The Piltdown Man wasn't "weeded" out until the damage was done to the minds of school children 42 years later! If certain scientists were doing their job, it shouldn't have been taught as fact until fully proven. Evolutionists are full of deceit... as shown may many, many hoaxes and lies.
@AntichristComes From the start there was doubt among the scientific community & it wasn't until they could have access that they proved it was a hoax. If scientists were truly dishonest they would have continued the hoax rather than expose it. In fact, hoaxes are the trademark of creationists:- Paluxy footprints, Japanese Trawler Hoax, "fossilised" hammers & cowboy boots, Nephilim graves, Arc "discoveries", St Helens Coal beds, Darwin recanting, The Resurrection etc.
@DoctorYuro For a start Evolution is a proven fact with an embarrassment of evidence whether god(s) exists or not.
I am utterly amazed that you and others are so gullible and cannot see through such people as the Hovinds.It's just easily debunkable propoganda and they have absolutely no idea about science. This video highlights their self contradictions. Let's hear your defence.
@DoctorYuro Hovind knows next to nothing about any science. Have you ever read his dissertation? He can't even spell technical terms right. He thinks fossils contain carbon (in his attack on C14 dating). He thinks the earth is 6K years old when ice core rings alone go back 100s of K years. His so called"doctorate" was from a Diploma Mill (his qualification is not even in science) and i wonder how many peer reviewed papers he has written. He is a damn good showman though.
@DoctorYuro No, not on the science but you must also remember that Hovind attacks evolution by equating it with atheism. In truth, evolution says absolutely nothing about the existence of god. It neither proves nor disproves god. It doesn't invalidate Christianity but i'm afraid it does invalidate the literal account of creation in Genesis (but then so does basic critical thinking by a layman). There is too much money to be made by the Hovinds of this world to back down.
@pilgrimpater Evolution does not correspond with the bible's teaching and i dont see how they make so much money since they don't copyright their products and want the word to spread. Did u ever sit and watch a full Hovind seminar?
@DoctorYuro Evolution can corrrespond with the bible's teaching on an allegorical basis. That's why there are so many Christian pro evolutionists. There are so many independenat branches of science that prove evolution & after 150 years since Darwin's publication, it has never been falsified. Trust me, Hovind deals in pseodo science. Have i watched a full seminar? Hell no, i don't have enough sick buckets but i have watched an awful lot of his stuff. It's dishonest.
@pilgrimpater THose Christians who r pro aren't real Christians since evolution does not correspond with the 6 day creation. Btw just curious r we having a chill discussion or is there anger in it? cuz im chill
@DoctorYuro "THose Christians who r pro aren't real Christians " Of course they are real Christians. They believe in the virgin birth, the miracles of Jesus, his ressurection and hence his divinity. They believe he is the son of god. This makes them Christians and nothing in Evolution disproves any of this. But if you want to take Genesis literally then you (and Hovind) are opting to defend the indefensible
@DoctorYuro cont "and i dont see how they make so much money "
Enough money to own numerous houses and enough money to think it worth avoiding taxes on such a substantial income. They are all the same, Ham, Comfort, Hovind etc. See how they live.
@DoctorYuro "do you follow the lives of you evolution buddies or r all human beings perfect" Their lives are of no relevance to the validity of evolution. Evolution merely describes the topic of speciation.
Are all humans perfect? Not all, obviously but some might well be (I don't know every person on the planet). Most peoplpe i know are good people but again irrelevent to evolution.
@DoctorYuro "If the way they live their lives isn't relevant, then why bring up the hovinds"
Because Hovind's pseodo science & anti evolution stance is tied in with preaching morals. His actions contradict what he preaches. On the other hand, evolution says nothing about morals so how the individual evolutiost conducts himself is irrelevant to evo's validity. Don't forget that this video is about how the Hovinds (& Taylor) contradict themselves on their attempts to debate science.
Hey this is Hovind is a fucktard post. Not some crap about bullshit end days. Faith is faith for no reason while science is reason. I will never believe in schizophrenic bronze age fairy tales as reality. I can't believe this conversation is even happening in the USA.
you guys are scoffers walking after your lusts. And you do not forgive your neighbors. Let's see you begging to enter his kingdom, after you have been judged on that frightening day.
@Yaylin2 Exposing lies and hypocricy is hardly lust. How do you arrive at such a conclusion? I would prefer it if you could provide some constructive criticism.
"Let's see you begging to enter his kingdom, after you have been judged on that frightening day."
That makes absolutely no sense, Could we have that in English please?
@pilgrimpater There isn't anything i can say to you to convince you of anything.
You worship yourself, and you are going to be held accounted for. You might say, well what about the people who suffer? or the slaves? what about science? i seen my eyeballs in the mirrior this whole time, and knew there was a God and didn't want to accept it?
I wouldn't gamble my eternity because of a philosophy.
@Yaylin2 you are welcome to believe that nobody is in charge of this Earth. Which let me remind you, is hurling at 66k mph, spinning at 1k mph, having being orbited by a huge rock at 2.3k mph. If you want to believe Evolution, and nobody is in charge, be my guest.
Your religion takes much more faith. And a Big Bang would be proven wrong, we have planets and moons spinning in the opposite direction. Even whole galaxies. Your Evolution is not fundamental.
@Yaylin2 "If you want to believe Evolution, and nobody is in charge, be my guest."
That's where all the evidence points to and unlike the two bozos featured in this video, i do not have to lie, misrepresent my opponent nor contradict myself.
"Your religion takes much more faith." I have no religion. I reject all religions due to lack of evidence.
"we have planets and moons spinning in the opposite direction"
which proves/disproves absolutely nothing unless you care to tell me why.
@Yaylin2 Why would you scoff, with your intellect. When the Bible has never been proven wrong. If you think the Bible has contradictions, how can you even believe in the idea of contradictions? You don't even believe there is an absolute truth.
"In the last days there will be scoffers walking after their own lust."
Why would you challenge this, with knowing only so little?
Do you know everything?
If you knew half of everything, what exists in the half you do not know?
@Yaylin2 "When the Bible has never been proven wrong. I" A layman can disdprove litereal Genesis and the rest of the Bible is chock a block with self contradictions.
"Why would you challenge this, with knowing only so little?" Because you have no compelling evidence for such a ridiculous claim.
"If you knew half of everything, what exists in the half you do not know?" Therefore i don't guess.
@Yaylin2 When I joined the Army, 2007, many senior Drill sergeants were disturbed that most of the recruits had changed greatly. This change was caused by Video Games, Cell Phone, MySpace (In those days), and Surfing the Internet. The recruits joined off a whim of ambition, and a desire of a great responsibility. Most of the recruits were numb minded.
One phrase in the military stuck with my, regarding Idle minded people. "They don't make Privates like they used to."
This is officially the Hovind is a fucktard post YouTube page of truth. Come back here every 10 days and post how fucking dumdass arrogantly shit for brained stupid Hovind is.
5:30 - this really is my favourite part of this video. All these years creationists/ religious fucknuts have been claiming that they have science on THEIR side, coming up with bullshit explanations for geology, speciation etc (stupid fuck NephilimFree beign a primary practitioner of this dark art) and Hovind wipes all that away in one sentence!
Eric is not as good in conning people as his daddy was. Poor boy, no talent and never learned anything else. It would be kinda sad if it wasn't so utterly despicable.
I would love to see Eric follow in his dad's footsteps - uh, prison time, that is. He is so fucking clueless. Using a laptop on a show and bashing science. Fuck you, you hypocritical retard.
Use puppets. Use cartooning. Use drawing. Don't let the pricks get you down and don't give them any reason to be able to get away with censorship.
It shouldn't be that hard to create identifiable puppets and make sure everyone gets the point by including a link to their nonsense. Check out dgreypscun's channel for puppet ideas. He has come up with a couple vary recognizable ones.
5:28 - this sums it all up - the funny thing is that the creationists have always denied that's what they do. And here's Eric admitting that they make shit up so it fits with the bible. Even Taylor looks a little unsure about this statement.
Paul Taylor has the wrong accent for this video. Something more like an Oklahoma drawl would fit better. But I guess it goes to show that neither genius nor stupidity know national boundaries.
might not be able to prove that the earth is billions of years old but we sure as hell can prove that its NOT 6,000 years old. anyone who thinks it is that young should not be allowed to have children, im not joking
@wearestarstuffsagan Yes. Even before radiometric dating, geologists over 150 years ago were coming to the inebitable conclusion that the Earth was at least 50 million years old, just by relative dating alone. Creotards always blindly deny science that goes against their myth such as radiometric dating (they offer only blind assertions instead of scientific study) but it's difficult to see how they can squirm out of relative dating. I guess when you have blind faith you can deny what you want.
Are we gonna god words or some modern scientific ideas that's not even scientific. I mean, why would we even consider taking scientific ideas born as results of evidence and intense scrutiny, ideas that give us vaccines, antibiotics, advanced medical procedures, space exploration, increasing the human lifespan etc, over the words of ignorant savages nomadic goat herders who spent their time bowing to invisible creature, and raping and killing their neighbors.
@FarmboyRecords ????? You are being ironic of course. These two prove beyond all doubt that the battle is between Blind Faith and Science. I guess i am bitter that such dishonest jerks are allowed airtime.
no i am not..... what is contradictory about saying...... science is what we observe. And then saying that evolution is wrong. And that you can study what other people believe, just don't believe it.
Evolution is NOT science. We never observe it taking place. We see the OPPOSITE of evolution taking place (things die and decay, break down....not get better).
If you hate dishonesty so much, hows about go after those "scientists" who told us global warming was on it's way.
@FarmboyRecords "Science is what we observe". Tick for evolution as it has been observed.
We also use observed evidence from the past, just as an archaeologists does & just as a forensic scientist does. Of all scientific theories, evolution is the most powerful.
There is not one single piece of scientific or non scientific evidence for creation.
The contradiction comes when the 2 bozos are asking that evo be challenged (i agree) but state that a 3K year old book written by primitives can't be.
oh really? You seen something of one kind turn into another kind?
You seen a dog produce a NON dog? A human produce a NON human?
If not......sorry, that is not science buddy. It is a religion....based on an idea before the fact. Welcome to the world of faith buster. From then on, you will use nothing but circular reasoning, and call that science.
Evidence for creation. Hmm.. how about creation? It's obvious. It's not even even worth a debate. You believe this came from nothing?
@FarmboyRecords Please define "KInd". You could be the first because nobody else can.
Have i ever seen a dog produce a non dog or a human produce a non human?
Don't be so wet, such events would DISPROVE evolution. As would "something from nothing" which incidentally is the creationist standpoint and not that of real science. Please take time out to understand what you are talking about.
"It's not even even worth a debate. " Translates as you have nothing to bring to the table.
Kind....animals that genetically have the ability to breed with one another. That is a loose defination but.... wolves, coyotes and dogs can all interbreed. They are of the same kind.
Zeebras and Horses are of the same kind.
Its not hard to spot animals of the same kind actually.
@FarmboyRecords So can a Cape Hunting Dog mate with a Coyote? This is what Creationist "scientists" should be striving to prove but they won't because they know the result. Zebras and Horses cannot be the same "Kind" as any offspring are infertile (more proof of evolution). However, the gist of your definition is a kind contains creatures that cannot breed with another Kind. Interesting since the Fruit Fly experiments have produced subsequent generations that cannot breed with each other.
just because they can change over time to the point where they arn't able to mate is not proof of evolution. Again, it is a LOSS of information...not a gaining of information.
That only proves that certain kinds can change enough so they can't mate.... big deal. That is not a proof of evolution. Creationist don't claim that a certain kind of animal will always be able to mate with different variations of the same kind. So really, its a strawman that you are trying to throw out.
@FarmboyRecords "just because they can change over time to the point where they arn't able to mate is not proof of evolution." Yes it is. It's called speciation.
"Again, it is a LOSS of information...not a gaining of information."
Again, what information is lost? If you don't know, just say so.
Whereas. gained information is very well documented by gene duplication (real science) without impacting the function of the original gene. So you are horribly mistaken in your wild baseless claims.
@FarmboyRecords "That only proves that certain kinds can change enough so they can't mate.... big deal. That is not a proof of evolution." Again that's evolution to a tee. Maybe you don't understand what evolution is.
"Creationist don't claim that a certain kind of animal will always be able to mate with different variations of the same kind." Oh dear. I'd check your own definition of "kind" about a week ago. Still a creationist moving the goal posts is no longer a suprise to me. Some Strawman.
@FarmboyRecords Continued - Therefore Speciation, according to your own definition, has occured in the lab thus proving Evolution. It is no good coming up with the "Yes but they are still fruit flies" because according to your definition they have speciated.
Then of course we have the Creationist nightmare of Ring Species. That really screws up your definition of "KInd".
Also with your definition of KInd then it should be possible for two wolves to produce a coyote. Fail, Fail every time.
@FarmboyRecords FInally this video is not about debunking Creationism, as easy as that is but it is about exposing the contradiction and double standards of the two bozos featured in the video. That's what you should attempt to be defending here. Good luck with that one.
@FarmboyRecords You clearly don't understand what evolution is all about. The idea that a dog could produce a non-dog is even more laughable from a scientific point-of-view than a religious one, as it would require a supernatural event. Dogs do, however, produce variations, as we can all see, from poodles to great danes, but these happen over generations, with offspring often varying in colour and size from their parents. It doesn't take many generations for small changes to add up....
.... and if the environment dictates or allows, then possibly with enough time these changes will amount to enough so that the new generations wouldn't be able to breed with the old ones. Hence, a new species is born. No-one EVER said a dog could produce a non-dog. The trouble with you creationists is that it's as though you haven't even been to school. You argue against an idea that doesn't even exist, simply because you don't even understand evolution in the first place.
@FarmboyRecords There are many fossils of bird-like reptiles with feathery protuberances which would've been useless for flying, which have led scientists to speculate that perhaps feathers originally evolved for some other purpose, such as insulation. With enough time, some species may have learnt to use them to glide away from danger, a trait which natural selection would've strengthened, and ultimately they led to flight. We're talking over thousands of generations, with probably many...
... failures, and some successes. Obviously, the more successful ones went on to breed, and pass on the successful genes. The evidence is as concrete as you can get, being imprinted in ancient rock, and each new find adds more insight into the past, and the paths that various branches of the tree of life have taken. It's a wildly more satisfying explanation, which fits all the evidence, than just to say 'god did it', which opens up more questions than answers.
@FarmboyRecords no, we have never seen a dog produce a non-dog, thats NOT what evolution says, however, we have witnessed (yes, its a fact, no arguing with reality) wolves evolve into dogs which some are inable to have fertile offspring, some cant have offspring at all, meaning that they are no longer wolves, but anothing species, it happens over many generations, not like the strawman creatards ALWAYS use because they KNOW the facts are against them. its pathetic to be honest
a wolf is STILL a dog-like creature.. heck my own husky looks like a wolf.
tell me when you see the beginnings of wings growing on one of these dogs, or horns, or something NEW.
the transformation from a pure wolf to a domestic dog, is the from the LOSS (evolution is reverse) of information, not NEW information added.
evolutionists make me laugh. you can't question evolution because you can't see it. but just take it on faith that they know what they are talking about.
@FarmboyRecords So can a Cape Hunting Dog mate with a Coyote? This is what Creationist "scientists" should be striving to prove but they won't because they know the result. Zebras & Horses cannot be the same "Kind" as any offspring are infertile (more proof of evolution). However, the gist of your definition is a kind contains creatures that cannot breed with another Kind. Interesting since the Fruit Fly experiments have produced subsequent generations that cannot breed with each other.
@FarmboyRecords The transformation from a wolf to a domestic dog is a loss of information? How do you figure that nonsense? Maybe you could identify the specific genes that have "lost" information & explain what information has been lost in the phenotype.
Maybe you could say what mechanism prevents microevolution becoming macroevolution.
Maybe you could explain Ring species but then again maybe not.
It's no good mate you are using blind faith against real proven & demonstrable science.
@FarmboyRecords you have just shown that you have not a clue what the theory actually says and how evolution actually works. nylonase is an example of a new trait that is beneficial. there is no such thing as reversed evolution. almost any vegetable or fruit you eat is different from the first ones humans starting breeding, if you eat corn then you know evolution happens
@FarmboyRecords You appear to accept that a small amount of change can happen within a species over relatively short amount of time. If that is true, what biological mechanism functions to prevent larger changes over a greater amount of time?
@WildwoodClaire1 Claire, for the record, he knows the answer to how DNA is "added".
I have told him it TWICE and he had no come back yet he continues with the same incorrect assertion but of course that assertion wasn't even addressing the question you asked of him. But then again, that's creationists for you.
@pilgrimpater The Bible does not say that leprosy is cured by the blood of birds or cedar wood. That was merely a ceremonial cleansing. In 2 Kings 5:6-7, we are told only God can cure leprosy. This would also extend to prophets working through God and of course Jesus Christ who is God incarnate.
@theabiotictheory Good grief that is one hell of a ceremony just to cure one man of leprosy.
I think Lev 14 makes it absolutely clear that this "ceremony" is just part of an overeall rigmorole to cure leprosy.
Are all those modern doctors (including Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Atheists etc) who administer the antibiotics as a cure for leprosy also prophets of Jesus?
@pilgrimpater Then a few chapters later prior to the flood, God described the world as filled with violence and was grieved that he created man. What atheists leave out is the fall, which changed everything. So both diametrically opposed statements were true due to the change in circumstances.
@pilgrimpater "Are all those modern doctors......... who administer the antibiotics as a cure for leprosy also prophets of Jesus?" At the time that statement was made, modern antibiotics did not exist, therefore making that a true statement. Atheists have also tried this same bait and switch tactic in the book of Genesis, once God completed creation when he said that everything was very good. Con'd
@pilgrimpater "Lev 14 makes it absolutely clear that this "ceremony" is just part of an overeall rigmorole to cure leprosy." Incredible statement. Leviticus 14:3-4 are crystal clear that this is a ceremonial cleansing that is to take place only after a person has already been cured of leprosy and not is not conducted for the expressed purposes of healing the person of the disease.
You have to wonder if these guys look at the show later and think "Yes! We did a great job there, beat that science!" Or are they too busy counting their 'gifts'?
Gotta feel bad for little Eric. He doesn't have the brains to be a convincing con-man, despite being raised by one of the best. He's just in over his head, embarrassing himself and anyone who dares go on video with Eric.
Future generations (assuming there will be no fundie-fueled world war) will look at such footage with jaws dropped and wonder how we didn't self-destruct.
His fathers organisation indeed is rather not in the same status as it was before. Eric is just not as good as his father, I mean maybe Eric hasn't sold his soul to the devil yet or hasn't had a sanity removal operation. Maybe he still has a heart... not something you can say of his father.
If I had the cash, I'd invite Christians of every denomination to come on live TV and expose how these delusional liars can't even agree on what the bible is suppose to be saying in the first place.
Question Science but don't question the bible nice double standard there. its a damn shame that Eric didn't inherited his fathers looks.Which might disprove evolution or that maybe Kent is not the daddy.
fuck, are these people real? For a split second I thought I was back in the dark ages! How can anyone be this mindbogglingly dishonest, trapped in their little ignorant faith box? Wow just wow...
The Piltdown Man wasn't "weeded" out until the damage was done to the minds of school children 42 years later! If certain scientists were doing their job, it shouldn't have been taught as fact until fully proven. Evolutionists are full of deceit... as shown may many, many hoaxes and lies.
AntichristComes 1 month ago
@AntichristComes From the start there was doubt among the scientific community & it wasn't until they could have access that they proved it was a hoax. If scientists were truly dishonest they would have continued the hoax rather than expose it. In fact, hoaxes are the trademark of creationists:- Paluxy footprints, Japanese Trawler Hoax, "fossilised" hammers & cowboy boots, Nephilim graves, Arc "discoveries", St Helens Coal beds, Darwin recanting, The Resurrection etc.
pilgrimpater 1 month ago
wow, how r u people so Godless, this country follows blindly a theory that has no proof.
Macro-evolution? c'mon people
DoctorYuro 1 month ago
@DoctorYuro For a start Evolution is a proven fact with an embarrassment of evidence whether god(s) exists or not.
I am utterly amazed that you and others are so gullible and cannot see through such people as the Hovinds.It's just easily debunkable propoganda and they have absolutely no idea about science. This video highlights their self contradictions. Let's hear your defence.
pilgrimpater 1 month ago
@pilgrimpater Dr. Hovind knows a lot of science, enough to stump his opposition
DoctorYuro 1 month ago
@DoctorYuro Hovind knows next to nothing about any science. Have you ever read his dissertation? He can't even spell technical terms right. He thinks fossils contain carbon (in his attack on C14 dating). He thinks the earth is 6K years old when ice core rings alone go back 100s of K years. His so called"doctorate" was from a Diploma Mill (his qualification is not even in science) and i wonder how many peer reviewed papers he has written. He is a damn good showman though.
pilgrimpater 1 month ago
@pilgrimpater um okay, since i'm not a science guy i kind of got that.
...do u think that our sides will ever see eye to eye?
DoctorYuro 1 month ago
@DoctorYuro No, not on the science but you must also remember that Hovind attacks evolution by equating it with atheism. In truth, evolution says absolutely nothing about the existence of god. It neither proves nor disproves god. It doesn't invalidate Christianity but i'm afraid it does invalidate the literal account of creation in Genesis (but then so does basic critical thinking by a layman). There is too much money to be made by the Hovinds of this world to back down.
pilgrimpater 1 month ago
@pilgrimpater Evolution does not correspond with the bible's teaching and i dont see how they make so much money since they don't copyright their products and want the word to spread. Did u ever sit and watch a full Hovind seminar?
DoctorYuro 1 month ago
@DoctorYuro Evolution can corrrespond with the bible's teaching on an allegorical basis. That's why there are so many Christian pro evolutionists. There are so many independenat branches of science that prove evolution & after 150 years since Darwin's publication, it has never been falsified. Trust me, Hovind deals in pseodo science. Have i watched a full seminar? Hell no, i don't have enough sick buckets but i have watched an awful lot of his stuff. It's dishonest.
pilgrimpater 1 month ago
@pilgrimpater THose Christians who r pro aren't real Christians since evolution does not correspond with the 6 day creation. Btw just curious r we having a chill discussion or is there anger in it? cuz im chill
DoctorYuro 1 month ago
@DoctorYuro "THose Christians who r pro aren't real Christians " Of course they are real Christians. They believe in the virgin birth, the miracles of Jesus, his ressurection and hence his divinity. They believe he is the son of god. This makes them Christians and nothing in Evolution disproves any of this. But if you want to take Genesis literally then you (and Hovind) are opting to defend the indefensible
pilgrimpater 1 month ago
@DoctorYuro cont "and i dont see how they make so much money "
Enough money to own numerous houses and enough money to think it worth avoiding taxes on such a substantial income. They are all the same, Ham, Comfort, Hovind etc. See how they live.
pilgrimpater 1 month ago
@pilgrimpater do you follow the lives of you evolution buddies or r all human beings perfect
DoctorYuro 1 month ago
@DoctorYuro "do you follow the lives of you evolution buddies or r all human beings perfect" Their lives are of no relevance to the validity of evolution. Evolution merely describes the topic of speciation.
Are all humans perfect? Not all, obviously but some might well be (I don't know every person on the planet). Most peoplpe i know are good people but again irrelevent to evolution.
pilgrimpater 1 month ago
@pilgrimpater If the way they live their lives isn't relevant, then why bring up the hovinds
DoctorYuro 1 month ago
@DoctorYuro "If the way they live their lives isn't relevant, then why bring up the hovinds"
Because Hovind's pseodo science & anti evolution stance is tied in with preaching morals. His actions contradict what he preaches. On the other hand, evolution says nothing about morals so how the individual evolutiost conducts himself is irrelevant to evo's validity. Don't forget that this video is about how the Hovinds (& Taylor) contradict themselves on their attempts to debate science.
pilgrimpater 1 month ago
@DoctorYuro "Dr. Hovind knows a lot of science, enough to stump his opposition"
He can't even stump me, a layman yet alone a scientists who dedicates his life to his chosen field of study.
pilgrimpater 1 month ago
Sad but true.
Bramak17 2 months ago
Hey this is Hovind is a fucktard post. Not some crap about bullshit end days. Faith is faith for no reason while science is reason. I will never believe in schizophrenic bronze age fairy tales as reality. I can't believe this conversation is even happening in the USA.
Bramak17 2 months ago
@Bramak17 "I can't believe this conversation is even happening in the USA."
I can, where there is big bucks to made from the gullible.
pilgrimpater 2 months ago
OK. How much is 2+2? Give it your best guess.
Bramak17 2 months ago
you guys are scoffers walking after your lusts. And you do not forgive your neighbors. Let's see you begging to enter his kingdom, after you have been judged on that frightening day.
Yaylin2 2 months ago
@Yaylin2 Exposing lies and hypocricy is hardly lust. How do you arrive at such a conclusion? I would prefer it if you could provide some constructive criticism.
"Let's see you begging to enter his kingdom, after you have been judged on that frightening day."
That makes absolutely no sense, Could we have that in English please?
pilgrimpater 2 months ago
@pilgrimpater just upset to see many scoffers in these last final days
Yaylin2 2 months ago
@Yaylin2 Exposing liars is not scoffing. It's our moral obligation.
"Final days"? Care to give any details so we can come back to you when they don't occur?
pilgrimpater 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@pilgrimpater There isn't anything i can say to you to convince you of anything.
You worship yourself, and you are going to be held accounted for. You might say, well what about the people who suffer? or the slaves? what about science? i seen my eyeballs in the mirrior this whole time, and knew there was a God and didn't want to accept it?
I wouldn't gamble my eternity because of a philosophy.
"An Idle Mind Is The Devils Workshop."
Yaylin2 2 months ago
Comment removed
Yaylin2 2 months ago
@Yaylin2 "electronic devices have fried your brain. an idle mind is the devils workshop."
It would appear this to be the case with you as you are responding to your own messages.
Oh and for the record there is no evidence for the existence of the devil than there is for god. In other words none.
I don't worship myself. Why would i?
"I wouldn't gamble my eternity because of a philosophy."
But you are gambling away this life. We know this life exists but have no evidence for an afterlife
pilgrimpater 2 months ago
@Yaylin2 you are welcome to believe that nobody is in charge of this Earth. Which let me remind you, is hurling at 66k mph, spinning at 1k mph, having being orbited by a huge rock at 2.3k mph. If you want to believe Evolution, and nobody is in charge, be my guest.
Your religion takes much more faith. And a Big Bang would be proven wrong, we have planets and moons spinning in the opposite direction. Even whole galaxies. Your Evolution is not fundamental.
Yaylin2 2 months ago
@Yaylin2 "If you want to believe Evolution, and nobody is in charge, be my guest."
That's where all the evidence points to and unlike the two bozos featured in this video, i do not have to lie, misrepresent my opponent nor contradict myself.
"Your religion takes much more faith." I have no religion. I reject all religions due to lack of evidence.
"we have planets and moons spinning in the opposite direction"
which proves/disproves absolutely nothing unless you care to tell me why.
pilgrimpater 2 months ago
@Yaylin2 Why would you scoff, with your intellect. When the Bible has never been proven wrong. If you think the Bible has contradictions, how can you even believe in the idea of contradictions? You don't even believe there is an absolute truth.
"In the last days there will be scoffers walking after their own lust."
Why would you challenge this, with knowing only so little?
Do you know everything?
If you knew half of everything, what exists in the half you do not know?
Yaylin2 2 months ago
@Yaylin2 "When the Bible has never been proven wrong. I" A layman can disdprove litereal Genesis and the rest of the Bible is chock a block with self contradictions.
"Why would you challenge this, with knowing only so little?" Because you have no compelling evidence for such a ridiculous claim.
"If you knew half of everything, what exists in the half you do not know?" Therefore i don't guess.
pilgrimpater 2 months ago
@Yaylin2 When I joined the Army, 2007, many senior Drill sergeants were disturbed that most of the recruits had changed greatly. This change was caused by Video Games, Cell Phone, MySpace (In those days), and Surfing the Internet. The recruits joined off a whim of ambition, and a desire of a great responsibility. Most of the recruits were numb minded.
One phrase in the military stuck with my, regarding Idle minded people. "They don't make Privates like they used to."
Yaylin2 2 months ago
@Yaylin2 "When I joined the Army, 2007, " Which army? And what does that have to do with anything?
pilgrimpater 2 months ago
This is officially the Hovind is a fucktard post YouTube page of truth. Come back here every 10 days and post how fucking dumdass arrogantly shit for brained stupid Hovind is.
Bramak17 2 months ago
Smells like one too.
Bramak17 2 months ago
Hovind look like a walking buttplug. Makes about as much sense ass one too.
Bramak17 2 months ago
Check out my page, I posted my first video. I touch on my conversation with Eric Hovind and give an intro to myself.
jocylean 4 months ago
5:30 - this really is my favourite part of this video. All these years creationists/ religious fucknuts have been claiming that they have science on THEIR side, coming up with bullshit explanations for geology, speciation etc (stupid fuck NephilimFree beign a primary practitioner of this dark art) and Hovind wipes all that away in one sentence!
Beautiful.
geffel 4 months ago
@geffel
You can always make up the evidence :P
OptimalElement 3 months ago
"but I have the documented evidence"
WTF
reasonformirrors 4 months ago
Two bumbling idiots.
sheesh!
bobster451 4 months ago
The Apple computers they are using in this video were probably made entirely in China, by atheists. I wonder if these 2 guys know that.
PaulKJHarris 4 months ago 2
@PaulKJHarris That's a great point.
pilgrimpater 4 months ago
Thumbs up if Wildwood Claire sent you here!
PaulKJHarris 4 months ago 4
God can do Anything!!!!
Ayuh, except for getting his own TV or Radio show, or even a frecken Youtube channel and speak for himself.
xdassinx 4 months ago
wonderful piece of work ! I can't listen to those sickening buffoons long enough to pick up any stupid ,So thank you very much,
no1saphead 4 months ago
These guys really do sound mentally deficient.
MrWagman11 4 months ago
Claire sent me and now I'm subscribing.
torrid426 4 months ago
Claire sent me here! I'm probably going to have to add you to my growing list of wonderful Youtube video makers! Thanks for your videos.
awreslr2 4 months ago 6
@awreslr2 Thankyou kindly.
pilgrimpater 4 months ago 2
Eric is not as good in conning people as his daddy was. Poor boy, no talent and never learned anything else. It would be kinda sad if it wasn't so utterly despicable.
Bloody hypocrites.
62netty 4 months ago 2
I would love to see Eric follow in his dad's footsteps - uh, prison time, that is. He is so fucking clueless. Using a laptop on a show and bashing science. Fuck you, you hypocritical retard.
TruthSurge 4 months ago 8
There is nothing wrong or inappropriate with telling the truth or this video!
Anyone who would flag this video is either a complete Delusional Moron or just too stupid to be allowed to mainstream with the rest of society.
This is Freedom of Speech.....something that Religitards & Bible Thumpers have no concept of.
doubtingED 4 months ago 2
Use puppets. Use cartooning. Use drawing. Don't let the pricks get you down and don't give them any reason to be able to get away with censorship.
It shouldn't be that hard to create identifiable puppets and make sure everyone gets the point by including a link to their nonsense. Check out dgreypscun's channel for puppet ideas. He has come up with a couple vary recognizable ones.
curlew0609 4 months ago
They miss the point.
There is evidence that the earth is NOT 6000 years old.
MoveOrder 4 months ago 2
5:28 - this sums it all up - the funny thing is that the creationists have always denied that's what they do. And here's Eric admitting that they make shit up so it fits with the bible. Even Taylor looks a little unsure about this statement.
geffel 5 months ago 2
Combined IQ in that room is about 100.
galoon 6 months ago
@galoon not that high
skippydeenice 4 months ago
Wow.
Bear5177 6 months ago
Paul Taylor has the wrong accent for this video. Something more like an Oklahoma drawl would fit better. But I guess it goes to show that neither genius nor stupidity know national boundaries.
AlanCFA 6 months ago
Those two oafs are comic gold mines, are they not?
WildwoodClaire1 6 months ago
might not be able to prove that the earth is billions of years old but we sure as hell can prove that its NOT 6,000 years old. anyone who thinks it is that young should not be allowed to have children, im not joking
wearestarstuffsagan 7 months ago 2
@wearestarstuffsagan Yes. Even before radiometric dating, geologists over 150 years ago were coming to the inebitable conclusion that the Earth was at least 50 million years old, just by relative dating alone. Creotards always blindly deny science that goes against their myth such as radiometric dating (they offer only blind assertions instead of scientific study) but it's difficult to see how they can squirm out of relative dating. I guess when you have blind faith you can deny what you want.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Prove it wrong then
momma2jaxx 7 months ago
Are we gonna god words or some modern scientific ideas that's not even scientific. I mean, why would we even consider taking scientific ideas born as results of evidence and intense scrutiny, ideas that give us vaccines, antibiotics, advanced medical procedures, space exploration, increasing the human lifespan etc, over the words of ignorant savages nomadic goat herders who spent their time bowing to invisible creature, and raping and killing their neighbors.
petion2010 7 months ago
As an American it was refreshing for me to see a British fool spouting this nonsense for once.
disrxt 7 months ago
nothing contradictory about this.
your just bitter.
FarmboyRecords 7 months ago
@FarmboyRecords ????? You are being ironic of course. These two prove beyond all doubt that the battle is between Blind Faith and Science. I guess i am bitter that such dishonest jerks are allowed airtime.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
@pilgrimpater
no i am not..... what is contradictory about saying...... science is what we observe. And then saying that evolution is wrong. And that you can study what other people believe, just don't believe it.
Evolution is NOT science. We never observe it taking place. We see the OPPOSITE of evolution taking place (things die and decay, break down....not get better).
If you hate dishonesty so much, hows about go after those "scientists" who told us global warming was on it's way.
FarmboyRecords 7 months ago
@FarmboyRecords "Science is what we observe". Tick for evolution as it has been observed.
We also use observed evidence from the past, just as an archaeologists does & just as a forensic scientist does. Of all scientific theories, evolution is the most powerful.
There is not one single piece of scientific or non scientific evidence for creation.
The contradiction comes when the 2 bozos are asking that evo be challenged (i agree) but state that a 3K year old book written by primitives can't be.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
@pilgrimpater
oh really? You seen something of one kind turn into another kind?
You seen a dog produce a NON dog? A human produce a NON human?
If not......sorry, that is not science buddy. It is a religion....based on an idea before the fact. Welcome to the world of faith buster. From then on, you will use nothing but circular reasoning, and call that science.
Evidence for creation. Hmm.. how about creation? It's obvious. It's not even even worth a debate. You believe this came from nothing?
FarmboyRecords 7 months ago
@FarmboyRecords Please define "KInd". You could be the first because nobody else can.
Have i ever seen a dog produce a non dog or a human produce a non human?
Don't be so wet, such events would DISPROVE evolution. As would "something from nothing" which incidentally is the creationist standpoint and not that of real science. Please take time out to understand what you are talking about.
"It's not even even worth a debate. " Translates as you have nothing to bring to the table.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
@pilgrimpater
Kind....animals that genetically have the ability to breed with one another. That is a loose defination but.... wolves, coyotes and dogs can all interbreed. They are of the same kind.
Zeebras and Horses are of the same kind.
Its not hard to spot animals of the same kind actually.
FarmboyRecords 7 months ago
@FarmboyRecords So can a Cape Hunting Dog mate with a Coyote? This is what Creationist "scientists" should be striving to prove but they won't because they know the result. Zebras and Horses cannot be the same "Kind" as any offspring are infertile (more proof of evolution). However, the gist of your definition is a kind contains creatures that cannot breed with another Kind. Interesting since the Fruit Fly experiments have produced subsequent generations that cannot breed with each other.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
@pilgrimpater
just because they can change over time to the point where they arn't able to mate is not proof of evolution. Again, it is a LOSS of information...not a gaining of information.
That only proves that certain kinds can change enough so they can't mate.... big deal. That is not a proof of evolution. Creationist don't claim that a certain kind of animal will always be able to mate with different variations of the same kind. So really, its a strawman that you are trying to throw out.
FarmboyRecords 7 months ago
@FarmboyRecords "just because they can change over time to the point where they arn't able to mate is not proof of evolution." Yes it is. It's called speciation.
"Again, it is a LOSS of information...not a gaining of information."
Again, what information is lost? If you don't know, just say so.
Whereas. gained information is very well documented by gene duplication (real science) without impacting the function of the original gene. So you are horribly mistaken in your wild baseless claims.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
@FarmboyRecords "That only proves that certain kinds can change enough so they can't mate.... big deal. That is not a proof of evolution." Again that's evolution to a tee. Maybe you don't understand what evolution is.
"Creationist don't claim that a certain kind of animal will always be able to mate with different variations of the same kind." Oh dear. I'd check your own definition of "kind" about a week ago. Still a creationist moving the goal posts is no longer a suprise to me. Some Strawman.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
@FarmboyRecords Continued - Therefore Speciation, according to your own definition, has occured in the lab thus proving Evolution. It is no good coming up with the "Yes but they are still fruit flies" because according to your definition they have speciated.
Then of course we have the Creationist nightmare of Ring Species. That really screws up your definition of "KInd".
Also with your definition of KInd then it should be possible for two wolves to produce a coyote. Fail, Fail every time.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
@FarmboyRecords FInally this video is not about debunking Creationism, as easy as that is but it is about exposing the contradiction and double standards of the two bozos featured in the video. That's what you should attempt to be defending here. Good luck with that one.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
@FarmboyRecords You clearly don't understand what evolution is all about. The idea that a dog could produce a non-dog is even more laughable from a scientific point-of-view than a religious one, as it would require a supernatural event. Dogs do, however, produce variations, as we can all see, from poodles to great danes, but these happen over generations, with offspring often varying in colour and size from their parents. It doesn't take many generations for small changes to add up....
glyderau 7 months ago
.... and if the environment dictates or allows, then possibly with enough time these changes will amount to enough so that the new generations wouldn't be able to breed with the old ones. Hence, a new species is born. No-one EVER said a dog could produce a non-dog. The trouble with you creationists is that it's as though you haven't even been to school. You argue against an idea that doesn't even exist, simply because you don't even understand evolution in the first place.
glyderau 7 months ago
@glyderau
how many generations did it take for a lizard-like creature to grow wings and become a bird creature?
And where is the concrete observable evidence that it happened?
FarmboyRecords 7 months ago
@FarmboyRecords There are many fossils of bird-like reptiles with feathery protuberances which would've been useless for flying, which have led scientists to speculate that perhaps feathers originally evolved for some other purpose, such as insulation. With enough time, some species may have learnt to use them to glide away from danger, a trait which natural selection would've strengthened, and ultimately they led to flight. We're talking over thousands of generations, with probably many...
glyderau 7 months ago
... failures, and some successes. Obviously, the more successful ones went on to breed, and pass on the successful genes. The evidence is as concrete as you can get, being imprinted in ancient rock, and each new find adds more insight into the past, and the paths that various branches of the tree of life have taken. It's a wildly more satisfying explanation, which fits all the evidence, than just to say 'god did it', which opens up more questions than answers.
glyderau 7 months ago
@FarmboyRecords no, we have never seen a dog produce a non-dog, thats NOT what evolution says, however, we have witnessed (yes, its a fact, no arguing with reality) wolves evolve into dogs which some are inable to have fertile offspring, some cant have offspring at all, meaning that they are no longer wolves, but anothing species, it happens over many generations, not like the strawman creatards ALWAYS use because they KNOW the facts are against them. its pathetic to be honest
wearestarstuffsagan 7 months ago
@wearestarstuffsagan
a wolf is STILL a dog-like creature.. heck my own husky looks like a wolf.
tell me when you see the beginnings of wings growing on one of these dogs, or horns, or something NEW.
the transformation from a pure wolf to a domestic dog, is the from the LOSS (evolution is reverse) of information, not NEW information added.
evolutionists make me laugh. you can't question evolution because you can't see it. but just take it on faith that they know what they are talking about.
FarmboyRecords 7 months ago
@FarmboyRecords So can a Cape Hunting Dog mate with a Coyote? This is what Creationist "scientists" should be striving to prove but they won't because they know the result. Zebras & Horses cannot be the same "Kind" as any offspring are infertile (more proof of evolution). However, the gist of your definition is a kind contains creatures that cannot breed with another Kind. Interesting since the Fruit Fly experiments have produced subsequent generations that cannot breed with each other.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
@FarmboyRecords The transformation from a wolf to a domestic dog is a loss of information? How do you figure that nonsense? Maybe you could identify the specific genes that have "lost" information & explain what information has been lost in the phenotype.
Maybe you could say what mechanism prevents microevolution becoming macroevolution.
Maybe you could explain Ring species but then again maybe not.
It's no good mate you are using blind faith against real proven & demonstrable science.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
@FarmboyRecords you have just shown that you have not a clue what the theory actually says and how evolution actually works. nylonase is an example of a new trait that is beneficial. there is no such thing as reversed evolution. almost any vegetable or fruit you eat is different from the first ones humans starting breeding, if you eat corn then you know evolution happens
wearestarstuffsagan 7 months ago
@FarmboyRecords You appear to accept that a small amount of change can happen within a species over relatively short amount of time. If that is true, what biological mechanism functions to prevent larger changes over a greater amount of time?
WildwoodClaire1 6 months ago
@WildwoodClaire1
the fact that no dna is actually added when that happens. You can't say that there are variations therefore dogs can grow wings over time.
That's a very irrational leap.
That is like saying, a grade 4 kid lied in class therefore he is going to commit perjury.
FarmboyRecords 6 months ago
@WildwoodClaire1 Claire, for the record, he knows the answer to how DNA is "added".
I have told him it TWICE and he had no come back yet he continues with the same incorrect assertion but of course that assertion wasn't even addressing the question you asked of him. But then again, that's creationists for you.
pilgrimpater 6 months ago
@pilgrimpater The Bible does not say that leprosy is cured by the blood of birds or cedar wood. That was merely a ceremonial cleansing. In 2 Kings 5:6-7, we are told only God can cure leprosy. This would also extend to prophets working through God and of course Jesus Christ who is God incarnate.
theabiotictheory 6 months ago
@theabiotictheory Good grief that is one hell of a ceremony just to cure one man of leprosy.
I think Lev 14 makes it absolutely clear that this "ceremony" is just part of an overeall rigmorole to cure leprosy.
Are all those modern doctors (including Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Atheists etc) who administer the antibiotics as a cure for leprosy also prophets of Jesus?
pilgrimpater 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@pilgrimpater Then a few chapters later prior to the flood, God described the world as filled with violence and was grieved that he created man. What atheists leave out is the fall, which changed everything. So both diametrically opposed statements were true due to the change in circumstances.
theabiotictheory 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@pilgrimpater "Are all those modern doctors......... who administer the antibiotics as a cure for leprosy also prophets of Jesus?" At the time that statement was made, modern antibiotics did not exist, therefore making that a true statement. Atheists have also tried this same bait and switch tactic in the book of Genesis, once God completed creation when he said that everything was very good. Con'd
theabiotictheory 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@pilgrimpater "Lev 14 makes it absolutely clear that this "ceremony" is just part of an overeall rigmorole to cure leprosy." Incredible statement. Leviticus 14:3-4 are crystal clear that this is a ceremonial cleansing that is to take place only after a person has already been cured of leprosy and not is not conducted for the expressed purposes of healing the person of the disease.
theabiotictheory 6 months ago
You have to wonder if these guys look at the show later and think "Yes! We did a great job there, beat that science!" Or are they too busy counting their 'gifts'?
DaithiDublin 7 months ago
This is proof that stupidity must be genetic as it seems to run rampant in the Hovind family.
bobster451 7 months ago
Gotta feel bad for little Eric. He doesn't have the brains to be a convincing con-man, despite being raised by one of the best. He's just in over his head, embarrassing himself and anyone who dares go on video with Eric.
Future generations (assuming there will be no fundie-fueled world war) will look at such footage with jaws dropped and wonder how we didn't self-destruct.
TheAnniepies 7 months ago 16
@TheAnniepies
His fathers organisation indeed is rather not in the same status as it was before. Eric is just not as good as his father, I mean maybe Eric hasn't sold his soul to the devil yet or hasn't had a sanity removal operation. Maybe he still has a heart... not something you can say of his father.
masticina 7 months ago
If I had the cash, I'd invite Christians of every denomination to come on live TV and expose how these delusional liars can't even agree on what the bible is suppose to be saying in the first place.
TheHigherVoltage 7 months ago
I think Edward Current must have modelled himself on Eric.
Boepyne 7 months ago 2
I had an email debate with Paul Taylor. He fails epically
BluJugganaut 7 months ago
Great pwnage, PP
AuntieDiluvian 7 months ago
Question Science but don't question the bible nice double standard there. its a damn shame that Eric didn't inherited his fathers looks.Which might disprove evolution or that maybe Kent is not the daddy.
finderfinder100 7 months ago 2
what a cackling idiot.
lennyhipp 7 months ago
Their world really gets smaller and smaller isn't it. What to do if your safe circle tightens.
masticina 7 months ago
funny how they criticise "mans" science when they sit comfortably using a computer that man made scientifically.
SANHEDRIN666 7 months ago
I can't help it.. Sometimes I wish USA was run by creationists.. Just for 4-8 years or so..
Just to see, what would happen.
Primz83 7 months ago
@Primz83 it was, during bush.
SCRulerShinoda 7 months ago
@SCRulerShinoda
I meant the extreme..
I'm certain even Bush would laugh at Eric H.
Primz83 7 months ago
@Primz83 Lol no he wouldn't. you're giving him too much credit.
SCRulerShinoda 7 months ago
this was so amazlingly stupid,,, wow
Aanthanur 7 months ago
fuck, are these people real? For a split second I thought I was back in the dark ages! How can anyone be this mindbogglingly dishonest, trapped in their little ignorant faith box? Wow just wow...
viridismonasteriense 7 months ago
These idiots make me angry!
kirafan68 7 months ago
If it weren't for scientific methodology & critical thinking, we'd still be living in caves, eating bugs and reading bibles!
727Phoenix 7 months ago
Nit wit TV.
Does your brain hurt when you open another book than the bible
Are you tired of reality and rationality
Do you like us think that the only technology's worth using are the technologies
build without science
Are you unable to place your hate to a specific group
Then watch Creation science TV the only channel that guaranties an ever lasting clean slate.
jipersson 7 months ago
"Use Evolution to make the world?"
I wonder what Earths genotype is like! Have we sequenced Earths genome yet?
DutchLiam84 7 months ago
Eric belongs in jail just like his mom and dad.
Just goes to show how gullible people are and how religion makes you stupid.
itsasin1969 7 months ago 17
@itsasin1969 Is his mother really in jail too? I didn't know.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
@pilgrimpater I think she is now out, but yes, she also went to jail. Lets look it up and do a vid on it,,,
itsasin1969 7 months ago
@pilgrimpater
His mum is out I think but she got sent down for a few months as an accessory if I remember rightly.
Zed1967 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@itsasin1969
agreed - for crimes against humanity and science.
geffel 4 months ago
"But I do have the documentary evidence."
Geh. That was so stupid I think it gave me cancer.
BiggusRobbicus 7 months ago