Science Says NO to Evolution Theory!

[bhsmte]

Unfortunately, people here talk smack and act like experts; though, none are accepting the challenge, Kent Hovind will smoke them just like he has hundreds of secular scientist; of whom, put a small box around science and turn it into religion.

Cool story.

I look forward to more entertainment from old Kent.

 

[lasthero]

Unfortunately, people here talk smack and act like experts; though, none are accepting the challenge, Kent Hovind will smoke them just like he has hundreds of secular scientist; of whom, put a small box around science and turn it into religion.

You know, while there are a few experts here, this is really more of a casual forum. There are actual forums on the internet where scientists meet and discuss things. Why aren't you peddling this at places like EvC?

I'd also like to inform you that, if you challenge Mike Tyson to a fight and he declines, the fact that he didn't accept your challenge doesn't necessarily mean you can beat him.

 

[RickG]

Unfortunately, people here talk smack and act like experts; though, none are accepting the challenge, Kent Hovind will smoke them just like he has hundreds of secular scientist; of whom, put a small box around science and turn it into religion.

Then ask Hovind to join my Hovind on carbon dating thread.

http://www.christianforums.com/threads/hovind-on-carbon-dating.7897624/

 

[FollowerOfJesus]

You know, while there are a few experts here, this is really more of a casual forum.

This is stating more than the obvious; though, equating some here as "Mike Tyson" is hilarious!!!

With all the trash talking, this all of a sudden became "a casual forum" for only those who hold a certain opinion. Is this part of what is called tolerance, where people are tolerant as long as you agree with their position?

 

[FollowerOfJesus]

Then ask Hovind to join my Hovind on carbon dating thread.

http://www.christianforums.com/threads/hovind-on-carbon-dating.7897624/

Or you could challenge him, come on step up!!!

 

[lasthero]

This is stating more than the obvious; though, equating some here as "Mike Tyson" is hilarious!!!

It was just an analogy, man.

With all the trash talking, this all of a sudden became "a casual forum" for only those who hold a certain opinion.

No, it was always a casual forum. Go to a place like EvC, which is frequented by scientists who hold multiple degrees. It's a lot more strict. Strangely, creationists tend not to stick around there very long.

And it seems like you're doing most of the trash-talking.

Is this part of what is called tolerance, where people are tolerant as long as you agree with their position?

I think we're tolerating you pretty well.

 

[RickG]

Or you could challenge him, come on step up!!!

So you are saying he won't debate a Christian on a Christian site? I'll debate him on anything having to do with Geology, and he can pick the specific topic.

 

[justlookinla]

Well, other than quoting me out of context, if evolution were false we would see fossils of all life forms that have ever existed, in that period instead of only those unique to the Cambrian Period and before.

I certainly didn't mean to quote you out of context, I was simply interested in this view in your post.

Why wouldn't you see those life forms from which the life forms in the Cambrian evolved? Maybe I'm not understanding what you're saying, just asking for clarification.

 

[RickG]

I certainly didn't mean to quote you out of context, I was simply interested in this view in your post.

Why wouldn't you see those life forms from which the life forms in the Cambrian evolved? Maybe I'm not understanding what you're saying, just asking for clarification.

Sorry for the misunderstanding. I believe there were a couple of relevant posts preceding the one you quoted, thus context was lost. It is the same question I have asked numerous times in many threads that I can't seem to get ansewred straightforward. Most discussions on evolution in the CF concern themselves for the most part details, completely ignoring the simple indisputable facts that reveal evolution; that is the description of the fossil record throughout geologic time as seen in the geologic column. Transition fossils are completely unnecessary to see this. If evolution were false, we would see fossils of all life forms that ever existed in all layers of sedimentary strata. The fact is we see them distributed in such a way that would be expected for evolution to occur. We do not see dinosaurs in the Silurian Period, or rabbits in the Triassic Period, or kangaroos in the Devonian Period.

 

[AV1611VET]

Unfortunately, people here talk smack and act like experts; though, none are accepting the challenge, Kent Hovind will smoke them just like he has hundreds of secular scientist; of whom, put a small box around science and turn it into religion.

Scientists have a powerful trump card at their disposal: evidence.

As long as they can ask, beg, or demand evidence, they think they can sufficiently quiet a creationist.

And this is nothing new, as even the scientists in Jesus' time demanded evidence ...

Matthew 27:40 And saying, Thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself. If thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross.

... and He refused.

Their drummer did the same thing earlier ...

Matthew 4:6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.

... and He refused.

Nothing's changed over the years.

Same old same old.

 

[justlookinla]

Sorry for the misunderstanding. I believe there were a couple of relevant posts preceding the one you quoted, thus context was lost. It is the same question I have asked numerous times in many threads that I can't seem to get ansewred straightforward. Most discussions on evolution in the CF concern themselves for the most part details, completely ignoring the simple indisputable facts that reveal evolution; that is the description of the fossil record throughout geologic time as seen in the geologic column. Transition fossils are completely unnecessary to see this. If evolution were false, we would see fossils of all life forms that ever existed in all layers of sedimentary strata. The fact is we see them distributed in such a way that would be expected for evolution to occur. We do not see dinosaurs in the Silurian Period, or rabbits in the Triassic Period, or kangaroos in the Devonian Period.

Please bear with me, I'm simply attempting to understand....and thank you for your patience.

I'm still not understanding why the direct ancestors of Cambrian life forms are not found in pre-Cambrian layers. Or are they?

 

[Oncedeceived]

Please bear with me, I'm simply attempting to understand....and thank you for your patience.

I'm still not understanding why the direct ancestors of Cambrian life forms are not found in pre-Cambrian layers. Or are they?

There are no known direct ancestors from the pre-cambrian fossils to the Cambrian fossils.

 

[justlookinla]

There are no known direct ancestors from the pre-cambrian fossils to the Cambrian fossils.

Strange.

 

[The Cadet]

Can anyone tell me why we should debate Hovind? I mean, even more than other creationists. He's the kind of creationist that makes other creationists cringe and say, "Dude, stop it, you're making us look like idiots". He has no credentials in any field; his alleged doctorate is from an unaccredited diploma mill; his dissertation is laughable; and his ideas are the dumbest I have ever heard.

 

[ebia]

Scientists have a powerful trump card at their disposal: evidence.

As long as they can ask, beg, or demand evidence, they think they can sufficiently quiet a creationist.

And this is nothing new, as even the scientists in Jesus' time demanded evidence ...

Like, say, Thomas you mean?

 

[AV1611VET]

Can anyone tell me why we should debate Hovind?

For the same reason you guys debate us?

 

[RickG]

Please bear with me, I'm simply attempting to understand....and thank you for your patience.

I'm still not understanding why the direct ancestors of Cambrian life forms are not found in pre-Cambrian layers. Or are they?

They are not. Do you think they should?

 

[RickG]

For the same reason you guys debate us?

I've only known Hovind to publicly debate one actual scientist (Hugh Ross), and it was on Hovind's terms. In other words, Ross wasn't allowed to ask certain questions or point out things Hovind has said that show his ignorance. And that is the problem with debates with creationists, it must be on their terms or not at all.

 

[USincognito]

Unfortunately, people here talk smack and act like experts; though, none are accepting the challenge, Kent Hovind will smoke them just like he has hundreds of secular scientist; of whom, put a small box around science and turn it into religion.

Glib poo poo artists tend to wow the rubes and the ignorant. That's why Hovind won't ever, ever agree to a written exchange. He can't blow smoke and rely on the abject ignorance of the audience to appear as if he were making a point.

 

[RickG]

There are no known direct ancestors from the pre-cambrian fossils to the Cambrian fossils.

Really, then how did the Cambrian fossils get there? Just poof! And there they were?