Kent Hovind takes another call from Jared, 05/05, Part One

[sustainedbyramen]

lmao at this flintstones bullshit.

[Timmay123456789]

He may love "teaching" but he loves tax fraud a lot more =)

[Crit0]

Its funny you should use those specific rocks in these videos. They are known fakes.

[TeaBagJizzer]

yeah and we know t-rex doenst stand up straight with its tail on the ground something which many people dont know in underdelevoped countries where it was found

[micah1116]

@Crit0 No they are not fake. This whole idea that the ica stones of peru are fake hads been debunked. The man who sells thousands of them was interviewed by I believe nat geo or someplace like that. They brought two officers from peru with them and asked the man where he gets these stones from. He was getting them from peoples graves, which in peru is a literal death sentence, so he lied and said he made them and attempted to make one that was nothing like the others.

[Crit0]

@micah1116 He found them in a cave, not a grave. And he would have said the same thing if he HAD forged them. You're simply picking the option you want rather than the option that makes sense. No one has ever seen the cave he supposedly found them in and they are not corroborated by anything else. These are the classic hallmarks of a hoax, especially since we know that T-Rex went extinct some 65 million years before the dawn of man and there is no reason to think otherwise.

[micah1116]

@Crit0 They've been dated at about 100,000 years old. We both don't agree with that number so either radiometric dating is a joke or the rock are legit, or both(correct answer).

[Crit0]

@micah1116 Radiometric dating would find the age of the stone itself, not the engravings. They could have been carved in 7000 BC or in 1984 AD and the STONES would still date to 100,000 years old. I mean, duh! To learn when the rocks were ENGRAVED, an archaeologist would examine the site it was found in and would determine an approximate age based on its location and other materials in the site (like organic material.) But, of course, the "cave" where these stones were found is still unknown.

[micah1116]

@Crit0 Also, do you notice the circles on the dinosuars skin? They never knew what those circles represented because they are on every dinosaur drawing on the ica stones. We have found actually dinosaur skin and it has a circular pattern on it, so these people had to have seen live dinosuars to know to draw the circular pattern on the skin.

[Crit0]

@micah1116 It also depicts T-Rex standing straight up with his tail dragging on the ground. That was a misconception about all dinosaurs for nearly a hundred years, but it's wrong. We know it's wrong. Someone who had seen a live T-Rex would have drawn them the right way, but an uneducated Peruvian copying an image from an old book on dinosaurs would draw it wrong.

[ChavezNChampagne12]

I call Poe's Law.

[lonerook860]

What rubbish, Hovind is no scientist. His so called qualifications are in 'creation science' not in the scientific models which account for all available and testable evidence in this world.

[pup101]

yeah well he believes in that science but not in evolution and stuff like that .. thats what he says anyway

[lonerook860]

'creation science' does not make sense in light of modern-day literature on the subject. Besides, Hovind thinks that x rays are stopped by water, and cause the body to age, and cannot tell a chromosome from a gene. Check thunderf00t's videos to see how gourmless this pseudo-scientist fraudster is.

[DopeJedi]

You are wrong.

Radiation can be shielded off by water. Wikipedia "Radiation Protection".

I guess this makes you a pseudo-scientist fraudster too?

[DopeJedi]

Actually his qualifications are a Bachelors Degree in Religious Education and a Phd in Philosophy, not "creation science".

[karlkarlkarl1234]

@DopeJedi

His PhD is not accredited at all, it is from some backwater bible school.

If I wrote on a piece of paper in pink crayon that I am a professor it would hold more weight.

[DopeJedi]

@karlkarlkarl1234 Do you know what accredited even means? Do you know how many Universities are accredited? Do you even know what having an accredited degree means? Do you know that all Universities are not accredited? Harvard was just re-accredited a few years back. It doesn't change the fact though that you misrepresented your knowledge on this.

[busymartian]

What Eric doesn't tell you: Kent Hovind is his father, Kent got his PhD in Christian education from a diploma mill, the name of the High school he taught at for 15 years, and that Kent is currently in jail.

[Konform2zoidberg]

Well yeah the clip is from almost three years ago. Eric is actually continuing his fathers work. but it's less this whole, woo woo I know lots about science, I have a PhD in "education" and more bible says this "evil"utionists are dum

type stuff. If you're curious I would say take a look at pharyngula's blog

[Psalm130]

A degree is just a piece of paper. Kent knows what he knows. Deal with the arguments, not the man.

[busymartian]

Kent's degree is just a piece of paper. Kent's arguments are known as PRATT (Point Refuted A Thousand Times). If you are going to bring arguments to the table. Use updated data and new arguments. Don't misrepresent science. If you're going to be talking science, get ready to have real scientists check your work. Hovind's work has been checked. He got an F.

[listen2radiohead]

hahahaha "real scientists" !

[DeimosSaturn]

If it were genetically advantageous for an organism to be the size of a state (coral reefs) or small as a flee (...the flee) they would evolve to those sizes. If it were genetically advantageous for Dogs to be the size of a planet or a single cell, it would evolve that way. This prediction from the theory of evolution have been validated MANY times.

[listen2radiohead]

how was it "validated" ?

[DeimosSaturn]

It's been validated because large multicellular organisms such as whales evolved from a common ancestor which was only a single cell through billions of years of evolution. This prediction that organisms will change size comes from the mountains of evidence that show they have changed size.

[listen2radiohead]

mountains of evidence?? they are still all different sizes.. how was it validated again? or why don't you just try to convince me that humans used to be smaller when we were more monkeyish ?

[DeimosSaturn]

*face palm*

The gene that makes people have dwarfism is just one gene. It's not like evidence that is staring you in the face was ever going to convince you anyway. You are too well conditioned to think objectively.

[listen2radiohead]

and that evidence is...................?

[engiskhan]

Watch Ken Miller's videos and you'll see all kinds of evidence. If you really understood evolution, you wouldn't take your ridiculous position.

[DopeJedi]

So you think Microcephalic Osteodysplastic Primordial Dwarfism is the proof that humans were one Hobbits? That's crazy!