• 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

dust1n

Zindīq
I think that is the point Hovid attempted to make. If it did make a lake it would stop flowing there and the canyon would not have been cut out. But it is geology which I know very little about so that's all. Someone asked what plausible point Hovid made and that was it.

Then Hovid has a pretty poor understanding of water.

Lakes aren't the end of water... the water evaporates back into the atmosphere, where it rains, and pours down again, continuing the process of erosion.

EDIT: Oh yeah... and the Colorado runs and drains in the ocean...
 
Last edited:

Warren Clark

Informer
The story of evolution goes something like this.

1. In the beginning was nothing.
2. The nothingness collapsed.
3. This collapse formed a big bang.
4. The big bang formed galaxy's.
5. The galaxy's formed stars.
6. The stars formed planets.
7. The planets formed ground.
8. The ground formed water.
9. The water formed bacterium.
10. The bacterium combined to form plants.
11. The plants changed to create insects.
12. The insects changed to create fish.
13. The fish changed to create reptiles.
14. The reptiles changed to create birds.
15. The reptiles changed to create mammals.
16. The mammals changed to create humans.

At least that's pretty much how the story goes, what I can't fathom is how any evolutionist can say that they can believe the theory without believing in a whole lot of assumptions.

Heres another one with more detail.

Evo_large.gif
 

dust1n

Zindīq
Hovind like most makes a mistake when he thinks the rift was formed by water at all.

The Grand Canyon is a rift line that was formed due to pressure build up when the land split apart a few hundred years after the day's of Noah, it was formed in only a few dozen years and not by water although it did go deep enough so that a small amount of water did run through the bottom of it.

Let me guess... you don't have empirical evidence to back this claim up...

However Kent Hovind was wrong is asserting that Water always runs downhill as we actually have proof that water runs uphill sometimes.

[youtube]1urMDmqvc5w[/youtube]
Uphill Waterfall in High Cup Nick, Cumbria - YouTube

The water is still running downhill, which is plainly observable in the video. The water that is "going up hill" is water droplets being blown by wind.
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
Water flowing can cause erosion. Erosion over millions of years is one explanation for the canyon depth. Water flows down by gravity. Yes? When the river reached ground that rose up what happened to it?


The grand canyon was formed by millions of years of uplift and erosion, uplift and erosion, etc.

"The geology clearly shows that the Grand Canyon formations were deposited in an environment which existed as a flat coastal marine area for hundreds of millions of years. This region began to be uplifted at the end of the Paleozoic era. At the same time the existing meandering river systems began to cut down into the rock, keeping pace with the uplift over the ensuing millions of years. The Colorado River acted as a "conveyor belt," carrying the material, as it gradually eroded from the canyon walls, into the Gulf of California."

https://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/viewArticle.do?id=126489
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Hovind like most makes a mistake when he thinks the rift was formed by water at all.

The Grand Canyon is a rift line that was formed due to pressure build up when the land split apart a few hundred years after the day's of Noah, it was formed in only a few dozen years and not by water although it did go deep enough so that a small amount of water did run through the bottom of it.

However Kent Hovind was wrong is asserting that Water always runs downhill as we actually have proof that water runs uphill sometimes.

[youtube]1urMDmqvc5w[/youtube]
Uphill Waterfall in High Cup Nick, Cumbria - YouTube

I hope that is suppose to be funny :rolleyes:
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I think that is the point Hovid attempted to make. If it did make a lake it would stop flowing there and the canyon would not have been cut out. But it is geology which I know very little about so that's all. Someone asked what plausible point Hovid made and that was it.

The elevation that Hovind points out was due to a process called tetonic upshift which occured there likely after formation. Of course Hovind didn't address that. His son Eric didn't fare much better. He screwed up the entrance and exit point and the canyons relationship with the river.
 
Last edited:

Sculelos

Active Member
Let me guess... you don't have empirical evidence to back this claim up...

The water is still running downhill, which is plainly observable in the video. The water that is "going up hill" is water droplets being blown by wind.

Sometimes crap just runs uphill.

[youtube]e2hAiM2yjso[/youtube]
Machakos - AntiGravity -Water flowing uphill? - YouTube

[youtube]dmSiFVeLhxs[/youtube]
Machakos2- AntiGravity - Car UpHill - YouTube

[youtube]EU1BpK9WGds[/youtube]
Reverse Gravity Hill - YouTube
 

dust1n

Zindīq
No, it doesn't. None of those videos are solid evidence of anything. They all look like flat surfaces to me.
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I realize this may be lost in this discussion, but the points I was making earlier to anyone interested I think are brilliantly underscored by this quote I came across by the Christian mystic Jacob Boehme from the 1700's. Savagewind, if you allow yourself to not be too distracted for awhile quibbling over Kent "Red Herring" Hovind's theatrical side shows, wrap your heart around the words of a truly insightful soul. And then tell me if this doesn't sound like what I am saying.

"There is a secret in the heart of life that is not only the unmoving white light. It is not only the still point of the turning world, not only the light-filled empty center. It is also the lion of fire, the unceasing explosion of expansive being, of proliferating life, from the center. It is the fontal energy that demands to express itself everywhere and through every form."​

This is the heart of evolution. This is creation.
 

Warren Clark

Informer
Not bad at all, pretty much you answered with the standard answers, the Ocean underneath the Sea 'Discovery' bit is pretty interesting because we have known that there is an ocean underneath the sea floor for thousands of years. However since you have answered my questions I will answer them as well so you can see how your opinion differs from my own.



1. God creates Energy out of Nothing.
2. The Universe is Finite
3. Yes the Universe is expanding.
4. God creates order.
5. Yes, there is 7 oceans 'Underneath' the Surface Oceans.
6. Yes Earth is expanding.
7. Yes the Stars are expanding.
8. All planets are expanding.
9. God creates matter.
10. Energy is finite.
11. Matter is finite.
12. Gravity doesn't exist.
13. There is Oceans underneath the Sea Floor.
14. God is nothing, that is to say God is a spirit and occupies no energy nor matter.
15. Yes everything was created out of nothing.
16. Both Energy and Matter are the Same Thing.
17. Electromagnetism is the only thing that holds anything together or pushes anything apart, that is to say, Electricity and Matter are not separate forces but the same force.
18. Space is low density nitrogen.
19. Space is not empty as it has an atmosphere of low density nitrogen.
20. A rotating sphere has 4x the force/weight in it's shell as compared to it's core.



I suppose the evidence for evolution is theoretical so it's based on the logic of the mind therefore it's logic only lies within the minds of those who accept it.

Evolution is not just theoretical. The only part of evolution that we cannot observe is that first organism of which all life originated.
We can find evolution in the works just beyond our back door. A leopard giving birth to cubs with stripes has been a recent genetic manipulation that could end up creating a new species.

#1 God creates Energy out of Nothing.
Why does the energy have to come from something. If got could have always existed in a lonely void why can't energy?

#2-3 - Correct.

#4 God creates Order.

I think you ignored the part about Chaos Theory.
The fact is that there is no order to anything.
Its like have a bag of skittles and spilling them on the table.
You might find a group of 5 red skittles settled near each other but it was not by divine intervention. It was simply the way the skittles were randomly thrown in the bag and ended up on the table once spilled.

5. Yes, there is 7 oceans 'Underneath' the Surface Oceans.
I don't really know what this has to do with evolution in any sense at all.
I mean really there is water everywhere on the planet. I already confirmed that there is water within earth's mantle/crust and possibly below it.

#6 - 8
Yes expansion is occuring, all thanks to what scientists call the "Big Bang".

9 God created matter.

Matter exists because of energy, not God.
Remember E=MC2

#10, 11 Energy & Matter is finite.
Yep.

#12 Gravity doesn't exist.
Holy cow. :facepalm: You just through out the baby with the bath water.
What is going on? Did you manage to float to space and suffer from lack of oxygen?
Probably not, gravity does exist. Otherwise the very planet you are standing on would NOT exist.

Im going to skip #13. See #5.

#14 God is nothing, that is to say God is a spirit and occupies no energy nor matter.
Lord, have mercy.
You just defined a spirit, which is untestable and not relevant in science. Seeing as science is all about testing a hypothesis.
God is nothing because god doesn't exist in what you just said.
At least in scientists understanding, your understanding of a spirit doesn't exist.

#15 Everything was created out of nothing.
Not technically possible. Although we have no idea of what could happen before the big bang. Which by the way didn't create anything. It just set the universe in motion.

#16 Both Energy and Matter are the Same Thing.

Wrong again unfortunately. Otherwise you would not have Matter AND Energy.
Energy is what makes up Matter, but Matter does not make up Energy.

#17 Electromagnetism is the only thing that holds anything together or pushes anything apart, that is to say, Electricity and Matter are not separate forces but the same force

Nope. Sorry.
Electromagnetism is what makes matter. Electricity is the current that runs through it. Some matter is more conductive than other matter. Like we are more conductive than a rock.
So no, they are not the same "force". Matter is not a force.

#18 Space is low density nitrogen.
#19 Space is not empty as it has an atmosphere of low density nitrogen.

Where on earth did you get this from? I've never even heard such an outrageous claim.
I already explained with a really cool mythbusters episode that space is a vacuum. Nitrogen is a gas and it has a constant density/mass.
Space does NOT have its own atmosphere. Where did you get this information from?

#20 A rotating sphere has 4x the force/weight in it's shell as compared to it's core.
I would really like to see your sources for all of this?
 

Alceste

Vagabond

#1 What creates energy?

Nothing. Energy is only every transferred, never created or destroyed.
The energy has always existed but it is in an endless but finite loop.

#2, 10 & 11 Infinite or finite?

Space has a finite volume (and finite energy), but no center or edge. Yet you could fly a spaceship in a straight line forever and never get to a place with no stars visible in the front window.

How could that be? it's a 4-dimensional sphere (but we can see only three dimensions). A "dimension" is a direction you can point in that is 90º away from every other direction. "Up-down" is one dimension, and "left-right" is another, and the third is "close-far away". We can't point in the direction of the fourth dimension because the length of any line pointing in that direction is a negative number.

[Yes really. Smartasses: see the signature of the interval metric equation. ct squared has the opposite sign of the space values].

If you threw a baseball fast enough and wait long enough, it will cross the universe and hit you in your *** (but there are reasons you can't actually throw it that fast).

It's easier to understand if you think in 3 dimensions instead of 4. An ant on a large sphere can step out of his front door and walk in a straight line. He thinks his "world" is flat, because the sphere is too big for him to see that it curves. But if he walks long enough, he will walk into his back door and say "no way! That's impossible!"

Note that the sphere had no edge, but still had finite surface area.

Well, that's what's going on in four dimensions.


#3 Is the Universe Expanding?

Yes. Radiometric dating confirms this.

#4 What creates order?
Funny thing is everything you see is a not a result of order. Everything has been caused by chaos. A series of causes and effects.
Look up Chaos Theory.

#5 Are there Oceans under the earth's mantle?
Actually, most likely yes!
Huge 'Ocean' Discovered Inside Earth | LiveScience

#6 - 8 Are we expanding?
800px-Ilc_9yr_moll4096.png

9 year WMAP image of the cosmic microwave background radiation (2012). The radiation is isotropic to roughly one part in 100,000.
(Answer: Yes, everything is expanding outward.)

#9 How is matter created?

E=MC2
Energy creates Matter, Matter creates Energy.
But for reference,
[youtube]b6cbaMj883c[/youtube]

#10, 11 - See #2

In case you are confused...
Energy is Matter. So if energy is finite so is matter. Energy can only be transferred, never destroyed.


#12 Does Gravity Push or Pull?

Gravity is the attraction of mass to other mass. It is a "pull" rather than a "push" in that light.
Not really. This is a 17th century Newtonian way of looking at Gravity. A
According to Einstein's theory of General Relativity, gravity is a push. The space around an object is malleable and is warped by that object. So in Earth's case the Space is pushing us back down to earth.
There are many arguments for both pull and push when it comes to gravity, a search of the internet will lead you to many arguments for both push and pull
I disagree with the above Gravity is still a PULL rather than a PUSH Anyone else care to add ?
No it is a pushing effect. Think of earth as being immersed in pool of dark matter, which could also be described as Einstein's Space-time stuff, it is pressure of that displacement on neutral particles in your body and other everyday stuff that results in the downward force. An interesting fact that proves this is that as soon as you go underground you become slightly lighter. Another fact is that when you go into space just outside of the atmosphere you become weightless within a relatively short distance (Note from J. Craig: This is not true. You feel weightless if you are falling around the Earth, which is called orbit.). If it were a pulling force you would lose weight at the inverse square law and it does not happen that way. Also if you consider the Moon as shielding us from gravity rather than pulling us, it would create the same effect.


Now, while the above is a very good example of the theoretical background of the advancement of gravity discussions, it's mostly useless to someone wanting applicable knowledge about gravity.
With this said, gravity is BOTH a push and a pull. Think about a horse and carriage. To the observer, the horse is pulling the carriage. To the horse, however, it feels as though it's pushing on the chest brace to move the carriage. Even in engineering calculations using vector forces, the difference between push and pull doesn't matter much when doing calculations with particle physics.


The difference between push and pull is merely a semantic argument.

#13 How are there springs in the bed of the sea?

These are usually caused by tectonic shifts and hydrothermal vents.


#14 Difference between God and Nothing?


There is a big problem with this.
First you have to define God.
If we are talking about anything that could have resulted in the origin of life, you could say the universe is God.
Nothing would indicate that neither you nor I exist.
I am, in a sense, God. I make powerful decisions that effect other people and myself in my daily life.
No one ever considers "nothing".

#15 Can something be created from nothing?

With out current understanding of physics, no.
Of course the physics we observe today most likely did not exist before the big bang, so it is completely speculative. But as of now, the answer is no.

#16 Which came first energy or matter.
If you watched the video above you would now know that energy came first.


#17 Everything is expanding so what draws it together.

Everything is expanding while the matter is interacting with each other. This interaction is known as gravity. Gravity causes the creation of solar systems, planets, stars, and black holes, etc.

#18, 19 If space is empty/nothing/something...?

"space" is the place of which all matter and energy exists.
space is just a big vacuum. its just a bunch of nothingness. No air or anything. We can move through it just like you can move in a vacuumed container.
The mythbusters use a vacuum for many of their experiments, such as testing a flags movement in space.

[youtube]yhab86KoVjU[/youtube]

#20 Does a rotating sphere have more force outside in or inside out?

This makes a fun experiment. The truth is it has an equal force.
You can watch this video and observe how this works.

[youtube]BxyfiBGCwhQ[/youtube]


I hope I answered your questions well enough. :danana:
Pearls before swine, I'm afraid, but I enjoyed it. :)
 

McBell

Unbound
The story of evolution goes something like this.

1. In the beginning was nothing.
2. The nothingness collapsed.
3. This collapse formed a big bang.
4. The big bang formed galaxy's.
5. The galaxy's formed stars.
6. The stars formed planets.
7. The planets formed ground.
8. The ground formed water.
9. The water formed bacterium.
10. The bacterium combined to form plants.
11. The plants changed to create insects.
12. The insects changed to create fish.
13. The fish changed to create reptiles.
14. The reptiles changed to create birds.
15. The reptiles changed to create mammals.
16. The mammals changed to create humans.

At least that's pretty much how the story goes, what I can't fathom is how any evolutionist can say that they can believe the theory without believing in a whole lot of assumptions.
:biglaugh:

Not even close

:biglaugh:
 

FranklinMichaelV.3

Well-Known Member
Meh...I just wasted 20 minutes of my life watching Kent...

For what it's worth, the Big Bang theory might not be right. Given the length of time, etc, I could see that. But if it's wrong, we'll work it out scientifically, or we won't.

Big Bang theory under threat from quantum graphity breakthrough | Space, Military and Medicine | News.com.au

The point being that knowledge develops, and ignorance can be honest.

I always figured that the singularity spoken of in black holes was the same that have rise to the universe in the Big Bang theory. At that singularity wouldn't all after condensed in its smallest denses point. It would also be extremely hot resulting in matter existing in a plasma state. And the start of the universe would have been like when black holes shoot out quasars massive amounts of energy, blowing away chunks of the matter that would cool to the other three states.

But I just recently started reading up on things like this so I'm probably really off base.
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
I always figured that the singularity spoken of in black holes was the same that have rise to the universe in the Big Bang theory. At that singularity wouldn't all after condensed in its smallest denses point. It would also be extremely hot resulting in matter existing in a plasma state. And the start of the universe would have been like when black holes shoot out quasars massive amounts of energy, blowing away chunks of the matter that would cool to the other three states.

But I just recently started reading up on things like this so I'm probably really off base.

I'd be the first to admit it's not my strong point either. I'm certainly not advocating the theory I linked to. But from my point of view, there sometimes seems to be a view espoused that a lack of knowledge (eg. what came before the Big Bang) is equivalence to saying the Big Bang is wrong. Which is sheer ignorance.

The Big Bang represents (in the broadest sense) our best guess at the creation of the universe, based on scientific reason. It is not the only guess, and I would both expect and hope that the theory continues to develop, and continues to be challenged.

Kent Horvind seems to somehow make the startling leap from 'the Big Bang can't answer all questions' to 'the Big Bang theory is stupid'.
I could suggest his views are biased, but it'd be an insult to almost everyone to state something so obvious.

He said one thing, ridiculous as it was, that has a kernel of truth, albeit not in the way he meant it. He mentioned about the Big Bang being a religion to those who believed in it. That's actually blatant crap. But if he worded it slightly differently, and said that some held to non-religious positions with the same dogmatic view he held his religious positions, then I'd completely agree. And in neither case does it lend their beliefs credence, nor speak well of how much faith in them they have.

I think Windwalker made a bunch of good points along these same lines already within this thread.
 
Top