Dodo can you tell us what would happen to a RNA molecule (without the aid of a ribozyme engineer) if it was left completely unto its self?
If you need the half lives of Cytosine, Adenine, Cyanoacetaldehyde, Cyanoacetylene, Guanine & Uracil to help you in your equation ill be happy to send you the information
Interesting fail on the claim only plants harness the suns energy - what does he think powers the weather and ocean currents? How about the water cycle? Guess that's what happens when you ignore reality and try to twist the truth to fit what you already decided without evidence.
To quote Emma Goldman : "If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal". Seriously, no amount of voting is going to help douchebags from getting into office. All it gives you is replacing one douchebag by another, both being mere puppets of the corporate oligarchy.
Having said that.... Nice video series. Just stick with the topics you're good at and avoid politics, please ;-)
Entropy is a measure of disorder, THERMNODYNAMIC DISORDER, not the 'neat room/messy room' nonsense some people try to claim. A system uses energy to do work. That works is obtained by breaking molecular or atomic bonds. A system will destroy more molecular bonds in terms of their energy content than it can create molecular bonds in terms of energy content. Otherwise you would have an over-unity device. Therefore less usable energy remains in a system as it does work. Entropy made easy.
@TerrencePhillip66 To recap, works destroys more bonds in a system than it can create. Fewer bonds means less work can be done by the system and it means the atoms can be in a greater possible set of microstates - that is, THERMODYNAMIC DISORDER increases. This is the connection between entropy and disorder, they are diiferent measures of the same thing, two different consequences of fewer molecular bonds in the system as the system does work.
Well, it seems that Entropy would not produce systems as complex as a DNA strand or even a single celled organism from a bunch of superheated space dust.
Wow your a true asshole Extant. Adding energy from the sun will break down any chemicals or gasses trying to get together to form some kind of primitive cell. Urey and miller knew this.
@TEKNINEZ You get your energy from the sun dummy. If you don't take in energy [food] you die. We are not talking about the paint on your house fading, we are tlaking about the energy in chemical bonds of sugar they you live on.
Resource? Science/faith issues are pretty simple to resolve.
Where science conflicts with faith, science is right. Science relies on observation and evidence. If the evidence pointed towards faith being right, there would be no conflict. If there is a conflict, it's clearly because the evidence points away from faith.
When the information contained in a holy book takes people to the moon, maybe then we'd be justified in giving it the slightest bit of credence.
I see your point. With respect to the Christian worldview, if we establish that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, which says that God, who created the universe, is true & unchangeable, then what is revealed in the Bible (special revelation) should be consistent with what is revealed in nature (general revelation). Reasons To Believe helps to portray this harmony.
"if we establish that the Bible is the inspired Word of God... then what is revealed in the Bible (special revelation) should be consistent with what is revealed in nature"
And yet, it clearly is not. For instance, the bible says that plants existed before the sun. So, either the bible is at lest partially false or reality is at least partially false.
Reasons To Believe starts with their conclusion already decided. That is not science.
@blackplatypus You make a great point about the alleged inconsistency with respect to the creation accounts. There are 4 different literal meanings for “yom,” which is Hebrew for “day,” one of which means a long, finite period of time. It’s also important to consider all creation accounts throughout the Bible & you will see that the Bible & nature are consistent with regard to the origin of the universe & life.
Wow, spam much? I already know what day-age creationism is and it is fundamentally incompatible with the findings of science... as well as the bible. (and the EVENING and the MORNING were the first/second/third day)
There is no firmament dividing waters in the sky from anything, birds and whales did not exist before reptiles and insects and ERV's and human chromosome 2 demonstrate a clear common ancestry with other primates.
@blackplatypus “Evening and morning” refer to something that is completed, followed by a period of rest. Junk DNA & human chromosome 2 evidence can point to a Creator.
I see, so it's all true... until it conflicts with science. then it's metaphor.
if you're just going to copy/paste scientifically illiterate articles, (the chromosome 2 one basically boils down to "it's unlikely, therefore magic man did it") then I see little reason to continue discussing with you. Provide evidence that your claims are true plzkthx.
@blackplatypus Before I move on, I want to share my background. I have a degree in biological sciences, & completed university courses in philosophy & religious studies, including Christian origins & Philosophy of Religion, & my learning came through the public school & university system. I understand the Christian worldview from the perspective of a skeptic, from a secular view, & I appreciate the points you make. However, as a follower of Christ, I can see it from the believer’s standpoint.
"However, as a follower of Christ, I can see it from the believer’s standpoint"
and you assume I can't? I simply refuse to engage in special pleading.
"In terms of evidence..."
I can get anecdotal testimonial evidence for any other religion on the planet as well as aliens and astrology. I don't buy their stories and I assume that, for the most part, you don't either. Do we see what I mean by special pleading?
@blackplatypus “I don't buy their stories...” Yes, but the Christian worldview addresses anecdotal testimonial evidence from other worldviews: For such people are false apostles, deceitful workers, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants also masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve (2 Cor. 11:13-15).
"But after sincerely repenting of my sins & receiving Jesus as forgiver & leader, I came to know that He does exist"
You claim to have completed university philosophy courses... listen carefully... THAT IS CIRCULAR. By the way, you assume I also haven't done that.
"Jesus did & is doing amazing things in my life"
yes, yes. Preach, preach. I can get similar effects through narcotics abuse or excessive head trauma and I wouldn't have to engage in a philosophically bankrupt exercise
@blackplatypus If I may, what is your background? What do you think about the Christian worldview? Are you a follower of Christ? What do you believe in? To me, the Christian worldview surpasses others such as naturalism, postmodernism, pantheistic monism, Islam, etc., in terms of logical consistency, explanatory power & scope of reality, pragmatics, & addressing the internal needs of humanity.
Really, this is getting tiresome. Stop telling me what you believe if you're not going to support a single thing you say with anything other than copy/pasted links to apologist websites.
If you’re looking for “hard evidence,” then I currently can’t give you any. I can however give you reasons to believe. In the end it comes down to one exercising his/her faith, but it’s a valid basis of faith. Take care.
@blackplatypus I understand & appreciate your position. Although I presently can’t give others definitive proof for Christianity, a powerful, cumulative case can be made in favor of the Christian worldview, via inductive & abductive reasoning, thus giving a valid basis for one’s faith. And I see beauty in faith – it’s my ally rather than my enemy – I let it work for me rather than against me, for the LORD preserves the faithful (Psa. 31:23).
@blackplatypus Because it’s an intellectually honest response – a rational one. Philosophy of Religion (PoR) gives arguments (both deductive & inductive, both valid-sound & strong-cogent) for God’s existence that make Theism probable, which makes faith reasonable, & allows for the probability of miracles. According to PoR, direct observation & hearing testimonies are forms of evidence, which can cause one to have faith in God. All of this is rational, & the Christian faith is a rational one.
@blackplatypus Cosmological, Design & Moral arguments make Theism probable.
“different standard of evidence” Please define evidence.
Just as it takes faith to believe in God, it takes faith to believe in atheism. Extreme skepticism is also self-defeating – the claim “one cannot know” is incoherent for he claims to know that he doesn’t know.
@blackplatypus Then please tell me, in your honest, humble opinion, what worldview, either philosophical or religious, demonstrates the most consistency with respect to logic, has the most explanatory power and scope of reality, has the most verifiable truth claims, offers the most in terms of multiple lines of converging evidence that give it support, corresponds the most with what we experience in the world, is the most pragmatic, and addresses the internal needs of humanity the most?
@blackplatypus Thank you for your honesty. I will refrain from using the ad hominem fallacy, although I disagree with your claim about naturalism working pretty well – I see 50% of it having high points & the remaining 50% having flaws. I can offer a critique of naturalism if you want, but let’s focus on the positive case for the Christian worldview. For instance, it’s based on evidence. Paul (c. 1st century AD – c. 67AD) & Peter (c. 1BC – c. 67AD) are true historical people, as...
@wolfpack2023 Pt. 2…Clement of Rome (1st century AD - c.99AD), a contemporary of Paul & Peter, establishes their existence in his letter to the Church at Corinth c. 95AD, which is an extra-biblical source: “Let’s focus the eyes of our hearts to the Apostles the good: Peter, who suffered …” “Paul showed the way to the appreciation of the resilience of [faith] …” Ignatius of Antioch (c. 35AD – c. 107AD), another contemporary of Paul & Peter, also establishes their existence...
@wolfpack2023 Pt. 3…in his [Ignatius] letter to the 7 churches, another extra-biblical work: “Ignatius, also called Theoforus, to the Church who have received mercy in the glory of the transcendent … which also led a major place in the power of Rome … Not like Peter and Paul, I do not issue orders to you ….”
Therefore, we know that Paul & Peter are actual historical persons.
@blackplatypus Pt. 2…Clement of Rome (1st century AD - c.99AD), a contemporary of Paul & Peter, establishes their existence in his letter to the Church at Corinth c. 95AD, which is an extra-biblical source: “Let’s focus the eyes of our hearts to the Apostles the good: Peter, who suffered …” “Paul showed the way to the appreciation of the resilience of [faith] …” Ignatius of Antioch (c. 35AD – c. 107AD), another contemporary of Paul & Peter, also establishes their existence...
@blackplatypus Pt. 4 - Paul claims to give actual eyewitness testimony. Paul in 1 Cor. 15:6-8 states, “After that, he [Jesus] appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.”
Notice that Paul tells his audience that they are able to verify what he is saying .
@blackplatypus Pt. 5 - Paul also appeals to the knowledge of his opposing audience, concerning the facts of which he spoke. “I am not insane, most excellent Festus,” Paul replied. “What I am saying is true and reasonable. The king is familiar with these things, and I can speak freely to him. I am convinced that none of this has escaped his notice, because it was not done in a corner (Acts 26:25-26).
@blackplatypus Pt. 6 - Similarly, In Acts 2, Peter appeals to the knowledge of his audience: “Fellow Israelites, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.” Throughout, he appeals to 4 kinds of evidence: seen miracles, fulfilled prophecy, the witnessed resurrection, & observed events of the day.
@blackplatypus Pt. 7 - Peter continues, “Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Messiah.” Peter also claims to give actual eyewitness testimony: “God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of it (Acts 2:32).” “For we did not follow cleverly devised stories when we told you about the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in power, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty (2 Pet. 1:16).”
@blackplatypus Pt. 8 - In addition to this evidence, the preservation of the New Testament far surpasses the preservation of ancient works such as Homer’s Iliad, Pliny, Thucydides, Caesar’s Gallic Wars, Plato, & Aristotle’s Poetry. The variables are: 1) time interval from original date written to date of oldest surviving copy, 2) number of known manuscripts, & 3) accuracy of copies. We can be confident that the NT is far more reliable than other ancient works. See: carmDOTorg/manuscript-evidence
@blackplatypus Looks like Pt. 6 didn't post, here it is:
Pt. 6 - Similarly, In Acts 2, Peter appeals to the knowledge of his audience: “Fellow Israelites, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.” Throughout, he appeals to 4 kinds of evidence: seen miracles, fulfilled prophecy, the witnessed resurrection, & observed events of the day.
@blackplatypus I'll further address the Genesis Flood. The flood, as described in Gen. 6-8, was worldwide, but not global; i.e. it covered all of human civilization, but not the entire planet. The linguistic & historical context of the terms “world” & “earth,” & the integration of all Bible passages that address this subject, lead us to believe that the flood wasn’t global, but universal with respect to humanity. “Earth” means “land,” & “world” refers to “a major region of human civilization.”
@blackplatypus Genesis Flood cont’d - We also see these definitions of “earth” & “world” applied in 1 Kgs 10:24, Rom. 1:8, Col. 1:6, 2 Pet. 2:5, & 2 Pet. 3:6. Thus, only land that corresponded with human societies got flooded. Also, Psa. 104:5-9 & Job 38-39 tells us that the after landmasses emerged from the water-covered planet (Gen. 1), water will never cover the entire planet again since they serve as permanent boundaries for oceans.
@blackplatypus Genesis Flood cont’d - In terms of geography, it seems possible that the flood covered all of Mesopotamia, the entire Persian Gulf region, & much of southern Arabia. For more info. see: reasonsDOTorg/exploring-extent-flood-part-one
@blackplatypus There are criticisms against the Cosmological, Design & Moral arguments but they do not completely discredit them or disprove God’s existence. I believe that it takes more faith to believe in atheism rather than in God. The universe & life is so complex (and irreducibly complex) & fine-tuned that it would take more faith to believe that these resulted from random, unguided, impersonal processes rather than the simple answer that God created it.
@blackplatypus And not any God will do – it’s more rational to believe in the Christian God than in other forms of theism. For example, the Bible presents a cosmology - a singular beginning to all matter, energy, space & time, that matches well with the predominant views of modern science.
@blackplatypus In terms of evidence that the Christian worldview is true, I can offer my personal testimony as “indirect evidence” for others. There was a period of time when I didn’t believe in God & thought Christians & their beliefs were very foolish. But after sincerely repenting of my sins & receiving Jesus as forgiver & leader, I came to know that He does exist.
@blackplatypus Jesus did & is doing amazing things in my life; e.g. He gave me an unprecedented peace, satisfaction, & sense of purpose, & freed me from bitterness, depression & addiction! It all comes down to “If you could know God personally, would you want to? If yes, & if you sincerely repent of your sins & ask God to forgive & lead you, then you get proof that He exists. Best regards.
@wolfpack2023 However, it appears I'm getting ahead of myself. I have no need to preemptively debunk your claims before you actually support them. All you did was explain WHAT you believe and didn't give the slightest indication of why it's true.
Approaching the subject with the presupposition that the bible is correct is inherently contrary to scientific investigation and leads to these obvious mental gymnastics to reconcile the absurd with observation.
@blackplatypus Gen. 1 gives the major physical creation events in a time-ordered sequence but gives only a partial list of humankind’s responsibilities. In Gen. 2 God lays out humankind’s major responsibilities in a step-by-step sequence but makes a partial, passing reference of the physical creation events.
@wolfpack2023 Genesis 1 & 2 provide incompatible sequences. was man made before animals or not? Also, it's be nice if you could provide evidence that EITHER is true.
@blackplatypus In Genesis, animals were created before man was created. “Gen. 2:19: Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals…” Here, God already created animals, before man existed – “had formed” is the past perfect tense. Concerning the flood, I agree with Reasons To Believe’s position: youtubeDOTcom/watch?v=jKPw_VvIyu4
@blackplatypus Yes, my response is based on the premise that the Bible is the inspired Word of God. Many arguments support the Bible’s validity: it consists of 66 different books, written by 40 different authors, at different locations, over c. 1600 years, yet has unity & consistency; archaeological & geographical evidences give it credibility; it’s historical preservation far surpasses any ancient literary work; it's scientific foreknowledge, fulfilled prophecy, & standard for morality, etc.
@blackplatypus For alleged biblical contradictions, there are logical explanations. Google “bible contradictions explained,” Gleason Archer, Norman Geisler, F.F. Bruce, Walter Kaiser, Peter Davids, & Manfred Brauch wrote explanations too. carmDOTorg/ offers some as well. However, even with these, it’s important to understand context & discern truth.
Oh, yes, I forgot that ancient Israel understood general relativity and had constant travel to and from the moon.
"fulfilled prophecy"
Like all the times Jesus said the end of the world would come in his followers lifetimes.(Mt 10:23, 16:28, 23:36 26:64 Mk 9:1, 13:30, 14:62 Lk 9:2721:32 Jn 21:22) Confirmation bias and post-dictions are easy.
@blackplatypus With respect to fulfilled prophecy, I can see it either as biased confirmations or God’s sovereignty, but I choose the latter. With regard to archaeological & geographical evidence, I’m using inductive & abductive reasoning to give credibility to the Bible. With respect to morality, it’s important to understand the context when one reads the Bible.
@blackplatypus The Bible is mainly a story of redemption - God created humans in His image (rational, moral & spiritual) but have misused their freedom in order to sin & therefore need redemption in Christ. And while God’s relationship to evil remains to be fully revealed, it might lead to a greater good, & God promises that the day will come when He will do away with all evil, pain, & suffering on behalf of His people (Rev. 21:3-4).
@blackplatypus Keep in mind that there are 4 different literal meanings for “yom,” which is Hebrew for “day,” one of which is a long, unspecified, finite period of time. In Gen. 1, before day 1, God created the universe. He already made the sun, moon & stars (described during day 4), the Hebrew word for made is “asa,” which means that the action was already done.
@blackplatypus During day 1 (a long, finite period of time), the frame of reference is Earth’s surface. Here, sunlight reaches Earth’s surface. According to Science, some interplanetary debris is cleared, microbial life is present, & the atmosphere is changed from opaque to translucent. Then day is distinguished from night. Here, when God called the light “day,” another literal definition of “yom” is used – a period of time when light is present, 12 hours of daylight as opposed to nighttime.
@blackplatypus In Gen. 1, during day 2 (a long, finite period of time), the atmosphere (with water) is separated from the surface water, & the water cycle begins. In Gen. 1, during day 3 (a long, finite period of time), dry land masses emerge above the surface water, & land vegetation proliferates.
@blackplatypus In Gen. 1, during day 4 (a long, finite period of time), the sun, moon, & stars become distinctly visible from Earth’s surface; & the 24-hour day, seasons, & year are defined. Here, another literal definition of “yom” is used for “days” – 24 hrs. According to science, photosynthetic organisms absorbed atmospheric gases, making the atmosphere transparent.
@blackplatypus In Gen. 1, during day 5 (a long, finite period of time), swarms of small & minute animals (marine life & birds) are created. In Gen. 1, during day 6 (a long, finite period of time), specialized land mammals are created—livestock, creatures that move along the ground – rodents, hares, armadillos, etc., & wild animals; & Adam & Eve are created, having God’s image.
@blackplatypus Reasons To Believe adheres to the Progressive Creationism view, a type of Old-Earth Creationism. Some Christians adhere to Theistic Evolution, but I don’t hold that position. Please see youtubeDOTcom/watch?v=n-syxid39kg
People have been complaining about Obama, but when you actually think of what the alternative would have been, it's no wonder he won the Nobel peace prize.
So let me see if I have this correct: Entropy is basically energy evening out in a system, like an unplugged refrigerator warming up to room temperature until it gets plugged in again?
Physicist Stephen Hawking stated,Because there is a law such as gravity,the universe can and will create itself from Nothing.Look him up on yahoo he's trying to show proof that God didn't do it.That's all evolutionist do any way,but to be fair if you can show me some kind of proof that nothing can create something then I will agree.P.S if you break down the word uni verse uni means single and verse means spoken sentence,like Bible verse.
@TheChaosthegreat No, the world "universe" comes from the latin "universum", which means "everything rolled into one". Also, Stephen Hawking is referring to the quantum vacuum state, a matterless void where electromagnetic waves and particles pop in and out of existence. I'm not an expert on quantum physics, but its all there for you to look up. Given your multiple Hovindisms, I sincerely doubt you will though.
i think it should be illegal to talk about particle or theoretical physics without actually knowing what you are talking about. i think it would make the world a much better place. all you have to do is spend an hour in a library and you can pick up the basic understanding of particle physics and entropy. hell i did it in less than an hour, took me twenty minutes. his stupidity actually killed some of my brain cells, yes i felt them die.
As for my spelling,I'm typing on my IPad and I'm just getting use to it.And as far as evolution teaching we came from a rock 4.6 billion years ago just keep asking yourself where did we come from.If you do that you will understand,but besides that just pick up an evolution book,remember everything came from the big bang right,the earth cooled down,it rained on the rocks,formed an ocean of soup which came alive.I'm sorry but that's stupid,very stupid talk about voodoo science,or belief
Coming from a guy who think he's a type of monkey,who think all life on earth came from rocks that turned to soup when it rained on earth from nowhere,coming from someone who believes nothing exploded and created the uni verse.if nothing can create a uni verse then absolutely nothing sounds more intelligent than you.
@TheChaosthegreat I was gonna type a huge essay for you to understand why you don't understand evolution, especially when you're implying life came from "rocks".
@TheChaosthegreat lol, we ARE a type of ape, we are not currently monkeys, we decended from them, and actually, my explanation ISN'T a strawman, yours is, but STILL your belief sounds sillier, and what makes you think it rains from nowhere? :L is that how uneducated you are? lmao, and no, it's not that nothing exploded, that is your shit-for-brains interpretation of how, in actual fact, EVERYTHING expanded from an infinintecimal unit, you truly are a shame to the monkeys you decended from...
and no, Evolutionists are NOT all atheists, nor are all atheists evolutionists, you are simply too small minded to make the distinction...
and WE lack common sense? coming from the one that believes that god made man from dirt and a bit of magic, and that god sacrificed god to god because god was angry, and that an elderly old man built a wooden ark 1/3 the size of the titanic, found every animal in existence, and somehow got them on?
@DiggityDogg56 (cont.) Why is specified functional information important? Mainly because it is strong evidence against the reductionist and 'matter first' arguments. The difference between a blank DVD and a copy of the Lion King is not a material argument, it is the difference between information carrying potential compared to the existence of specified functional information. The moment information is discovered i.e. The Lion King, than the material reductionist argument becomes mute.
@DiggityDogg56 I don't see where I'm wrong, given the post. Yours is a typical reductionist argument in that it works great right up until you develop an understanding of Information theory and micro cellular processes. Entropic resistance is accomplished with guided use of matter and energy. Guided by what? Functionally specific micro cellular machines such as proteins, messenger RNA, and a laundry list of other devices. Each 'machine' is created and operates using job specific information.
@DiggityDogg56 I don't see where I'm wrong, given the post. Yours is a typical reductionist argument in that it works great right up until you develop an understanding of Information theory and micro cellular processes. Entropic resistance is accomplished with guided use of matter and energy. Guided by what? Functionally specific micro cellular machines such as proteins, messenger RNA, and a laundry list of other devices. Each 'machine' is created and operates using job specific information.
@Bluevlolution But I digress, Hovind and Berlinski both have a genuine scepticism for Darwinian Evolutionary theory (gradual, punctuated equilibrium, and/or any attempt to mix these two.) I have an even greater scepticism toward the origin of life (or species, to be honest) being from something other than Intelligent Design. There are many reasons for my position (all based in evidence) and I am more than willing to share ,point for counter point, with anyone who is interested.
@Bluevolution I was only offering an observation about life. I understand that many scientists view the origin of life as a separate topic from the origin of species. This has not stopped many well respected members of academia from spewing out all types of nonsensical theories for the origin of life (everything from proteins randomly forming within electrified crystals to 'Alien Seeding.)
Life, as I observe it, is basically a kind of Anti-Entropic engine operating within the second law of thermodynamics. The theory that such an engine could randomly occur without intelligent design is mathematically improbable. I enjoy Kent Hovind's scepticism of organic evolutionary theory. I would recommend Berlinski as well. A very interesting and challenging topic.
@TheFreebourne You OBVIOUSLY have NO comprehension of evolutionary theory. No part of it says ANYTHING about random occurrence. Such an engine would have come about by evolution, and NO other means supported by any measurable evidence, hence the lack of ANY other theory. I. D. is NOT a theory, it does not hold up to the scientific method. You cant even call it a proper hypothesis, unless of course you throw widely accepted scientific evidence out the window.
@TheFreebourne Wrong. The tiny bit of matter that life binds into organic molecules, thereby increasing usable energy available to the system and decreasing thermodynamic disorder since it locks up atoms into fewer degrees of freedom is swamped by the disorder occurring in the energy source, the sun. This is true of all systems. Disorder in the energy source will always swamp whatever order the process that is using that energy may create.
People need to comment on ur upload more aswear like but yh GRIMINAL try teef the NASTY hook still so where got a brand new DISS for him and at the end you can see what happens in the rave
It is only logical to assume that we evolved from something as small as a bacterium.
Not only is Hovind's science weak, so is his Theology. He needs to go back to secondary school to relearn Theology and Science. He denies the Sacraments and that Salvation isn't guaranteed. So his parish is actually very arrogant for assuming guaranteed salvation. However that's moot since Heaven and Hell are asinine concepts. Why an infinite punishment for a finite transgression?
msstateguy18: both parties are in the pocket of big business. Both the ignorant poor and the vast majority of the Social Register (in addition to the nouveaux riches) vote Republican, such a party cannot be good for the majority of Americans. 90% of the population has only 30% of the wealth, and most of that goes to the middle-class, not the working-class majority. Only in the sphere of class does the minority have privilege.
Where the fuck did you hear that? That's grossly inaccurate. Either way, Jesus was a person, so I'd say Christianity officially counts as a cult according to your definition.
:Lol man the words like homogeneity are not made for me, but the scary shit is i know what ur talking about that puts somebody not seeing the inside of a university (to expensive!) and smoked out brain above the Theist in the foodchain yay
Vote, why would I do that? No one good win's anyway. The Republican party has been hijacked with fundamentalist extremist and the Democratic party goes against Free Market principles and supports regulatory organizations that are instruments of oppression against the free market.
The major leaders of Christian or Creation apologetics basically agree with what Hovind is saying. He is not the ONLY one who says what he says most of the other creation scientists have done the same research he has done, so would you PLEASE stop calling it "Hovindism", because he is not starting an abusive cult like Islam or Communism, but he's only trying to win your heart to the Lord.
Well, depends if you wish to believe in what the Bible says is ACTUALLY true, or simple try to grind it down to a wishy-washy allegory, instead of just admitting that the Bible is plainly wrong.
Really Eye2Eye? Islam is a cult? Well it must be a very big cult, with 1.2 billion people. You're probably one of those hating bigots that thinks every religion besides his/her own is a cult. What about Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Shintoism, and Jainism? You probably think those are cults too. I wouldn't be surprised if you thought of Catholocism as a cult. The cults are those who take their religion too far. The Westborough Baptist Church, Extremists, and, of course, Creationists.
Ha, it's funny you ask that question! That's a very important step in the process of science. We should all be skeptical. If you don't understand how scientist know and use the unit of measure (light year), I suggest you buy a good textbook. Research your question based on the evidence provided. But, DON'T dismiss it simply because YOU don't understand it. That's a common fallacy based on personal incredulity!
Um... Humans can use sun light. I want to rip Hovindins balls off and shove them down his trough. the muffled cry's of pain are more scientific then the bullshit he says
it's not necessary to know where gravity came from to explain how nature works...we have a very clear understanding that if you jump off the empire state building--your body will fall towards the earth. Try it, if you don't believe it!!! lol
I'm form Canada and I'm sorry to inform you but snow is evil and must be the tool of the devil. Just visit Winnipeg in January and you can see for your self.
(this comment was intend for humorous uses only, for those of you how are about to flame)
I used to live in Norway, up there is a place called Hell and it's covered in shit loads of snow all winter long, proof if any were needed that snow is indeed the work of satan!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Please, if you are going to read a script for your videos, then please do not try and sound like you are not, because you aren't very good at it. :) Your videos are great, but I would rather you just straight up read.
Haha! The name at the beginning of Reference 1, that's my last name! Good video, but lessen on politics. Politics are all stupid and just alienate people (especially the people who really need to take in the points of the video)!
THis video is basically useless politics. I was hoping that someone could explain to me how the second law of thermaldynamics and the process of evolution could co-exist in the same universe. Evolution is real but so is entropy. THis reality is unexplained by any scientist, so Hovind is right. THe origin of life is unexplained as well. BTW, how you liking your hope and change president now? What a fraud
When they say there is an invisible person that created everything they scold skeptics for trying to apply reason and science to religion but when the intellectual community comes forward they seem to have no problem applying reason to those scientific theory's all while claiming there invisible god with no evidence and telling everyone else that evidence is useless. seems they are trying so hard to convince themselves of lies lol
okey. This series seems pretty good for debunking Hovind, but I still can't find an argument that proves there isn't any type of creation in life. Life creating itself out of nothing doesn't seem to have any consistance.
Yeah, I don't know, which is why I'm not a strong believer, there's theories such as the big bang which suggests a small dot exploding and expanding and inevitably will reverse the process and could have done so before this expand, but I want to read more about it before I start jumping on that theory... for all i know, the Egyptians were more advanced than us, which I've thought up a few times before, just cuz it'd be cool :).
well, I think it wasnt the Egyptians, it was an ancient civilization that lived 10.000 years ago that was more advanced. This civilization would be responsable for the Pyramids all around the world; there are so many authors that remark that ancient civilization. You may find interesting Graham Hancock's discoveries on that, and these 2 videos:
I don't think Egyptians are more advanced than us considering they had no electricity., space travel abilities, and they didn't have a very adequate written language
Wow what a douche hovind is. The japanese nukes did not only kill the people listed in this video but also allowed radioactive mutations to carry on to the victims babies or themselves. Along with the loss of land.Besides about the suns energy thing, if 100 thousand nukes exploded in the vastness of space far away from earth,we wouldnt really feel much would we?
"It's, it's like addition, really. It's just addition at this point." This is where I cracked up.
dpowens 3 days ago in playlist Uploaded videos
Dodo can you tell us what would happen to a RNA molecule (without the aid of a ribozyme engineer) if it was left completely unto its self?
If you need the half lives of Cytosine, Adenine, Cyanoacetaldehyde, Cyanoacetylene, Guanine & Uracil to help you in your equation ill be happy to send you the information
toobsucker 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
Interesting fail on the claim only plants harness the suns energy - what does he think powers the weather and ocean currents? How about the water cycle? Guess that's what happens when you ignore reality and try to twist the truth to fit what you already decided without evidence.
faircompetition1 2 months ago
Kent Hovind: Because nothing says "Christian values" quite like joking about atrocities and thinly veiled racism.
bobdolesrevenge 4 months ago
Lol@the voting crap. If voting was worth while people might actually do it
herb420ish 5 months ago
@herb420ish "if voting actually made a difference they'd make it illegal"
tuseroni 3 months ago
To quote Emma Goldman : "If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal". Seriously, no amount of voting is going to help douchebags from getting into office. All it gives you is replacing one douchebag by another, both being mere puppets of the corporate oligarchy.
Having said that.... Nice video series. Just stick with the topics you're good at and avoid politics, please ;-)
OutOfTheBoxThinker 7 months ago
Entropy is a measure of disorder, THERMNODYNAMIC DISORDER, not the 'neat room/messy room' nonsense some people try to claim. A system uses energy to do work. That works is obtained by breaking molecular or atomic bonds. A system will destroy more molecular bonds in terms of their energy content than it can create molecular bonds in terms of energy content. Otherwise you would have an over-unity device. Therefore less usable energy remains in a system as it does work. Entropy made easy.
TerrencePhillip66 7 months ago
@TerrencePhillip66 To recap, works destroys more bonds in a system than it can create. Fewer bonds means less work can be done by the system and it means the atoms can be in a greater possible set of microstates - that is, THERMODYNAMIC DISORDER increases. This is the connection between entropy and disorder, they are diiferent measures of the same thing, two different consequences of fewer molecular bonds in the system as the system does work.
TerrencePhillip66 7 months ago
What does Entropy have to do with the Big Bang?
Well, it seems that Entropy would not produce systems as complex as a DNA strand or even a single celled organism from a bunch of superheated space dust.
Does that help?
Laylow4now 8 months ago
Wow your a true asshole Extant. Adding energy from the sun will break down any chemicals or gasses trying to get together to form some kind of primitive cell. Urey and miller knew this.
TEKNINEZ 8 months ago
@TEKNINEZ You get your energy from the sun dummy. If you don't take in energy [food] you die. We are not talking about the paint on your house fading, we are tlaking about the energy in chemical bonds of sugar they you live on.
gregrutz 6 months ago
The absolute best explanation I have heard for the imbalance of matter to energy was pulled from the discovery of a third flavor of neutrino.
EgadsNo 10 months ago
Reasons To Believe, reasonsDOTorg is a great resource regarding science-faith issues.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@wolfpack2023
Resource? Science/faith issues are pretty simple to resolve.
Where science conflicts with faith, science is right. Science relies on observation and evidence. If the evidence pointed towards faith being right, there would be no conflict. If there is a conflict, it's clearly because the evidence points away from faith.
When the information contained in a holy book takes people to the moon, maybe then we'd be justified in giving it the slightest bit of credence.
blackplatypus 1 year ago
@blackplatypus "Science/faith issues"
I see your point. With respect to the Christian worldview, if we establish that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, which says that God, who created the universe, is true & unchangeable, then what is revealed in the Bible (special revelation) should be consistent with what is revealed in nature (general revelation). Reasons To Believe helps to portray this harmony.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@wolfpack2023
"if we establish that the Bible is the inspired Word of God... then what is revealed in the Bible (special revelation) should be consistent with what is revealed in nature"
And yet, it clearly is not. For instance, the bible says that plants existed before the sun. So, either the bible is at lest partially false or reality is at least partially false.
Reasons To Believe starts with their conclusion already decided. That is not science.
blackplatypus 1 year ago
@blackplatypus You make a great point about the alleged inconsistency with respect to the creation accounts. There are 4 different literal meanings for “yom,” which is Hebrew for “day,” one of which means a long, finite period of time. It’s also important to consider all creation accounts throughout the Bible & you will see that the Bible & nature are consistent with regard to the origin of the universe & life.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@wolfpack2023
Wow, spam much? I already know what day-age creationism is and it is fundamentally incompatible with the findings of science... as well as the bible. (and the EVENING and the MORNING were the first/second/third day)
There is no firmament dividing waters in the sky from anything, birds and whales did not exist before reptiles and insects and ERV's and human chromosome 2 demonstrate a clear common ancestry with other primates.
blackplatypus 1 year ago
@blackplatypus “Evening and morning” refer to something that is completed, followed by a period of rest. Junk DNA & human chromosome 2 evidence can point to a Creator.
reasonsDOTorg/chromosome-2-best-evidence-evolution
reasonsDOTorg/junk-dna-hotspots-connect-case-intelligent-design
reasonsDOTorg/junk-dna-evidence-biological-evolution
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@wolfpack2023
I see, so it's all true... until it conflicts with science. then it's metaphor.
if you're just going to copy/paste scientifically illiterate articles, (the chromosome 2 one basically boils down to "it's unlikely, therefore magic man did it") then I see little reason to continue discussing with you. Provide evidence that your claims are true plzkthx.
blackplatypus 1 year ago
@blackplatypus Before I move on, I want to share my background. I have a degree in biological sciences, & completed university courses in philosophy & religious studies, including Christian origins & Philosophy of Religion, & my learning came through the public school & university system. I understand the Christian worldview from the perspective of a skeptic, from a secular view, & I appreciate the points you make. However, as a follower of Christ, I can see it from the believer’s standpoint.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@wolfpack2023
"However, as a follower of Christ, I can see it from the believer’s standpoint"
and you assume I can't? I simply refuse to engage in special pleading.
"In terms of evidence..."
I can get anecdotal testimonial evidence for any other religion on the planet as well as aliens and astrology. I don't buy their stories and I assume that, for the most part, you don't either. Do we see what I mean by special pleading?
blackplatypus 1 year ago
@blackplatypus “I don't buy their stories...” Yes, but the Christian worldview addresses anecdotal testimonial evidence from other worldviews: For such people are false apostles, deceitful workers, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants also masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve (2 Cor. 11:13-15).
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@wolfpack2023
"But after sincerely repenting of my sins & receiving Jesus as forgiver & leader, I came to know that He does exist"
You claim to have completed university philosophy courses... listen carefully... THAT IS CIRCULAR. By the way, you assume I also haven't done that.
"Jesus did & is doing amazing things in my life"
yes, yes. Preach, preach. I can get similar effects through narcotics abuse or excessive head trauma and I wouldn't have to engage in a philosophically bankrupt exercise
blackplatypus 1 year ago
@blackplatypus If I may, what is your background? What do you think about the Christian worldview? Are you a follower of Christ? What do you believe in? To me, the Christian worldview surpasses others such as naturalism, postmodernism, pantheistic monism, Islam, etc., in terms of logical consistency, explanatory power & scope of reality, pragmatics, & addressing the internal needs of humanity.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@wolfpack2023
Really, this is getting tiresome. Stop telling me what you believe if you're not going to support a single thing you say with anything other than copy/pasted links to apologist websites.
Provide evidence or go away.
blackplatypus 1 year ago
@blackplatypus
If you’re looking for “hard evidence,” then I currently can’t give you any. I can however give you reasons to believe. In the end it comes down to one exercising his/her faith, but it’s a valid basis of faith. Take care.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@wolfpack2023
As is clear, I prefer to believe things based on evidence. One can justify *any* given proposition with "I have faith".
Special pleading is intellectually dishonest.
blackplatypus 1 year ago
@blackplatypus I understand & appreciate your position. Although I presently can’t give others definitive proof for Christianity, a powerful, cumulative case can be made in favor of the Christian worldview, via inductive & abductive reasoning, thus giving a valid basis for one’s faith. And I see beauty in faith – it’s my ally rather than my enemy – I let it work for me rather than against me, for the LORD preserves the faithful (Psa. 31:23).
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@wolfpack2023
Explain to me how this is *not* special pleading.
blackplatypus 1 year ago
@blackplatypus Because it’s an intellectually honest response – a rational one. Philosophy of Religion (PoR) gives arguments (both deductive & inductive, both valid-sound & strong-cogent) for God’s existence that make Theism probable, which makes faith reasonable, & allows for the probability of miracles. According to PoR, direct observation & hearing testimonies are forms of evidence, which can cause one to have faith in God. All of this is rational, & the Christian faith is a rational one.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@wolfpack2023 "gives arguments (both deductive & inductive, both valid-sound & strong-cogent) for God’s existence that make Theism probable"
I would disagree.
"According to PoR, direct observation & hearing testimonies are forms of evidence"
I know that and a different standard of evidence is being applied to your god than to other claims... Hence special pleading.
Faith. Believing a claim despite evidence and in the face of evidence to the contrary, is nonsense.
blackplatypus 1 year ago
@blackplatypus Cosmological, Design & Moral arguments make Theism probable.
“different standard of evidence” Please define evidence.
Just as it takes faith to believe in God, it takes faith to believe in atheism. Extreme skepticism is also self-defeating – the claim “one cannot know” is incoherent for he claims to know that he doesn’t know.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@wolfpack2023
"Cosmological, Design & Moral arguments make Theism probable"
There's enough refutations of all of these on the internet. I'm not even going to bother doing more than laugh at you.
Evidence: that which is used to demonstrate the truth of a proposition.
"Just as it takes faith to believe in God, it takes faith to believe in atheism"
No more faith than it takes to not believe in unicorns or dragons.
blackplatypus 1 year ago
@blackplatypus Then please tell me, in your honest, humble opinion, what worldview, either philosophical or religious, demonstrates the most consistency with respect to logic, has the most explanatory power and scope of reality, has the most verifiable truth claims, offers the most in terms of multiple lines of converging evidence that give it support, corresponds the most with what we experience in the world, is the most pragmatic, and addresses the internal needs of humanity the most?
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@wolfpack2023
I fail to see how this is anything more than a setup to commit a big tu quoque fallacy.
Humanism or naturalism seem to work pretty well but, on the whole, a single word label tends to oversimplify the matter.
blackplatypus 1 year ago
@blackplatypus Thank you for your honesty. I will refrain from using the ad hominem fallacy, although I disagree with your claim about naturalism working pretty well – I see 50% of it having high points & the remaining 50% having flaws. I can offer a critique of naturalism if you want, but let’s focus on the positive case for the Christian worldview. For instance, it’s based on evidence. Paul (c. 1st century AD – c. 67AD) & Peter (c. 1BC – c. 67AD) are true historical people, as...
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@wolfpack2023 Pt. 2…Clement of Rome (1st century AD - c.99AD), a contemporary of Paul & Peter, establishes their existence in his letter to the Church at Corinth c. 95AD, which is an extra-biblical source: “Let’s focus the eyes of our hearts to the Apostles the good: Peter, who suffered …” “Paul showed the way to the appreciation of the resilience of [faith] …” Ignatius of Antioch (c. 35AD – c. 107AD), another contemporary of Paul & Peter, also establishes their existence...
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@wolfpack2023 Pt. 3…in his [Ignatius] letter to the 7 churches, another extra-biblical work: “Ignatius, also called Theoforus, to the Church who have received mercy in the glory of the transcendent … which also led a major place in the power of Rome … Not like Peter and Paul, I do not issue orders to you ….”
Therefore, we know that Paul & Peter are actual historical persons.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@blackplatypus Pt. 2…Clement of Rome (1st century AD - c.99AD), a contemporary of Paul & Peter, establishes their existence in his letter to the Church at Corinth c. 95AD, which is an extra-biblical source: “Let’s focus the eyes of our hearts to the Apostles the good: Peter, who suffered …” “Paul showed the way to the appreciation of the resilience of [faith] …” Ignatius of Antioch (c. 35AD – c. 107AD), another contemporary of Paul & Peter, also establishes their existence...
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@blackplatypus Pt. 4 - Paul claims to give actual eyewitness testimony. Paul in 1 Cor. 15:6-8 states, “After that, he [Jesus] appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.”
Notice that Paul tells his audience that they are able to verify what he is saying .
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@blackplatypus Pt. 5 - Paul also appeals to the knowledge of his opposing audience, concerning the facts of which he spoke. “I am not insane, most excellent Festus,” Paul replied. “What I am saying is true and reasonable. The king is familiar with these things, and I can speak freely to him. I am convinced that none of this has escaped his notice, because it was not done in a corner (Acts 26:25-26).
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@blackplatypus Pt. 6 - Similarly, In Acts 2, Peter appeals to the knowledge of his audience: “Fellow Israelites, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.” Throughout, he appeals to 4 kinds of evidence: seen miracles, fulfilled prophecy, the witnessed resurrection, & observed events of the day.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@blackplatypus Pt. 7 - Peter continues, “Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Messiah.” Peter also claims to give actual eyewitness testimony: “God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of it (Acts 2:32).” “For we did not follow cleverly devised stories when we told you about the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in power, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty (2 Pet. 1:16).”
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@blackplatypus Pt. 8 - In addition to this evidence, the preservation of the New Testament far surpasses the preservation of ancient works such as Homer’s Iliad, Pliny, Thucydides, Caesar’s Gallic Wars, Plato, & Aristotle’s Poetry. The variables are: 1) time interval from original date written to date of oldest surviving copy, 2) number of known manuscripts, & 3) accuracy of copies. We can be confident that the NT is far more reliable than other ancient works. See: carmDOTorg/manuscript-evidence
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@blackplatypus Looks like Pt. 6 didn't post, here it is:
Pt. 6 - Similarly, In Acts 2, Peter appeals to the knowledge of his audience: “Fellow Israelites, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.” Throughout, he appeals to 4 kinds of evidence: seen miracles, fulfilled prophecy, the witnessed resurrection, & observed events of the day.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@blackplatypus I'll further address the Genesis Flood. The flood, as described in Gen. 6-8, was worldwide, but not global; i.e. it covered all of human civilization, but not the entire planet. The linguistic & historical context of the terms “world” & “earth,” & the integration of all Bible passages that address this subject, lead us to believe that the flood wasn’t global, but universal with respect to humanity. “Earth” means “land,” & “world” refers to “a major region of human civilization.”
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@blackplatypus Genesis Flood cont’d - We also see these definitions of “earth” & “world” applied in 1 Kgs 10:24, Rom. 1:8, Col. 1:6, 2 Pet. 2:5, & 2 Pet. 3:6. Thus, only land that corresponded with human societies got flooded. Also, Psa. 104:5-9 & Job 38-39 tells us that the after landmasses emerged from the water-covered planet (Gen. 1), water will never cover the entire planet again since they serve as permanent boundaries for oceans.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@blackplatypus Genesis Flood cont’d - In terms of geography, it seems possible that the flood covered all of Mesopotamia, the entire Persian Gulf region, & much of southern Arabia. For more info. see: reasonsDOTorg/exploring-extent-flood-part-one
reasonsDOTorg/exploring-extent-flood-what-bible-says-part-two
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@blackplatypus There are criticisms against the Cosmological, Design & Moral arguments but they do not completely discredit them or disprove God’s existence. I believe that it takes more faith to believe in atheism rather than in God. The universe & life is so complex (and irreducibly complex) & fine-tuned that it would take more faith to believe that these resulted from random, unguided, impersonal processes rather than the simple answer that God created it.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@blackplatypus And not any God will do – it’s more rational to believe in the Christian God than in other forms of theism. For example, the Bible presents a cosmology - a singular beginning to all matter, energy, space & time, that matches well with the predominant views of modern science.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@blackplatypus In terms of evidence that the Christian worldview is true, I can offer my personal testimony as “indirect evidence” for others. There was a period of time when I didn’t believe in God & thought Christians & their beliefs were very foolish. But after sincerely repenting of my sins & receiving Jesus as forgiver & leader, I came to know that He does exist.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@blackplatypus Jesus did & is doing amazing things in my life; e.g. He gave me an unprecedented peace, satisfaction, & sense of purpose, & freed me from bitterness, depression & addiction! It all comes down to “If you could know God personally, would you want to? If yes, & if you sincerely repent of your sins & ask God to forgive & lead you, then you get proof that He exists. Best regards.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@blackplatypus Correction: "...then you will get proof that He exists."
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@wolfpack2023 However, it appears I'm getting ahead of myself. I have no need to preemptively debunk your claims before you actually support them. All you did was explain WHAT you believe and didn't give the slightest indication of why it's true.
Approaching the subject with the presupposition that the bible is correct is inherently contrary to scientific investigation and leads to these obvious mental gymnastics to reconcile the absurd with observation.
Also, Genesis 2 says you're wrong.
blackplatypus 1 year ago
@blackplatypus Gen. 1 gives the major physical creation events in a time-ordered sequence but gives only a partial list of humankind’s responsibilities. In Gen. 2 God lays out humankind’s major responsibilities in a step-by-step sequence but makes a partial, passing reference of the physical creation events.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@wolfpack2023 Genesis 1 & 2 provide incompatible sequences. was man made before animals or not? Also, it's be nice if you could provide evidence that EITHER is true.
blackplatypus 1 year ago
@blackplatypus In Genesis, animals were created before man was created. “Gen. 2:19: Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals…” Here, God already created animals, before man existed – “had formed” is the past perfect tense. Concerning the flood, I agree with Reasons To Believe’s position: youtubeDOTcom/watch?v=jKPw_VvIyu4
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@blackplatypus Yes, my response is based on the premise that the Bible is the inspired Word of God. Many arguments support the Bible’s validity: it consists of 66 different books, written by 40 different authors, at different locations, over c. 1600 years, yet has unity & consistency; archaeological & geographical evidences give it credibility; it’s historical preservation far surpasses any ancient literary work; it's scientific foreknowledge, fulfilled prophecy, & standard for morality, etc.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@wolfpack2023
"yet has unity & consistency"
HA that's funny. I think I'll take a page from your book... skepticsannotatedbibleDOTcom/contra/by_nameDOThtml
"archaeological "
erm... no. There is no archaeological evidence for the exodus for instance. Even Jewish scholars admit this.
"geographical"
Like ALL the evidence for a global flood?
"it’s historical preservation"
So, was Jesus born during the reign of Herod the Great or when Cyrenius was governor?
blackplatypus 1 year ago
@blackplatypus For alleged biblical contradictions, there are logical explanations. Google “bible contradictions explained,” Gleason Archer, Norman Geisler, F.F. Bruce, Walter Kaiser, Peter Davids, & Manfred Brauch wrote explanations too. carmDOTorg/ offers some as well. However, even with these, it’s important to understand context & discern truth.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@wolfpack2023
"it's scientific foreknowledge"
Oh, yes, I forgot that ancient Israel understood general relativity and had constant travel to and from the moon.
"fulfilled prophecy"
Like all the times Jesus said the end of the world would come in his followers lifetimes.(Mt 10:23, 16:28, 23:36 26:64 Mk 9:1, 13:30, 14:62 Lk 9:27 21:32 Jn 21:22) Confirmation bias and post-dictions are easy.
"standard for morality"
rape = fine. working on Sunday = death. sure...
blackplatypus 1 year ago
@blackplatypus With respect to fulfilled prophecy, I can see it either as biased confirmations or God’s sovereignty, but I choose the latter. With regard to archaeological & geographical evidence, I’m using inductive & abductive reasoning to give credibility to the Bible. With respect to morality, it’s important to understand the context when one reads the Bible.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@blackplatypus The Bible is mainly a story of redemption - God created humans in His image (rational, moral & spiritual) but have misused their freedom in order to sin & therefore need redemption in Christ. And while God’s relationship to evil remains to be fully revealed, it might lead to a greater good, & God promises that the day will come when He will do away with all evil, pain, & suffering on behalf of His people (Rev. 21:3-4).
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@blackplatypus Keep in mind that there are 4 different literal meanings for “yom,” which is Hebrew for “day,” one of which is a long, unspecified, finite period of time. In Gen. 1, before day 1, God created the universe. He already made the sun, moon & stars (described during day 4), the Hebrew word for made is “asa,” which means that the action was already done.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@blackplatypus During day 1 (a long, finite period of time), the frame of reference is Earth’s surface. Here, sunlight reaches Earth’s surface. According to Science, some interplanetary debris is cleared, microbial life is present, & the atmosphere is changed from opaque to translucent. Then day is distinguished from night. Here, when God called the light “day,” another literal definition of “yom” is used – a period of time when light is present, 12 hours of daylight as opposed to nighttime.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@blackplatypus In Gen. 1, during day 2 (a long, finite period of time), the atmosphere (with water) is separated from the surface water, & the water cycle begins. In Gen. 1, during day 3 (a long, finite period of time), dry land masses emerge above the surface water, & land vegetation proliferates.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@blackplatypus In Gen. 1, during day 4 (a long, finite period of time), the sun, moon, & stars become distinctly visible from Earth’s surface; & the 24-hour day, seasons, & year are defined. Here, another literal definition of “yom” is used for “days” – 24 hrs. According to science, photosynthetic organisms absorbed atmospheric gases, making the atmosphere transparent.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@blackplatypus In Gen. 1, during day 5 (a long, finite period of time), swarms of small & minute animals (marine life & birds) are created. In Gen. 1, during day 6 (a long, finite period of time), specialized land mammals are created—livestock, creatures that move along the ground – rodents, hares, armadillos, etc., & wild animals; & Adam & Eve are created, having God’s image.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
@blackplatypus Reasons To Believe adheres to the Progressive Creationism view, a type of Old-Earth Creationism. Some Christians adhere to Theistic Evolution, but I don’t hold that position. Please see youtubeDOTcom/watch?v=n-syxid39kg
youtubeDOTcom/watch?v=JlGVqUZo83s&feature=related
Hope this helps.
wolfpack2023 1 year ago
0:20 Nice beard dickweed
MrReasonFTW 1 year ago
People have been complaining about Obama, but when you actually think of what the alternative would have been, it's no wonder he won the Nobel peace prize.
MarshmallowRadiation 1 year ago
@MarshmallowRadiation "it's no wonder he won the Nobel peace prize."
Its a wonder to me :|
SidewaysGts 1 year ago
@SidewaysGts 'tis a joke. I don't really think he should have won it either.
MarshmallowRadiation 1 year ago
So let me see if I have this correct: Entropy is basically energy evening out in a system, like an unplugged refrigerator warming up to room temperature until it gets plugged in again?
Omnywrench 1 year ago
Physicist Stephen Hawking stated,Because there is a law such as gravity,the universe can and will create itself from Nothing.Look him up on yahoo he's trying to show proof that God didn't do it.That's all evolutionist do any way,but to be fair if you can show me some kind of proof that nothing can create something then I will agree.P.S if you break down the word uni verse uni means single and verse means spoken sentence,like Bible verse.
TheChaosthegreat 1 year ago
@TheChaosthegreat No, the world "universe" comes from the latin "universum", which means "everything rolled into one". Also, Stephen Hawking is referring to the quantum vacuum state, a matterless void where electromagnetic waves and particles pop in and out of existence. I'm not an expert on quantum physics, but its all there for you to look up. Given your multiple Hovindisms, I sincerely doubt you will though.
Omnywrench 1 year ago
What would it take to prove God's exists?
BigBobsh2o 1 year ago
i think it should be illegal to talk about particle or theoretical physics without actually knowing what you are talking about. i think it would make the world a much better place. all you have to do is spend an hour in a library and you can pick up the basic understanding of particle physics and entropy. hell i did it in less than an hour, took me twenty minutes. his stupidity actually killed some of my brain cells, yes i felt them die.
MobileThinker 1 year ago
As for my spelling,I'm typing on my IPad and I'm just getting use to it.And as far as evolution teaching we came from a rock 4.6 billion years ago just keep asking yourself where did we come from.If you do that you will understand,but besides that just pick up an evolution book,remember everything came from the big bang right,the earth cooled down,it rained on the rocks,formed an ocean of soup which came alive.I'm sorry but that's stupid,very stupid talk about voodoo science,or belief
TheChaosthegreat 1 year ago
@TheChaosthegreat ... okay... that settles it... you're an idiot...
TheEnchantedCereal 1 year ago
Coming from a guy who think he's a type of monkey,who think all life on earth came from rocks that turned to soup when it rained on earth from nowhere,coming from someone who believes nothing exploded and created the uni verse.if nothing can create a uni verse then absolutely nothing sounds more intelligent than you.
TheChaosthegreat 1 year ago
@TheChaosthegreat
get educated, but not in a church. in a library or a elementary school...
amon16 1 year ago
@amon16 EDUCATION HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. THE GUY IS LIVING IN DELUTION AND DENIAL. YOU CAN EDUCATE HIM ALL YOU WANT IT WONT MATTER
gotnatas 1 year ago
@TheChaosthegreat I was gonna type a huge essay for you to understand why you don't understand evolution, especially when you're implying life came from "rocks".
I'll make it MUCH simpler:
Explain how the theory of evolution works.
GO!
Proghead88 1 year ago
@TheChaosthegreat lol, we ARE a type of ape, we are not currently monkeys, we decended from them, and actually, my explanation ISN'T a strawman, yours is, but STILL your belief sounds sillier, and what makes you think it rains from nowhere? :L is that how uneducated you are? lmao, and no, it's not that nothing exploded, that is your shit-for-brains interpretation of how, in actual fact, EVERYTHING expanded from an infinintecimal unit, you truly are a shame to the monkeys you decended from...
TheEnchantedCereal 1 year ago
This guy have a week argument,one thing I realize with evolutionist( atheist) is that they don't use common sense.
TheChaosthegreat 1 year ago
@TheChaosthegreat explain how his argument is weak...
and no, Evolutionists are NOT all atheists, nor are all atheists evolutionists, you are simply too small minded to make the distinction...
and WE lack common sense? coming from the one that believes that god made man from dirt and a bit of magic, and that god sacrificed god to god because god was angry, and that an elderly old man built a wooden ark 1/3 the size of the titanic, found every animal in existence, and somehow got them on?
TheEnchantedCereal 1 year ago
@TheChaosthegreat coming from the guy that can't spell "weak" and doesn't understand how spaces work in a sentence...
Proghead88 1 year ago
@DiggityDogg56 (cont.) Why is specified functional information important? Mainly because it is strong evidence against the reductionist and 'matter first' arguments. The difference between a blank DVD and a copy of the Lion King is not a material argument, it is the difference between information carrying potential compared to the existence of specified functional information. The moment information is discovered i.e. The Lion King, than the material reductionist argument becomes mute.
TheFreebourne 1 year ago
@DiggityDogg56 I don't see where I'm wrong, given the post. Yours is a typical reductionist argument in that it works great right up until you develop an understanding of Information theory and micro cellular processes. Entropic resistance is accomplished with guided use of matter and energy. Guided by what? Functionally specific micro cellular machines such as proteins, messenger RNA, and a laundry list of other devices. Each 'machine' is created and operates using job specific information.
TheFreebourne 1 year ago
@DiggityDogg56 I don't see where I'm wrong, given the post. Yours is a typical reductionist argument in that it works great right up until you develop an understanding of Information theory and micro cellular processes. Entropic resistance is accomplished with guided use of matter and energy. Guided by what? Functionally specific micro cellular machines such as proteins, messenger RNA, and a laundry list of other devices. Each 'machine' is created and operates using job specific information.
TheFreebourne 1 year ago
@Bluevlolution But I digress, Hovind and Berlinski both have a genuine scepticism for Darwinian Evolutionary theory (gradual, punctuated equilibrium, and/or any attempt to mix these two.) I have an even greater scepticism toward the origin of life (or species, to be honest) being from something other than Intelligent Design. There are many reasons for my position (all based in evidence) and I am more than willing to share ,point for counter point, with anyone who is interested.
TheFreebourne 1 year ago
@Bluevolution I was only offering an observation about life. I understand that many scientists view the origin of life as a separate topic from the origin of species. This has not stopped many well respected members of academia from spewing out all types of nonsensical theories for the origin of life (everything from proteins randomly forming within electrified crystals to 'Alien Seeding.)
TheFreebourne 1 year ago
9:17 "The suns energy would be make the earth, like the moon" Priceless.
Bluevolution 1 year ago
Life, as I observe it, is basically a kind of Anti-Entropic engine operating within the second law of thermodynamics. The theory that such an engine could randomly occur without intelligent design is mathematically improbable. I enjoy Kent Hovind's scepticism of organic evolutionary theory. I would recommend Berlinski as well. A very interesting and challenging topic.
TheFreebourne 1 year ago
@TheFreebourne You OBVIOUSLY have NO comprehension of evolutionary theory. No part of it says ANYTHING about random occurrence. Such an engine would have come about by evolution, and NO other means supported by any measurable evidence, hence the lack of ANY other theory. I. D. is NOT a theory, it does not hold up to the scientific method. You cant even call it a proper hypothesis, unless of course you throw widely accepted scientific evidence out the window.
Bluevolution 1 year ago
@TheFreebourne Wrong. The tiny bit of matter that life binds into organic molecules, thereby increasing usable energy available to the system and decreasing thermodynamic disorder since it locks up atoms into fewer degrees of freedom is swamped by the disorder occurring in the energy source, the sun. This is true of all systems. Disorder in the energy source will always swamp whatever order the process that is using that energy may create.
DiggityDogg56 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
People need to comment on ur upload more aswear like but yh GRIMINAL try teef the NASTY hook still so where got a brand new DISS for him and at the end you can see what happens in the rave
reloadfmradio 1 year ago
It is only logical to assume that we evolved from something as small as a bacterium.
Not only is Hovind's science weak, so is his Theology. He needs to go back to secondary school to relearn Theology and Science. He denies the Sacraments and that Salvation isn't guaranteed. So his parish is actually very arrogant for assuming guaranteed salvation. However that's moot since Heaven and Hell are asinine concepts. Why an infinite punishment for a finite transgression?
jaymthegenius 1 year ago
Reloadfmradio: WTF are you talking about?
msstateguy18: both parties are in the pocket of big business. Both the ignorant poor and the vast majority of the Social Register (in addition to the nouveaux riches) vote Republican, such a party cannot be good for the majority of Americans. 90% of the population has only 30% of the wealth, and most of that goes to the middle-class, not the working-class majority. Only in the sphere of class does the minority have privilege.
jaymthegenius 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
yh i subd ya still abeg u check the new GRIMINAL, MZ BRATT AND LADY L DISS ON MY PAGE ABEG U WATCH IT IN HD ITS VERY HYPE like garage in 2004.
reloadfmradio 1 year ago
Yes, please go vote...because hope and change has done so much for America!
msstateguy18 1 year ago
Actually, a cult must worship a person, not a god.
Gabumon54321 1 year ago
Where the fuck did you hear that? That's grossly inaccurate. Either way, Jesus was a person, so I'd say Christianity officially counts as a cult according to your definition.
Muchodelcrazy 1 year ago
And Jesus totally wasn't a person.
decemius 1 year ago
watch my valentines video! ^_^
juntaon 1 year ago
Yeah, I'm sure the sun's energy caused that building's foundation to crumble and its windows to break.
Moron
tekbarrier 2 years ago
Just to be picky I think you'll find Fred Hoyle stopped espousing anything about a decade ago.
He's dead.
LiamE69 2 years ago
or whoever
tctheunbeliever 2 years ago
That was supposed to be for eye2eye, by the way.
So Hovind is the SECOND-biggest douche in the universe.
tctheunbeliever 2 years ago
:Lol man the words like homogeneity are not made for me, but the scary shit is i know what ur talking about that puts somebody not seeing the inside of a university (to expensive!) and smoked out brain above the Theist in the foodchain yay
haashond 2 years ago
Not a very nice video. Extensive usage of words like douchbag, stupid etc does not make your argument strong.
astat1 2 years ago
Do you call this a refutation?
Micahklaz 2 years ago
Love the video!
0:51
He uses zillion as a number.
lol!!!
86adamleon 2 years ago
Although if a viable third party that supports free-market principles and individual rights I'll take voting for him under consideration.
jaymthegenius 2 years ago
Vote, why would I do that? No one good win's anyway. The Republican party has been hijacked with fundamentalist extremist and the Democratic party goes against Free Market principles and supports regulatory organizations that are instruments of oppression against the free market.
jaymthegenius 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The major leaders of Christian or Creation apologetics basically agree with what Hovind is saying. He is not the ONLY one who says what he says most of the other creation scientists have done the same research he has done, so would you PLEASE stop calling it "Hovindism", because he is not starting an abusive cult like Islam or Communism, but he's only trying to win your heart to the Lord.
Eye2EyeIIIV 2 years ago
"The major leaders of Christian or Creation apologetics basically agree with what Hovind is saying."
Except for, you know, the Pope and others.
It's obvious that Evolution and religious belief don't have to exclude one another.
gagaplex 2 years ago 2
You don't HAVE to be a Creationist to be a Christian.
gagaplex 2 years ago
@gagaplex
Well, depends if you wish to believe in what the Bible says is ACTUALLY true, or simple try to grind it down to a wishy-washy allegory, instead of just admitting that the Bible is plainly wrong.
Aaberg123 1 year ago
ok.....yeah that's true....but HOVIND is just the most vocal......so he's stuck with the label....HOVINDISM...
robbylafont 2 years ago
Eye2EyeIIIV
We dont subject ourselves to mythology like the one you believe in.And most christians actually now believe in evolution rather than creationisim.
Killer0fTheSun 2 years ago
Really Eye2Eye? Islam is a cult? Well it must be a very big cult, with 1.2 billion people. You're probably one of those hating bigots that thinks every religion besides his/her own is a cult. What about Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Shintoism, and Jainism? You probably think those are cults too. I wouldn't be surprised if you thought of Catholocism as a cult. The cults are those who take their religion too far. The Westborough Baptist Church, Extremists, and, of course, Creationists.
Meself58 2 years ago
Ha, it's funny you ask that question! That's a very important step in the process of science. We should all be skeptical. If you don't understand how scientist know and use the unit of measure (light year), I suggest you buy a good textbook. Research your question based on the evidence provided. But, DON'T dismiss it simply because YOU don't understand it. That's a common fallacy based on personal incredulity!
robbylafont 2 years ago
This video has so many flauds..
Evolution can not and did not happen as the cell has limits as do all science law's, that is why they are called laws.
I dismiss this video as ..Garbish and its arguments are not founded.
QAndyRa 2 years ago
Wel,l at least extantdodo can spell. Flauds should be spelled flaws.....
and you are wrong....this video is well thought out and full of facts...
robbylafont 2 years ago
300 million light yrs?
How do they know this distance, their is great doubt on these great distances..
QAndyRa 2 years ago
So selective breeding of cattle, canines and insects is just a big old myth?
10-12,000 years ago digs didn't exist. Look it up, please.
Take care!
WillSKB88 2 years ago
flaws
science's laws;
garbage
not well-founded
And you're just wrong.
tctheunbeliever 2 years ago
Um... Humans can use sun light. I want to rip Hovindins balls off and shove them down his trough. the muffled cry's of pain are more scientific then the bullshit he says
Teim36 2 years ago
Don't insult penguins by compairing them to Hovind like that.
RedwingVII 2 years ago 16
everytime you can't explain somthing, you say that it's the gravity that explain this. BUT, where does the gravity come frome??? loool
JESUSFreeck 2 years ago
Actually, the theory of relativity dictates where the gravity comes from.
It is an artifact of the flexible nature of the universe, combined with the rest energy of mass deforming it.
Sort of like marbles on a piece of paper.
Ururuchan 2 years ago
Read up on the theory of relativity, if you're educated enough to understand it that is.
Tavereen 2 years ago
it's not necessary to know where gravity came from to explain how nature works...we have a very clear understanding that if you jump off the empire state building--your body will fall towards the earth. Try it, if you don't believe it!!! lol
robbylafont 2 years ago
i am stupider for watching this.
zebuluncovert 2 years ago
I'm form Canada and I'm sorry to inform you but snow is evil and must be the tool of the devil. Just visit Winnipeg in January and you can see for your self.
(this comment was intend for humorous uses only, for those of you how are about to flame)
fireflygirl246 2 years ago
I used to live in Norway, up there is a place called Hell and it's covered in shit loads of snow all winter long, proof if any were needed that snow is indeed the work of satan!
FordPrefect23 2 years ago
Global warming is awesome if you live in Alaska or Canada lol
I lived in Alaska and no even gives a shit about global warming lol
jjason55740 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Please, if you are going to read a script for your videos, then please do not try and sound like you are not, because you aren't very good at it. :) Your videos are great, but I would rather you just straight up read.
anselmo666666 2 years ago
No, fail.
Blitzaking 2 years ago
What?
anselmo666666 2 years ago
Haha! The name at the beginning of Reference 1, that's my last name! Good video, but lessen on politics. Politics are all stupid and just alienate people (especially the people who really need to take in the points of the video)!
beyondbedandbathisme 2 years ago
steady state actually does require an expanding universe. what does away with the theory is the CMB.
keggerous 2 years ago
AND a cookie.
DasMustafah 2 years ago
THis video is basically useless politics. I was hoping that someone could explain to me how the second law of thermaldynamics and the process of evolution could co-exist in the same universe. Evolution is real but so is entropy. THis reality is unexplained by any scientist, so Hovind is right. THe origin of life is unexplained as well. BTW, how you liking your hope and change president now? What a fraud
RevelationStation 2 years ago
When you are obsessed with something, you will see it everywhere.
*thermodynamics. It's right there in the title.
Why evolution on Earth exists in the face of entropy: Because Earth is not a closed system.
DasMustafah 2 years ago
what does voting has to do with this
signofthehammer 2 years ago
getting the retards that believe a big guy from the clouds came down and made everything 4000 years ago.
KeoghsGuides 2 years ago
When they say there is an invisible person that created everything they scold skeptics for trying to apply reason and science to religion but when the intellectual community comes forward they seem to have no problem applying reason to those scientific theory's all while claiming there invisible god with no evidence and telling everyone else that evidence is useless. seems they are trying so hard to convince themselves of lies lol
jjason55740 2 years ago
I forgot to continue, i meant getting those retards OUT of the government :)
KeoghsGuides 2 years ago
okey. This series seems pretty good for debunking Hovind, but I still can't find an argument that proves there isn't any type of creation in life. Life creating itself out of nothing doesn't seem to have any consistance.
signofthehammer 2 years ago
Yeah, I don't know, which is why I'm not a strong believer, there's theories such as the big bang which suggests a small dot exploding and expanding and inevitably will reverse the process and could have done so before this expand, but I want to read more about it before I start jumping on that theory... for all i know, the Egyptians were more advanced than us, which I've thought up a few times before, just cuz it'd be cool :).
KeoghsGuides 2 years ago
well, I think it wasnt the Egyptians, it was an ancient civilization that lived 10.000 years ago that was more advanced. This civilization would be responsable for the Pyramids all around the world; there are so many authors that remark that ancient civilization. You may find interesting Graham Hancock's discoveries on that, and these 2 videos:
-"Nassim Harramein-the event horizon-pyramids 1"
-"Michael Cremo Pt.1"
signofthehammer 2 years ago
I don't think Egyptians are more advanced than us considering they had no electricity., space travel abilities, and they didn't have a very adequate written language
jjason55740 2 years ago
I expect Big Leroy is inserting some energy into Kents unwilling butt as we speak. There just might be a god !
ilikezappa 2 years ago
The Second Law of Thermodynamics predicts that the Universe started from a very low entropy base, ie the Big Bang.
Sorry Kent.
gamesbok 2 years ago 2
What is a closed system? Sorry for this stupid question.
DarkZerkerX 2 years ago
Wow what a douche hovind is. The japanese nukes did not only kill the people listed in this video but also allowed radioactive mutations to carry on to the victims babies or themselves. Along with the loss of land.Besides about the suns energy thing, if 100 thousand nukes exploded in the vastness of space far away from earth,we wouldnt really feel much would we?
DarkZerkerX 2 years ago
Out! Out you demons of stupidity!
Tavereen 2 years ago 10
People like Thunderf00t, ExtantDodo, Potholer54,etc. are the exorcists and they do their job pretty well IMO.
DarkZerkerX 2 years ago 2
Oh boy is Kent Hovind stupid!!
NeedsEvidence 2 years ago
only a douchebag would use something like pearl harbor to use as a smarmy counter to a debate
moreopiumplz 2 years ago
recieving a constant flow of energy from... the sun. haha. and the gravity part. yeh the second half was waaay better. good video. peace
ProjectBlaze420 2 years ago
VOOOOOOOOOOTE
lol
deathadder32 2 years ago
'we call it gravity'
I'm gonna get that on a shirt
didjabringadidjalong 2 years ago
-Creationist: "God created the universe and everything in it!"
-Other guy: "Well how do you know God exists?"
-Creationist. "Because he done made all this!"
Well once again we've concluded that circular arguments work because circular arguments work because circular argument work because...
Idiots!
Come back when you have proof of God. Then you may be able to use him as an explanation...
"God is eternal" Well prove it...
DinMorsPimp 2 years ago