This is my favorite PWNING of Kent Hovind and he still has not removed GSPP 862 from his "Creation Seminar Notebook" which CSE through Eric Hovind is still selling. I just tweeted this in my "Lies Hovind told Me" series on Twitter (same user name with the "UM" removed from the end).
@WretchedRecords Thank you I had been gathering the sources Kent cited in his "Seminar Notebook" for a couple of years and when I heard he was going to be on the IG show, I made sure to call in right away to own his ass.
Though there certainly is no quote present like what appears in 1:55, the paper listed does contain a table of radiocarbon dates from Alaska. Several are related to a "Mammuthus primigenius (baby mammoth)". The dates given range from 23,700 ya to 15,380 ya. It does not appear these samples were taken from the same specimen, as these fossils are common in Alaska.
I suspect that Kent had several sources on this Dima thing, and posted a related source, but not the one he supposedly quoted from.
@Trin80ty, Hovind is right about the de-population agenda. Most people are just ignorant of the Illuminati and their agenda. The de-population agenda and new world order are facts all over the Internet. You better wake up before it is too late. Don't be a sheeple slave. Wake up.
Hovind is a convicted felon, an uneducated buffon, and an anti-science nut who believes in a range of conspiracies. He lies about things, as this video shows, to promote an ideological agenda.
Simpy put, he makes stuff up and twists reality to match his radical religious views. If you believe him and other conspiracy peddlers, then you're the sheep.
@Trin80ty, His alleged felon (I believe he was set-up in order to be silenced) has nothing to do with his science. I have never seen him lie about anything. He gives sources. And what conspiracy does he hold to, and can you prove it is untrue?
1) In his own videos, Hovind brags that has never filed taxes! He was convicted of withholding payroll taxes and structuring withdrawals. HE DIDN'T EVEN DENY THIS IN COURT!
2) Hovind lies about citations. THIS VIDEO SHOWS THAT HOVIND CLAIMS A PAPER ARGUES CARBON DATING DOESN'T WORK. YET, THE PAPER DOES NOT AND HOVIND THEN ADMITS HE NEVER EVEN READ THE PAPER.
3) You ignore Hovind's own words to believe he's innocent of criminality and doesn't lie about science.
then you know nothing about the case, it's all online. look for it and read it... it's pretty thorough and there's CLEAR evidence of wrong doing on Hovind's part and CLEAR evidence he lied and tried to hide assets as is evidenced in his calls from jail. Hovind was too F'n stupid to not know someone would be listening to his calls.
I guess you have to have a basic understanding of science to know how wrong Hovind is. Or you can watch this video and see that HOVIND MISREPRESENTED SCIENTIFIC PAPERS HE NEVER EVEN READ.
If you accept Hovind's lies to accept Hovind's beliefs, fine.
"He makes the evolutionists he debates look very incompetent"
probably because either:
1) he only debates incompetent
2) you're ignorant, and don't realize he's wrong
3) you think he's winning because he throws a lot of babble out there, and his opponent has no way of checking the sources Hovind uses... as this vid shows, he misrepresents what the sources say.
IF most science theories are wrong, that yet would not support the existence of gods. Theists have the responsibility to support the claims that gods exist & arguing against science is only a feeble feverish attempt to fool themselves.
No 1 bases their life, how they treat others, how they want the government to be, etc etc on radiocarbon dating, the Theory Of Evolution or the Big Bang Theory.
The fact is about every qualified scientist in the entire world understands rcd to be valid, as well there are several other methods to date ancient items that are accurate. Hovind simply wont admit that his "belief" that the earth is 6,000 years old is just wrong. Hovind looks so dishonest when he goes on about how the world scientific community is wrong and no matter what evidence he encounters, he will not just admit that his "belief" is not confirmed with science. Give up Hovind.
I'm sorry is English your second language? I am asking for a citation that has appeared in a scientific publication and was written by a professional credentialed in a relevant field.
If all you have is videos from uninformed and professional liars like Hovind save your time.
@Trin80ty NEANDERTHAL RADIOCARBON PROBLEM reported in an article in BBC News 13 Feb 2009. Scientists trying to work out what happened to Neanderthals have made an interesting admission about dating methods.
@Trin80ty "This evidence came from radiocarbon dates obtained ..." and then it goes on to discuss how complex radiocarbon is" what is Laughable is your Assumption philosophy of naturalism, uniformitarianism assumes that the same natural laws and processes that operate in the universe now, have always operated in the universe in the past and apply everywhere in the universe. is so pathetic!
It's very telling you didn't even give the title of the article, which is "Did climate kill off the Neanderthals?" The abstract of the article is "Climate change, we're told, poses the single gravest threat to the survival of our species."
You either didn't read the citation you gave or didn't understand it. Either way, your laziness or misunderstanding isn't evidence against evolution. It's just more proof of how hollow creationist claims are.
@Trin80ty in the article points to The radiocarbon chronometer is like a clock that is sometimes running faster, and sometimes stops. So there are differences between radiocarbon years and calendar years, and that complicates trying to work out what is going on with the climate for a given radiocarbon date. The reference archives (Greenland ice cores) that we have for what climate was doing are in calendar years. And the discrepancies can be up to thousands of years apart."
Yep, and scientists know that which is why they have factored that in with their techinques. The article makes that clear. Carbon dating is a complicated process with several methods to fact in the different sources of carbon and the different material that gets tested.
A range of dates aren't "discrepancies." You clearly have limited knowledge of math, science and even polling if you don't understand margin of error.
Stop commenting until you read what carbon dating is.
@ednja at what part does this video promote hatred and violence? i can agree that it is a little bit disrespectful to call him crazy but i dont see any hatred and violence...
Who cares about old bones and old rocks? Makes no difference. God created everything whenever it was created. Whats more important is the future which is yet to occur. I'm looking forward to being with God forever in the paradise that Jesus said he was creating for us. The earth is ok, it's served it's purpose for our flesh while we're here and learning, but God has a far better place for people who love him.
@NewDirection4us you didn't answer my question. i asked how do you know? kent hovind knows exactly why he is defending this part in the bible, because if it is proven wrong, whole christianity will fall with it.
@Lunkan164 How is it then that many modern Christians have no issue with evolution? That they can adapt to fit modern knowledge. It usually the fundamentalists and ignorant the Kent caters to, he’s a smart guy, he uses these peoples fear against them and makes money off it. I mean it makes him an ass but smart.
@NightHawkBomber001 real Christians don't believe evolution. Only those who say tghey are Christian but don't have the Holy Spirit in them. IF they had the holy Spirit they would know the truth that evolution is the devil's lie.
@NewDirection4us Do you have any evidence of that? or are you just now dividing your religion further and promoting cult mentalities? A man made evolution not the devil son. Must we take the bible literally to be true Christians? You know those laws about killing rude children and such .
@Lunkan164 Do your best to look at it in the eyes of the people from that time period. Understand the history and the culture. Realize it was written by people in that period and so laws and morals that would not be followed today are likely outdated and stuff with no evidence (such as the flood or Genesis creation) are meaningful stories but not actual history.
@NightHawkBomber001 well, you can further develop your idea and say that god is a meaningful story, but not actual history. im not trying to be offensive or anything, im just saying... Look at religion in the eyes of an atheist. Could a religion serve a purpose evolutionary-wise? For me it sure could. It doesn't matter if it is true if people think it is true. Wake up, you're in the matrix :)
@Lunkan164 I could say that, however by claiming such a statement I would be not be accounting for error. A better way to put that would be “Perhaps there is a god, but seeing all the different religions that are out there past and present the likely hood of any one of them being right is small.”
@Lunkan164 Religion can be used to help people, or it can be used to separate them. Especially when people resort to combating modern knowledge based off their beliefs. They can still adapt and keep their beliefs but one must account for modern knowledge.
@NightHawkBomber001 it is a modern way you look at christianity indeed, and i'm aware that most christians agrees with this. but why are you a christian? why cannot the belief be personal instead? all unpersonal beliefs leads to accepting conclusions/"rules" through authority, and not through common sense. how do you look at homosexuality for example? i'm not one, but i can't see the problem with other being homosexuals.
@Lunkan164 religiously I don’t know what to call myself actually. Homosexuality is a natural phenomenon. A God would have had to created it, and then told his people it was wrong even though some were pre-programmed with the homosexual tendencies making this God to be somewhat Malevolent
@NightHawkBomber001 my personal opinion: modern christians are a "hybrid" between humanism and teism. this is the best compromise a human with both a logical and a theological urge. we have been domesticated through thousands of years to be "believers", disbelievers (and wrong faith) have been massacred throughout history. modern christians believe in a god of the gaps. i'm fine with it, but i don't see any logic behind calling yourself christians, just call yourself believers :)
@Lunkan164 how do I know? The holy Spirit reveals the truth to me. you unbelievers do not have the spirit, are blind to spiritual things, and follow satan your father.
@Lunkan164 The Father has chosen those whom he has given to Christ to save. The same people chosen will receive the Holy Spirit and be reborn. These are God's elect.
P.S. If you would maybe study some biblical history, you will find that it is one of the most flawed sources of all time. We have no origional documents of the text and have over six thousand versions in greek that are different from each other. Scribes you to copy them by hand. The made mistakes both on accident an on purpose. There is also no proof of jesus. Ken is also wrong becasue the burdon of proof IS on him. He has no evidence of his claims, he has no evidence that Jesus even lived.
Why don't you take a geology class and actually date them before you you make dumb shit conclusions like that. Kent gets owned over and over again by actual scientists. He continuously lies about our most accurate dating method, carbon dating. Sir, you obviously are bias, because there is proof right in front of you. We can date things from things in which the dates are already known! We can also check dates by other dating methods. Did you even listen to the caller you dumb ass.
Kent go the name of a river wrong. The rest of what he said was true. There are no secondary evidence for any dating methods using any form of radiometric or radio carbon dating. The bible is as all evolutionists are well aware true.
This is my favorite PWNING of Kent Hovind and he still has not removed GSPP 862 from his "Creation Seminar Notebook" which CSE through Eric Hovind is still selling. I just tweeted this in my "Lies Hovind told Me" series on Twitter (same user name with the "UM" removed from the end).
ScientiaPerceptum 1 week ago
That dude on Infidel Radio tore Mr Hovind a new arsehole!
WretchedRecords 1 month ago
@WretchedRecords Thank you I had been gathering the sources Kent cited in his "Seminar Notebook" for a couple of years and when I heard he was going to be on the IG show, I made sure to call in right away to own his ass.
ScientiaPerceptum 1 week ago
Though there certainly is no quote present like what appears in 1:55, the paper listed does contain a table of radiocarbon dates from Alaska. Several are related to a "Mammuthus primigenius (baby mammoth)". The dates given range from 23,700 ya to 15,380 ya. It does not appear these samples were taken from the same specimen, as these fossils are common in Alaska.
I suspect that Kent had several sources on this Dima thing, and posted a related source, but not the one he supposedly quoted from.
CasualTS 6 months ago
@CasualTS
Hovind said he NEVER read the paper. In fact, he had trouble even remembering the secondary source.
The paper makes no such claim that Hovind says it does. This video isn't hard to understand.
Trin80ty 4 months ago
@Trin80ty, Hovind is right about the de-population agenda. Most people are just ignorant of the Illuminati and their agenda. The de-population agenda and new world order are facts all over the Internet. You better wake up before it is too late. Don't be a sheeple slave. Wake up.
Pilgrim1411 3 months ago
@Pilgrim1411
Hovind is a convicted felon, an uneducated buffon, and an anti-science nut who believes in a range of conspiracies. He lies about things, as this video shows, to promote an ideological agenda.
Simpy put, he makes stuff up and twists reality to match his radical religious views. If you believe him and other conspiracy peddlers, then you're the sheep.
You better wake up.
Trin80ty 3 months ago
@Trin80ty, His alleged felon (I believe he was set-up in order to be silenced) has nothing to do with his science. I have never seen him lie about anything. He gives sources. And what conspiracy does he hold to, and can you prove it is untrue?
Pilgrim1411 3 months ago
@Pilgrim1411
1) In his own videos, Hovind brags that has never filed taxes! He was convicted of withholding payroll taxes and structuring withdrawals. HE DIDN'T EVEN DENY THIS IN COURT!
2) Hovind lies about citations. THIS VIDEO SHOWS THAT HOVIND CLAIMS A PAPER ARGUES CARBON DATING DOESN'T WORK. YET, THE PAPER DOES NOT AND HOVIND THEN ADMITS HE NEVER EVEN READ THE PAPER.
3) You ignore Hovind's own words to believe he's innocent of criminality and doesn't lie about science.
Trin80ty 3 months ago
"I believe he was set-up in order to be silenced"
then you know nothing about the case, it's all online. look for it and read it... it's pretty thorough and there's CLEAR evidence of wrong doing on Hovind's part and CLEAR evidence he lied and tried to hide assets as is evidenced in his calls from jail. Hovind was too F'n stupid to not know someone would be listening to his calls.
"I have never seen him lie about anything"
then you have never watched a single vid of his!
see watch?v=ZyEOPBx6i8o
lennyhipp 3 months ago
Respond to this video... He makes the evolutionists he debates look very incompetent. I have never been impressed by the evolutionists.
Pilgrim1411 3 months ago
@Pilgrim1411
I guess you have to have a basic understanding of science to know how wrong Hovind is. Or you can watch this video and see that HOVIND MISREPRESENTED SCIENTIFIC PAPERS HE NEVER EVEN READ.
If you accept Hovind's lies to accept Hovind's beliefs, fine.
Trin80ty 3 months ago
"He makes the evolutionists he debates look very incompetent"
probably because either:
1) he only debates incompetent
2) you're ignorant, and don't realize he's wrong
3) you think he's winning because he throws a lot of babble out there, and his opponent has no way of checking the sources Hovind uses... as this vid shows, he misrepresents what the sources say.
lennyhipp 3 months ago
"Hovind is right about the de-population agenda"
when you remove your tinfoil hat, and wipe the drool from your chin, you can join the rest of us in reality.
There's no evidence to support your silly conjectures. you, like your buddy Hovind, are just plain stupid
lennyhipp 3 months ago
IF most science theories are wrong, that yet would not support the existence of gods. Theists have the responsibility to support the claims that gods exist & arguing against science is only a feeble feverish attempt to fool themselves.
No 1 bases their life, how they treat others, how they want the government to be, etc etc on radiocarbon dating, the Theory Of Evolution or the Big Bang Theory.
Strangerinasland 7 months ago
The fact is about every qualified scientist in the entire world understands rcd to be valid, as well there are several other methods to date ancient items that are accurate. Hovind simply wont admit that his "belief" that the earth is 6,000 years old is just wrong. Hovind looks so dishonest when he goes on about how the world scientific community is wrong and no matter what evidence he encounters, he will not just admit that his "belief" is not confirmed with science. Give up Hovind.
orangemod 8 months ago
Ya but, I ah well I um lies in the text books. LOL
gregrutz 9 months ago
Look carbon dating still wrong in 1975 or 1977
drshamast 10 months ago
@drshamast
Give a source.
Trin80ty 10 months ago
@Trin80ty watch this on you-tube tape ............ Why radiometric dating doesn't work
drshamast 10 months ago
@drshamast
I'm sorry is English your second language? I am asking for a citation that has appeared in a scientific publication and was written by a professional credentialed in a relevant field.
If all you have is videos from uninformed and professional liars like Hovind save your time.
Trin80ty 10 months ago
@Trin80ty NEANDERTHAL RADIOCARBON PROBLEM reported in an article in BBC News 13 Feb 2009. Scientists trying to work out what happened to Neanderthals have made an interesting admission about dating methods.
drshamast 10 months ago
@drshamast
1) I asked for a scientific publication. The BBC is a news outlet. As such, the article is by a journalist, not a scientists, written for the public.
2) The source does NOT claim "radiometric dating doesn't work."
3) That article actually cites radiometric dating as evidence for the argument putforth. For example, from the article:
"This evidence came from radiocarbon dates obtained ..." and then it goes on to discuss how complex radiocarbon is. Laughable.
Trin80ty 10 months ago
@Trin80ty "This evidence came from radiocarbon dates obtained ..." and then it goes on to discuss how complex radiocarbon is" what is Laughable is your Assumption philosophy of naturalism, uniformitarianism assumes that the same natural laws and processes that operate in the universe now, have always operated in the universe in the past and apply everywhere in the universe. is so pathetic!
drshamast 10 months ago
@drshamast
It's very telling you didn't even give the title of the article, which is "Did climate kill off the Neanderthals?" The abstract of the article is "Climate change, we're told, poses the single gravest threat to the survival of our species."
You either didn't read the citation you gave or didn't understand it. Either way, your laziness or misunderstanding isn't evidence against evolution. It's just more proof of how hollow creationist claims are.
Trin80ty 10 months ago
@Trin80ty in the article points to The radiocarbon chronometer is like a clock that is sometimes running faster, and sometimes stops. So there are differences between radiocarbon years and calendar years, and that complicates trying to work out what is going on with the climate for a given radiocarbon date. The reference archives (Greenland ice cores) that we have for what climate was doing are in calendar years. And the discrepancies can be up to thousands of years apart."
drshamast 10 months ago
@drshamast
Yep, and scientists know that which is why they have factored that in with their techinques. The article makes that clear. Carbon dating is a complicated process with several methods to fact in the different sources of carbon and the different material that gets tested.
A range of dates aren't "discrepancies." You clearly have limited knowledge of math, science and even polling if you don't understand margin of error.
Stop commenting until you read what carbon dating is.
Trin80ty 10 months ago
Scientists do not use Carbon Dating to test older materials.
They use Rubidium-Strontium, Uranium-Lead, and Potassium-Argon tests to give corroborating dates.
Scorpion4hours 1 year ago
The person(s) who edited and posted this video promote hatred and violence towards Christians and Christianity.
ednja 1 year ago
@ednja don't worry when Kent Hovind is released from prison he is going to set these evilutionists straight.
HappyCabbie 1 year ago
@ednja at what part does this video promote hatred and violence? i can agree that it is a little bit disrespectful to call him crazy but i dont see any hatred and violence...
Lunkan164 1 year ago
@ednja Explains why he’s picking out a huge douche-bag to equate to Christians. Cut your ties to hovind
NightHawkBomber001 1 year ago
this infidel douche keeps bailing out Hovind.
thedayitriedtodie 1 year ago
Who cares about old bones and old rocks? Makes no difference. God created everything whenever it was created. Whats more important is the future which is yet to occur. I'm looking forward to being with God forever in the paradise that Jesus said he was creating for us. The earth is ok, it's served it's purpose for our flesh while we're here and learning, but God has a far better place for people who love him.
NewDirection4us 1 year ago
@NewDirection4us the problem is, how do you know that that part is true when other parts are false?
Lunkan164 1 year ago
@Lunkan164 False to the unbeliever who was not saved by the blood of Christ.
NewDirection4us 1 year ago
@NewDirection4us you didn't answer my question. i asked how do you know? kent hovind knows exactly why he is defending this part in the bible, because if it is proven wrong, whole christianity will fall with it.
Lunkan164 1 year ago
@Lunkan164 How is it then that many modern Christians have no issue with evolution? That they can adapt to fit modern knowledge. It usually the fundamentalists and ignorant the Kent caters to, he’s a smart guy, he uses these peoples fear against them and makes money off it. I mean it makes him an ass but smart.
NightHawkBomber001 1 year ago
@NightHawkBomber001 real Christians don't believe evolution. Only those who say tghey are Christian but don't have the Holy Spirit in them. IF they had the holy Spirit they would know the truth that evolution is the devil's lie.
NewDirection4us 1 year ago
@NewDirection4us Do you have any evidence of that? or are you just now dividing your religion further and promoting cult mentalities? A man made evolution not the devil son. Must we take the bible literally to be true Christians? You know those laws about killing rude children and such .
NightHawkBomber001 1 year ago
@NightHawkBomber001 the problem is as i stated before: how do you know which part is true and which part needs to be "altered" to fit modern science?
Lunkan164 1 year ago
@Lunkan164 Do your best to look at it in the eyes of the people from that time period. Understand the history and the culture. Realize it was written by people in that period and so laws and morals that would not be followed today are likely outdated and stuff with no evidence (such as the flood or Genesis creation) are meaningful stories but not actual history.
NightHawkBomber001 1 year ago
@NightHawkBomber001 well, you can further develop your idea and say that god is a meaningful story, but not actual history. im not trying to be offensive or anything, im just saying... Look at religion in the eyes of an atheist. Could a religion serve a purpose evolutionary-wise? For me it sure could. It doesn't matter if it is true if people think it is true. Wake up, you're in the matrix :)
Lunkan164 1 year ago
@Lunkan164 It doesn't matter if it is false if people think it is true.
Lunkan164 1 year ago
@Lunkan164 I could say that, however by claiming such a statement I would be not be accounting for error. A better way to put that would be “Perhaps there is a god, but seeing all the different religions that are out there past and present the likely hood of any one of them being right is small.”
NightHawkBomber001 1 year ago
@Lunkan164 Religion can be used to help people, or it can be used to separate them. Especially when people resort to combating modern knowledge based off their beliefs. They can still adapt and keep their beliefs but one must account for modern knowledge.
NightHawkBomber001 1 year ago
@NightHawkBomber001 it is a modern way you look at christianity indeed, and i'm aware that most christians agrees with this. but why are you a christian? why cannot the belief be personal instead? all unpersonal beliefs leads to accepting conclusions/"rules" through authority, and not through common sense. how do you look at homosexuality for example? i'm not one, but i can't see the problem with other being homosexuals.
Lunkan164 1 year ago
@Lunkan164 religiously I don’t know what to call myself actually. Homosexuality is a natural phenomenon. A God would have had to created it, and then told his people it was wrong even though some were pre-programmed with the homosexual tendencies making this God to be somewhat Malevolent
NightHawkBomber001 1 year ago
@NightHawkBomber001 my personal opinion: modern christians are a "hybrid" between humanism and teism. this is the best compromise a human with both a logical and a theological urge. we have been domesticated through thousands of years to be "believers", disbelievers (and wrong faith) have been massacred throughout history. modern christians believe in a god of the gaps. i'm fine with it, but i don't see any logic behind calling yourself christians, just call yourself believers :)
Lunkan164 1 year ago
@Lunkan164 how do I know? The holy Spirit reveals the truth to me. you unbelievers do not have the spirit, are blind to spiritual things, and follow satan your father.
NewDirection4us 1 year ago
@NewDirection4us how does the holy spirit decide to which people it will reveal the truth to?
Lunkan164 1 year ago
@Lunkan164 The Father has chosen those whom he has given to Christ to save. The same people chosen will receive the Holy Spirit and be reborn. These are God's elect.
NewDirection4us 1 year ago
hahaha and he is rotting in prison right now, some christian.
TheAndrewMan1000 2 years ago
P.S. If you would maybe study some biblical history, you will find that it is one of the most flawed sources of all time. We have no origional documents of the text and have over six thousand versions in greek that are different from each other. Scribes you to copy them by hand. The made mistakes both on accident an on purpose. There is also no proof of jesus. Ken is also wrong becasue the burdon of proof IS on him. He has no evidence of his claims, he has no evidence that Jesus even lived.
TheAndrewMan1000 2 years ago
Why don't you take a geology class and actually date them before you you make dumb shit conclusions like that. Kent gets owned over and over again by actual scientists. He continuously lies about our most accurate dating method, carbon dating. Sir, you obviously are bias, because there is proof right in front of you. We can date things from things in which the dates are already known! We can also check dates by other dating methods. Did you even listen to the caller you dumb ass.
TheAndrewMan1000 2 years ago
Kent go the name of a river wrong. The rest of what he said was true. There are no secondary evidence for any dating methods using any form of radiometric or radio carbon dating. The bible is as all evolutionists are well aware true.
warriorprince1010 2 years ago
@warriorprince1010 curious what you mean by secondary evidence. Tree ring counts are used to calibrate carbon dating methods.
SqueakerAlpha 1 year ago