• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

100 Reasons why Evolution is Stupid - Dr. Hovind

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I don't get it. I honestly don't. You are willing to believe what this man says or at least give him benifit of the doubt when he has been shown to be wrong and a liar. But the mountains of evidence for evolution is just a scam?

You have to be consistant. Either your so skeptical of everything that its hard pressed to get you to believe everything or not. Otherwise you have to admit its just an over bearing bias towards the subject and your true problem with evolution isn't the scrutiny of it.

That is well said and there are inklings of truth to it. I am biased toward the subject, true.
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Why? Because there are specialists in a technical field, and you are not. That's why. It's like you telling astronauts the moon is made of green cheese, having nothing to go on in any sense of the word having to do with science! I work in technology with computer systems. I'm a specialized engineer in a particular field working for a major international company. It would be like you telling me that instead of these things working following the rules of the computer sciences, there are instead controlled by magic spirits. Who, between you and me, knows what the heck they're talking about, and who does not?

This is NOT scientists telling you God doesn't exist! This is you fearful of what they in fact, legitimately are seeing, that YOU interpret as a threat to your beliefs. This is obvious. I believe in God. I embrace evolution. You fear it. Please explain why that difference exists between you and me.

You sound angry. I am fearful? Sometimes I imagine there is a sniper across the lake (I'm going to call it a lake) but I think it's funny. Fearful can't go all around to funny, can it?
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I wonder what the chances are that Dr. Hovind is reading this thread? I think being busy isn't in his way anymore.
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
You sound angry. I am fearful? Sometimes I imagine there is a sniper across the lake (I'm going to call it a lake) but I think it's funny. Fearful can't go all around to funny, can it?
That's a fascinating deflection away from my question to you. Why don't you answer it honestly?
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
That's a fascinating deflection away from my question to you. Why don't you answer it honestly?

I do not know the question.

Who knows what they are talking about and who does not? That's it?

Nobody is right 100%, but you know that. On the other hand, nobody is 100% wrong either.
 

Alceste

Vagabond
I do not agree with you.
1. He may very well have a doctorate from an unaccredited school. He passed the required curriculum and wrote his thesis. That is called benefit of the doubt. Have you heard of that before?
2. You can ignore my premise that he is a conscientious (thanj God foir spell check) objector but I think it is rude.
3. So what if he calls the precedent to evolution evolution? Without those prior things evolution could never have happened. You are not a judge are you?
4. We do not know if he lied about the carbon dating. If the tests he shared are real there are many reasons why they may not have become well known. The most obvious one I can think of is embarrassment, you know, like, in Yale and Harvard.

I hear evidence differently than you. Is that OK?

A doctorate from an unaccredited school is not a real doctorate. If you want to give me fifty bucks and write me an essay on why the sky is blue I'll scribble you a degree on the back of a napkin and you can go around calling yourself Doctor Savagewind. Does that sound appealing to you? If not, it might be because, unlike Kent Hovind, it doesn't give you a thrill to lie to people.
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I do not know the question.

Who knows what they are talking about and who does not? That's it?

Nobody is right 100%, but you know that. On the other hand, nobody is 100% wrong either.
I am an expert in my field. Someone who has never been qualified through experience to work in the field, who doesn't understand even the basics of the field, then sits and spouts his opinions about it when I in fact am the expert and he is a hack, who is credible when he says the other person is wrong, and who is full of themselves? That's a simple question.

Of course I'm not right 100% of the time. But I am 95%+ of the time, and I am for a good reason. The hack on the other hand may be lucky and guess something right 5% of the time. Who would you trust your buisness infrastructure to when you have 100's of millions of dollars on the line? Kent, "computer hacker" Hovind, or me who earns his living dealing with business infrastructure in a high-tech industry?

But my real question to you, beyond the self-evident answer to the above is what I asked you explicitly. "I believe in God. I embrace evolution. You fear it. Please explain why that difference exists between you and me." Why do you fear changing how you understand things about God? I don't. Why do you?

BTW, I have no anger at all about this. I'm merely frustrated for you watching you put yourself through this.
 
Last edited:

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
A doctorate from an unaccredited school is not a real doctorate. If you want to give me fifty bucks and write me an essay on why the sky is blue I'll scribble you a degree on the back of a napkin and you can go around calling yourself Doctor Savagewind. Does that sound appealing to you? If not, it might be because, unlike Kent Hovind, it doesn't give you a thrill to lie to people.

OK Now I know. Kent Hovind's doctoral dissertation - RationalWiki Although I do believe it is too sad to be true. But it is, I am sure it is. :run:
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I am an expert in my field. Someone who has never been qualified through experience to work in the field, who doesn't understand even the basics of the field, then sits and spouts his opinions about it when I in fact am the expert and he is a hack, who is credible when he says the other person is wrong, and who is full of themselves? That's a simple question.

Of course I'm not right 100% of the time. But I am 95%+ of the time, and I am for a good reason. The hack on the other hand may be lucky and guess something right 5% of the time. Who would you trust your buisness infrastructure to when you have 100's of millions of dollars on the line? Kent, "computer hacker" Hovind, or me who earns his living dealing with business infrastructure in a high-tech industry?

But my real question to you, beyond the self-evident answer to the above is what I asked you explicitly. "I believe in God. I embrace evolution. You fear it. Please explain why that difference exists between you and me." Why do you fear changing how you understand things about God? I don't. Why do you?

BTW, I have no anger at all about this. I'm merely frustrated for you.

I cannot agree we have developed without a plan because I would rather agree with Yeshua who said Matthew 19:4 " haven't you read he who created them from the beginning made them male and female". and Genesis 1:27 So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

It is not possible for me to believe God means random selection. My God is the antithesis of randomness. To believe I am the product of evolution is to chuck the Bible. The Bible might be my favorite thing. Yehoshua is my favorite person. If Moses is a real person, I'd hate to doubt him. I do not want to doubt any holy one. But I think I do not know a scientist that I like.
 

Monk Of Reason

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
LOL I don't think so! Evolution a gnat? Hardly. I think you have it backwards.
Small changes happen over time. Eventually small changes accumulate to big changes. simple and easy to understand.

There is an invisible undetectable being we call god that made the whole universe where 99.999999999999999999999999999999% of it is uninhabitable and would kill you in a second. However its perfectly engineered for life. And he did this all so that he could one day create man. Then he created all of the DNA to appear as if we evolved from a naturally occuring mechanism that is observable and testable. Though there are secret limiters that he has put in place that science doesn't know about. Also he buried fake fossils that also depict this illusion of evolution. He also gave us genes to grow tails and have full body hair but then gave us other genes to silence them just because.

He loves you and this is a test. Now love him back or he will send you to hell for all of eternity forever and ever. And there is no physical evidence. Just faith. There are other gods that other people believe in but they are fake gods. Just this god is the true god. I don't care that the other people say the same thing.



Yeah....its reversed all right.
 

secret2

Member
I cannot agree we have developed without a plan because I would rather agree with Yeshua....

Right here, you are admitting that you place personal preferences above the pursuit of truth. Sounds in contrary to christian teaching.

It is not possible for me to believe God means random selection.

SIGHHHHH......this kind of untruth again. Evolution is not purely random. Read up on it before "debating".
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
SIGHHHHH......this kind of untruth again. Evolution is not purely random. Read up on it before "debating".
Have you read the great thread about this, what you are doing?

Natural selection is the simple result of variation, differential reproduction, and heredity — it is mindless and mechanistic. It has no goals; it's not striving to produce "progress" or a balanced ecosystem.

The genetic variation that occurs in a population because of mutation is random-but selection acts on that variation in a very non-random way: genetic variants that aid survival and reproduction are much more likely to become common than variants that don't.
Misconceptions about natural selection

Look right smart at my expense. It is what the internet is about, is it not? I am immune.
So who said "purely"? You or me please?
 
Last edited:

outhouse

Atheistically
Genesis 1:27 So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

.

You don't understand the work you quote. Scientifically not one bit of Genesis is accurate beyond mythology.

You also cherry pick.

1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:

That is plural deities, as early Israelites believed in a family of deities, Yahweh even had a wife Asherah. El was Yahwehs father, and Yahweh had a brother Baal.


Creation is outlawed from poisoning our children's minds in a science class where science is taught, not mythology.
 

outhouse

Atheistically
Hovind is not a scholar nor a scientist, and doesn't know the first thing about Science.

What's worse, he knows less about the bible, and could not stand up to me in a one on one debate regarding biblical knowledge.
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
You don't understand the work you quote. Scientifically not one bit of Genesis is accurate beyond mythology.

You also cherry pick.

1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:

That is plural deities, as early Israelites believed in a family of deities, Yahweh even had a wife Asherah. El was Yahwehs father, and Yahweh had a brother Baal.


Creation is outlawed from poisoning our children's minds in a science class where science is taught, not mythology.

Listen I know you can. It is not Genesis that interests me. And Genesis as history should not be taught. I agree. Genesis as literature should be taught imo.
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Hovind is not a scholar nor a scientist, and doesn't know the first thing about Science.

What's worse, he knows less about the bible, and could not stand up to me in a one on one debate regarding biblical knowledge.

I believe you. I shall not defend the man again.
 
Top