order to believe.
jomen112 1 week ago
@whiteliketar "The caller's premise is that there was no common designer"
No it wasn't. No such assumption is made, or even needed, to come to the conclusion that evolution took place. Evolution follows, as a consequence, from the simple fact that living beings clusters into unique sets - and this regardless on what or how one measure it - they all give the same clustered sets. That is independent, and multiple, lines of evidence says the same very same things: evolution took place as a fact.
jomen112 1 week ago
@whiteliketar "The self brainwashed caller keeps pointing to the similarities in ancestry"
Martin explain it NOT about similarities. Obvious you have not even cared to try to understand Martins argument. As it is now you only show a grave ignorance about the topic as you, evidently, do not, or do not want to, understand why and how evolution has been determined to taken place. Evolution is a fact and it can be proven. You can believe whatever you like but that does not make you right in anyway.
jomen112 1 week ago
@jomen112 give me one example as i indicated below.
whiteliketar 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@whiteliketar "give me one example as i indicated below."
The point is; I don not have to.
It is all out there in the literature and free for anyone to find out. If you have read it, which I will grant you to have, then it leads me to believe you do not accept the evidence. Which is fine with me, but then be honest and say so. However you only claims things facts are not fact. Claims are not evidence. You have to show why you are right otherwise non will take you seriously.
jomen112 1 week ago
@whiteliketar "just because organisms reproduce dosen't mean the creator didn't infuse the DNA with the necessary programming to make them reproduce until they come to a dead end like the mule."
That is true, but then again that something you just made up to explain an creator. If you can not show it then you do not know it.
But we can show IF life forms clusters of non overlapping unique sets THEN it that is the proof that evolution have taken place. Weather you accept it is another question.
jomen112 1 week ago
@jomen112 - you have no idea what you are talking about - being specific and expert in explaining micro-changes dosen't get to you to where your imagiantion wants to take you. Hoving is right on - the student is brainwashed - sorry
whiteliketar 1 week ago
@whiteliketar "you have no idea what you are talking about"
It goes with out saying that good manner includes to be able to respectfully disagree with others as bad manners works against yourself when declaring somebody ignorant with no support to back it up with, in particular when you poses as knowing better than virtual any expert in the field in question, this with out having show any credentials what soever on your side."
jomen112 1 week ago
@jomen112 oh don't be a patsy - aan atheist talking about good manners is akin to a savage giving a lecture on the travails of cannibalism - people with more degrees than a thermometer kill, lie and steal every day and they are as infallible as anyone else - so put that in your pipe and smoke it - where is just 1 example of a modern day creature with plain macro -transition occuring in plain sight for all to see - let me guess. the changes are so small and u need another billion years
whiteliketar 1 week ago
@whiteliketar "an atheist talking about good manners is akin to a savage giving a lecture on the travails of cannibalism - people with more degrees than a thermometer kill, lie and steal every day and they are as infallible as anyone else"
So not only do you spit on respect toward other human beings but now you also accuse me for being a liar, thief, murder and cannibal, and for what reason? Only because I disagree with you. I can only pity you...
jomen112 1 week ago
@jomen112 i am not sure i want your pity - i just want you to come up with a modern day example of a creature in transition plain and simple. surely you have had your billions of years to find one example ....just one....please. lol that's what happens to atheist fairy tales - it all crumbles under proper scientific scrutiny ...the term empirical gives you nightmares ...dosen't it? the madness of atheism continues in full stride. lol
whiteliketar 1 week ago
@whiteliketar "just want you to come up with a modern day example of a creature in transition plain and simple"
Why are do you want to switch topic from hierarchical clustering to transitional forms? What does that has to do with hierarchical clustering? But to answer your question: according to the theory of evolution every single living being that has lived, is living, and ever will live is a transitional form. Weather or not you accept this is completely irrelevant. Its a fact.
jomen112 1 week ago
@jomen112 ha ha - attempting to solve the Gordian knot with the sword of Alexander wont help you on this one - no matter how you repeat like a parrot that macro is true and all around you. God's signature is on DNA - not your beloved chance plus billions of years - if is a fact show me a 'transitional ' where we can clearly observe this fantastic creature - you have had your billions of years - can't find one - can you?
whiteliketar 4 days ago
@whiteliketar "explaining micro-changes dosen't get to you to where your imagiantion wants to take you"
Why would anyone need to talk about micro-evolution to prove evolution as a fact? The naturalistic mechanisms that drives evolution -as opposed to "god drives it magically"- is a separate issue from the fact that evolution has occurred - micro-evolutions has nothing to do with the fact that evolution have happen. It only explains how evolution happen, not that it did.
jomen112 1 week ago
@jomen112 you ares till fumbling around in the Micro gets to macro fairy tale world of the atheist. you still are confusing self with your non-sequitur statments and they are coming faster by the second. Micro and variations within kinds have occured - just as the good book says. sorry
whiteliketar 1 week ago
@whiteliketar "you ares till fumbling around in the Micro gets to macro fairy tale
world of the atheist"
I do not know if you do not want to, refuse to, or cant understand. I just informed you that HOW evolution progress is an entire separate issue from the fact that evolution HAS occurred - they are a independently of each other. Darwin proved evolution HAS happen 150 years ago. Since then we be trying to figure out HOW that was possible. We now KNOW the answer; micro evolution.
jomen112 1 week ago
@jomen112 ha ha - the atheist biology professor has done a number on you ...hasn't he? trying to twist and bend the term micro evolution to suit your decimated logic will only suffice for brianwashed atheist mind. you don't even understand your own arguments or somehow you have got someone to hihack the term micro-evolution and mold it into your owm fertile extrapolation. i keep asking for a modern day example of a 'transitional'. can't find one? ....not enough time ....aaaawwwww
whiteliketar 1 week ago
@whiteliketar "the atheist biology professor has done a number on you ...hasn't he?"
In fact no. I have research the data myself, that is investigated the facts, and came to the conclusion that it is a fact that evolution has occurred.
"you don't even understand your own arguments or somehow you have got someone to hihack the term micro-evolution and mold it into your owm fertile extrapolation."
If you mean I do not know the definitions you use for these words then that is true
jomen112 1 week ago
@jomen112 - really? you have your own little experiment where you can see natural selection acting on a genetic mutation. Wow ! that's amazing ...why don't you publish this in science journals where we can oberve this new data? lol cats still produce cats and dogs - dogs - try some radiation on fruit flies and see what 'new species' you get. you poor brainwashed atheist. Pity is the only emotion that one can have for this type of brainwashing - this is bad...real bad.
whiteliketar 4 days ago
@whiteliketar um...if you ever see a cat producing a non-cat that is observable within a human lifespan..let me know, that's proof AGAINST evolution, not FOR it. Your lack of understanding in evolution theory is shocking..you are demanding to see something that is actually against what evolution theory states. Please at least learn what you are criticizing before criticizing it. Same thing with a monkey: if you ever see a monkey giving birth to a human, that's proof AGAINST evolution.
Casshyr 2 days ago
@Casshyr - here we go again - overlaying micro-changes with the imagination of macro-madness whilst hiding behind time-I AM GOING TO ASK YOU ONE LAST TIME - showm me one ' transitional ' with its billions of years behind it where we can visible changes going on - I am giving you the benefit of time - take your billions of years and find one creature where we can clearly see these changes - quit hiding behind behind normal species and ducking behind time.
whiteliketar 23 hours ago
@whiteliketar Sure: example: Archaeopteryx lithographica. And I'm also going to give you ONE AST TIME to stop quoting from creationists articles. ONLY INFORMATION FROM PEER-REVIEW ACADEMIC JOURNALS count as scientific information. Just because Hovind put a contrary statement on his creationist blog that doesn't make it science. It has to be PEER-REVIEWED. Quit hiding behind creationists sites.
Casshyr 9 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@whiteliketar "rying to twist and bend the term micro evolution to suit your decimated logic will only suffice for brianwashed atheist mind."
Do you mind to please answer the following simple question:
Do you concede that weather someone is dead IS A FACT and do you concede that HOW someone died is a complete different issue separated from the fact that some has died as a fact?
jomen112 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@whiteliketar "you still are confusing self with your non-sequitur statments and they are coming faster by the second. Micro and variations within kinds have occured - just as the good book says. sorry "
You only makes claims. Making a claim does not make you right or make facts go away.
Knowing is showing, so I will ask you to show the following simple things:
a) how to define a 'kind'.
b) what is the non sequitur I did make.
jomen112 1 week ago
@whiteliketar "just because organisms reproduce dosen't mean the creator didn't infuse the DNA with the necessary programming to make them reproduce until they come to a dead end like the mule."
To further clarify what I said before. We already know how this works: we call it reproduction and genetics describes the mechanisms behind it. We have no evidence that DNA is magical infused in living things and create new "kinds". Again you claim things with no evidence to support them.
jomen112 1 week ago
"This is where an understanding of evolution comes in. Unfortunately' it's tricky for those of us who are not scientists." Okay so you're calling everyone who is not a scientist or is not an evolutionist dumb? You should be banned from Youtube kid.
RushAnthem69 3 months ago
@RushAnthem69 "so you're calling everyone who is not a scientist or is not an evolutionist dumb?"
The theory of evolution is not a easy thing to grasp, but a subject for academical studies, it is a quite complex theory that involves advance mathematical models which explains a whole range of phenomena we observe in living system that otherwise would remain a mystery for us. To be humble is not an offense to anyone's intellect but to show appreciation towards real expert knowledge.
jomen112 1 week ago
Lol DarwinsLobster is a damn tool, totally siding with the evolutionist, while Kent is not perfect. The evolutionist couldn't name where a platypus came from, 'a mammal' which mammal? Lol Dragonflys and the Platypus having a common ancestor, PUH-LEASE.
RushAnthem69 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RushAnthem69 "The evolutionist couldn't name where a platypus came from, 'a mammal' which mammal?"
Did you also take notice that Martin said we have not found a fossil example of the evolutionary line of Platypus and thus can not tell?
Or would you rather have Martin make up something else than mammal just in order to be able to produce an answer or can you accept the fact that sometime we must say "we don't know" because we do not have any facts to support our claims with?
jomen112 1 week ago
@RushAnthem69 "Lol DarwinsLobster is a damn tool, totally siding with the evolutionist, while Kent is not perfect. "
That is a very interesting way, in terms of psychology, to say "while Kent is not right".
jomen112 1 week ago
@RushAnthem69 "Dragonflys and the Platypus having a common ancestor, PUH-LEASE."
I do understand why Kent Howind do not believe this to be the case but do YOU understand why Martin (yes, the "evolutionist" has a name and that is Martin) believe this to be the case?
(Note: you may not realize it but the hidden purpose to call people "evolutionist" is to depersonalize, dehumanize and demonize people. This is a classical trick and every time you use this word you are a tool.)
jomen112 1 week ago 2
I’m sure Kent has heard all of this stuff 100 times by now, and he is still willfully ignorant to all of it. Shame on him.
BigJonBone 3 months ago
:47 - caller acts like a know-it-all and proceeds to use a just-so story as evidence.
CiscoWes 3 months ago
There are some people, and some claims, so far divorced from reality that 'engaging' with them as if they were legitimate points of view is actually damaging to society, as such engagement legitimizes those points of view as topics for discussion.
Say a presentation on 'Did the Holocaust Happen?' with Holocaust deniers presenting their arguments; The Holocaust occurred but just presenting the opposing arguments will convince a great many people that a genuine historical controversy exists.
VideoAudioDisco09 4 months ago
@VideoAudioDisco09 "such engagement legitimizes those points of view as topics for discussion"
In a way I tend to agree with you, but not fully.
This is my line of thoughts; there are kids out there that lives in close communities in where the only opinion they have access to is that from the village "elders" - and they all think the same. However they may have access to internet and with that they may come in contact with opinions that may help them break lose from dogmas.
jomen112 1 week ago
@jomen112
Yes your right I think it is a broad gray line.
I have also said before that it is imperritive these gits are debunked publically, for no other purpose than to allow observers from the "I am an idiot too lobby" to have a fair chance to get the truth and ask the questions. It seems from reading deconversion stories the first step is to seek the truth and research scientific claims.
However they should be entertained with due respect as ridiculous imbiciles.
VideoAudioDisco09 1 week ago
@VideoAudioDisco09
I have to extend my apologizes to you for, unintentionally, quote mining you only to make my point. I realize my comment is a strawman.
jomen112 1 week ago
@jomen112
It all good.
Hovind is a despicable thief, liar and conman, at least he is getting some (I hope arse pounding) recompense for his action at the moment.
VideoAudioDisco09 1 week ago
Hovind has practiced throughout the entirety of his career: Lazy acts of demagogic hucksterism and intellectual dishonesty. He has indulged in self delusion that he shamefully projects with unsupportable confidence to the gulible.
VideoAudioDisco09 4 months ago
Sometimes it's hard to tell if Kent is trying to convince the caller or himself....
MrRafaelblock 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrRafaelblock "Sometimes it's hard to tell if Kent is trying to convince the caller or himself...."
Indeed our brains sometime plays trick with our self. I believe, but sure I can not be, that Kent honestly believes in what he says. However I also noticed to what me sounded like nervous laughter from Kent during the show and that he stops following a thread of argument as he seams to understand what he says at that moment does not hold. Cognitive dissonance is stressful indeed.
jomen112 1 week ago
The definition of science is "knowledge attained through study or practice," or "knowledge covering general truths of the operation of general laws, esp. as obtained and tested through scientific method [and] concerned with the physical world."
The theory of evolution does not fit in the definition of science,it is rather developing hypothesis without any physical evidence.
narniafreak129 4 months ago
@narniafreak129 So DNA and fossils don't come under scientific agreement?, fossils have been studied and so has DNA.
spmcd2011 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@narniafreak129 "The theory of evolution does not fit in the definition of science,it is rather developing hypothesis without any physical evidence."
In order to know how you came to that conclusion we would also need to know how you define "The theory of evolution". Would you mind to tell that as well?
jomen112 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!
narniafreak129 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@narniafreak129 "Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!Evolution is a fairytale!"
This is called a mantra, and we know by repeating something many time enough you can make anyone start believe in whatever. Also repeating yourself is a sign of either immaturity or low IQ or trolling, it is not conclusive but indicative. What is your case?
jomen112 1 week ago
Oh Martin..You are talking to a guy who thinks that the Flinstone's are a documentary about early human life.
Stevoukos 4 months ago 15
@Stevoukos It is possible that Kent is just willfully dishonest, like he was being willfully dishonest about paying taxes. He thinks he is a smooth talker who can make money by ripping people off. It is important to disprove such people to reveal them for the fakes they are.
MunkyDrag0n 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MunkyDrag0n "He thinks he is a smooth talker who can make money by ripping people off."
He is (was;-) in fact a smooth talker, because he did indeed mange to rip a lot of money from people (and he is funny to listen to as well) but his big mistake was to try to rip the government of tax and that he could not smooth talk himself out of. ;-)
jomen112 1 week ago
What does one expect from Hovind. He is really just a High School graduate.
Hovind has a Bachelor of Religious Education from NON-ACCREDITED Midwestern Baptist College and Master's degree and PhD in Christian Education through correspondence from the NON-ACCREDITED Patriot University.
He should be debating High School students and not graduate student with ad hominem arguments.
Does anyone know where Kent Hovind taught High School as he is not qualified due to non accredited "diplomas"
MrHoolits 4 months ago
@MrHoolits Does home-schooling his own kids for 15 years count? xD
Faustaao 4 months ago
poop
sillydillydokieo 4 months ago
@sillydillydokieo poop
sillydillydokieo 4 months ago
@CarajilloDulce There are minimum requirements for a doctorate, no matter what school you're in. The school does not hand out the diplomas, the government does through the school.
TheLightedDarkness 5 months ago
Comment removed
CarajilloDulce 5 months ago
@TheLightedDarkness The Patriot Bible University is totally unaccredited and therefore has absolutely nothing to do with the US government or any accreditation agency. You are right... for a proper doctorate there are minimum requirements, none of which Hovind managed. Read his dissertation.... it's a joke and contains absolutely no original research which is one of the things for which a doctorate is awarded. He's a fundamentalist preacher with a rather poor understanding of science.
CarajilloDulce 5 months ago
@ahhhhjjjj Similarities does not show common ancestry, you don't know if a fossil had any kids at all, and therefore you cannot come down to such a conclusion that they came from another animal with those similarities
@TheOmegaJuice Meanwhile he has a Ph.D in Education and taught Science for 15 years, how about you?
TheLightedDarkness 5 months ago
@TheLightedDarkness Kents so called doctorate was issued by the Patriot Bible college and awarded for a dissertation citing 16 chapters but containing only 4, with no TOC, full of spelling mistakes, and containing absolutely no original research. He taught Intelligent Design.... scripture based Young Earth Evangelical Christian Fundamentalist theory in private baptist schools, and in 1 school he set up himself... religion, not science. Hovind is a preacher, not a science teacher.
CarajilloDulce 5 months ago
@Carajillodulce. Even if there is no God. Which I believe there is. The evolution theory still has too much evidence against it. Your eyes refuse to look at it.
acolony22 5 months ago
@acolony22 I am happy to examine, as I have done, the evidence against the theory of evolution. After all it's exactly that, a theory, and can be altered or replaced if a better and more complete theory is developed. Unfortunately you can't say the same thing about your scripture based religious fundamentalism.
CarajilloDulce 5 months ago
@Carajillodulce. Because they are all taught the same stuff. Nobody ever teaches the things that threaten what their teaching. It's moronic. The vast majority of people believed the sun rotated around the earth. They were wrong. Majority is no evidence. It just shows how deep evolution has put it's claws. Until you look at the evidence instead of ignoring you will never fade in your theory. Study the ancient astronaut theory. Half of their stuff disproves evolution.
acolony22 5 months ago
@acolony22 Well actually they do study religious theory.... in religious education class. All the info is out there to be studied. You are simply saying that all these geologists & scientists, or at least the vast majority, are unable to think for themselves; which is pretty rich coming from a religious fundamentalist. Take a look at all the Christian (& those of other religious persuasions) involved in those research fields who's beliefs do not find contradiction with the theory of evolution.
CarajilloDulce 5 months ago
@acolony22 The only reason you attack the theory of evolution is because the time scales involved mean that your sect's YEEC fundamentalist doctrine cannot be true. The theory of evolution does not exclude a creator which is why the majority of Christians, Catholics, & adherents to other religions have no problem with it. The YEEC fundamentalist world view is however constrained by it's interpretation of scripture, & anything running contra to that must therefore be wrong regardless of evidence.
CarajilloDulce 5 months ago
@acolony22 you state 'Study the ancient astronaut theory. Half of their stuff disproves evolution.'. If that was true the person who discovered that would win the noble peace prize and would be on the cover of every newspaper in the world. You're talking nonsense.
spmcd2011 4 months ago
Comment removed
enokmn 5 months ago
@Carajillodulce. I see. Every where I get my evidence is false and every where you get it is true. One good argument. I guess I can't beat that. So your saying every evolutionists I listen to is a liar or dumb? You sound like the mainstream media. Maybe you should run for president. You can be just as good as wonderful Obama. People, please make sure you leave good comments. You don't wanna seem stupid do you?
acolony22 5 months ago
@acolony22 Well, if your so called evidence is so convincing then why do the vast majority of those people who have studied and researched, or are currently studying and researching geology, biology, paleontology, and other related disciplines not agree with you that dinosaurs and man coexisted? Why are there no fossilized remains of humans found in the same strata as those of dinosaurs? Surely there should be at least a few fossilized human bones found alongside those of the dinosaurs.
CarajilloDulce 5 months ago
@Carajillodulce. The difference between me and you is that I know both sides. I grew up in the church. I've read the Bible plenty of times. I've watched countless hours of documentaries pertaining to evolution. I've studied it. I'm currently reading Why Evolution Is True by Jerry A. Coyne. The guy is really brilliant. Problem is he smashes the intelligent design but doesn't know what he's talking about. Every evidence he gives can be turned for creation.
acolony22 5 months ago
@acolony22 Well having studied comparative religion and also having grown up in the Christian faith, and therefore obviously having read the bible I have a fair idea of what I'm talking about. There is plenty of evidence to show that the human footprints at Glen Rose are fakes but if you want to clutch at straws in order to maintain your belief that dinosaurs played along with humans so be it. You still can't find any real evidence that they lived together. Just religious fundamentalist nonsense
CarajilloDulce 5 months ago
@Carajillodulce. So the fact that I just watched a special on the glen rose footprints on the history channel was a lie? Even though their were 6 evolutionists saying they were real. And one of the guys was there when they flipped massive limestone rocks and found the same stretch of footprints continuing a hoax? Haha. You truly do walk with and talk with your eyes closed and your ears shut don't you?
acolony22 5 months ago
@acolony22 Watching documentaries is not really that reliable as a form of research I watched one in which Ron Wyatt claimed to have found the remains of Noah's Ark in Turkey. After further investigation it became clear that the whole story was a fabrication created by Wyatt and his YEEC fundamentalist friends.
CarajilloDulce 5 months ago
@Carajillodulce. Who may I ask has carried out worse crimes that was a Christian? Maybe the Catholic church but any real Christian knows that the catholic church is not a real religion of God. So what Christians have killed more then ten million people? Please, tell me. You can't because your lying. That's disgusting. Your hate for God makes you become dishonest.
acolony22 5 months ago
@acolony22 Study the crusades.
CarajilloDulce 5 months ago
If there is no God then there is no laws. Seriously, if evolution is true then who gets to be the one who says what's wrong or right? Adolf Hitler was a huge follower of charles darwin (as was Joseph Stalin). These people did a lot of what they did because they thought there was no consequence for their actions. Sadly, they would be right according to evolutionists.
acolony22 5 months ago
@acolony22 What, so you can't think for yourself and therefore need some imaginary "Sky Daddy" to keep you on the straight and narrow? Get a grip and stop whining about Hitler and Stalin.... far worse crimes have been carried out in the name of God than without it.
CarajilloDulce 5 months ago
@Carajillodulce. Really? So fossilized footprints isn't enough? Must have fossilized remains? Okay, so every fossilized footprint must be thrown away. Like I said, just because you ignore something doesn't mean it's not there. Look at ALL the facts. I'm not asking anyone to look at the Creationists theory. I'm only asking you to question your own.
acolony22 5 months ago
@acolony22 If man and dinosaurs lived together then where are the fossilized remains to show this? If one does "look at all the facts" one sees that the fossil record is not a scam, that dating techniques do not produce nonsense readings as they would if they didn't work, and that the geological column clearly shows layers of deposits which could not possibly have been laid down in such a way 4000 years ago by some imaginary biblical world flood.
CarajilloDulce 5 months ago
Simply put, it can't explain these oddities. Instead evolutionists just ignore them hoping they go away, but us people with common sense realize the faults in evolution. Just because you ignore something doesn't mean it's not there. Quit listening to only evolutionists and do the research your self and you will see that it makes no sense, and in it's entirety, is completely unscientific.
acolony22 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@videoaudiodisco09. Please, the fossil record is a scam. What about the spheres that have etched lines in them found in 2.5 million old rock layer? Or the human footprints found next to dinosaur footprints in glen rose, Texas? Those TWO examples kill the evolutionary theory. Dinosaurs supposedly died millions of years before humans yet they are found together. How does the evolution theory explain these?
acolony22 5 months ago
@videoaudiodisco09. Please, the fossil record is a scam. What about the spheres that have etched lines in them found in 2.5 million old rock layer? Or the human footprints found next to dinosaur footprints in glen rose, Texas? Those TWO examples kill the evolutionary theory. Dinosaurs supposedly died millions of years before humans yet they are found together. How does the evolution theory explain these?
acolony22 5 months ago
@acolony22 Where have human and dinosaur remains been found together? If they lived together then they died together so their fossilized remains should be found together.
CarajilloDulce 5 months ago
@acolony22 In your trips to the creation museum (sic) or to creationist websites I think you may have missed the fact that the Glen Rose human footprints were fakes. The family of George Adams admitted that they were a hoax created by their sculptor grandfather to boost the family's income. The other tracks were shown to be those of metatarsal dinosaurs. Now.. those fossilized remains of humans and dinosaurs that would clearly show how they lived (and according to creationists) played together?
CarajilloDulce 5 months ago
@gmn545. I will check out the video. One thing is you didn't actually answer my question about the "big bang". I know what the "big bang" is. I want to know how two totally different things could makes themselves spontaneously.
acolony22 5 months ago
@katnils. I will now destroy the "big bang" theory. The "big bang" is supposedly space-time rapidly expanding to make our universe. Then scientist tell us space-time was most likely made during the big bang. Okay? Now where's the problem here? So I'm supposed to believe that space-time expanding made the "big bang" but at the same time the "big bang" made space-time?
acolony22 5 months ago
@katnils. First off the pope is not a real Christian nor does he even believe in God. The catholic church used to crucify Christians also. As well they gave money to Nazi regime. Evolution is dumb. Give me one or more examples that prove evolution. It's man greatest failure. Seriously give me one thing that proves evolution.
acolony22 5 months ago
@acolony22 "nor does he even believe in God" You're saying the pope is an atheist? "The Catholic church used to crucify Christians also" Tortured, imprisoned & killed, yes...crucified? Who? "gave money to Nazi regime" Huh? They signed concordats, pressured by the surge of totalitarianism, yet you failed to mention the Vatican issued two encyclicals - Non Abbiamo Bisogno (1931) & Mit Brennender Sorge (1937) - AGAINST Hitler & Mussolini. "one thing that proves evolution" Endogenous retroviruses.
gmn545 5 months ago
@acolony22 And for a good vid showing how endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) are solid evidence for evolution:
youtube. com / watch?v=TUxLR9hdorI
(remove spaces)
The big-bang - an expansion of spacetime from a point of singularity - is the initial cause of our universe. All evidence points towards it (e.g. Hubble's Law; cosmic microwave background radiation; general relativity). As to what caused the big-bang itself, that's currently unknown.
gmn545 5 months ago
@acolony22 The Pope is Catholic you retards!!
MetalxXxMayhem 5 months ago
@acolony22
One thing that proves evolution. Have you been living in a closet?
The Evidence supports the Theory. For the last 150 years the experiments and observations have added to our knowledge and fit hand in glove with the Theory. Added to ths is the fossil record which has also grown at a great rate, more recently DNA has been the icing on the cake. It is one of the best evidenced theories in science. Much debate about speed and process but no serious doubts about the theory.
VideoAudioDisco09 5 months ago
@acolony22
I think you will find that, the earth is not flat, nor the ceter of the universe and it moves.
More to the point religion will in the future be regaurded as the greatest con that man created and took so long to grow out of as a species. It has served a usful purpose in social cohesion and charity coordination but has also created the greatest evil and hinderance to advancment. Phase of development or mental disorded I am not sure but certainly a break with reality.
VideoAudioDisco09 5 months ago
Respond to this video...
Hovind what a simpleton and con. He is a gifted orator and to the uniformed can sound plausable, particularly when as they say you preach to the converted. He can explain his side in few words, like anyone can explain the bible CRAP. However his opposition has to try to condence a staggering quantity of experiment, observation, validations and proofs, which can make them look cumbersome or even unsure but thats the beauty of have the facts and been right.
VideoAudioDisco09 5 months ago
Respond to this video...
Hoving last of the great comedians, his stand up comody show is very funny, ioften show my friends clips and we have a great laugh. He really reminds me of the Irak minister of information Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf "There are no American Tanks in Bagdad" while one drove past in the back of shot.
Thats Hovind and co hanging on to ancient myths while science cruises past in the background.
-Does he believe his own crap? probably not, but it pays.
VideoAudioDisco09 5 months ago
7:09 That's the most BEAUTIFUL picture of a dragonfly I have ever seen! ! !
numbersCH31vs17 5 months ago
i agree his finger is called a hammer
Youngmurderer71 5 months ago
@Youngmurderer71 Yeh that must be a major problem for him that biologists can´t agree whether to classify his finger as a limb or a hammer. I wonder what he is doing with his finger to have this unique problem? Is this finger perhaps what he use to beat himself back to ignorance with whenever he is attacked by evidence and rational thoughts?
katnils 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The atheists comments on here are like a train wreck, part of me is sad that parts of the human race are so so so ignorant, the other part cant stop coming back to see what new ignorance they have posted.
jamesgayok 6 months ago
those machine parts come from a lawn mower, i think.
SoleCitizen33 6 months ago
You guys are just jealous that you have to pay your taxes. He had the guts to test his ground. You'll never have that.
NewVinland 6 months ago
That student was grasping for straws ... as does everyone who makes such bold claims for evolution
firedawgMD 6 months ago
Kent Hovind...clown
TheR0tter 6 months ago
at 7:12, yeah that's the finest example of evolution I've ever seen for sure. That dragonfly was a good example too I guess.
c02shows 6 months ago
With so much public funds, taxpayers money went to prove evolutionism and there still no single credible theory? How much more public has to pay to these moronic scientists? They should be sued for treason of public funds.
narniafreak129 6 months ago
@narniafreak129 way makes u think they havent already found the evidence>?
guineapiggyman 6 months ago
@guineapiggyman what evidence? Evolution is a fairytale!
narniafreak129 4 months ago
@narniafreak129 lol, youre really brainwashed, then
guineapiggyman 4 months ago
@narniafreak129 seriously??? you havent heard or seen any of the evidence? have you been living under a rock?1 oh, wait- if you had, then you wouldve probably seen some evidence! lol brainwashed theist.....
guineapiggyman 4 months ago
@guineapiggyman what do you call evidence? It is clear that it is political issue, and has nothing to do with science, some people choose to believe in evolution because of lack of evidences. Being educated in USSR, I had enough exposure to the theory of evolution. The KGB led so called "scientific" studies which were falling apart with the single challenge of the physical evidence.
narniafreak129 4 months ago
@narniafreak129
evolution lacks evidence? xD
OptimalElement 3 months ago in playlist More videos from DarwinsLobster
@narniafreak129 Brilliant. Let's stick are head head in the sand and say God created everything. Next time you're sick don't go to the doctors or hospital. Those science guys are wrong. Just pray you'll get better and see what happens.
spmcd2011 3 months ago
the reason i came to the wrong conclusion is because the properties of liquid allowed it to conform to the shape of the glass and solid was not. the characteristic of the 2 matter, is different, and the characteristic of biological life and inanimate machienary is also different. biological life reproduce and therefore is able to subject itself to the laws of natural selection, on the other hand inanimate machienary has no ability to self improve. hovind is a liar.
kissntellen 6 months ago
an example would be, if i have a squared shape glass and i've been trying to find a rock in perfect composition to conform to the shape of the glass. if there was such rock, i would conclude that the rock was designed to fit perfectly inside the glass. but then i poured water inside the glass, and also did it fit to conform to the shape of the glass. there for i wrongly concluded that the water was designed for such purpose.
kissntellen 6 months ago
The graduate student held himself very well.
TheMightyShell 6 months ago
hovind often uses complex human made machine to compare with biological machine, to imply design element and strategies. this is a logical fallacy, due to the main different characteristic between biological life and inanimate machienary, which is the ability of reproducing and passing down gene's.
kissntellen 6 months ago
Hovind is insane. Every time martin is making an argument that he doesn't understand he jumps in and starts saying something completely irrelevant.
TheJamietheGreat 6 months ago
Would people whose only dogy they have met only German shepherds so far consider a pug a dog, if they don´t know that it derives also from the wolf?
VitoPossilipo 6 months ago
God Bless kent hovind for spreading the truth.
k12rising 6 months ago
@k12rising Considering he's doing 10 years in the chokey, I think he's been spreading more than the truth :-O!!
InfiniteTurtles 6 months ago
@InfiniteTurtles proves that some people in high places didn't like he was revealing truth and exposing them... i think kent hovind in jail gives him more creditability if anything. He's a good man but tried to fight the system unfortunately he wasn't aware at how corrupt these people are and the lengths they will go. He underestimated them, but is still a good man and will be respected when he comes out of jail, he was doing an amazing job before he went in its ashame it had to happen like this
k12rising 6 months ago
Comment removed
TheOmegajuice 6 months ago
@k12rising Kent Hovind is not somebody who has imprisoned for protesting a cause, he was just greedy and refused to pay his fair share towards taxation and he got caught out and imprisoned.
He isn't Nelson Mandela!
TheOmegajuice 6 months ago
@k12rising Hmm, the internet is teeming with ppl "exposing the NWO" etc but they don't get busted. Mr Hovind boasted of "beating the IRS", which was a challenge he made and eventually lost. Don;t forget it was other Christians in Pensacola that raised concerns and advised ppl not to work for him. He also offered to raise the money from his followers to pay off his taxes and fines if the judge let him go free. That's hardly standing up for his principles and fighting the system!
InfiniteTurtles 6 months ago
Kent Hovind is an excellent example of why Technocracies should advocate the death penalty for sophistry.
mastersausagemaker 6 months ago
The only reason Kent has done so well in debates so far is because
1. He argues with ppl who dont really understand evolution.
2. He has a forked tongue.
fromstart2finish 7 months ago
7:18 I love dragonflies..
jcnabb22 7 months ago
Feel sorry for tyhe Graduate Student. Having to deal with this ignorant turd.
Kent does not understand and just keeps trying to give his tried and tested bulshit.
However he is dealing with someone who has a good knowledge of the subject and is lost, kent stuggles trying to sound plausable but even his ace in the hole fails on the grad, just shows how Kent has no clue.
VideoAudioDisco09 7 months ago
Kent Hovind is a perfect example of somebody who is too stupid to realise that they are stupid, in fact he's so stupid that he actually thinks he's teaching this guy something!
TheOmegajuice 7 months ago 5
@TheOmegajuice Maybe, but I think it's more that he's too arrogant to accept he could be wrong. You could even say it's the Sin of Pride!
InfiniteTurtles 6 months ago