Kent Hovind Gets Taken Again
Oh, this is just too precious.
The April 2005 issue of Scientific American included an editorial entitled “Okay, We Give Up” and subtitled, “We feel so ashamed”. The editors said they were contrite for ignoring creationism and ID, simply because there’s no evidence for either one.
That’s what makes ID a superior scientific theory: it doesn’t get bogged down in details.
Good journalism values balance above all else. We owe it to our readers to present everybody’s ideas equally and not to ignore or discredit theories simply because they lack scientifically credible arguments or facts.
This was clearly an April Fools joke. Perhaps not the funniest ever, but still pretty blatant. But Kent Hovind fell for it anyway.
Go read his response. I’m not reading so much as a twitch on the Clue-O-Meter. No wonder he’s a laughingstock, even by creationist standards.
This isn’t the first time this has happened, either: in 1999, New Mexicans for Science and Reason awarded Hovind the P.T. Barnum Award for showing a Philadelphia audience evidence of humans and dinosaurs coexisting. He didn’t realize it was NMSR’s April Fools prank.
Anyway, here are some selections from Hovind’s reply to Scientific American. Those of you who are familiar with him may recognize a lot of it. Those who don’t will discover new depths of kookiness.
The magazine treats evolution as if it is a part of science, when there’s nothing further from the truth. It is a religion, masquerading as science. But there is no scientific evidence that would tell us a dog produced a non-dog, let alone that a dog came from a work 4.6 billion years ago.
There’s actually overwhelming evidence that dinosaurs have always lived with humans. We simply called them dragons. Man killed most of them, and there may be a few still alive today.
As for the flood carving Grand Canyon, why don’t they explain to us why the top of the Canyon is 4,000ft higher than where the river (Colorado River) enters the canyon? Why don’t they explain to us how rivers miraculously flowed up-hill for millions of years to finally cut the groove deep enough so they could flow downhill?
The simple answer is uplift, of course. But Kent doesn’t accept continental drift, so presumably the idea of mountains growing is anathema to him as well.
There’s no such thing as a “fossil record”; there are simply fossils in the dirt.
Thanks for clearing that up. In other news, there’s no such thing as the free market; there’s just people buying and selling stuff. There’s no such thing as the National Archives; just a government building with a lot of old papers.
And if you can’t get your point across any other way, compare your opponents to Nazis or Communists:
Try to get a creationist article into a magazine like Scientific American, and see what happens. Ten years ago if a professor in the Soviet Union tried to submit an article to any Soviet magazine claiming that communism didn’t work, and capitalism is a better system, he would be shipped off to Siberia if he survived. Today, if a teacher in a public university, or a writer at any major science magazine (such as Scientific American) dares to suggest that evolution is not true, and maybe Creation is true, he will be sent to academic Siberia in a heart-beat.
One thing, though: ten years ago was 1995. The Soviet Union had formally become Russia four years earlier. I doubt anyone would have been sent to Siberia for saying that the old regime didn’t work.
I can’t believe these guys think there are scientifically credible arguments for the idea that all life came from nothing, 18 billion years ago. What are they thinking?
I agree with Hovind on this point: you’d have to be crazy to think that life on Earth started 4 billion years before the Big Bang. (For those unsure of the timeline: the universe is roughly 14 billion years old. The Earth is roughly 4.5 billion years old. Life appeared somewhere on the order of 1 billion years after the Earth formed, or about 3.5 billion years ago.)
The truth is that many scientists have come to understand who butters their bread. They have to support the evolution theory or lose their grant money. Ask any number of scientists who have not kissed the sacred cow of evolution and have lost their job, grant money, or position at a university. The list grows every day. See video number 7 for much more on this.
Ah, I love a good conspiracy theory!
The Bible says, “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.” Anyone who believes they came from a rock is a fool.
Hovind doesn’t think he came from a rock. He thinks he came from dirt.
You can download MP3s and videos of Hovind’s unique brand of stand-up comedy here.
Update, Sep. 16, 2005: Fixed URL to Hovind’s response. Thanks to alert reader Jamie for the correction.
Is this spam as well?
Hmm, I can see that all my posts are gone away from here. So I was right then moderator (Fez/Arensb)… Good luck with your false teachings
Is this page not up and running?
Ravenghost:
Looks like a bunch of your comments got eaten by the spam filter. This tends to happen when someone posts too often or too quickly, since it looks like spam.
I’ve pulled your comments out of the spam bucket. Please don’t make me regret it.
Astounding.
The way I read this, you’re saying, “Eventually, you’re going to be tortured forever, and I’ll enjoy watching your unending pain and suffering, because you made fun of my ideas.”
Nice sense of proportion there. Do you also firebomb the restaurant when the waitress messes up your order?
Almost 3 months and Jesus hasn’t saved you yet, Ravingghost? Guess it was decided you weren’t worthy.
Looks like I may have missed the fun over the last few years of debate here, but both sides are talking about making things up to fit their view etc. Here is a topic to ponder.
Would you be willing to be tortured (whipped, stoned, beaten, hung, run through with a sword, etc) for a lie that you made up yourself? Sounds a little far fetched not? I can see maybe being convinced by someone else that a lie they made up is truth and worth dying for, but if I made up the lie and then was told to recant or die, I am recanting for all I am worth.
Here is the point: the apostles (Peter, Paul, Andrew, Matthew and the rest) ALL (except for John who was “only” banished to an isolated island called Patmos) were all tortured and killed for something. Either it was a lie they made up about seeing Jesus risen from the dead or they saw Jesus risen from the dead.
I am college educated with a science and engineering background. I know that this debate will never be settled by “facts” because it is a heart and faith issue. The “facts” are the same for both sides. Interpretation will be the only convincing fact we can have. Fossils will not and can not prove anything. For example, if I find a dodo fossil can I claim it is a transitional fossil from a chicken to a turkey? or a hummingbird to an ostrich? or a t-rex to a chicken? Yes, I can make any interpretation of it but the fact remains, it was and always will be a DODO fossil. Any fossil can be “claimed” to be a transistional species, or just an extienct species depending on what you want it to be. (within reason of course)
As to the origin of life, think on this: Put a frog (or better yet for increased odds 10 frogs) in a blender and mix them up real good. You will have a goo. A very special goo, because it has carbon, DNA, RNA, Cellualr structure, all the necessary building blocks and pieces to make life. EVERYTHING!!! even blood, brain matter, nerve cells, bones. Now just try to make it come alive with sunlight, darkness, lightning, or even use unnatural processes like centrifuge, electroshock stirring, shaking what ever. AINT GONNA HAPPEN. No Frogs will come jumping out of the goo.
Try the same thing with some single cell organism like a bactiria or virus cell. First kill it without changing the chemical or biological formulation then try to spontainiously bring ti back to “life” Now you want to tell me that somehow NATURE all by its self brought all the pieces together and created life with some jumt start process. As Lucy Ball would say “buddy you got some ‘splaining to do!”
Consider what changed Peter from a man who denied even knowing Jesus before his death and then returning to his fishing boat to the man who challenged the Sanhedren (sp?) and endured prison, the stoning of his friend Stephen and his own death crucified upside down on a cross. He SAW and TALKED to GOD Jesus Christ after he came back from the Dead. Or He made up a lie that he did and died for his own lie.
May your day be full of blessings.
PCDR:
And how do you know that these things even happened? Because you read about them in a book that also has talking animals, magic spells, and zombies walking around Jerusalem? Got anything more convincing?
How do you know that Barack OBama is really in the Middle East right now? Because you see it on TV? There is more evidence external to the Bible for Jesus Being a real person, for the Missionary Journeys of Paul, and Peter, and Andrew, and John, and the rest doing what they did then there is evidence for Plato or Socrates or even Julius Cesear. Do you also doubt them too? Interesting research for you may be “Evidence that Demands a Verdict” by Josh McDowell.
Don’t reduce your argument to silliness either. I could just as easy turn around and say, “How do you know that animals don’t talk? Maybe the evolution of your brain is not as advanced as other so you just can’t hear them?” That would be silly.
Other science questions for you. Why do some of Jupiters Moons have magnetic fields showing they have a liquid core. At that distance from the sun, they should have frozen solid with say 5-8000 years of existance. Why are their comets in our solor system. The way they lose material from their tail they should be gone within say 8-10000 years. (and don’t use the made up Oort Cloud as some comet factory that shoots them off) If our moon was broken off from the earth by some collision, where is the hole? Why is it round? Where is the thing that hit us? Layers on the surface. Where did the material come from for each layer? Why did we get millions of years of Cambrian Stone, then suddenly it changes to millions of years of Shale, Then suddenly to millions of years of Limestone?
Why are there fossilized Clams on the top of Mt Everest. Still Closed? When Clams Die, they open. When they are buried, they stay closed. How do you bury a clam on Mt. Everest? The Earths magnetic Field is getting weaker meaning it used to be stronger. Go back about 10000 years and it is too strong for life. Don’t tell me it reverses because that lie has been disproven too.
Why do we find Cave paintings and Pottery with pictures of dinosaurs on them? Have you ever tried Alchemy? How does Gold get Spontaneously formed from hydrogen and helium? or oxygen, or silver, or lead?
Some faith questions for you. I believe in the beginning God existed, you believe in the beginning Nothing Existed. I do not claim to understand God because by His Nature of being God I can not. You claim to believe in Science, but science can not take nothing and make it explode into everything. Have you seen the latest claims? Watch National Geographics video on the Big Bang and the fact it was silent. It quotes “within a trillioneth of a trillioneth of a second the universe expanded to billions of light years across.” In fact it goes on to say, (paraphrase here) that rather than an explosion from a point, everything just appeared everywhere at once.
Now, you believe that everything appeared everywhere at once and is expanding, I believe that God Created everything where it is and stretched out the heavens as the bible says. We have the same facts. The Universe Exists, it is expanding. You believe nothing started it, I believe God did it 6000 years ago and wrote about it 3500 years ago in the bible. Which takes more faith? Your belief in nothing or my belief in a written word?
PCDR said a second time:
tl;dr, skimmed, nicely formatted, punctuated, and the spelling doesn’t make my head hurt, overall a cut above the usual.
So are you going to answer arensb’s question? He asked if you had anything more convincing to refute observed behavior than your opinion. Consider it a question I’m asking now as well.
FEZ, See “Evidence that demands a verdict” by Josh McDowell for the sources of all these.
What happened to the apostles?
Matthew – sufffered martyrdom in Ethiopia, killed by a sword wound.
Mark – died in Alexandria, Egypt, after being dragged by horses through the streets until he was dead.
Luke – was hanged in Greece as a result of his tremendous preaching to the lost.
John – faced martydom when he was boiled in huge basin of boiling oil during a wave of persecution in Rome. However, he was miraculously delivered from death. John was then sentenced to the mines on the prison island of Patmos. He wrote his prophetic Book of Revelation on Patmos.The apostle John was later freed and returned to serve as Bishop of Edessa in modern Turkey. He died as an old man, the only apostle to die peacefully.
Peter – was crucified upside down on an x-shaped cross.,according to church tradition because he told his tormentors that he felt unworthy to die in the same way that Jesus Christ had died.
James the Just – the leader of the church in Jerusalem, was thrown over a hundred feet down from the southeast pinnacle of the Temple when he refused to deny his faith in Christ. When they discovered that he survived the fall, his enemies beat James to death with a fuller’s club. This was the same pinnacle where Satan had taken Jesus during the Temptation.
James the Greater – a son of Zebedee, was a fisherman by trade when Jesus called him to a lifetime of ministry. As a strong leader of the church, James was ultimately beheaded at Jerusalem. The Roman officer who guarded James watched amazed as James defended his faith at his trial. Later, the officer walked beside James to the place of execution. Overcome by conviction, he declared his new faith to the judge and knelt beside James to accept beheading as a Christian.
Bartholomew, also known as Nathanael – was a missionary to Asia.He witnessed to our Lord in present day Turkey. Bartholomew was martyred for his preaching in Armenia when he was flayed to death by a whip.
Andrew – was crucified on an x-shaped cross in Patras, Greece. After being whipped severely by seven soldiers they tied his body to the cross with cords to prolong his agony. His followers reported that, when he was led toward the cross, Andrew saluted it in these words: “I have long desired and expected this happy hour. The cross has been consecrated by the body of Christ hanging on it.” He continued to preach to his tormentors for two days until he expired.
Thomas – was stabbed with a spear in India during one of his missionary trips to establish the church in the sub-continent.
Jude, the brother of Jesus, – was killed with arrows when he refused to deny his faith in Christ.
Matthias – the apostle chosen to replace the traitor Judas Iscariot, was stoned and then beheaded.
Barnabas – one of the group of seventy disciples, wrote the Epistle of Barnabas. He preached throughout Italy and Cyprus.Barnabas was stoned to death at Salonica.
Paul – was tortured and then beheaded by the evil Emperor Nero at Rome in A.D. 67. Paul endured a lengthy imprisonment which allowed him to write his many epistles to the churches he had formed throughout the Roman Empire. These letters, which taught many of the foundational doctrines of Christianity, form a large portion of the New Testament.
All of this is from Non Biblical sources. Feel Free to respond to this with rebuttals or any of my science questions.
This is fun.
PCDR Says:
Ah.
As rebuttal see http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder/jury/chap5.html as it covers the highlights with far greater knowledge of the subject material and far greater detail than I posses.
As for your “science” questions…ugh. Have you never encountered plate tectonics in your studies to receive your “science and engineering” background? Hope you aren’t involved in any building, bridge, or other infrastructure construction. I could answer your question regarding the oblate spheroid shape of the moon with, “because all bodies above a certain size are oblate spheroids” but that would be engaging in the same deflection tactics used…elsewhere. Instead I’ll rhetorically ask if you have never encountered gravity nor conservation of angular momentum in your studies to achieve your “science and engineering” background?
Moving on…why are you so dismissive of the Oort Cloud’s existence? Been there and seen the lack of evidence for yourself? What about the unicorn herd existing at the liquid/gaseous interface boundary in Neptune – how can you prove to me they don’t exist?
PCDR:
I was about to point you at the same critique of McDowell as Fez did. As for your assertion that
In the case of Julius Cæsar, we have books that he is said to have written (such as his history of the gallic conquests). We have contemporary accounts that talk about him, from multiple sources, both praising him and criticizing him. We have statues and likenesses of him made during his (alleged) lifetime. Nothing similar to that exists today. The best we have is copies of copies of manuscripts dating to the 2nd century CE.
But that’s really beside the point: the question isn’t really whether there was an itinerant cult leader named Yeshua in Judea at that time who thought the end of the world was near. Those were a dime a dozen, so it’s quite possible that he existed. The question is, was he a god? Did he perform miracles? And for that, there is no extrabiblical evidence.
You may want to look up Sai Baba who is, according to his followers, performing miracles today. No need to look through ancient manuscripts in dead languages; this guy’s on YouTube. Does that evidence convince you that he’s a god? And if not, why should I be convinced that Jesus was one?
Mormonism has some tens of millions of members. Scientology has at least some tens of thousands (reliable numbers seems to be hard to come by). Many of members of both those religions have sacrificed a great deal for their devotion, in some cases even their lives.
And yet we know beyond all reasonable doubt that the founders of both sects were con-men who made the whole thing up.
In 1978 over 900 members of the Jonestown cult commited suicide. In 1993, 76 people died when the Branch Davidian compound burned down. In 1997, 39 members of the Heaven’s Gate cult commited suicide, believing they would be reincarnated as something better.
The moral of this story is that devotion — even martyrdom — in the followers is very poor evidence for the truth of the teachings.
Oh, and this: Don’t tell me it [the earth’s magnetic field] reverses because that lie has been disproven too.
That would be news to almost every geologist on the planet. Disproven by whom? Ignoramus and crackpot Walter Brown, perhaps?
Great Replys, I have to be quick today, but I will be back on Monday.
First off Fez, The extra biblical sources each by its self not provide 100% proof, but taken all together make a very strong argument. Did we land man on the moon? Well a photograph can be faked, and moon rocks can be fabricated, and space ships can launch one place and land another, and people can lie, but add all the evidence together and the case becomes very strong. So, taking the biblical account with the vast array of other accounts, It is pretty certain that Jesus the man did exist as a real person in Jerusalem in the time frame of 30 AD. So the next question is – still unanswered by both arensb and Eamon Knight – did his followers see him rise from the dead or did they make it up. Don’t give me the the second hand follower example of mormonism and scientology or Jonestown or even Christian Martyrs, respond to the Direct Followers, the ones who gave their lives for the claim that THEY started. If they lied, why would they die for it? Would you die for a lie you made up? I can see dying for a lie someone convinced you was real because you wanted to believe, but not for my own lie. You mention Sai Baba, IF he said go ahead and Kill Me, I will come back in 3 days, then His followers said “yep he came back to life, I am willing to be stoned and left for dead, beaten 3 times with 39 stripes, shipwreaked, chained to a soldier, put in prison, watch my friends and fellow believers be beaten, stoned, beheaded, burned at the stake, crucified on a cross, thrown to lions, pulled apart by horses, and many other heinous ways to die, THEN I may consider him to truly be back from the dead.
Besides as eager as the Jewish leaders were to suppress this “cult uprising” why did they not just go to Jesus grave, open it up and say “Here is the dead guy these “christians” are lying about. Oh yeah, I forgot, the fishermen stole his body from an armed trained Roman Guard.
Plate Techtonics explains movement at the cracks in the crust, it does not explain the accumulation of layers of materials.
Conservation of angular momentum does not explain why Jupiter has moons that spin in opposite direction or why Jupiter has moons that have moons that spin in opposite directions or why the sun has planets that spin in opposite directions.
I thought we were going to talk science and proof here not an Oort Cloud with no direct or even indirect evidence. It is only 2000 – 50000 AU away. Hubble should be able to see that before breakfast considering it is staring “far in the reaches of our past millions and billions of light years away”
So, FEZ, I find your dismissiveness of real observed science to be childish and petty. Answer the questions if you can or move on to a different topic. Don’t patronize me with Unicorns and “have you heard of gravity”
So ARENSB, I find your arguments well crafted but not answering the questions. All the Deaths of the Apostles are recorded in extrabiblical sources. The only one killed in the Bible are Stephen and unnamed ones that Paul pursued when he was Called Saul. What could have possibly changed his mind? A Lie he helped make up? Come on!! Get real.
And Eamon Knight, I am not talking about the followers of cult leaders, I am talking about the Ones starting the “cult” (not my word) of Christianity being willing to be not just killed but brutally killed. And the Magnetic Field is supposed to protect us from radiation, but since no major extinctions can be timed to the supposed reversals it must not protect us, something else does. Science want to have their cake and eat it too is seems to me. It is also funny that for some reason the last “reversal” 780,000 years ago, but they happened very frequently before that. Also some scientists even claim they happen every 2000-20000 years. How does it happen? Why does it happen? When will it happen? Science is about Facts. Theories are just opinions until repeated testing observation proves them. I saw a tree that grew some wierd shaped branches that were made of iron and shaped like a tractor. That is a theory. Facts are a tractor was left in a grove and a tree gree up through and around it and incorporated the tractor into the tree. We see portions of the ocean floor with patterns (stripes) of magnetic field strength differences ( highs and lows not reversals). My Opinion is the ocean floor was wrinkled by ejection of molton material and the wrinkles have sediment in them in places, cracks in them on the peaks, and were cooled at different rates causing regulars stripes of differing magnetic fields. Others opinions are that the magnetic field changes direction at random unpredictably. The facts are the same the opinions are different and no one was around 780,000 years ago to know the truth 100%. One theory fits the bible, the other theory confilts with other science. We get to choose which to believe because of our world view and neither can PROVE the other side wrong. Unless we see the magnetic field reverse again with the corresponding results or Jesus Returns with the corresponding results. Agree or Disagree?
Actually, I stayed longer than I thought. Have a good weekend. (Maybe check the Dead Sea Scrolls for some of the over 200 distinct prophecies fulfilled by Jesus the Man written long before Jesus the Man Came to earth. Could be food for thought.)
PCDR:
I’ll repeat:
PCDR continues:
It explains perfectly your expressed puzzlement regarding, “Why are there fossilized Clams on the top of Mt Everest. Still Closed? When Clams Die, they open. When they are buried, they stay closed. How do you bury a clam on Mt. Everest?” The answer is that enclosing material was not Mt. Everest when said clams were deposited but I shouldn’t have to explain that to an educated person with a science and engineering background.
Yes it does, in conjunction with other physics that I’m not going to bother going in to and I’m even going to explain why. Let me explain via analogy: you’ve just asked me to explain to you how to replace the valve body in a GM THM350 transmission after explaining to me that not only do you not own a car the only maintenance procedure you know of was you once read that cars require periodic refueling and there’s this “battery” thing that you’ve heard about but haven’t seen. You’re demonstrably lacking in the fundamental knowledge necessary to make use of this other information you desire.
So why don’t you explain to us where comets come from.
The existence of the Oort cloud explains all observed phenomena to date and the physics necessary for such a construct to exist are well understood and have withstood centuries of experimental and observational efforts. It’s quite hypocritical of you, after making such an ignorant display, to accuse anyone of being “dismissive” thus you’ve earned the right to pass the Unicorn test:
I know what unicorns look like, you probably know what unicorns look like, in fact millions of people can explain without hesitation what unicorns look like. I can provide you with a wealth of literature, both historical and contemporary, where unicorns are mentioned or featured. I can provide you pictures of unicorns. From where do you get the arrogance to (metaphorically) stand there and tell me that there are no unicorns on Neptune? I’ve even provided you specifics of where on Neptune they can be located so what’s your problem?
PCDR:
First of all, your last comment got caught in the spam filter for some reason. If you leave a comment and it doesn’t show up, don’t panic. If I see it, I’ll fish it out.
Secondly, I thought I’d try my hand at argument mapping. As far as I can make out, your argument looks like the tree below, with the conclusion at the top, sub-arguments that support the conclusion (in a form resembling a syllogism) underneath that, sub-sub-arguments that support the sub-arguments, and so forth. Arguments in red weaken the arguments above them, instead of strengthening them. So:
Conclusion: Jesus was a god.
Jesus rose from the dead; only gods rise from the dead. Therefore, the conclusion is true.Peter saw Jesus rise from the dead; eyewitness testimony is reliable; therefore, (1) Jesus rose from the dead.Peter wrote that he saw Jesus rising from the dead; this account is reliable; therefore, (1.1) Peter saw Jesus rise from the deadPeter wrote that he saw Jesus rise from the dead; Peter lied; therefore, (1.1) is false: Peter did not see Jesus rise from the dead.Peter was tortured for his beliefs; people do not maintain lies under torture; therefore, (1.1.2) is false: Peter did not lie, and (1.1) he did see Jesus rise from the dead.There are extrabiblical accounts of Peter’s torture; these accounts are reliable; therefore (1.1) is true: Peter saw Jesus rise from the dead.Repeat (1.1) for Paul, Andrew, Matthew, etc.Jesus performed other miracles; only gods can perform miracles; therefore, Jesus was a god.Repeat (1) for these other miracles.
I’m sure you can see problems all over the place with this argument. It relies heavily on the reliability of eyewitness testimony. But as any detective, judge, or stage magician can tell you, eyewitness testimony is far from reliable. If I’m ever on a jury, and on one hand, ten people swear that they saw the accused rob a liquor store, while on the other hand a single security tape shows him getting gas at the time of the robbery, I’ll side with the security tape over the eyewitnesses every time.
Your argument also begins with the existence of eyewitness accounts of Jesus after his death. Okay, where are the gospels of Peter, Paul, Andrew, and any other extrabiblical eyewitnesses you had in mind? Or are you asking us to accept a second-hand claim that these accounts once existed? Given that you won’t accept video testimony that Sai Baba is a god, you may want to rethink this.
You’re asking us to accept as reliable two sets of accounts: a) the “eyewitness” accounts saying that Jesus rose from the dead, and b) those that say that the alleged eyewitnesses maintained their beliefs. If either one is false, that weakens or destroys your argument. Furthermore, you haven’t given any references to either set of accounts.
You’re also making a false dichotomy: that either a person is telling the truth, or that person is deliberatly lying. The person could instead be misremembering, or mistaken, or confused, or passing along a legend. In addition, we don’t have any originals of the New Testament. And we know that errors have crept in between manuscripts, sometimes significant ones.
In short, your argument is full of weaknesses. Go back and fix them.
Sorry for the delay, I have been out of town to a very interesting Robotics trade show. More on that later. I am busy trying to catch up so I just have one question.
Where did you come from? Prove it.
pcdr,
You’ve had lots of questions thus far and they’ve been answered. It’s your turn now. Answer the questions above that you’ve bypassed.
Fez,
You use Jeff Lowder as a source of rebuttal.
As rebuttal see http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder/jury/chap5.html as it covers the highlights with far greater knowledge of the subject material and far greater detail than I posses.
In summary for those reading, here is his rebuttal.
Paraphrase “Yes there are eyewitness accounts, but eyewitness sometimes lie so any eyewitness account can not be proof.”
Paraphrase “Yes there are unaffiliated persons writing the same thing, but their writings could have been faked or altered by aformentioned eyewitness so the outside accounts can not be proof.”
Paraphrase “Yes there are accounts of the apostles and disciples being tortured and killed, but there are also stories and legends of other non biblical heros suffering. The apostles stories could be copies. Therefore, no proof”
The same type of argument could be used to disprove anything.
Nasa said we landed on the moon but sometimes people lie – no proof
We have pictures that men were on the moon, but sometimes pictures are fake – no proof
We have space capules that launched and landed in the ocean, but no one saw them on the moon – no proof.
We have astronauts that say they were on the moon but they have a vested interest – no proof.
We have moon rocks but they could have been rocks altered in a lab – no proof.
There is a flag planted on the moon, but that could have evolved in place – no proof.
Another way to put it is “Jeff Lowder was not around when any of the sources were written so HE (and his argument) is unable to be proof for or against them.” However I am not arguing that. I am simply saying any one point – including Videotape can be picked apart, but sometimes the preponderance of the entire volume of evidence makes the proof unmistakable.
I could go on and on:
Fez types reponses with his “name” but anyone can put the characters F E Z in the name box – no proof that Fez Exists
Fez sees unicorns on neptune – everyone knows that is false so Fez is not grounded in reality – therefore Fez must be insane.
Fez argues his points on this board, but no one reading here can see him typing so He Must not have done it. His words probably just evolved here by chance arrangement of the bits and electrons over time.
So Fez you answered my questions with “You are to stupid to understand the science so I am not going to answer your questions.” Brilliant Response.
You want to know where comets come from. I have two possibilities both backed by the evidence.
First the facts
1. Comets exists.
2. Comets lose material out their tail as they fly.
3. Comets melt as they approach the sun in their orbit.
4. Any comet that passes through the interplanatary system has its orbit changed “deflected” by the sun and the planets it passes by leading to destabilization of the orbit eventually causing it to fly into space or collide with something.
Any arguments with facts 1-4?
Study of the physics and properties of comets leads the scientific community to conclude the lifespan of a comet at the top end is about 10,000 years.
Any disagreement with this conclusion (this is not my conclusion by the way, I just agree with it)?
So ANY observed comet must have been formed less than 10,000 years ago by some process. (agreed? or Not?)
The bible says that God created the Heavens and the Earth and All that is in them about 6000 years ago.
Answer one is that God created the comets about 6000 years ago, this fits the facts.
Answer two is that When the Earth was flooded 4400 years ago the fountains of the deep broke forth. This could have caused Water and dirt to be ejected from the Earths gravitational pull. Viola – a new comet. Consider that Oil and Natural Gas deposits have been found with pressures of 20000-30000 psi and it becomes not too hard to imagine this happening.
Now Can you disprove either of these with SCIENCE or OBSERVED FACT?
Fez Writes:
The existence of the Oort cloud explains all observed phenomena to date and the physics necessary for such a construct to exist are well understood and have withstood centuries of experimental and observational efforts.
This is all good except for the lack of proof of its existance there fore it is just as big of a leap of faith as saying God did it. In other word, it can NOT be seen, observed, touched, felt, measured, or proven.
One other thing about all bodies above a certain size are “oblate spheroids”. Fine, but when you break one “oblate spheroid” off of another “oblate spheroid”, the original now is not an “oblate spheroid” but an “oblate spheroid” with a chunk missing. Try this with a 5 year old.. Take an apple, ask what whape it is. Round will be the answer. Take a melon baller and remove a ball from the apple. Ask what shape the ball is. Round will be the answer. Ask them if the apple is still round. NO will be the answer. There is a chunk missing.
Your turn.
PCDR:
The first problem I noticed was with claim #2: comets don’t lose material from flying through space: there’s no air in space to blow material off of a comet, like snow from a car. Rather, when comets get close enough to the sun, they get warmed up, and the ice sublimates and escapes the comet.
You’ll notice that the tail of a comet doesn’t follow the comet’s motion; rather, it always points away from the sun.
Citation, please. The only person I’ve ever heard claim this is Kent Hovind.
Sorry, comets are chunks of ice, not string instruments. Thanks for playing.
Well, sure. Once you posit a magic man who can do anything, you can explain anything. I could reply that the Flying Spaghetti Monster formed the world to look the way it is. This explanation fits all the facts, but I bet you don’t find it very convincing. So why should I take your magic man more seriously than the Flying Spaghetti Monster?
I think we may have found a source of your confusion: your science consultant is a five-year-old who thinks that apples are round like balls. Have you considered going to scientists when you have science-related questions?
At any rate, your central assertion, that Jesus existed and did magic, is still backed up with nothing more than nth-generation hearsay. You haven’t presented any new evidence, just tried to argue that that should be good enough. I’m sorry, but it isn’t. And it’s not good enough for you, either: otherwise you would have to accept that Joseph Smith was visited by the angel Moroni and that the Quran was dictated to Mohammed by the archangel Gabriel. But you don’t. So you’re engaging in special pleading.
Face it. You don’t have anything.
“The way they lose material from their tail they should be gone within say 8-10000 years. (and don’t use the made up Oort Cloud as some comet factory that shoots them off)
Answer two is that When the Earth was flooded 4400 years ago the fountains of the deep broke forth. This could have caused Water and dirt to be ejected from the Earths gravitational pull. Viola – a new comet.”
The amount of brainwashing that comes from Kent Hovind is amazing. With his water shot up from the deep and into space to make comets and form water on other planets. Do you even know what the Oort Cloud is and why is it made up? Because it flies in the face of your so called contradiction of the age of the universe you disbelieve it. The Oort cloud is a huge mass of Ices (water, ammonia, and methane) along with dirt and rocks that come together to form billions of comets that orbit far outside our solar system. How is that any different than your water and dirt being propelled into space to create comets? It’s not, it’s like saying that the free market economy doesn’t exist, people are just buying and selling things with little government regulation.
“I thought we were going to talk science and proof here not an Oort Cloud with no direct or even indirect evidence. It is only 2000 – 50000 AU away. Hubble should be able to see that before breakfast considering it is staring “far in the reaches of our past millions and billions of light years away””
Yet another example of your ignorance showing through. Pluto is approximately 30-49 AU’s distance from sun, or 30 to 49 times the distance from the sun than the earth is. That’s about 47 Billion KM’s. The Oort cloud is hypothesized to be 2000 to 50,000 AU’s from the sun. That is 40 times the distance Pluto is from the sun at it’s nearest and 1,000 times at it’s farthest. Now imagine looking for something smaller than pluto at that distance even with the Hubble telescope, which btw, a telescope works by collecting light from an object. A comet isn’t going to give off any of it’s own light, it’s going to reflect all the light from other sources. Which means that only a fraction is going to be reflected towards earth. Combine that with the fact that even the few photons that a comet at that distance would reflect and as well as those that could possibly reach hubble might not even register (there’s only so much the human eye can see in a photograph).
Google Hubble Deep View and you might get an understanding of just how massive the universe is and how ridiculous your statement is. It would just as easy to find gold atoms spread out over several hundred or even a thousand football fields using binoculars.
So using Arensb argument Prove the Oort cloud exists or don’t use it. Or at least have some shred of evidence other than Comets exist so they have to come from the Oort Cloud.
“Viola – a new comet”, just copying science “Big Bang – a new universe”
PCDR:
The sum total of your statements above boil down to this: the only acceptable proof to you is that which you can directly observe and/or participate in.
Congratulations, you’ve just invalidated every claim you’ve made here, spending two weeks and a few thousand words to say absolutely nothing.
What, to you, was the purpose of this exercise?
And you still haven’t taken the Unicorn test.
Not the only acceptable proof, ANY PROOF will at least make it usable. NOT just Theory!
Unicorns are like transition fossils. Figments of your imagination.
FEZ says “The sum total of your statements above boil down to this: the only acceptable proof to you is that which you can directly observe and/or participate in. ”
Isn’t that the criteria that Science is supposed to use?
I am gone till Friday. Enjoy.
PCDR,
Come on, you can do better than that. I’ll even do you the courtesy of restating it here so you don’t have to go back for it.
Unicorns are like transition fossils. Figments of your imagination.
Well then, you can explain why none of the fossils referenced here, and in the linked pages, are transitional. In particular, you can tackle Wes Elsberry’s Transitional Fossil Challenge.
Or you can just admit you’re making stuff up, and do not, in fact, have a clue what you’re talking about.
Your choice.
PCDR:
According to this site, Hubble’s angular resolution is 0.1 arcseconds, which means that it can resolve an object 241 miles across that’s as far away from us as Saturn is.
According to Wikipedia, Saturn is between 8 and 10.5 AU away, depending on where it and Earth are in their orbits. The Oort cloud is roughly 2,000-5,000 AU away. If my math is correct, an item 2000 AU away would have to be over 90,000 miles across for Hubble to resolve it. But comets are only up to 40 km across. (Yes, it can resolve galaxies that are much, much farther away than the Oort cloud. But those galaxies are also brain-manglingly large.)
See also this discussion on whether Hubble could take pictures of the lunar landers (short answer: no).
At any rate, you said that there was extrabiblical evidence for Jesus’ existence. Are you ever planning on presenting this evidence? If not, you should at least have the grace to admit that you don’t have any, so that we can move on.
PCDR:
You seem to be under the impression that scientists just pull stuff out of their asses. You should really do yourself a favor and listen to the June 17 episode of the 365 Days of Astronomy podcast (MP3 here), which is all about the Big Bang. It’s only about 10 minutes long, and provides a nice layman-level introduction to the Big Bang.
While you’re listening, take note of two things: first, the narrator isn’t shy about pointing out areas that aren’t well understood yet, and unanswered questions. Second, he mentions evidence that leads astronomers to their conclusions, like the current expansion of the cosmos, and the cosmic background radiation. Not as much as I’d like, but there’s only so much you can do in ten minutes.
At any rate, it’s a good introduction to the subject, and might help you to not mischaracterize it in the future.
PCDR:
After you’re done with Eamon Knight and Wesley Ellsberry’s challenge, you may want to explain why this isn’t a transitional fossil.
Or rather, why that isn’t a transitional fossil in the sense that evolutionary biologists use the term. I already know that it’s not a crocoduck, which is the only thing that would convince Ray Comfort that evolution occurs, but is also something completely different from what people who know what the hell they’re talking about mean by “transitional species”.
“Isn’t that the criteria that Science is supposed to use?”
Can science directly observe how DNA is used by the Human body to reproduce? How about directly observing a hydrogen atom fusing to form helium? Do you really need to see a virus for yourself before you believe that it is what makes you sick? Of course not, but based on the facts that we know about these systems along with other facts that are known, a hypothesis can be pieced together eventually with enough reproducible examples leads to a theory.
“Not the only acceptable proof, ANY PROOF will at least make it usable. NOT just Theory!”
Besides the fact that you sound like an idiot when you say that. As shown above scientific theories are based on facts and observations. Not just someone such as yourself that spouts something out and calls it a theory (which really means a guess). I don’t think that any proof will be acceptable to you unless it happens to be one of the many impossible and unrealistic ideas that make no sense and therefore would never happen. These include fish with feet and or fish with lungs. Sorry you just won’t find those, the same way you won’t find monkeys and gorillas giving birth to Homo Sapiens. It’s just an impossibility that creationists use to deny evolution to themselves and other people. You know there are some people today that still think the earth is flat? No matter how much proof you give them, they continue to deny that the earth is round. Some people believe that the earth is round, yet they deny that the earth orbits the sun. The list goes on and on, but in the end there is sufficient proof for all these things, yet they refuse to believe it because they are stuck in their belief and refuse to change.
You speak of transitional fossils being a figment of someone’s imagination, but what do you really expect to find in a transitional fossil??? Ignoring the fact that transitional fossils have been found. What kind of fossil would make you realize that maybe there is something more to evolution? I can answer that for you. There won’t be any kind because you will find some way to rationalize how it’s not really transitional, or it’s a hoax, or it’s still not real proof. Because you are stuck in your beliefs, for whatever reason, any outside view of origins is going to be rejected no matter how much proof you have been given. If you would only open your eyes and your mind you would see how many transitional animals are alive today much less that are found in the fossil record.
menes777:
Not to rain on your parade or anything, but what about Acanthostega and its feet, or lungfish and their, well, lungs?
First Question, what criteria is used to determine what is a “transitional fossil”?
Second Question, for all evolutionist here, You are a human. If you have Kids (and grandkids), I assume they are human. I would also place a high dollar bet that your parents are human. And your Grandparents. And their parents. And Their Parents. I would bet they all have 23 pairs of Chromosomes. Explain to me when in your family tree you would expect your decendents to not be human and not have the same 23 chromosomes or when in your ancestory they were not humans and did not have 23 chromosomes. When was this http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science/05/19/human.ancestor/index.html?iref=mpstoryview part of your family background?
“Not to rain on your parade or anything, but what about Acanthostega and its feet, or lungfish and their, well, lungs?”
Nope, not raining on my parade. 🙂
I think those are excellent examples of transitional evidence.
Menes:
In response to your direct proof of viruses, DNA, etc. That is at least some proof. We may not understand it all, but we can observe viruses, we can measure and analyze DNA, That moves it into the Science Realm from the Theory Realm. Give me ONE measure, observance, test, anything showing any sign of an OORT Cloud other than the fact that Comets are flying through space and they have a limited life span so they must have come from somewhere.
Then speculate back 17 billion or so years for the age of the Universe and Theorize how big the Oort cloud would have had to have been in the beginning of the solar system, then thoerize where the ice and rock came from to form it, then you really start to have a problem with the whole concept of a billions of years old Oort cloud “creating” comets.
PCDR:
You have no fucking clue what “theory” means in science, do you?
This fragment is a mishmash of poorly-understood ideas, and illustrates one of your big problems (and of creationists in general): you’re not in this debate to find out what the truth is. If you were, you could’ve taken a few seconds to google “age of the universe” and “age of the solar system” and found out that while the universe is about 13 billion years old (not 17 billion), the solar system (and the Earth, and the Oort cloud) is only 4.5 billion years old.
There’s no shame in being ignorant. Hell, I’m ignorant about any number of things. But you seem to have no interest in correcting your ignorance. And in this information age, that’s far less forgivable.
You’re not in this to figure out what’s true. You’re here to push your dogma. That’s why you never respond to criticism, and just jump from one point to another, trying to find something that’ll stick. Your approach is purely tactical: you don’t care whether an argument or claim is true, only whether it works rhetorically. Look at how quickly you forgot all about your claims of extrabiblical evidence for Jesus’ miracles.
You’ve shown no evidence of having read any of the resources people have pointed you at, above. Or, indeed, of any willingness to learn. If you ever decide that you’re interested in debating the truth of a given proposition, you’re welcome to come back, but in the meantime I have no desire to trade rhetorical points with you.
You’re not in this to figure out what’s true. You’re here to push your dogma. That’s why you never respond to criticism
Indeed. I was thinking of asking an online geologist or two for some references on paleomagnetism to rebut some of PCDR’s silly claims, but it hardly seems worth bothering busy people for the sake of an ignoramus who won’t listen.
PCDR wrote:
That’s like asking when Abraham’s descendants will stop being descended from Abraham.
This is a common misconception, so I’ll recycle something I wrote elsewhere:
Oh, and here’s one of those “something interesting”s.
So anyway, when are you going to get around to answering the questions you’ve been asked?
Explain to me when in your family tree you would expect your decendents to not be human and not have the same 23 chromosomes or when in your ancestory they were not humans and did not have 23 chromosomes.
That’s two questions in one.
If by “human” you mean Homo sapiens then IIRC we’ve been around for something like 250kyrs. Genus Homo goes back another few hundred thousand years (maybe a million or so?).
Chromosome number is a separate question, as that does not define species boundaries, ie. some of our ancestral species may also have had 46, and not even all humans have 46 (and the exceptions are not always pathological, either. Google “robertsonian fusion”).
But if you’re asking when our lineage achieved its current chromosome count, that would presumably be sometime since we split off from the chimpanzee lineage, IIRC ~6Mya. Here is a paper discussing the genetic differences between us and them, in particular that human chromosome 2 appears to be the result of a fusion between chimp chromosomes 12 and 13: http://overtexplorations.com/Bill/2qFus.pdf
PCDR,
Seems that pretty much everyone contributing to your resurrection of this thread has done you the courtesy of answering your questions. When are you going to demonstrate an equivalent level of politeness?
Hi, I have been out on Vacation for 2 weeks and Missed you all. I am starting to detect some harshness to your responses though, and so I am sorry for appearing to not answer your questions as you think I should. I tried to answer every one but with so many different directions being taken I probably missed some. By the same token, I have presented many questions I feel are not being addressed also.
So with that in mind, I do feel that for many areas we cen look at the same facts and draw different conclusions and never agree. I would like to continue these discussions though, so here is what I would like to do. I will ask one question. Anyone who responds with answers to that one question or related questions, I will try to respond to. If you would like to ask me one question/topic at a time, I will respond to that also.
I do not know how to put the little boxes around previous quotes or italics or other formatting. Please bear with me on that.
My Question. Tell me about the evolution of time, space, and matter. Where did it come from?
PCDR:
It’s ordinary HTML: <blockquote> for quoting, <em> for emphasis.