I hope that your time in Jail went by ok. I think that you are a good speaker kent and I imagine that debating you is very difficult not to say frustrating. Your brief skating over such complex and beautiful ideas in front of an audience that is clearly on your side and clearly ignorant of the scientific method is close to farcical. You mix mis imformation with ignorance of science and plant this nonsense with the aid of a peppering of cheap humour into the minds of these poor sheep.
The universe must've started in an explosion. The galaxies are moving away from eachother. Usually gravity would hold us together. The only way to let the universe expand, is to blow everything away, in a bang. And to blow away an entire universe, you'll need quiet a big bang
Science doesnt pretend to know everything. It is being worked out over time by the GREATEST minds in earths lifetime. There would be no einstein without newton. Do you get it? The big bang at the moment IS the most plausable idea put forward thus far. But scientists are still working on it to bring truth.
@66kaisersoza ...oh yeah...it's sooo plausible....first there was nothing....then it exploded. Nothing.....exploded....and here we are. You poor victim of public education.
@KJVWordofGod The thing is, as far as i understand.. Scientists have different theories on what was, or was not, before big bang. Some more educated creationists say "god" made the big bang happen. But any and all theories involving a god or other devine creator is just rubbish. Saying that "You cannot prov one part of the bible false" is also rubbish. You cannot prove that the teachings of the giant spaghetti monster is not false.
@TheJo4an You say scientists have different "theories" regarding the "big bang" and you accept these theories as plausible until proven BUT you also say any theories involving God are automatically not plausible. Your public education is showing. Your whole argument is self contradictory. Yet you probably cannot see that because you are so indoctrinated and biased and you don't want to follow anyone's rules but your own. Psalms:14:1: "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God".
You use the word indoctrinated to describe scientists, people who spend their life watching the way things work, writing them down, and trying to figure out why? You, someone who quotes a line out of a book written thousands of years ago in order to glean some sense of meaning from the world are calling others indoctrinated? Oh, and here, I got this quote for you: Psalms: 137:9 "Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones." Sounds reasonable.
The "daughter of Babylon" is a metaphor for the future incarnate of Babylon, or a 'modern' Babylon that will arise. If you are asking what nation or culture this is specifically, I wouldn't presume to know.
@KJVWordofGod Actually, what is showing is my common sence. There are observable evidence that support the theories that i find plausible. There are no observable evedence of one or more gods. I can critically read about the science behind theories, and go "hm.. this reasoning seems plausible", and i am yet to find a creationist that makes his case without beeing disproved by science.
@TheJo4an ....."sence"....."evedence"...."beeing"....Yes, you are very "educated"....in spelling.....there are grammatical errors too but the 500 character limit precludes my listing your other errors.
@speciwacy If your theory had evidence, it would be fact. As it is, evolution is a failed theory in search of evidence. It is a religion that requires faith. It has no proof. If you accept the so called *evidence* to support the theory of evolution, you are not much of thinker....just a sheep blindly following *so called* science in the vain hope your leaders will one day actually find proof. BTW, there is so much SECULAR evidence for Jesus Christ that only a fool would reject it.
@KJVWordofGod ERROR! well.. You are actually right. Nothing exploded because that is not what the big bang theory says, it says that a singularity expanded.
BRAVO!
FYI the big bang theory and abiogenesis are NOT part of evolution so half of hovinds seminar is incorrect.
@KJVWordofGod first there was nothing....then it exploded. Nothing.....exploded....and here we are. You poor victim of public education.
Nobody claims that you poor victim of home schooling.
""They" can't prove one part of the bible true... one part of the bible false. "
Logic dictates that you cant really prove anything wrong, so you have to prove things are right. I mean i could just make stuff up and you have to believe it if you cant prove me wrong ? How does that make sense?
@drummr88 Interesting fact: Did you know that the first man to say that the Earth revolves around the sun and is not the center of the universe was threatened to be killed by the Catholic church because it conflicted with the creationism story in the Bible? It wasn't until decades years later that Isaac Newton proved it with calculus that it was even taken seriously by Christians.
@SuicidalWaltDisney Interesting fact: Did you know that the first man to say that the Earth revolves around the sun and is not the center of the universe was threatened to be killed by the Catholic church because it conflicted with the creationism story in the Bible?
Interesting fact : he was not the first man, not even among the first thousand to say that. If you want to play a smartass at least check your facts
The idea that it was literally "nothing at all" that exploded in the Big Bang is false. The idea of a singularity is not that it is nothing, just that it has no volume, which would indeed be the case if that much mass were in one place at once. Ever heard of a black hole? It's the same idea, except with the entire mass of the universe at the center, so if the mass of one supermassive star has enough gravitational force to become a single point, the mass of the entire universe certainly does.
there are so many things wrong with his facts first we have seen where stars are formed and there is proof for the big bang the universe is expanding so of course it had to of been closer before in past
@laladieladada So, I guess you're free to discard all of the FACTUAL, EMPIRICAL, CONCRETE scientific evidence he presents?
Being intellectually honest with yourself, wouldn't you want to follow the evolutionary theory to its obvious implications and conclusions?
According to evolution, life had to begin (somewhere along the line) with non-living, self-creating matter. And I've got bad news for you, Abiogenesis is 100% scientifically impossible...
@Drummr88 Actually, you can get life from non-life, at least in a certain way that was demonstrated. But, let's say for the sake of debate, that there is absolutely no way to get life from non-life. Wouldn't that technically make God completely impossible, since of course, there's no way to get life from non-life, especially in a timeless dimension that's devoid of anything.
@SnippyDoughnut I must applaud you, friend, for at least entertaining the “possibility” that Abiogenesis is an absolute scientific impossibility. Unfortunately for those desperate to write off the existence of God though, it’s not merely a possibility. It’s a scientifically verifiable, proven certainty.
@Drummr88 for at least entertaining the “possibility” that Abiogenesis is an absolute scientific impossibility.
This is utter nonsense ! Abiogenesis is in no way impossible, its even quite likely as experiments done in 2008 show. They showed that under the right circumstances a fully working RNA can create itself quite easily. From there its not such a big step to a working cell.
The creastionists arguments on this rely on ignorance of nature, as it is usually the case with them
@SnippyDoughnut To answer your question; No, God would be in NO way limited, or subject to the finite, created realities and dimensions that He spoke into being. He exists outside of the continuum that we know as time, space and matter, and is unaffected by them.
Now am I, a finite being with a 3 pound brain, able to fully comprehend and understand this? Well I will humbly and readily admit that I am not.
@SnippyDoughnut -“And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness.” 1 Timothy 3:16
If I could fully understand God, he certainly wouldn’t be worth worshiping. However, signs and obvious, irrefutable proof is abundantly clear to those who will see it, and the Bible is the adequate, sufficient, infallible expression of His will.
@Drummr88 Ok, if you undoubtedly think that your religion is self-evident, it's fine. But, as a fellow human, I beg of you not to make huge life decisions based on the thought that God is there. Have shit loads of happiness in your life, and make decisions based on demonstrable consequences. :D
@Drummr88 No, we're not free to discard any of the "FACTUAL, EMPIRICAL, CONCRETE scientific evidence he presents," but that's alright, because there isn't any of that. Everything that Hovind says is either not true at all, or in no way disproves evolution. Just because he makes it sound convincing by putting a bunch of scientific jargon in there does not in any way mean that he is correct.
@Drummr88 Oh really now, where is the improper punctuation in that one? All I see is failure to capitalize the first word in a sentence, which is just being lazy, not stupidity. Also, he made a goddamn typo, so don't get your panties in a wad. ONE typo. Also, you correcting somebody else's grammar doesn't lend any credibility to your false assertions.
Hovind... Please enjoy your stint in prison. You need to get out and spread more of your misinformation as soon as possible. What does Hovind use the science books for? I am guessing toilet paper or kindling. Then again he does need science to put a touch of truth in with his purposeful lies.
He doesn't have understanding of a lot of stuff he talked about. Just in another video he talks about DNA and chromosomes and said each chromosome contains enough information for one person. I really don't know what to say about him except that he speaks well enough to sound intelligent while spouting nonsense.
@silverysnow92 You want to know about DNA check out the genesis confilict I think number 7 from Prof Walter Veith very informative and it truly clears all the cob webs.
Even if dinosaurs were still alive, how would this be going against evolution? Also, radioactive dating down by thousands of scientists, you need evidence they are wrong. In Genisis, it says 7 day creation, but when a lot of metiphores are in Bible, why should this not be? It could be millions of years and just 7 important times. Also, God wants people to believe in him, not give them science. It was hard enough to convince someone of God, billions of years would be harder back then.
@kkk345ify Well maybe no scientist can prove the earth is millions of years old to you, since you reject every piece of completely reasonable evidence provided to you. However, there is really no way to reject that the universe is at least 13 billion years old, since we can see light from galaxies 13 billion light years away. That would mean that light would have to travel for 13 billion years to reach earth... 6,000 years my ass.
@kkk345ify Okay, so which of those things are you rejecting? That there are things that are more than 13 billion light years away, or just the conclusion that I drew from the fact that we can see objects more than 13 billion light years away? Because if it's the former, then I can give you evidence that it's true, and if it's the latter, then you're just willfully ignorant (read: stupid).
@siegel019 So you're asserting that the speed of light is a constant? And has always been a constant?
Furthermore, if God was capable of creating this universe as he says he did, wouldn't it be prudent to assume that he would make his Creation visible to mankind?
Furthermore, the Bible says in 17 different times that God 'stretched' out the heavens.
Interesting fact: Were you aware that Bible referred to the Earth as spherical, LONG before ancient astronomers became aware of this?
@Drummr88 Yes, that's what I'm asserting. The speed of light is a constant. It is, always has been, and always will be a constant. Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity tells us that nothing, including light, can travel faster than the speed of light, i.e. 300,000,000 m/s. And it doesn't matter whether or not god stretched out "the heavens," because it wouldn't change what we see. Interesting fact: Were you aware that Earth is not a sphere, but rather an oblate spheroid (i.e. a 3D ellipse)?
@Drummr88 Also, there are multiple things other than the speed of light that indicate that the universe is approximately 13.8 billion years old, such as the age of the coolest (which would also be the oldest) white dwarfs, the rate of expansion of the universe (look up Hubble's Law), and the Cosmic Microwave Background (which, I have to admit, I'm not incredibly clear on; I missed that class in astronomy). If you're interested in any of the facts, read How Old is the Universe by David Weintraub.
@Drummr88 "Interesting fact: Were you aware that Bible referred to the Earth as spherical, LONG before ancient astronomers became aware of this?" No, you are incorrect. It is supported by pillars on its 4 corners from which you can view the whole Earth from the highest mountains. The Bible is the literal inerrant word of God and not to be questioned or interpreted for your own agenda. Don't forget to kill your son when he disobeys and insects have 4 legs.
@The1Skinsfan It's possible that a god could've caused the big bang. However, there's no reason to believe that it's plausible. Until there is, it's but a waste of time and thought to even consider it; just like the notion of a god altogether.
@The1Skinsfan If God caused the big bang, how would you know? God is invisible right? How can you tell the difference between God causing the big bang vs God not causing the big bang? There's no way to distinguish the two. It's a rhetorical question, too philosophical without any real scientific benefit. The only real benefit would be for those weak-minded individuals who need to believe in notion of God in order to feel their lives have a purpose and feel happy and loved.
At 8:49 Hovind shows a picture of a textbook and quotes it as describing the Big Bang. And yet you can see it is describing a planetary nebula. So is Hoving lying? Does he not understand what he is reading? What about the description he quotes the Berkeley scientist as giving? Is Hovind lying, confused, or what? His fans need to ask themselves.
how bout coming up with 1 reason that is backed up with scientific facts other than trying to sway the viewers opinion with terrible jokes every 2 seconds.
its quite stupid, im creationist and i dont bolive earth is six thousand years old, and that dinosaurs died in flood -its ridiculous
according to bible, just Adam lived 800 years its hard to bolive he counted ears there and result just 6k.
knowing this incredible world, with its chemistry, physics, and awesome variaty, i think if i would be agnostic i would bolive creation retherthan big bang and randomness
@Jerzyw88 Hovind have this number 6k because he calculated and based it on A Biblically based world history chart showing 6,000 years of events and people.if you want to see that chart then i can send to you if you want?.I also want to say that i believe the world is created, but i dont have the confidence like Hovind to say the world is 6000 years old but rather 6000-12000 there are clues that the earth is young.
@jesusLostChildren777 The early forefathers beliveved it 2000 to Abraham 2000 to Jesus and 2000 from His death and resurrction looks like A thousand years Sabbath is about due.
@jesusLostChildren777 Yet the stars are millions of light years away, yet the earth is only thousands of years old? You saying God saved the Earth for last and had to make those stars first?
@jesusLostChildren777 By the way, not saying the earth is millions of years old or anything, but the Bible doesn't actually say how much time went by between adam and eve's creation and fall. All it says is that Adam and Eve began to die when they ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Don't take this the wrong way I'm just not sure about the earth being only 6000 years old. Personally I think it's a bit longer but I don't know.
@Jerzyw88 learn to spell; get educated and i'm sure you will change your beliefs. See creationism is created from Christianity so people could be controlled by making them believe ridiculous made up things, in fact all religion is made up; they cant prove one part of the bible true.. 3:29 the big bang doesn't evolve nor the elements only living things evolve.. HERP DERP this guys dumb and the only reason people listen to him is because he says he believes in god another example of controlling..
@hornyarab11 "They" can't prove one part of the bible true? Rather, YOU cannot prove one part of the bible false. You speak as if you know it all....but you know nothing.
@AntonioRothfeller And before Darwin died he confessed that he made it all up... but he was told its too late , the theory has spread too far, too late now. Except u wouldn't know that now would you?
@MSeroga Can you please send me the link or bibliographic details of where Darwin said that he admitted he lied about evolution on his death bed, I'd like to use it in an essay. Also, does it say anything about his motivations for trying to deceive the world in the greatest hoax ever created, I would be interested in noting his psychological conditions.
@MSeroga Seriously, could you give some sort of proof, some sort of citation, anything at all that demonstrates that Darwin actually said this? Creationists always cite this, but never have any proof of it. Also, it does not matter what one person said, even if he was the one who came up with the theory. Evidence is the only thing that matters in science, and there is plenty of evidence for evolution, whether you would like to believe it or not.
What astonishing works have creationist scientists bring to us recently? Evolution has provided ecologists ways to protect endangered species, laid groundwork for novel drug designs, and bioinformatics analysis of newly sequenced genomes. What has creationists done for us, scientifically speaking? Hmmm..??
"The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reason, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason what so ever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs. Makes perfect sense."
Uuhh. I think the Bible has a much better explanation…
Please listen closely to what the Bible says regarding this very thing:
“For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.” Rom 1:20
Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on him.” John 3:36
Please accept Jesus today as your Lord and Savior if you want salvation.
I wonder if evolutionists ever ask themselves if the oxygen in the atmosphere has always been the same amount? because carbon dating depends on it! Now what happens when a big catastrophe changes earth in all possible ways? everything changes, including oxygen lvls, but evolutionists doesn't take this into count. So everything is millions of years old, to them...
@banheden You know that carbon dating isn't used to date things which are millions of years old. The measurement only works for things less than about 20000 years non-marine things. Sure you know that.
@banheden I wonder if you ever asked yourself how carbon dating actually works or is used. Try not to parrot anything just because it favors your point somehow: Carbon dating is only used for time scales up to about 60,000 years. Maybe a few thousand years more or less, but not millions of years.
@banheden Lol'd. Actually it's often calculated the carbon in the atmosphere for non-marine specimens.
Granted it can only test up to 60,000 years old accurately. And Marine life will always be un-testable through carbon dating because the carbon in the ocean is older than the carbon in the air.
This is why things are dated on a range. Say something is dated to be 5200 years old, then it's estimated 4000-6000 years old.
Leaving plenty margin for error for atmospheric changes.
@JuiceBoxheero I would be impressed if evolutionists could only replicate the birth of a species by adding info to the genome of a cell. Cells are not programmed to evolve into species and Darwinism is founded on the premise that it did happen
I'd have to agree to that and may I add that from my experience of interacting with scientists, the one that are the least prone to believe in evolution are the geneticists. Do you know why? Because they understand the best, scientifically, how life is supposed to have originated and developed according to evolutionism, but they just do not see it happen, nor do they see the potential of it happening. "you will know the truth and the truth shall set you free". do we wanna be free?
@flotopo I am a molecular biologist and know some things about genetics. The funny thing is, that genetics alone (without any fossils, Darwin finches, etc.) offers enough evidence to validate common ancestry. Most people I heard talking (or writing) that genetics disproves evolution have in fact no clue about that field or at least they are at a low level of understanding. The predicted tree of life in the genome was found when modern genetics came up.
@alexthasy Fine. Craig Venter did that with a bacterium. Adding sequences into the genome and by this causing new proteins happens with every retrovirus. And know what: About 8-10% of YOUR genome are of retroviral origin.
Your conclusion of "Darwinism" (whatever that is) is wrong on many levels. But I guess you are too ignorant to get some education in this field.
If this deity can hear prayers, and express commands to people, why does "God" not have a blog?
Also another thing to consider-> when it's all said and done, it's better to empathize in anyway possible. Empathy is the idea that we're all rooting for each other in our struggle to live. So in heaven or hell, there is no empathy, because those are perfect places (constant and people know what is awaiting them.)
@elagentenumerouno Sorry.. But is not good information.. You Cant Exspect us Humans to have all the right answeres. We make alot of mistakes.. We are in the early states of understanding the universe and what its contanes.
You either have to be ignorant, uneducated, or brainwashed to look at the complexity of nature and how it works so perfectly and not see that someone designed it. Even Richard Dawkins is forced to admit that nothing on earth could have happened unless someone came and started it. . . but somehow the ones who came and started it are even more complex yet they came out of nowhere... talk about ignorant.
lol, you've never seen a star come into existence? well by that logic... i never seen a god bring a human into existence, thanks to render your own concept useless
@Dreadfultime well God dint show us how he dit it because it was 6000 years a go,so how he want to show us that? Bible say he just dit it.God dont need a explantion, becaise all people now he exist For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse, its more ridicules to believe that random explosion that came from completely noting made everting.
@jesusLostChildren777 i dont see why god does not need an excuse, and dont say because its god, circular reasoning is fallacy.
you have to prove too much before saying god does not need an excuse or explanation. the bible... well you have to prove its the word of god, and well, faith isnt evidence :D
@Dreadfultime why God dont need excuse? i just give you the reason lol,ho are you to say that God need to proof him self to you? are you more wise then him?,meby more righteousness? you made the universe? people need to learn that God is not the one thats need help.it ''you'' that need to find out what he want from you.And what you believe is faith to,and its more insane to believe we came from absolute noting and random explosion made everting :D
@krishole That is EXACTLY the point! Thank you so much for typing this. We KNOW ours is a religion. But evolutionists and people who believe in the Big Bang cant get it or just wont. We love science! Science is great and helps humanity. But that is not what the debate is about.
The big bang will NEVER be scientifically proven. It can not be observed, reproduced or recreated. And so far neither can evolution. They look as if they are destined to be theories for eternity
@psford1 Never it right. fairy-tails for eternity ha. If the world had enough time ahead of it, evolution would be a big joke in the history books of the future.
and if someone is reading this and thinking "well your theory is a fairy-tail too!", at least you get the point if you put "too" at the end of your statement. Hopefully that gets you thinking what it the real truth...seek and you shall find. ask God and in one way or another, if you don't harden your heart, He will answer you.
@jesusLostChildren777 Yes god needs to prove himself! That is what we are saying. I am wiser and morally superior to your god. He killed everything on the planet and I havent killed anyone. I am more powerfull too cos I can pick up this cup of tea and he cannot. And sir, it is YOU, Mr Creationist, not us, that believes that the universe, the earth, life, animals, humans, EVERYTHING all appeared spontaneously from NOTHING!
@adey5 ho say everting comes from noting? God made it lol..its not your ridiculous theory that everting comes from absolute noting in a random explosion,expansion,implosion(every year the have something new ) and created everting in order and structure in all complexity of all life we see now.really ''you'' more powerful and more moral? how about insanity???lol ''you'' a created being from God,...ha ha well hope this was a joke..(Jesus comes,we live in the end days)
@Dreadfultime Darwinism is the perfect example of circular reasoning. Darwin invented the law of natural selection to which he attributed divine power like that of giving a cell the power to evolve into a simple species and to that species the power to grow or alter organs and limbs + add accessories like hair or feathers and turn into something else. Natural selection around which gravitates the theory of evolution would be called a god in any other other cult.
well i have a good buddy. his name is god. he was conceived of nothing for there was nothing before him. duh he is god. so if you are right jesusLostChildren777 god does not exist. because as you say things cannot be created from nothing. so where did my buddy, god come from?
note: please don't tell me god has existed for an infinite amount of time in the past , because he had to start his existence somewhere somewhere.
@MrFoxbat25 God created the universe so he is not effected by his creation,and he wouldn't be God if he was created.God explane him self in the Bible that he is the eternal being that always existed.and we dont present it on schools and in the text books that this is a fact. I now this is part of religion,but evolution try to explane the origin of life and present it as a fact.but its also a part religion .(sets of believes)
@MrFoxbat25 It is completely unreasonable to say that God needs a creator. In this universe, things that exist have to have a cause. This is a rule or "law" that governs us. But God is not ruled by this law. Why should he be? He created the law in the first place.
Is the guy who created the game Checkers ruled by the laws he created for that game? He made up or "created" the rules for the game. But he himself doesn't have to be ruled by those rules he created.
@TheClownCrew your statement is completely unreasonable and whats funny about it is that you don't seem to realize it. Think about what you just said. You're argument is such a cop out. It's equivalent to a game of cops and robbers little kids play. When one kid shoots another and says "you're dead" the kid who got shot says something like " Nope because I have an invisible bullet deflector." You see what I am saying? You can't just make bold assumptions of things without any shred of evidence.
Its Stubborn ignorance..what do we see in nature ..life arises from life..never non living assembling into life? ever!!..francis crick and fred hoyle both have said abiogenesis is mathematically impossible but still stubbornly were atheist ..they also have ZERO Testable repeatable chemistry to back up abiogenesis..no one has ever been able to assemble amino acids into anything.which should be simple..primitive cells never existed
@jesusLostChildren777 Even with all the Proteins and DNA and RNA ...What would they do with it??..from there they have zero molecular machines, zero assembly instructions...all this stuff would just float away in some primordial soup and break down..and it would be the same thing in a test tube. to get amino acids to self assemble is impossible..there is no natural process.to make a cell evolve ..it would be easier to build the space shuttle..blindfolded while riding a unicycle
@jesusLostChildren777 That whole message you just posted was intellectually weak.If god never showed anyone how he did it, then how do you or anyone know that creation happened, or that it happend at all? Oh and by the way, Big Bang wasnt really an explosion like in the A-Team, more of a Rapid Expansion of space/time/matter/energy, and it may have existed before the Big Bang but in another state.There are a few ideas, but using god as an explanation is cheating as far as a scientific hypothesis
@adey5 we dont say its a fact we now its part of religion,but the big bang is presented in the textbooks as a fact so the burden of proof is on your shoulders.big bang theory is a part of religion to because it try to explane the origin of cosmos.
Thanks for these great videos, much needed, so good of Kent Hovind to be willing to speak out the truth even though he was severely persecuted for it by the false charges brought against him. Income taxes are not constintutional, and were implemented during war time and was supposed to be only temporary, he stood up for what was right, God bless him. The rest of us suckers who continue to let them tax our income get what we derserve, MORE taxes, we're working four months a year for $-0. Rise up!
@elagentenumerouno Sorry.. But is not good information.. You Cant Exspect us Humans to have all the right answeres. We make alot of mistakes.. We are in the early states of understanding the universe and what its contanes.
... Incorrect. Mutations do not ALWAYS produce detrimental changes in DNA and in some cases enhances the offsprings chances of survival. The probability of an individual having a mutation does not preclude 100% chance of lethality of that mutation in its offspring. It is high, yes but not 100%. In this case your argument has no footing because for those that do survive they are genetically equipped to deal with the selection pressure that edited their precursors out.
because you probably not a Christian,but when you are saved then its different. Christians want to listen to Gods moral laws,unsaved people don't care what God say,the love there Sins.thats why lot of people do what the want to do.
For God so loved the world that he have his one and only Son that who ever believes in him shall not perish,but have eternal life John 3:16.............................. Who ever believes in the Son has eternal life,but who ever rejects the Son,will not see life.for God's wrath remains on him John 3:36 For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God Roman 3:23............................. Who can say:''I have kept my heart pure;I am clean and whitout sin''? Prov 20 :6
.If we confess our sins,he is faithful and just and will forgive us all our sins purify us from all unrighteousness 1 John 1:9 .......................... For it is whit your heart that you believe and are justified,and it is whith your mouth that you Confess and are saved Romans 10:10
"people present evidence but when the give it to you you don't study the evidence"
That is merely your assumption, yet again you've provided no evidence to back it up.
The bottom line is this. Science is about truth. We get to that by looking at evidence. I have presented a great deal, you have presented nothing so far. All you have done is pretend otherwise. You are not interested in truth, and that is your loss. This is why scientists don't take creationists seriously. Think about it.
sorry Ozzy but i am done whit you ask oder people for evidence i have given you examples.Science is indeed about truth.but evolution have noting to do whit science ,thats why creationisten don't take evolution serious lol.i here rest my case ,good by.and don't ask my anymore questions.
i don't do this silly games Ozzyman how old are you? you are scientist?ya right! tell why 2 law of thermodynamics don't contradict evolution? give my good explanation in logical and normal words why its not evidence.because you thinks this is very funny so you try to ask my questions but you don't answer my question then only ''no its not evidence'' tell my plz i am curios.
"i don't do this silly games Ozzyman how old are you? "
Stop with the silly games and ad hominems. You have no idea about thermodynamic or you'd have said what they are.
If you think the 2nd law contradicts evolution, then say why. Just typing "evolution doesn't happen because I say so" is not evidence. If you want to be taken seriously, then step up and answer a straight question.
i have no idea about 2 law of thermodynamic? you mean you don't now. i have already explane it to you so how you can say that i don't now? do you even border to read my commends Ozzy? 2 law state that everting falls slowly in disorder that everting is winding down,now evolution claims that everting get better over time and more orderly.we can see on earth (open system) that is clearly wrong
we have evidence for it ,that this is the truth because we can test it ,observe it here on earth.we all get old and turne into dust all buildings fall in to dust,trees dies enz.
you now DNA is proof for intelligent design?you now that in DNA is information and that it is coded? you say its not evidence then plz explane to my how coding system and semantic information could originate by itself in a material medium,plz tell my a am curios.
i hear somebody els say it only apply for close system,well ofc you have scientist that have a theory,and the need that because if this is right then evolution is impossible.lucky we have science( testable and observable ).All experimental and physical observation appears to confirm that the Law is universal, affecting all natural processes in the long run.here on earth you can clearly see the effect on daily life.
Natural selection exist indeed but it only select it don't produce new morphological structures.only that stronger survive in the wild.and there is only adaptation.and thats what we can observe test,its science but we have never have seen new morphological structures,it only spread currently existing traits.there is no new information.
Ozzyman your asking for evidence i have given that to you,i think you ask my because thats the only think you can do,but one again i will give you some examples:The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, Irreducible Complexity,information,Formation of Life, Fine-tuning of Physics.ya i now your awnser and is like this"NO its not evidence ha ha''
''99% of biologists and geneticists--the people who actually study the material and are qualified to render judgment'' ho say that all come to the same conclusion?it is a fact that many scientist to day don't believe in evolution.I just pointed out to Ozzy that not all scientist believe in evolution and that there is evidence for it,i dint make contest out of it,I simple present some evidence for it.
what about fine tuning of the earth? for us humans.if the earth were a little closer or further away, then the earth would freeze or boil,If the earth did not rotate at the 1000mph, rather at a slower 100mph then the days would burn everything alive and the night would freeze the same life,If the moon was a little closer then the tides would flood all the land. If the oceans where deeper it would absorb all the carbon dioxide making plant life impossible.
i can go on and on about how everting is fine tuned for life,you must be completely insane if you think that everting we see just happen by random chance,whiteout any order or design,that the moon and sun just exactly at right distanced just by random chance..
no 1 is claiming that it happen whit random chance?no? hole evolution theory is based on that.and how started to evolved? by random chance, life spontaneously arising from some sort of "primordial soup,just by chance,you don't even now your own science.
Dear Kent,
I hope that your time in Jail went by ok. I think that you are a good speaker kent and I imagine that debating you is very difficult not to say frustrating. Your brief skating over such complex and beautiful ideas in front of an audience that is clearly on your side and clearly ignorant of the scientific method is close to farcical. You mix mis imformation with ignorance of science and plant this nonsense with the aid of a peppering of cheap humour into the minds of these poor sheep.
ludwig177 2 days ago
The universe must've started in an explosion. The galaxies are moving away from eachother. Usually gravity would hold us together. The only way to let the universe expand, is to blow everything away, in a bang. And to blow away an entire universe, you'll need quiet a big bang
henkfapper 4 days ago
Science doesnt pretend to know everything. It is being worked out over time by the GREATEST minds in earths lifetime. There would be no einstein without newton. Do you get it? The big bang at the moment IS the most plausable idea put forward thus far. But scientists are still working on it to bring truth.
66kaisersoza 2 weeks ago
@66kaisersoza ...oh yeah...it's sooo plausible....first there was nothing....then it exploded. Nothing.....exploded....and here we are. You poor victim of public education.
KJVWordofGod 2 weeks ago
@KJVWordofGod The thing is, as far as i understand.. Scientists have different theories on what was, or was not, before big bang. Some more educated creationists say "god" made the big bang happen. But any and all theories involving a god or other devine creator is just rubbish. Saying that "You cannot prov one part of the bible false" is also rubbish. You cannot prove that the teachings of the giant spaghetti monster is not false.
TheJo4an 2 weeks ago
@TheJo4an You say scientists have different "theories" regarding the "big bang" and you accept these theories as plausible until proven BUT you also say any theories involving God are automatically not plausible. Your public education is showing. Your whole argument is self contradictory. Yet you probably cannot see that because you are so indoctrinated and biased and you don't want to follow anyone's rules but your own. Psalms:14:1: "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God".
KJVWordofGod 2 weeks ago
@KJVWordofGod
You use the word indoctrinated to describe scientists, people who spend their life watching the way things work, writing them down, and trying to figure out why? You, someone who quotes a line out of a book written thousands of years ago in order to glean some sense of meaning from the world are calling others indoctrinated? Oh, and here, I got this quote for you: Psalms: 137:9 "Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones." Sounds reasonable.
cosmith 2 weeks ago
@cosmith I shall answer if you can tell me who is the daughter of Babylon? ( Of whom the scripture is speaking)
KJVWordofGod 1 week ago
@KJVWordofGod
The "daughter of Babylon" is a metaphor for the future incarnate of Babylon, or a 'modern' Babylon that will arise. If you are asking what nation or culture this is specifically, I wouldn't presume to know.
cosmith 1 week ago
@KJVWordofGod Actually, what is showing is my common sence. There are observable evidence that support the theories that i find plausible. There are no observable evedence of one or more gods. I can critically read about the science behind theories, and go "hm.. this reasoning seems plausible", and i am yet to find a creationist that makes his case without beeing disproved by science.
Calling me indoctrinated? I call myself educated.
TheJo4an 1 week ago
@TheJo4an ....."sence"....."evedence"...."beeing"....Yes, you are very "educated"....in spelling.....there are grammatical errors too but the 500 character limit precludes my listing your other errors.
KJVWordofGod 1 week ago
@KJVWordofGod So you stoop to that. Well, English is not my 1st language, and I wasn't using any spellcorrecting. I make a better argument than you.
TheJo4an 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KJVWordofGod You say scientists have different "theories" regarding the "big bang" and you accept these theories as plausible until proven BUT
That is because they make sense and have logic and evidence supporting them. Your god as you describe him, is illogical !
You of all people call scientists indoctrinated ? Oh the irony !
MrRichardQED 5 days ago
@KJVWordofGod theories have evidence, your god does not..
speciwacy 21 hours ago
@speciwacy If your theory had evidence, it would be fact. As it is, evolution is a failed theory in search of evidence. It is a religion that requires faith. It has no proof. If you accept the so called *evidence* to support the theory of evolution, you are not much of thinker....just a sheep blindly following *so called* science in the vain hope your leaders will one day actually find proof. BTW, there is so much SECULAR evidence for Jesus Christ that only a fool would reject it.
KJVWordofGod 3 hours ago
@KJVWordofGod ERROR! well.. You are actually right. Nothing exploded because that is not what the big bang theory says, it says that a singularity expanded.
BRAVO!
FYI the big bang theory and abiogenesis are NOT part of evolution so half of hovinds seminar is incorrect.
TioPhillippe 2 weeks ago
@TioPhillippe And this "singularity" came from? That's right.....NOTHING! LOL
KJVWordofGod 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KJVWordofGod And this "singularity" came from? That's right.....NOTHING!
Says who ? Scientists don´t, they say we don´t know, which is honest. Now like cretards, who make their argument up as they go along !
MrRichardQED 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TioPhillippe And this "singularity" came from? That's right.....NOTHING! LOL
KJVWordofGod 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KJVWordofGod first there was nothing....then it exploded. Nothing.....exploded....and here we are. You poor victim of public education.
Nobody claims that you poor victim of home schooling.
""They" can't prove one part of the bible true... one part of the bible false. "
Logic dictates that you cant really prove anything wrong, so you have to prove things are right. I mean i could just make stuff up and you have to believe it if you cant prove me wrong ? How does that make sense?
MrRichardQED 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
How can the world be 6000 years old when there are 9500 year old spruce trees growing in Sweden
MrIrishBilly 2 weeks ago
@drummr88 Interesting fact: Did you know that the first man to say that the Earth revolves around the sun and is not the center of the universe was threatened to be killed by the Catholic church because it conflicted with the creationism story in the Bible? It wasn't until decades years later that Isaac Newton proved it with calculus that it was even taken seriously by Christians.
SuicidalWaltDisney 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SuicidalWaltDisney Interesting fact: Did you know that the first man to say that the Earth revolves around the sun and is not the center of the universe was threatened to be killed by the Catholic church because it conflicted with the creationism story in the Bible?
Interesting fact : he was not the first man, not even among the first thousand to say that. If you want to play a smartass at least check your facts
MrRichardQED 5 days ago
people like this prove idiocy
deviiance 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hahahaha. What. The. Fuck. Grow a brain you utter, utter moron.
Static822 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
Static822 3 weeks ago
The idea that it was literally "nothing at all" that exploded in the Big Bang is false. The idea of a singularity is not that it is nothing, just that it has no volume, which would indeed be the case if that much mass were in one place at once. Ever heard of a black hole? It's the same idea, except with the entire mass of the universe at the center, so if the mass of one supermassive star has enough gravitational force to become a single point, the mass of the entire universe certainly does.
siegel019 3 weeks ago
there are so many things wrong with his facts first we have seen where stars are formed and there is proof for the big bang the universe is expanding so of course it had to of been closer before in past
thehoodlum1919 3 weeks ago
I love how the uploader disabled rating so viewers would have to watch for a while before realising how stupid the speaker is.
triovani 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
Drummr88 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Does this man honestly believe 97% of scientists think life came from a rock?
TheDilemma100 4 weeks ago
point 4 on his list:
organic evolution = origin of life
this is 100% not true.
evolution is about life evolving from other life.
so in evolution you always start whit something already living. so it's not saying the origin of life.
the origin of life = ABIOGENESIS
abiogenesis is unlike evolution about the origin of life and not the evolution of life.
conclusion..... this guys is full of bull-crap
laladieladada 1 month ago
@laladieladada So, I guess you're free to discard all of the FACTUAL, EMPIRICAL, CONCRETE scientific evidence he presents?
Being intellectually honest with yourself, wouldn't you want to follow the evolutionary theory to its obvious implications and conclusions?
According to evolution, life had to begin (somewhere along the line) with non-living, self-creating matter. And I've got bad news for you, Abiogenesis is 100% scientifically impossible...
Repent.
Drummr88 3 weeks ago
@Drummr88 Actually, you can get life from non-life, at least in a certain way that was demonstrated. But, let's say for the sake of debate, that there is absolutely no way to get life from non-life. Wouldn't that technically make God completely impossible, since of course, there's no way to get life from non-life, especially in a timeless dimension that's devoid of anything.
SnippyDoughnut 3 weeks ago
@SnippyDoughnut I must applaud you, friend, for at least entertaining the “possibility” that Abiogenesis is an absolute scientific impossibility. Unfortunately for those desperate to write off the existence of God though, it’s not merely a possibility. It’s a scientifically verifiable, proven certainty.
Drummr88 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Drummr88 for at least entertaining the “possibility” that Abiogenesis is an absolute scientific impossibility.
This is utter nonsense ! Abiogenesis is in no way impossible, its even quite likely as experiments done in 2008 show. They showed that under the right circumstances a fully working RNA can create itself quite easily. From there its not such a big step to a working cell.
The creastionists arguments on this rely on ignorance of nature, as it is usually the case with them
MrRichardQED 5 days ago
@SnippyDoughnut To answer your question; No, God would be in NO way limited, or subject to the finite, created realities and dimensions that He spoke into being. He exists outside of the continuum that we know as time, space and matter, and is unaffected by them.
Now am I, a finite being with a 3 pound brain, able to fully comprehend and understand this? Well I will humbly and readily admit that I am not.
Drummr88 3 weeks ago
@SnippyDoughnut -“And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness.” 1 Timothy 3:16
If I could fully understand God, he certainly wouldn’t be worth worshiping. However, signs and obvious, irrefutable proof is abundantly clear to those who will see it, and the Bible is the adequate, sufficient, infallible expression of His will.
Drummr88 3 weeks ago
@Drummr88 Ok, if you undoubtedly think that your religion is self-evident, it's fine. But, as a fellow human, I beg of you not to make huge life decisions based on the thought that God is there. Have shit loads of happiness in your life, and make decisions based on demonstrable consequences. :D
SnippyDoughnut 3 weeks ago
@Drummr88 No, we're not free to discard any of the "FACTUAL, EMPIRICAL, CONCRETE scientific evidence he presents," but that's alright, because there isn't any of that. Everything that Hovind says is either not true at all, or in no way disproves evolution. Just because he makes it sound convincing by putting a bunch of scientific jargon in there does not in any way mean that he is correct.
siegel019 3 weeks ago
oh my GOD!!!
all these people are soooo... stupid.
is it realy possible to be so stupid? or is it all just acting?
laladieladada 1 month ago
@laladieladada It's not wise to call other people "stupid" in a post that's riddled with improper punctuation and misspelled words.
It doesn't lend much credibility to your faulty assertions.
Drummr88 3 weeks ago
@Drummr88 Oh really now, where is the improper punctuation in that one? All I see is failure to capitalize the first word in a sentence, which is just being lazy, not stupidity. Also, he made a goddamn typo, so don't get your panties in a wad. ONE typo. Also, you correcting somebody else's grammar doesn't lend any credibility to your false assertions.
siegel019 3 weeks ago
Jesus loves you
ybuzhduha 1 month ago
Hovind... Please enjoy your stint in prison. You need to get out and spread more of your misinformation as soon as possible. What does Hovind use the science books for? I am guessing toilet paper or kindling. Then again he does need science to put a touch of truth in with his purposeful lies.
ultim4t32 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THIS MAN IS CORRECT. THIS PROVED THE FLYING SPEGHETTII MONSTER IS THE SOURCE OF ALL LIFE
istan50 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THIS MAN IS CORRECT. THIS PROVED THE FLYING SPEGHETTII MONSTER IS THE SOURCE OF ALL LIFE
istan50 1 month ago
To believe not in the 6 day literal creation and call one self a christian is in my opinion an oxy-moron.
1struthalways 1 month ago
1. Evolution has only one meaning, change over time in self-replicating organisms. Lie 1!
2. Nothing exploded, a singularity expanded. Lie 2!(8 if you count the various evolution lies)
Okay this is impossible, i give up. I can't keep up with the lies in this video. I stopped counting after 23 lies.
No wonder the U.S.A is in the same category as Turkey and Iran in education.
baldurus1 1 month ago
you see sir there is a reason why religion cannot be taught in public schools and evolution can.
TopCommentsYeah 1 month ago
@TopCommentsYeah There is one the government won't sanction it,,,because it is not on the agenda.
1struthalways 1 month ago
He claims to be a scientist, but does not seem to be familiar with the concept of entropy.
stupidfatuglybastard 1 month ago
He doesn't have understanding of a lot of stuff he talked about. Just in another video he talks about DNA and chromosomes and said each chromosome contains enough information for one person. I really don't know what to say about him except that he speaks well enough to sound intelligent while spouting nonsense.
silverysnow92 1 month ago
@silverysnow92 your crap is nonsense
kkk345ify 1 month ago
@kkk345ify If you believe him I have nothing to say except okay and thank you for your comment.
silverysnow92 1 month ago
@silverysnow92 You want to know about DNA check out the genesis confilict I think number 7 from Prof Walter Veith very informative and it truly clears all the cob webs.
1struthalways 1 month ago
1000000 reasons why creationists are stupid !!!! thats right lacking normal intelligence
RedBeretXXX 1 month ago
@RedBeretXXX your lacking normal intelligence retard
kkk345ify 1 month ago
@kkk345ify *You're
siegel019 3 weeks ago
Even if dinosaurs were still alive, how would this be going against evolution? Also, radioactive dating down by thousands of scientists, you need evidence they are wrong. In Genisis, it says 7 day creation, but when a lot of metiphores are in Bible, why should this not be? It could be millions of years and just 7 important times. Also, God wants people to believe in him, not give them science. It was hard enough to convince someone of God, billions of years would be harder back then.
animaljp3 1 month ago
@animaljp3 all that is junk you junk no scientist can prove the earth is millions of years pure crap get your facks right son
kkk345ify 1 month ago
@kkk345ify Well maybe no scientist can prove the earth is millions of years old to you, since you reject every piece of completely reasonable evidence provided to you. However, there is really no way to reject that the universe is at least 13 billion years old, since we can see light from galaxies 13 billion light years away. That would mean that light would have to travel for 13 billion years to reach earth... 6,000 years my ass.
siegel019 3 weeks ago
@siegel019 so. 13billion my ass
kkk345ify 3 weeks ago
@kkk345ify Okay, so which of those things are you rejecting? That there are things that are more than 13 billion light years away, or just the conclusion that I drew from the fact that we can see objects more than 13 billion light years away? Because if it's the former, then I can give you evidence that it's true, and if it's the latter, then you're just willfully ignorant (read: stupid).
siegel019 3 weeks ago
@siegel019 So you're asserting that the speed of light is a constant? And has always been a constant?
Furthermore, if God was capable of creating this universe as he says he did, wouldn't it be prudent to assume that he would make his Creation visible to mankind?
Furthermore, the Bible says in 17 different times that God 'stretched' out the heavens.
Interesting fact: Were you aware that Bible referred to the Earth as spherical, LONG before ancient astronomers became aware of this?
Drummr88 3 weeks ago
@Drummr88 Yes, that's what I'm asserting. The speed of light is a constant. It is, always has been, and always will be a constant. Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity tells us that nothing, including light, can travel faster than the speed of light, i.e. 300,000,000 m/s. And it doesn't matter whether or not god stretched out "the heavens," because it wouldn't change what we see. Interesting fact: Were you aware that Earth is not a sphere, but rather an oblate spheroid (i.e. a 3D ellipse)?
siegel019 3 weeks ago
@Drummr88 Also, there are multiple things other than the speed of light that indicate that the universe is approximately 13.8 billion years old, such as the age of the coolest (which would also be the oldest) white dwarfs, the rate of expansion of the universe (look up Hubble's Law), and the Cosmic Microwave Background (which, I have to admit, I'm not incredibly clear on; I missed that class in astronomy). If you're interested in any of the facts, read How Old is the Universe by David Weintraub.
siegel019 3 weeks ago
@Drummr88 "Interesting fact: Were you aware that Bible referred to the Earth as spherical, LONG before ancient astronomers became aware of this?" No, you are incorrect. It is supported by pillars on its 4 corners from which you can view the whole Earth from the highest mountains. The Bible is the literal inerrant word of God and not to be questioned or interpreted for your own agenda. Don't forget to kill your son when he disobeys and insects have 4 legs.
jknengr796 2 weeks ago
to anyone saying somethig cant come from nothing, i ask, where did god come from? was he just always there?
ErmacSRB 1 month ago
God could have caused the big bang.
The1Skinsfan 1 month ago
@The1Skinsfan It's possible that a god could've caused the big bang. However, there's no reason to believe that it's plausible. Until there is, it's but a waste of time and thought to even consider it; just like the notion of a god altogether.
ToaoRaj 1 month ago
@The1Skinsfan If God caused the big bang, how would you know? God is invisible right? How can you tell the difference between God causing the big bang vs God not causing the big bang? There's no way to distinguish the two. It's a rhetorical question, too philosophical without any real scientific benefit. The only real benefit would be for those weak-minded individuals who need to believe in notion of God in order to feel their lives have a purpose and feel happy and loved.
Casshyr 1 month ago
At 8:49 Hovind shows a picture of a textbook and quotes it as describing the Big Bang. And yet you can see it is describing a planetary nebula. So is Hoving lying? Does he not understand what he is reading? What about the description he quotes the Berkeley scientist as giving? Is Hovind lying, confused, or what? His fans need to ask themselves.
Misterb0z 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
how bout coming up with 1 reason that is backed up with scientific facts other than trying to sway the viewers opinion with terrible jokes every 2 seconds.
zkibbz71 2 months ago
Comment removed
zkibbz71 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster! Thumbs up!
Holland1994D 2 months ago
"A big bang may occur every 80 to 100 billion years"
Uhoh..looks like 2012 might happen...or not.
Ha..Hovind is the man.
jgl4c 2 months ago
its quite stupid, im creationist and i dont bolive earth is six thousand years old, and that dinosaurs died in flood -its ridiculous
according to bible, just Adam lived 800 years its hard to bolive he counted ears there and result just 6k.
knowing this incredible world, with its chemistry, physics, and awesome variaty, i think if i would be agnostic i would bolive creation retherthan big bang and randomness
Jerzyw88 2 months ago
@Jerzyw88 Hovind have this number 6k because he calculated and based it on A Biblically based world history chart showing 6,000 years of events and people.if you want to see that chart then i can send to you if you want?.I also want to say that i believe the world is created, but i dont have the confidence like Hovind to say the world is 6000 years old but rather 6000-12000 there are clues that the earth is young.
jesusLostChildren777 2 months ago
@jesusLostChildren777 The early forefathers beliveved it 2000 to Abraham 2000 to Jesus and 2000 from His death and resurrction looks like A thousand years Sabbath is about due.
1struthalways 1 month ago
@jesusLostChildren777 according to the bible its around 6000-7000 years
benmints 1 month ago
@jesusLostChildren777 Yet the stars are millions of light years away, yet the earth is only thousands of years old? You saying God saved the Earth for last and had to make those stars first?
timoteoman13 2 weeks ago
@jesusLostChildren777 By the way, not saying the earth is millions of years old or anything, but the Bible doesn't actually say how much time went by between adam and eve's creation and fall. All it says is that Adam and Eve began to die when they ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Don't take this the wrong way I'm just not sure about the earth being only 6000 years old. Personally I think it's a bit longer but I don't know.
personpeoplehime 1 week ago
Comment removed
hornyarab11 2 weeks ago
@Jerzyw88 learn to spell; get educated and i'm sure you will change your beliefs. See creationism is created from Christianity so people could be controlled by making them believe ridiculous made up things, in fact all religion is made up; they cant prove one part of the bible true.. 3:29 the big bang doesn't evolve nor the elements only living things evolve.. HERP DERP this guys dumb and the only reason people listen to him is because he says he believes in god another example of controlling..
hornyarab11 2 weeks ago
@hornyarab11 "They" can't prove one part of the bible true? Rather, YOU cannot prove one part of the bible false. You speak as if you know it all....but you know nothing.
KJVWordofGod 2 weeks ago
@KJVWordofGod Why would i need to prove something wrong when its not even proven true, that would be like arguing with air.....
hornyarab11 2 weeks ago
Here is a picture of "Dr" Hovind's "University" Replace * with a . imgur*com/BbsO2
soulsmile72 2 weeks ago
Awesome, I love this guy.
W1ndbr8ker 2 months ago
@AntonioRothfeller And before Darwin died he confessed that he made it all up... but he was told its too late , the theory has spread too far, too late now. Except u wouldn't know that now would you?
MSeroga 2 months ago
@MSeroga Can you please send me the link or bibliographic details of where Darwin said that he admitted he lied about evolution on his death bed, I'd like to use it in an essay. Also, does it say anything about his motivations for trying to deceive the world in the greatest hoax ever created, I would be interested in noting his psychological conditions.
UniversalPariah 2 months ago
@MSeroga ... do you have the source of this information about Darwin making up his theory ... ?
UniversalPariah 2 months ago
@MSeroga Seriously, could you give some sort of proof, some sort of citation, anything at all that demonstrates that Darwin actually said this? Creationists always cite this, but never have any proof of it. Also, it does not matter what one person said, even if he was the one who came up with the theory. Evidence is the only thing that matters in science, and there is plenty of evidence for evolution, whether you would like to believe it or not.
siegel019 3 weeks ago
The definition of evolution thing is completely retarded, nobody has ever seen God but he totally exists!
joanim 2 months ago
What astonishing works have creationist scientists bring to us recently? Evolution has provided ecologists ways to protect endangered species, laid groundwork for novel drug designs, and bioinformatics analysis of newly sequenced genomes. What has creationists done for us, scientifically speaking? Hmmm..??
Casshyr 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Evolution vs Creation:
First Evolution:
"The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reason, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason what so ever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs. Makes perfect sense."
Uuhh. I think the Bible has a much better explanation…
7777Ralph 3 months ago
@7777Ralph
That's not evolution you're describing there. Please try again.
generischernutzer 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please listen closely to what the Bible says regarding this very thing:
“For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.” Rom 1:20
Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on him.” John 3:36
Please accept Jesus today as your Lord and Savior if you want salvation.
7777Ralph 3 months ago
Maxiking120 u obvliously dident watch the video :P
Brandonm7928 3 months ago
I wonder if evolutionists ever ask themselves if the oxygen in the atmosphere has always been the same amount? because carbon dating depends on it! Now what happens when a big catastrophe changes earth in all possible ways? everything changes, including oxygen lvls, but evolutionists doesn't take this into count. So everything is millions of years old, to them...
banheden 9 months ago
@banheden
So, what you're saying is that you DON'T know if evolutionists take this into account and that you DO know that they don't.
Ok, so you find evolution confusing, that's ok.
But how can you dismiss so readily what you clearly don't understand?
shumble32 3 months ago
@banheden You know that carbon dating isn't used to date things which are millions of years old. The measurement only works for things less than about 20000 years non-marine things. Sure you know that.
fire112germany 3 months ago
@banheden I wonder if you ever asked yourself how carbon dating actually works or is used. Try not to parrot anything just because it favors your point somehow: Carbon dating is only used for time scales up to about 60,000 years. Maybe a few thousand years more or less, but not millions of years.
generischernutzer 3 months ago
@banheden Lol'd. Actually it's often calculated the carbon in the atmosphere for non-marine specimens.
Granted it can only test up to 60,000 years old accurately. And Marine life will always be un-testable through carbon dating because the carbon in the ocean is older than the carbon in the air.
This is why things are dated on a range. Say something is dated to be 5200 years old, then it's estimated 4000-6000 years old.
Leaving plenty margin for error for atmospheric changes.
Microtardz 2 months ago
ive been saved
hoelker9876 9 months ago
Science is fine, but it's not my God. Thinking outside the box...
watch?v=QRfBFdNFdQw
InformedTexasVoter 10 months ago
@JuiceBoxheero I would be impressed if evolutionists could only replicate the birth of a species by adding info to the genome of a cell. Cells are not programmed to evolve into species and Darwinism is founded on the premise that it did happen
alexthasy 11 months ago
@alexthasy ,
I'd have to agree to that and may I add that from my experience of interacting with scientists, the one that are the least prone to believe in evolution are the geneticists. Do you know why? Because they understand the best, scientifically, how life is supposed to have originated and developed according to evolutionism, but they just do not see it happen, nor do they see the potential of it happening. "you will know the truth and the truth shall set you free". do we wanna be free?
flotopo 9 months ago
@flotopo I am a molecular biologist and know some things about genetics. The funny thing is, that genetics alone (without any fossils, Darwin finches, etc.) offers enough evidence to validate common ancestry. Most people I heard talking (or writing) that genetics disproves evolution have in fact no clue about that field or at least they are at a low level of understanding. The predicted tree of life in the genome was found when modern genetics came up.
fire112germany 3 months ago
@alexthasy Fine. Craig Venter did that with a bacterium. Adding sequences into the genome and by this causing new proteins happens with every retrovirus. And know what: About 8-10% of YOUR genome are of retroviral origin.
Your conclusion of "Darwinism" (whatever that is) is wrong on many levels. But I guess you are too ignorant to get some education in this field.
fire112germany 3 months ago
It's called sin mate :-)
stepharnos115 11 months ago
If this deity can hear prayers, and express commands to people, why does "God" not have a blog?
Also another thing to consider-> when it's all said and done, it's better to empathize in anyway possible. Empathy is the idea that we're all rooting for each other in our struggle to live. So in heaven or hell, there is no empathy, because those are perfect places (constant and people know what is awaiting them.)
coelhewi 11 months ago
@coelhewi God does have a blog... It is called the HOLY BIBLE
wvquiltlady 9 months ago
@elagentenumerouno Sorry.. But is not good information.. You Cant Exspect us Humans to have all the right answeres. We make alot of mistakes.. We are in the early states of understanding the universe and what its contanes.
TheNorthCold 11 months ago
@t4qesd1 haha thats right.
You either have to be ignorant, uneducated, or brainwashed to look at the complexity of nature and how it works so perfectly and not see that someone designed it. Even Richard Dawkins is forced to admit that nothing on earth could have happened unless someone came and started it. . . but somehow the ones who came and started it are even more complex yet they came out of nowhere... talk about ignorant.
krishole 1 year ago
lol, you've never seen a star come into existence? well by that logic... i never seen a god bring a human into existence, thanks to render your own concept useless
Dreadfultime 1 year ago
@Dreadfultime well God dint show us how he dit it because it was 6000 years a go,so how he want to show us that? Bible say he just dit it.God dont need a explantion, becaise all people now he exist For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse, its more ridicules to believe that random explosion that came from completely noting made everting.
jesusLostChildren777 1 year ago
@jesusLostChildren777 i dont see why god does not need an excuse, and dont say because its god, circular reasoning is fallacy.
you have to prove too much before saying god does not need an excuse or explanation. the bible... well you have to prove its the word of god, and well, faith isnt evidence :D
Dreadfultime 1 year ago
@Dreadfultime why God dont need excuse? i just give you the reason lol,ho are you to say that God need to proof him self to you? are you more wise then him?,meby more righteousness? you made the universe? people need to learn that God is not the one thats need help.it ''you'' that need to find out what he want from you.And what you believe is faith to,and its more insane to believe we came from absolute noting and random explosion made everting :D
jesusLostChildren777 1 year ago
Christians don't need to prove anything. We believe in God and thats out faith, we don't call it science.
science is something you can observe. So lets teach that in schools, not the religion of evolution.
you think what you believe is science when you cant even prove it. you cant prove any of evolution, so please don't call your religion science.
you dont even understand the concept of the argument. its not to show you that your wrong, its to show you that evolution is a religion.
krishole 1 year ago
@krishole That is EXACTLY the point! Thank you so much for typing this. We KNOW ours is a religion. But evolutionists and people who believe in the Big Bang cant get it or just wont. We love science! Science is great and helps humanity. But that is not what the debate is about.
The big bang will NEVER be scientifically proven. It can not be observed, reproduced or recreated. And so far neither can evolution. They look as if they are destined to be theories for eternity
psford1 1 year ago
@psford1 Never it right. fairy-tails for eternity ha. If the world had enough time ahead of it, evolution would be a big joke in the history books of the future.
and if someone is reading this and thinking "well your theory is a fairy-tail too!", at least you get the point if you put "too" at the end of your statement. Hopefully that gets you thinking what it the real truth...seek and you shall find. ask God and in one way or another, if you don't harden your heart, He will answer you.
krishole 1 year ago
@krishole
Rodents born with a high resistance to the pesticide Warfarin.
A new antibiotic resistant strain of the flu.
Changes that are observable in less than a Human lifetime.
.
Observed natural selection. The strongest, or the fittest, or the most adapted to their environment will be the most successful at reproducing.
Animal courtship rituals. They're not doing it just cause they like to dance around.
acronus 1 year ago
@jesusLostChildren777 Yes god needs to prove himself! That is what we are saying. I am wiser and morally superior to your god. He killed everything on the planet and I havent killed anyone. I am more powerfull too cos I can pick up this cup of tea and he cannot. And sir, it is YOU, Mr Creationist, not us, that believes that the universe, the earth, life, animals, humans, EVERYTHING all appeared spontaneously from NOTHING!
adey5 11 months ago
@adey5 ho say everting comes from noting? God made it lol..its not your ridiculous theory that everting comes from absolute noting in a random explosion,expansion,implosion(every year the have something new ) and created everting in order and structure in all complexity of all life we see now.really ''you'' more powerful and more moral? how about insanity???lol ''you'' a created being from God,...ha ha well hope this was a joke..(Jesus comes,we live in the end days)
jesusLostChildren777 11 months ago
@Dreadfultime Oh but that is so not true & you know it. We all have the same ability to know, It.
dnahulvey 1 year ago
@Dreadfultime Darwinism is the perfect example of circular reasoning. Darwin invented the law of natural selection to which he attributed divine power like that of giving a cell the power to evolve into a simple species and to that species the power to grow or alter organs and limbs + add accessories like hair or feathers and turn into something else. Natural selection around which gravitates the theory of evolution would be called a god in any other other cult.
alexthasy 1 year ago
@jesusLostChildren777
well i have a good buddy. his name is god. he was conceived of nothing for there was nothing before him. duh he is god. so if you are right jesusLostChildren777 god does not exist. because as you say things cannot be created from nothing. so where did my buddy, god come from?
note: please don't tell me god has existed for an infinite amount of time in the past , because he had to start his existence somewhere somewhere.
MrFoxbat25 1 year ago
@MrFoxbat25 God created the universe so he is not effected by his creation,and he wouldn't be God if he was created.God explane him self in the Bible that he is the eternal being that always existed.and we dont present it on schools and in the text books that this is a fact. I now this is part of religion,but evolution try to explane the origin of life and present it as a fact.but its also a part religion .(sets of believes)
jesusLostChildren777 1 year ago
@MrFoxbat25 It is completely unreasonable to say that God needs a creator. In this universe, things that exist have to have a cause. This is a rule or "law" that governs us. But God is not ruled by this law. Why should he be? He created the law in the first place.
Is the guy who created the game Checkers ruled by the laws he created for that game? He made up or "created" the rules for the game. But he himself doesn't have to be ruled by those rules he created.
TheClownCrew 1 year ago
@TheClownCrew your statement is completely unreasonable and whats funny about it is that you don't seem to realize it. Think about what you just said. You're argument is such a cop out. It's equivalent to a game of cops and robbers little kids play. When one kid shoots another and says "you're dead" the kid who got shot says something like " Nope because I have an invisible bullet deflector." You see what I am saying? You can't just make bold assumptions of things without any shred of evidence.
cjaygrove 11 months ago
@jesusLostChildren777 amen!!!!!
1954phyllis 1 year ago
@jesusLostChildren777
Its Stubborn ignorance..what do we see in nature ..life arises from life..never non living assembling into life? ever!!..francis crick and fred hoyle both have said abiogenesis is mathematically impossible but still stubbornly were atheist ..they also have ZERO Testable repeatable chemistry to back up abiogenesis..no one has ever been able to assemble amino acids into anything.which should be simple..primitive cells never existed
5tonyvvvv 11 months ago
@jesusLostChildren777 Even with all the Proteins and DNA and RNA ...What would they do with it??..from there they have zero molecular machines, zero assembly instructions...all this stuff would just float away in some primordial soup and break down..and it would be the same thing in a test tube. to get amino acids to self assemble is impossible..there is no natural process.to make a cell evolve ..it would be easier to build the space shuttle..blindfolded while riding a unicycle
5tonyvvvv 11 months ago
@jesusLostChildren777 That whole message you just posted was intellectually weak.If god never showed anyone how he did it, then how do you or anyone know that creation happened, or that it happend at all? Oh and by the way, Big Bang wasnt really an explosion like in the A-Team, more of a Rapid Expansion of space/time/matter/energy, and it may have existed before the Big Bang but in another state.There are a few ideas, but using god as an explanation is cheating as far as a scientific hypothesis
adey5 11 months ago
@adey5 we dont say its a fact we now its part of religion,but the big bang is presented in the textbooks as a fact so the burden of proof is on your shoulders.big bang theory is a part of religion to because it try to explane the origin of cosmos.
jesusLostChildren777 11 months ago
Thanks for these great videos, much needed, so good of Kent Hovind to be willing to speak out the truth even though he was severely persecuted for it by the false charges brought against him. Income taxes are not constintutional, and were implemented during war time and was supposed to be only temporary, he stood up for what was right, God bless him. The rest of us suckers who continue to let them tax our income get what we derserve, MORE taxes, we're working four months a year for $-0. Rise up!
martiebaby 1 year ago
Final Score --- GOD WINS!
Turn2God4Hope 1 year ago
I love Dr. Kent Hovind!
OBMB 1 year ago
hovind makes some valid points. even scientists i know ignore evolutionary theory.
BibleWinScienceFail 1 year ago
evolution is really stupid
Letria 1 year ago
God is great brother. God is great.
Riste1986 1 year ago
The information this guy show in this video, it's very convincing to me. Exelent information
elagentenumerouno 1 year ago
this guy is awesome!
renaudbrent 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Thank you for this video, Exelent information.
elagentenumerouno 1 year ago 2
@elagentenumerouno Sorry.. But is not good information.. You Cant Exspect us Humans to have all the right answeres. We make alot of mistakes.. We are in the early states of understanding the universe and what its contanes.
TheNorthCold 11 months ago
... Incorrect. Mutations do not ALWAYS produce detrimental changes in DNA and in some cases enhances the offsprings chances of survival. The probability of an individual having a mutation does not preclude 100% chance of lethality of that mutation in its offspring. It is high, yes but not 100%. In this case your argument has no footing because for those that do survive they are genetically equipped to deal with the selection pressure that edited their precursors out.
Snorglat 2 years ago
because you probably not a Christian,but when you are saved then its different. Christians want to listen to Gods moral laws,unsaved people don't care what God say,the love there Sins.thats why lot of people do what the want to do.
jesusLostChildren777 2 years ago
Fear of being wrong is pretty scary isnt it?
tate22000 2 years ago
Sure sounds like you're scared. So, when you are over your fear, let us creationists know.
tate22000 2 years ago 2
For God so loved the world that he have his one and only Son that who ever believes in him shall not perish,but have eternal life John 3:16.............................. Who ever believes in the Son has eternal life,but who ever rejects the Son,will not see life.for God's wrath remains on him John 3:36 For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God Roman 3:23............................. Who can say:''I have kept my heart pure;I am clean and whitout sin''? Prov 20 :6
jesusLostChildren777 2 years ago
.If we confess our sins,he is faithful and just and will forgive us all our sins purify us from all unrighteousness 1 John 1:9 .......................... For it is whit your heart that you believe and are justified,and it is whith your mouth that you Confess and are saved Romans 10:10
jesusLostChildren777 2 years ago
"people present evidence but when the give it to you you don't study the evidence"
That is merely your assumption, yet again you've provided no evidence to back it up.
The bottom line is this. Science is about truth. We get to that by looking at evidence. I have presented a great deal, you have presented nothing so far. All you have done is pretend otherwise. You are not interested in truth, and that is your loss. This is why scientists don't take creationists seriously. Think about it.
Ozzyman200 2 years ago
sorry Ozzy but i am done whit you ask oder people for evidence i have given you examples.Science is indeed about truth.but evolution have noting to do whit science ,thats why creationisten don't take evolution serious lol.i here rest my case ,good by.and don't ask my anymore questions.
jesusLostChildren777 2 years ago
Brierc have Ozzyman called you to help? because i don't debate 2 people take number and wait behind the line lol
jesusLostChildren777 2 years ago
i don't do this silly games Ozzyman how old are you? you are scientist?ya right! tell why 2 law of thermodynamics don't contradict evolution? give my good explanation in logical and normal words why its not evidence.because you thinks this is very funny so you try to ask my questions but you don't answer my question then only ''no its not evidence'' tell my plz i am curios.
jesusLostChildren777 2 years ago
"i don't do this silly games Ozzyman how old are you? "
Stop with the silly games and ad hominems. You have no idea about thermodynamic or you'd have said what they are.
If you think the 2nd law contradicts evolution, then say why. Just typing "evolution doesn't happen because I say so" is not evidence. If you want to be taken seriously, then step up and answer a straight question.
Ozzyman200 2 years ago
i have no idea about 2 law of thermodynamic? you mean you don't now. i have already explane it to you so how you can say that i don't now? do you even border to read my commends Ozzy? 2 law state that everting falls slowly in disorder that everting is winding down,now evolution claims that everting get better over time and more orderly.we can see on earth (open system) that is clearly wrong
jesusLostChildren777 2 years ago
we have evidence for it ,that this is the truth because we can test it ,observe it here on earth.we all get old and turne into dust all buildings fall in to dust,trees dies enz.
jesusLostChildren777 2 years ago
you now DNA is proof for intelligent design?you now that in DNA is information and that it is coded? you say its not evidence then plz explane to my how coding system and semantic information could originate by itself in a material medium,plz tell my a am curios.
jesusLostChildren777 2 years ago
i hear somebody els say it only apply for close system,well ofc you have scientist that have a theory,and the need that because if this is right then evolution is impossible.lucky we have science( testable and observable ).All experimental and physical observation appears to confirm that the Law is universal, affecting all natural processes in the long run.here on earth you can clearly see the effect on daily life.
jesusLostChildren777 2 years ago
Natural selection exist indeed but it only select it don't produce new morphological structures.only that stronger survive in the wild.and there is only adaptation.and thats what we can observe test,its science but we have never have seen new morphological structures,it only spread currently existing traits.there is no new information.
jesusLostChildren777 2 years ago
Ozzyman your asking for evidence i have given that to you,i think you ask my because thats the only think you can do,but one again i will give you some examples:The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, Irreducible Complexity,information,Formation of Life, Fine-tuning of Physics.ya i now your awnser and is like this"NO its not evidence ha ha''
jesusLostChildren777 2 years ago
haha wow now i am Ozzy " evolution is wrong"" wow what lot of information i really proof that evolution is wrong ha ha
jesusLostChildren777 2 years ago
''99% of biologists and geneticists--the people who actually study the material and are qualified to render judgment'' ho say that all come to the same conclusion?it is a fact that many scientist to day don't believe in evolution.I just pointed out to Ozzy that not all scientist believe in evolution and that there is evidence for it,i dint make contest out of it,I simple present some evidence for it.
jesusLostChildren777 2 years ago
what about fine tuning of the earth? for us humans.if the earth were a little closer or further away, then the earth would freeze or boil,If the earth did not rotate at the 1000mph, rather at a slower 100mph then the days would burn everything alive and the night would freeze the same life,If the moon was a little closer then the tides would flood all the land. If the oceans where deeper it would absorb all the carbon dioxide making plant life impossible.
jesusLostChildren777 2 years ago
i can go on and on about how everting is fine tuned for life,you must be completely insane if you think that everting we see just happen by random chance,whiteout any order or design,that the moon and sun just exactly at right distanced just by random chance..
jesusLostChildren777 2 years ago
"you must be completely insane if you think that everting we see just happen by random chance"
The, no one is claiming it just happened by random chance, you are attacking a straw man. The scienctific view is that it evolved.
Ozzyman200 2 years ago
no 1 is claiming that it happen whit random chance?no? hole evolution theory is based on that.and how started to evolved? by random chance, life spontaneously arising from some sort of "primordial soup,just by chance,you don't even now your own science.
jesusLostChildren777 2 years ago