The $250,000 dollar question

[Jet Black]

On 2, Hovind claims that since we are not actually AT another star, there's no proof that protons and electrons are ordered the same way elsewhere. In fact, that's his explanation of the red shift (from his seminar #7) as well, never mind that the spectra are EXACTLY what we would expect minus a very small red shift. There is NO combination of electron orbits in ANY atom that could reproduce the Hydrogen spectra shifted through a simply red-shift!

I recall Hovind's rather bizarre explanation that red shift is "shifting the red bit of the spectrum away from the rest of the spectrum" indicating, unsuprisingly, that he has no clue what red shift is. Also in one of the Hovind Pigliucci debates he made a bizarre coment about nipples being where the skin stops, and something even stranger about the islets of langerhans.

 

[MySavior]

I bet Hovind would never pay. There are a lot of people here a lot smarter then him but he would not pay them! People like Lucaspa, Meert, Jet Black, LorentzHA, Forerunner, Bushido, Nathan Poe, Arikay and may many more.

 

[Philosoft]

Hovind's "challenge" is obviously intended to mock James Randi. Many people, theists and atheists alike, scoff at Randi and/or his public persona and/or his tactics, and I won't begrudge them their criticisms. But the man puts his money where his mouth is. He flies to Europe, Austraila, the Philppines, just to give people their "day in court," so to speak. He lets the claimant have a generous amount of input into how the test is to be run. And the money verifiably exists.

Perhaps the most important difference - Randi has actually tested potential claimants. Hovind has never provided so much as a summary of any claim to his quarter mil. Now any sane person, in light of this fact, might begin to ask himself why no one takes up the challenge. I imagine I need not draw the obvious conclusion [Hovind is insane].

 

[Iddie4him]

What if it's wrong?

MY BIBLE IS NOT WRONG !!!!!!!

 

[revolutio]

MY BIBLE IS NOT WRONG !!!!!!!

Depends, do you have a King James version? I can name some critical errors in it off the top of my head. They don't affect the fundamentals of Christianity, hence they haven't been corrected, however they are incorrect translations nonetheless.

 

[armed2010]

MY BIBLE IS NOT WRONG IMHO!!!!!!!

fixed

 

[Natro]

MY BIBLE IS NOT WRONG !!!!!!!

I thought the only thing that was perfect was God? Does the bible equal God in perfection?

 

[ForeRunner]

I bet Hovind would never pay. There are a lot of people here a lot smarter then him but he would not pay them! People like Lucaspa, Meert, Jet Black, LorentzHA, Forerunner, Bushido, Nathan Poe, Arikay and may many more.

You like me, you really like me!

/spin
/blush

 

[LorentzHA]

MY BIBLE IS NOT WRONG !!!!!!!

About anything?

 

[Arikay]

What if your bible is not wrong, but how you interpret it is. is that a possibility?

MY BIBLE IS NOT WRONG !!!!!!!

 

[LorentzHA]

fixed

:fixed:​

 

[USincognito]

Hovind's "challenge" is obviously intended to mock James Randi. Many people, theists and atheists alike, scoff at Randi and/or his public persona and/or his tactics, and I won't begrudge them their criticisms. But the man puts his money where his mouth is. He flies to Europe, Austraila, the Philppines, just to give people their "day in court," so to speak. He lets the claimant have a generous amount of input into how the test is to be run. And the money verifiably exists.

Perhaps the most important difference - Randi has actually tested potential claimants. Hovind has never provided so much as a summary of any claim to his quarter mil. Now any sane person, in light of this fact, might begin to ask himself why no one takes up the challenge. I imagine I need not draw the obvious conclusion [Hovind is insane].

I'd have to say that Hovind is clearly not insane. He's got a lucrative business where churches pay him to spout his b.s. and then he has the sheep line up to be fleeced at his table in the hallway selling his tainted wares. He's Elmer Gantry, not Elmer Fudd. Taking valuable (literally) time away from his speaking engagements to address takers for his "challenge" would cost him money.

And your JREF $1mil challenge analysis is spot on. Randi's challenge is set up so that the claimaint is in the drivers seat. Claim you can do something paranormal - and then do it. It's not that hard (despite the endless waffling of wannabe claimants that show up on the JREF message board) to understand. Hovind's "challenge," however, is set up so Kent cannot lose because a claimant would basically need to recreate the entire universe in a lab.

 

[USincognito]

Hovind what a propagandizing jerk.

 

[Skillz151]

I'll offer $250,000 to the first person who can prove the following five to have happened/happen beyond reasonable doubt:

1 Direct, Divine creation of time, space and matter.
2 Direct, Divine creation of all elements.
3 Direct, Divine creation of stars and planets.
4 Direct, Divine creation of life from dust.
5 Direct, Divine creation of individual species 6,000 years ago exactly as they are today.

Before you start quoting genesis here... realize that you'll have to live up to a scientific standard of proof. I'll begin paying out submissions right around the time Hovind does.

Yes, but you've missed one very important aspect. Evolution claims that we happened by chance and should be able to reproduce it. When creationist claim that GOD has Created. We cannot reproduce what God has done. If evolution did occur then we should be able to see it being reproduced right? Or another thought that just came to mind, Why don't we see Evolution -in the Macro sense- Happening TODAY!?!?

 

[Jet Black]

Yes, but you've missed one very important aspect. Evolution claims that we happened by chance and should be able to reproduce it.

I hope you aren't being naughty and confusing evolution with abiogenesis there. If not, then you seem to be misunderstanding evolution to the point that it would require all of exactly the same environments, organisms and mutations on which natural selection may act in order to get us where we are today. If all you want to see however is the processes which got us where we are now, then you can get that without problem.

When creationist claim that GOD has Created. We cannot reproduce what God has done. If evolution did occur then we should be able to see it being reproduced right?

well we do see evolution happening all the time. so that is fine.

Or another thought that just came to mind, Why don't we see Evolution -in the Macro sense- Happening TODAY!?!?

aah, now you throw in the macro sense. what on earth are you asking for? saltation? hopeful monsters? WHat is it you are asking for? if it is speciation, then this has been observed. Evolution is by necessity a gradual process. The totality of gene space is so unfathomably huge, that it is perverse to expect massive changes in a single step. That in mind, evolution must progress in small steps, which over a long time appear like a large step. Much like a mountain, one does not jut leap from the base to the summit in one easy step.

 

[thomas the tank engine]

Evolution claims that we happened by chance

Wrong! Wrongetty wrongetty wrong! Evolution makes no claim about how we "happened" - evolution addresses the development and diversification of species not their origin. The title "The Origin Of Species" means "this book is addressing how different types of organisms developed from a common ancestor i.e. finding the origin of species (different kinds". It does not mean "the origin of life".

 

[Skillz151]

I hope you aren't being naughty and confusing evolution with abiogenesis there. If not, then you seem to be misunderstanding evolution to the point that it would require all of exactly the same environments, organisms and mutations on which natural selection may act in order to get us where we are today. If all you want to see however is the processes which got us where we are now, then you can get that without problem.

No problem you say? Ok Letz see some evidence.. Links to sites plz.
Point: And when I speak of Evolution I usually am always talking about MACRO EVOLUTION, but i'll be sure to specify during future discussions.... We see Micro evolution yes, but we never see A flower changing into an animal or an Ape changing into a Man? According to Darwin if his theory stands correct, we should see millions of intermediate species. Unfortunently we do not.....

well we do see evolution happening all the time. so that is fine.

Yes, Micro evolution which is changing a dog into another "KIND" of dog, but we will always end up with another dog-type. Which the Bible speaks of "KINDS". On another note I will kindly have to ask you to specify which type of evolution you are speaking of since you have slainted my words as well.

aah, now you throw in the macro senseaah, now you throw in the macro sense. what on earth are you asking for? saltation? hopeful monsters? WHat is it you are asking for? if it is speciation, then this has been observed. Evolution is by necessity a gradual process. The totality of gene space is so unfathomably huge, that it is perverse to expect massive changes in a single step. That in mind, evolution must progress in small steps, which over a long time appear like a large step. Much like a mountain, one does not jut leap from the base to the summit in one easy step.

I am asking for Evidence of MACRO EVOLUTION, I would like to see a plant change into an animal. I would like to see a beneficial mutation. I would like to see an ape change into a MAN. OR at least give me the fossils of a Half ape half man. Real evolutionist will tell you the missing links are ...... lol Missing. It was all made up. The DEVIL aka. Father of lies is good at what he does. WAKE UP PPL!

 

[Skillz151]

Wrong! Wrongetty wrongetty wrong! Evolution makes no claim about how we "happened" - evolution addresses the development and diversification of species not their origin. The title "The Origin Of Species" means "this book is addressing how different types of organisms developed from a common ancestor i.e. finding the origin of species (different kinds". It does not mean "the origin of life".

Ok well please specify which evolution you are speaking of there are a few different theories.

 

[thomas the tank engine]

to Darwin if his theory stands correct, we should see millions of interchangeable species

I very much doubt you have ever read The Origin Of Species. And what on earth do you mean by millions of interchangeable species?

I would like to see an ape change into a MAN. OR at least give me the fossils of a Half ape half man

May I ask you what exactly evolution is, in your opinion. I would also like to add that there are no such things as macro and micro evolution in The Origin Of Species, so please restrict yourself to the actual theory of evolution without changing it so its easier to attack.

 

[Jet Black]

No problem you say? Ok Letz see some evidence.. Links to sites plz.
Point: And when I speak of Evolution I usually am always talking about MACRO EVOLUTION, but i'll be sure to specify during future discussions.... We see Micro evolution yes, but we never see A flower changing into an animal or an Ape changing into a Man? According to Darwin if his theory stands correct, we should see millions of intermediate species. Unfortunently we do not.....

all species are either intermediate, or will become extinct. What you are asking for above is called saltation, saltation is not evolution.

Yes, Micro evolution which is changing a dog into another "KIND" of dog, but we will always end up with another dog-type. Which the Bible speaks of "KINDS". On another note I will kindly have to ask you to specify which type of evolution you are speaking of since you have slainted my words as well.

these are nested hierarchies. Dogs will always produce dogs, evolution predicts this too. however evolution predicts, that given selective pressures, Dogs may split into a number of subspecies with their own particular specialisations.
[/QUOTE]I am asking for Evidence of MACRO EVOLUTION, I would like to see a plant change into an animal. I would like to see a beneficial mutation. I would like to see an ape change into a MAN. OR at least give me the fossils of a Half ape half man. Real evolutionist will tell you the missing links are ...... lol Missing. It was all made up. The DEVIL aka. Father of lies is good at what he does. WAKE UP PPL![/QUOTE]well then you are asking for saltation and hopeful monsters, neither of which happen, and neither of which are predicted by evolution. In short, you have constructed a strawman of evolution which you are not proceeding to beat, which will not get you anywhere. I see no point discussing your strawman with you, but if you wish to learn what evolution really is, then that would be a start.