WHat side are you on???

[Arikay]

I would say you should research somewhere else.

•Hovind misrepresents evolution. The "theory of evolution" you have learned from hovind, is NOT the real one.

•Hovind still uses false evidence as truth. Why would he do that?

•You are believing a guy that claims that 666 appears in practically Every UPC bar code. This is false, and Just Stupid. If he had taken the 5 minutes to research barcodes, he would know this, but he apparently didnt.
Why should you trust him on anything else?

 

[troodon]

Yes, his name is Kent Hovind...I figured you guys should know him...

Whenever I need a laugh I listen to one of his seminars. Sooooooo funny

Before the Big bang happened...Where did the matter come from? Thats what I am referring to. And where did the energy to get that matter moving come from?

God........?

No, not from my pastor, from one of Hovind's theories actually...And goes hand in hand with the rest of the theory.

What is the theory and what evidence supports it then?

If absolutely necessary, I could find you research materials from newspaper writing, National Geographic, etc that has this info in it but I think you must know this already, no?

Well, you just claimed that Homo sapiens grew to 13 feet tall. Yes, if you don't mind, I think that a source would be absolutely necessary. Also, National Geographic isn't the best source for scientific information (let us never forget Archaeoraptor )

Why does that make you mad? I was honestly asking...

You made a post about evolution and asked if the evolutionists worship Satan. That draws a clear connection between the theory, those who accept the theory, and worshipping our enemy. I tend to get upset when people make vague references to me worshipping the Prince of Darkness

It sorta seems like some of you do not believe in God or flat out think He's imperfect

How would God be imperfect if He thought the universe should take a stab at creating life. It does nothing to question God's capabilities and demonstrates the enormous patience He is willing to grant us and how much He loves us (I wouldn't wait 14 billion years for anything).

meaning Satan would be on the same level...

Yes, and evolution is not on that level.

Please explain what ur feelings are towards the God you believe in.

I love the God I believe in. He's a swell entity

Okay, the basic original theory of creation is taught ion Genesis ...We all know that one...6,000 year old earth, adam and eve, etc...

Then you admit that there isn't 1 theory of special creation but several, correct?

people (schoffers) have taken that theory and made their own theories to suit their personal beliefs on exactly how the creation happened; Those theories that don't go along with Genesis are not actually theories, but rather they are unbiblical add-ons that have become known to us as "theories" when they are really just personal beliefs.

Are you talking about theistic evolutionists now or all the other forms of special creationist? And did you just call OECs *coughJohnR7* scoffers?

I am leaving work soon

Have fun

I'll be back on tomorrow.

We'll be waiting

 

[Arikay]

Even AIG warns against Hovinds false arguments. Which is both funny and Ironic.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

That's news to me. Do you have a paper in which an anthropologist described these outstanding finds?


-If absolutely necessary, I could find you research materials from newspaper writing, National Geographic, etc that has this info in it but I think you must know this already, no?

I have been reading National Geographic for about 40 years and I don't remember anything about people 13 feet tall. I think I would. What we know for sure is that Hovind is a liar and you have been lied to about this and probably many other things as well if you listen to Hovind.

The Frumious Bandersnatch

 

[ThePhoenix]

Phoenix- What experiments are "proving" evolution? I have yet to see any solid proof of it...If you do know of anyone with solid, mandable evidence that definately proves evolution totally true, I know a creation scientist that will pay out $100,000 to that individual... I have his contact information if you know of anyone...

Hey, lupasca if these people actually followed the scientific method you could get yourself a larger house and a sweet car!

 

[LadyShea]

And also why scientists find human bodies that are over 10 feet tall...they found one 20 years ago in Italy that was 13 feet tall No, they haven't. This is false. You can search National Geographic or whatever else, there is no evidence of any such thing. When you find it is not documented will you retract your statement?

Also, The ark was not small by any means..God warned Noah 120 years before the Flood was to come. That means he had 120 years to build a boat big enought o fit two of each into it. Now, int hat length of time, with a few people working on that boat, you could make it pretty big. So, it was not small... According to the measurements given in the Bible, the Ark would have been about the size of a standard Carnival cruise ship. Not nearly big enough to hold 2 of all the millions of species on Earth. How would koalas and other animals only found in Australia, or animals only found in North America have gotten to the Middle East anyway? Swim? If they could make that swim, then why did they need to be on the Ark? The whole flood story is nonsense.

Look, Hovind is a liar and has been discredited again and again...check the forum for the dozens of discussions about him. He is not a Doctor (he bought his degree from an unaccredited degree mill), has no science education, and refuses written debates. He is a fraud making money off True Believers. Christians should be up in arms against him for duping the young and naive.

 

[T.R.D.]

Not to mention 900 year old men and a woman changing into a pillar of salt and the sun "standing still" or moving backwards and wasn't there a talking donkey in there somewhere and a tree so tall you could see the whole earth from the top?

The Frumious Bandersnatch

The Bible is not to be taken literally, some parts are obviously symbolic. There is no evidence for a 6,000 year old earth, and the Bible does not specifically say that the earth is 6,000 years old.

 

[T.R.D.]

Human bodies 20 feet tall? Obviously a hoax. The tallest human being who ever lived was just under 9 feet tall.

 

[JohnR7]

Are you talking about theistic evolutionists now or all the other forms of special creationist? And did you just call OECs *coughJohnR7* scoffers?

I am a scoffer when it comes to the theory of evolution.

 

[T.R.D.]

Evolution is scientific fact. Why do you scoff at fact?

 

[ThePhoenix]

Evolution is scientific fact. Why do you scoff at fact?

"No, it's a theory! Theories can be wrong."
"Scientific theory, and this one has so much evidence behind it it's absurd."
"But some of the evidence is wrong."
"Doesn't matter. The bulk of the evidence isn't faked and is correct."
"Why do evolutionists dismiss everything out of hand?"

There, that should summarize the next eight or ten posts.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Evolution is scientific fact. Why do you scoff at fact?

C'mon T.R.D., you of all people know how rabid someone can be when trying to hold on to their precious dogma.

 

[Cantuar]

Those theories that don't go along with Genesis are not actually theories, but rather they are unbiblical add-ons that have become known to us as "theories" when they are really just personal beliefs.

Do yourself a favour and learn about what scientific theories are. It looks pretty stupid for a person to come breezing in here telling scientists and other scientifically literate people that they don't know what their own subjects are about when you haven't got the first clue about something as basic as the meaning of the term "theory."

 

[Jet Black]

Yes, his name is Kent Hovind...I figured you guys should know him...

oh just a bit. He has no idea about biology, and thinks we are shrink wrapped. In a recent debate he thought that men had nipples because the skin "needed somewhere to stop" which is a bit odd since skin stops next to other bits of skin all over the body. and then there was his odd comment about islets of langerhans, which I didn't quite pick up on, but were wrong.

Martin- I am at work...What is the exact definition of punctuated equilibrium??? I don't have any references at work here, sorry man....

punctuated equilibrium is where you have a system in equilibrium, and then something happens to knock it out of equilibrium, and then there is lots of evolution until you reach a new stable state.

Troodon, to answer ur questions...

At what stage in biological evolution is matter created from nothing?

-Before the Big bang happened...Where did the matter come from? Thats what I am referring to. And where did the energy to get that matter moving come from?

right some rules:

rule 1) Evolution has nothing to do with cosmology: the big bang is cosmology. Big bang theory also not reliant on how the matter and energy got there. God could have done it, but there are a number of possibilities.

rule 2) Evolution has nothing to do with abiogenesis (the formation of "life" from "non life". Evolution can happen even if God put the first Cell on Earth.

From your pastor? Or are we talking about actual medical research?

-No, not from my pastor, from one of Hovind's theories actually...And goes hand in hand with the rest of the theory.

hovind thought that tyrannosurus and lion were vegitarians. Hovind cannot explain where malarya came from (no death.. whar did the parasites do, eat peaches?) Hovind cannot explain where many insect breeding practises came from (such as the balck widow spiders and the preying mantis where the female eats the male during or after copulation)

-Okay, the basic original theory of creation is taught ion Genesis ...

genesis 1 or 2?

You seem like a nice guy, so one thing I suggest you do here is listen, don't take Hovind to be gospel, because he is not. do a search for hovind on here and the internet at large and have a look at people's opinions on him and his ideas. This is not an ad hominem against Hovind, but most people think that his ideas shoudn't even be given the time of day. please don't fall for them.

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

Lovely. I've been waiting for one like this. This is classic "rank and file" creationism, gentle readers. This is the sort of nonsense that gets passed around the pews when there are no nasty evolutionists around to correct the blatant errors and mis-statements. I know; I've been there. You don't see so much of this on the web these days because the average creationist on the web knows which of his silver bullets can no longer harm the scientific nosferatu.

I am sure you have all heard of people saying.."Oh, I believe in evolution but I believe in God also; He's the one who started it all and gave evolution everything it needed to get going like matter, energy, etc.."

Sounds like Deism. I'm sure there are some Deists around here, but the theistic evolutionists here, by definition, are not amongst them.

What is evolution? Evolution is basically a long long long series of screw-ups until something goes right and is then considered an evolvement (a positive change for the advancement of life and matter).

Nope. Evolution is just a change. Of course, natural selection will tend to prefer the ones that benefit the species. But this is not for some grand "advancement of life and matter" - this is for the survival of that particular lineage. The Smilodon's teeth were a great advance for Smilodontes, but a serious setback for gazelles.

Mutations are the most common theory of evolutionary changes or advancement and how everything came to be. You have probably seen many mutated cows and different animals that are born with an extra foot, leg, head, etc... These errors are obviously not "advancements" or "proof of evolution" as most evolutionists will tell you, yet they are a hinderance to the creature that it has happened to. Most creatures in the wild that have a hinderance of this nature will be killed or unable to survive due to this genetic error. Yet, the fairytale believers, sorry, I mean evolutionists will tell you that YES! this is proof of evolution!! They are dead wrong.

No, we wouldn't be that stupid. We might point to mutations like that which enables bacteria to digest nylon, or that which causes melanism in peppered moths, but no, two headed pigs are not evidence we'd present of beneficial mutation.

My point to that little story is that if someone tells you that they believe in evolution, then they do not believe in the same God we do because our God is perfect and did not create everything through trial and error... the God that they believe in who created everything through this error-filled technique called evolution is surely not our God; yet their evolutionary God is one who is not perfect and created everythig by blind chance and better belongs in their childrens' fairy tale books.

Bzzzzzzzt. But thank you for playing.

Tell me something. Is God not "working His purpose out as year succeeds to year"? Does He not work through the contingencies and vagueries of human history, with all its chances and freely chosen paths? So tell me why He cannot work through a process that is governed by chance and contingency as is evolution to bring about His purposes? Or is your image of God not sufficiently powerful to do so?

Lastly, and yes, this time it is lastly, lol, how many theories of Creation are there to us Christians? 1... How many theories of evolution are there? 33, the latest being punctuated equilibrium. What does this mean? This means that the 33rd theory that evolutionists are on have proved the 32 prior theories wrong. Now, which side would you choose; the side that has 1 theory that has never been proven false or the other side that has been proven false 32 times so far? No-brainer.

False? No. Less accurate a model of reality than the previous model. That's how science works. By your reasoning, we should jettison Newton because Einstein's equations describe matter at high speeds or in large gravitational fields better. And we should jettison Einstein anyway, because his theories break down at some scales and better ones will no doubt be formed.

(Soon this 33rd theory will be proven false..it teaches that since we have seen no evidence of evolution, punctuated equilibrium is true...It teaches that the way species have evolved and the way the varieties have come about is through a certain species giving birth to a different species....for example, a duck laying an egg and a cat hatching out of the egg, or a snake...I am not joking, this is literally what this theory teaches...Really smart, intelligent people these evolutionists are huh guys?) They need because their hypothesis makes me

No. You're not joking. You're either lying or parrotting lies that your sources have told you. Get this clear - neither Gould nor Eldridge proposed anything like what you describe. Nothing like it. Repeat after me:

Punk-Eek is not saltation
Punk-Eek is not saltation
Punk-Eek is not saltation

Are we there now? No? OK - Punk-Eek for dummies: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/punc-eq.html

I am not a very smart person, I just listen to what both sides have to say, that's all...

No. You listen to Hovind's version of what both sides have to say. Shame he's a lying toad, isn't it?

Tom

PS-Any thoughts??

You're welcome to them.

 

[Taffsadar]

Does anyone have a link to the AIG page where they warn against Hovind?

It will be fun to see if he argues against that.

 

[Arikay]

Im not sure if this is what you were looking for but it is interesting,




This is a basic break down of the AIG Dont use list (http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/faq/dont_use.asp). Warning against arguments Creationists should not use, mainly because they are blatantly false (I will leave the irony about that, for another time )
The Bolded ones are ones Hovind still uses according to,
http://www.geocities.com/kenthovind/aig_debunk.htm
"According to AIG, these arguments should definitely NOT be used

• Darwin recanted on his deathbed*
• Moon dust thickness proves a young moon
• NASA computers, in calculating the positions of planets, found a missing day and 40 minutes, proving Joshua's long day and Hezekiah's sundial movement of Joshua 10 and 2 Kings 20
• Woolly mammoths were snap frozen during the Flood catastrophe
• The Castenedolo and Calaveras human remains in old strata invalidate the geologic column
• Dubois renounced Java man as a missing link and claimed it was just a giant gibbon
• The Japanese trawler Zuiyo Maru caught a dead plesiosaur near New Zealand
• The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics began at the Fall
• If we evolved from apes, why are there still apes today?
• Women have one more rib than men
• Archaeopteryx is a fraud
• There are no beneficial mutations
• No new species have been produced
• Earth's axis was vertical before the Flood
• Paluxy tracks prove that humans and dinosaurs co-existed
• Darwin's quote about the absurdity of eye evolution from Origin of Species
• Earth's division in the days of Peleg (Gen. 10:25) refers to catastrophic splitting of the continents
• The Septuagint records the correct Genesis chronology
• There are gaps in the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11 so the Earth may be 10,000 years old or even more
• Jesus cannot have inherited genetic material from Mary, otherwise He would have inherited original sin
• The phrase "science falsely so called" in 1 Timothy 6:20 (KJV) refers to evolution
• Geocentrism (in the classical sense of taking the Earth as an absolute reference frame) is taught by Scripture and Heliocentrism is anti-Scriptural
• Ron Wyatt has found Noah's Ark
• Ron Wyatt has found much archaeological proof of the Bible
• Many of Carl Baugh's creation evidences

*
According to AIG these arguments are doubtful, hence inadvisable to use (Hovind's use highlighted with bold)

• Canopy theory
• There was no rain before the Flood
• Natural selection as tautology
• Evolution is just a theory
• The speed of light has decreased over time
• There are no transitional forms
• Gold chains have been found in coal
• Plate tectonics is fallacious
• Creationists believe in microevolution but not macroevolution
• The Gospel is in the stars. "

If you go to the page this came from (the geocities page) you can find info about a rebutal, and then an answer to the rebutal, and then a rebutal to the answer of the rebutal, etc.



TomInCT: As you can see, we have heard of Hovind, and as you can see, if you have been researching Evolution using Hovind, then you have not learned much that was based in reality.
Again, can you really believe a guy who claims that 666 can be found in most barcodes? Was he just too lazy to research, just plain ignorant, or is he lying to you for some reason?

Does anyone have a link to the AIG page where they warn against Hovind?

It will be fun to see if he argues against that.

 

[lucaspa]

Well, I knew I would get every goin

Well, as far as the "imperfect designs" go that you guys are referring to, you are misunderstanding...God created created everything perfect to start with....Adam and Eve chose free will which then allowed man to do what he wants so to speak. Satan (the guy you guys probably like, yes or no??? and im not being sarcastic, let me know) was the one who was then allowed to mess everything up because of man's choice of free will. He made something that was perfect, imperfect.

So what you are saying is that God gave the panda a perfect thumb when He created all animals, then Satan came along, took it away, and gave the panda the thumb it has now?

Sorry, but that theory contradicts the Bible, both the literal and accurate interpretations. Satan NEVER HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH CREATION. Nor is there anything said about other created creatures changing after the Fall. The consequences of the Fall are spelled out in Genesis 3: the serpent loses his legs and his descendents get hated by Eve's descendents forever, Adam has problems with weeds in agriculture, and Eve has pain in childbirth. That's IT.

Now, if you want to make a mockery of the Bible, go ahead. But that's not a nice thing to do on a Christian board.

Disease came about, genetic imperfections, etc to God's perfect creation.

Sorry, non-Biblical again. Genesis 1 has God saying that Creation is "very good". NEVER perfect. Again, if you want to take liberties with the Bible, you can. But you can't then turn around and tell us we are supposed to use it as a guide.

What you are asking us to do is follow YOU. Sorry, we don't follow false prophets. We've been warned about them.

Phoenix- What experiments are "proving" evolution? I have yet to see any solid proof of it...If you do know of anyone with solid, mandable evidence that definately proves evolution totally true, I know a creation scientist that will pay out $100,000 to that individual... I have his contact information if you know of anyone...

Then you haven't looked very hard. Go to http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi and enter "evolution" as your search term. You've got over 120,000 articles to read. Hovind has the money, but it's a sucker bet. Hovind is not talking about evolution as in descent with modification by natural selection. Hovind means "atheism" when he says "evolution". Since evolution is not atheism, it doesn't apply.

Pete- I have read up on evolutionary theory

Then why did you get Punctuated Equilibrium wrong? I submit that you have read ONLY creationist works. Have you read Origin of the Species? How about Evolutionary Biology by Douglas Futuyma?

Arikay- There are a # of different creation theories outside of the Christian faith but only 1 theory of Creation in the Christian faith, which is the theory that is discussed here. There has always been only 1 theory until schoffers (who are mentioned in 2nd Peter) made up theories of their own from the original theory.

There has always been TWO theories: Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. However, Arikay is right. Within creationism there are at least 5 theories:
1. YEC
2. Day-Age creationism
3. Gap theory
4. Time contraction theory a la Gerald Schroeder
5. Intelligent Design theory.

The proponents of these theories fight constantly among themselves. All claim to be Christians and all deny that the others are Christians. It's quite amusing to watch.

 

[lucaspa]

I shall lurk no more. Hey everybody, this is my first post at this website.

Welcome.

For your definition of natural selection, I suggest you create a Wordpad file and copy and past the following into it. It's hard to improve on this definition.

"If, during the long course of ages and under varying conditions of life, organic beings vary at all in the several parts of their organization, and I think this cannot be disputed; if there be, owing to the high geometric powers of increase of each species, at some age, season, or year, a severe struggle for life, and this certainly cannot be disputed; then, considering the infinite complexity of the relations of all organic beings to each other and to their conditions of existence, causing an infinite diversity in structure, constitution, and habits, to be advantageous to them, I think it would be a most extraordinary fact if no variation ever had occurred useful to each beings welfare, in the same way as so many variations have occured useful to man. But if variations useful to any organic being do occur, assuredly individuals thus characterized will have the best chance of being preserved in the struggle for life; and from the strong principle of inheritance they will will tend to produce offspring similarly characterized. This principle of preservation, I have called, for the sake of brevity, Natural Selection." [Origin, p 127 6th ed.]

 

[lucaspa]

Hey, lupasca if these people actually followed the scientific method you could get yourself a larger house and a sweet car!

LOL! Yeah, but what Hovind really wants "proven" is atheism! Like all good con men, he makes a sucker bet sound reasonable on the surface.

Also remember, the judging panel is hand picked by Hovind and he won't divulge their names. Talk about a setup!