Kent Hovind Radio Program
Andy Flom
radio program that is on every weekday from 1pm-2pm called "The
Creation Scince Hour." I myself am a young earth Creationist Christian
who will debate and defend the Bible at all cost. I have seen many
websites and chat rooms that think they have evidence for evolution
and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me. These sites claim they
could kill Hovind in a debate. HERE IS YOUR CHANCE!!! The main
purpose of Hovind's Radio Program (I think) is to get athiest(which
God doesn't believe exist) to call in and to show them there is no
evidence exist for evolution, which none does exist, and to strenghin
my faith and those of my blood brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ.
He still has his $250,000 reward for concrete evidence for evolution.
The Creation Science Hour.
1pm-2pm Weekdays
http://www.soundwaves2000.com/rammaker.asp?id=121b
Earth First!!! We'll mine the other planets later.
Save trees, eat beavers.
Blaming guns for school shootings is like blaming spoons for Rosie
O'Donnell for being fat.
God kicked Adam from the Garden of Eden for eating the wrong apple.
The moral standerd to get into Heaven is a lot stricter. John 6:23
Andy Flom
Frank Reichenbacher
"Andy Flom" <flom...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b3941d14.03062...@posting.google.com...
What's a "thropper"?
Frank
Eric Gill
news:b3941d14.03062...@posting.google.com:
> Creationist and Evolution thropper Dr. Kent Hovind now has a internet
> radio program that is on every weekday from 1pm-2pm called "The
> Creation Scince Hour." I myself am a young earth Creationist Christian
> who will debate and defend the Bible at all cost.
Including, no, *especially* outright lying and general bufoonery, if you
are a Hovind fan.
I wonder how long it's going to take ya'll to get the idea this is doing
just the opposite?
> I have seen many
> websites and chat rooms that think they have evidence for evolution
> and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me. These sites claim they
> could kill Hovind in a debate. HERE IS YOUR CHANCE!!! The main
> purpose of Hovind's Radio Program
....that Hovind controls the screening and content of, yes? Where did you
get the idea such a thing could be called a "debate?"
> (I think) is to get athiest(which
> God doesn't believe exist)
God told you this?
What if a Christian called in instead?
> to call in and to show them there is no
> evidence exist for evolution,
That's Hovind's job, isn't it? Granted he sucks at it, but...
> which none does exist, and to strenghin
> my faith and those of my blood brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ.
> He still has his $250,000 reward for concrete evidence for evolution.
And he is still unable to defend *any* proposition using the same set of
rules, up to and including the sun rising in the west in the morning. I
wonder when his fans are going to stop being impressed by that sham?
rich hammett
häntä, Andy Flom yllätti tuomarin todistamalla:
> Creationist and Evolution thropper Dr. Kent Hovind now has a internet
> radio program that is on every weekday from 1pm-2pm called "The
> Creation Scince Hour." I myself am a young earth Creationist Christian
> who will debate and defend the Bible at all cost. I have seen many
> websites and chat rooms that think they have evidence for evolution
> and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me. These sites claim they
> could kill Hovind in a debate. HERE IS YOUR CHANCE!!! The main
> purpose of Hovind's Radio Program (I think) is to get athiest(which
> God doesn't believe exist) to call in and to show them there is no
> evidence exist for evolution, which none does exist, and to strenghin
> my faith and those of my blood brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ.
> He still has his $250,000 reward for concrete evidence for evolution.
What language is this in?
rich
> The Creation Science Hour.
> 1pm-2pm Weekdays
> http://www.soundwaves2000.com/rammaker.asp?id=121b
> Earth First!!! We'll mine the other planets later.
> Save trees, eat beavers.
> Blaming guns for school shootings is like blaming spoons for Rosie
> O'Donnell for being fat.
> God kicked Adam from the Garden of Eden for eating the wrong apple.
> The moral standerd to get into Heaven is a lot stricter. John 6:23
> Andy Flom
--
-to reply, it's hot not warm
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
\ Rich Hammett http://home.hiwaay.net/~rhammett
\ ..basketball [is] the paramount
/ synthesis in sport of intelligence, precision, courage,
\ audacity, anticipation, artifice, teamwork, elegance,
/ and grace. --Carl Sagan
Steve B.
> radio program that is on every weekday from 1pm-2pm called "The
> Creation Scince Hour." I myself am a young earth Creationist Christian
> who will debate and defend the Bible at all cost. I have seen many
> websites and chat rooms that think they have evidence for evolution
> and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me. These sites claim they
> could kill Hovind in a debate. HERE IS YOUR CHANCE!!! The main
> purpose of Hovind's Radio Program (I think) is to get athiest(which
> God doesn't believe exist) to call in and to show them there is no
> evidence exist for evolution, which none does exist, and to strenghin
> my faith and those of my blood brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ.
> He still has his $250,000 reward for concrete evidence for evolution.
I call troll. There's *way* too many ironic mistakes and obvious
opportunities for jokes to be accidental. Then, after he spouts the "blood
brothers" line and claims to be familiar with evolutionary defenses, he
drags up the tired old $250,000 reward hogwash. At best, he'll make a
couple passing replies but will probably disappear forever.
> The Creation Science Hour.
> 1pm-2pm Weekdays
> http://www.soundwaves2000.com/rammaker.asp?id=121b
>
> Earth First!!! We'll mine the other planets later.
> Save trees, eat beavers.
> Blaming guns for school shootings is like blaming spoons for Rosie
> O'Donnell for being fat.
No, blaming guns for all *deaths* would be like assigning causation of
Rosie's size to spoons. Those would be two instances of taking instruments
capable of assisting in a task and claiming they cause the task to be
performed. But any way you put it, it's a bad analogy. But that was the
point wasn't it?
> God kicked Adam from the Garden of Eden for eating the wrong apple.
> The moral standerd to get into Heaven is a lot stricter. John 6:23
> Andy Flom
I thought it was a banana.
--
Steve
The road to the inner soul is much too muddy for my foreign car.
AC
> häntä, Andy Flom yllätti tuomarin todistamalla:
>
>> The moral standerd to get into Heaven is a lot stricter. John 6:23
>> Andy Flom
What a nice god you have.
--
Aaron Clausen
Pip R. Lagenta
Flom) wrote:
>Creationist and Evolution thropper Dr. Kent Hovind now has a internet
>radio program that is on every weekday from 1pm-2pm called "The
>Creation Scince Hour." I myself am a young earth Creationist Christian
>who will debate and defend the Bible at all cost. I have seen many
>websites and chat rooms that think they have evidence for evolution
>and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me.
[snip]
"Debateable", huh? O.K. Give it your best shot:
<http://www.ebonmusings.org/evolution/evoevidence.html>
<http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-research.html>
Remember, if you want to cast doubt on evolution, then you have to
have an alternate explanation for *all* the evidence. Which means
that you first have to show an UNDERSTANDING of the evidence. To help
you with that understanding, there is this:
<http://www.abarnett.demon.co.uk/atheism/evolution.html>
<http://www.evolutionhappens.net/>
<http://home.houston.rr.com/bybayouu/Tenets_of_evolution.html>
Good luck!
(Also, please remember that "ignorance" is not a valid reason to
abandon science. Please do not display ignorance in your debate.
Thank you.)
內躬偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,
Pip R. Lagenta Pip R. Lagenta Pip R. Lagenta Pip R. Lagenta
�虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌
-- Pip R. Lagenta
President for Life
International Organization Of People Named Pip R. Lagenta
(If your name is Pip R. Lagenta, ask about our dues!)
Robert Carroll
Andy, You're hanging out with the wrong crowd. Liars and weaselers have
little to recommend them. I mean Hovind. Because he presents ideas that
are consistent with yours does not make him respectable.
Bob
>
mel turner
>
>Creationist and Evolution thropper Dr. Kent Hovind
"Thropper"?
<http://www.google.com/custom?q=hovind&sa=Search&sitesearch=www.talkorigins.org>
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/faqs.html#hovind
might suggest some other colorful words for him.
now has a internet
>radio program that is on every weekday from 1pm-2pm called "The
>Creation Scince Hour."
Was "The Oxymoron Hour" already taken?
>I myself am a young earth Creationist Christian
>who will debate and defend the Bible at all cost.
Fine. But many Christians seem to have no problem rejecting
"young earth Creationism" while keeping their beliefs.
I have seen many
>websites
Like
http://www.talkorigins.org/
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/outline.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-qa.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-mustread.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-intro-to-biology.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/other-links-gensci.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/other-links.html#evolution
?
>and chat rooms that think they have evidence for evolution
Websites and chatrooms. Ever seen a classroom or a science
book?
>and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me.
Great. This is just the place to debate them. Go for it.
What aspects of which bits of evidence for evolution do
you dispute, and why? Why should the scientists agree with
you? Show us. Be very specific, with citations of the
actual evidence. If you need a few example to start, see:
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
and its links
These sites claim they
>could kill Hovind in a debate. HERE IS YOUR CHANCE!!!
Sites would have a hard time debating [they don't talk].
The main
>purpose of Hovind's Radio Program (I think) is to get athiest(which
>God doesn't believe exist)
Then it sounds like the belief's mutual?
to call in and to show them there is no
>evidence exist for evolution,
Umm, you do know that evolutionary biology isn't
about atheism? Plenty of devout theists are "evolutionists"
and vice-versa
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-god.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/interpretations.html
http://www.glenn.morton.btinternet.co.uk/dmd.htm
http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~lindsay/creation/voices/
http://www.religioustolerance.org/evolutio.htm
http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_denom.htm
http://www.faithreason.org
http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/2027_statements_from_religious_orga_1_26_2001.asp
http://www.goshen.edu/bio/Biol410/Biol410SrSemPapers97/millerl.html
http://www.asa3.org/index.html
etc
which none does exist, and to strenghin
>my faith and those of my blood brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ.
>He still has his $250,000 reward for concrete evidence for evolution.
If this is a loki troll, well done.
cheers
Lane Lewis
> radio program that is on every weekday from 1pm-2pm called "The
> Creation Scince Hour." I myself am a young earth Creationist Christian
> who will debate and defend the Bible at all cost. I have seen many
> websites and chat rooms that think they have evidence for evolution
> and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me. These sites claim they
> could kill Hovind in a debate. HERE IS YOUR CHANCE!!! The main
> purpose of Hovind's Radio Program (I think) is to get athiest(which
> God doesn't believe exist) to call in and to show them there is no
> evidence exist for evolution, which none does exist, and to strenghin
> my faith and those of my blood brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ.
> He still has his $250,000 reward for concrete evidence for evolution.
>
But Hovind has a weird definition of Evolution which is unlike anyone
else in the world. He even includes the big bang in evolution along with the
formation of the stars. Is this honest.
From the website.
* NOTE:
When I use the word evolution, I am not referring to the minor variations
found in all of the various life forms (microevolution). I am referring to
the general theory of evolution which believes these five major events took
place without God:
1.. Time, space, and matter came into existence by themselves.
2.. Planets and stars formed from space dust.
3.. Matter created life by itself.
4.. Early life-forms learned to reproduce themselves.
5.. Major changes occurred between these diverse life forms (i.e., fish
changed to amphibians, amphibians changed to reptiles, and reptiles changed
to birds or mammals).
[end]
Can you tell me why a honest man would include lines 1 and 2.
Note that 3 is abiogenesis not evolution.
Lane
Von Smith
<snip>
>
> What's a "thropper"?
>
Someone who adheres to the "weak 'n' throppic principle" of course.
Von Smith
Fortuna nimis dat multis, satis nulli.
> Frank
Pithecanthropus erectus
> radio program that is on every weekday from 1pm-2pm called "The
> Creation Scince Hour." I myself am a young earth Creationist Christian
> who will debate and defend the Bible at all cost. I have seen many
> websites and chat rooms that think they have evidence for evolution
> and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me. These sites claim they
> could kill Hovind in a debate. HERE IS YOUR CHANCE!!! The main
> purpose of Hovind's Radio Program (I think) is to get athiest(which
> God doesn't believe exist)
Isn't it amazing how a creature that I don't believe exists doesn't believe
that I exist? Is he in a foxhole or something, cause we all know that
"athiests" don't exist in foxholes.
to call in and to show them there is no
> evidence exist for evolution, which none does exist, and to strenghin
> my faith and those of my blood brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ.
> He still has his $250,000 reward for concrete evidence for evolution.
>
> The Creation Science Hour.
> 1pm-2pm Weekdays
> http://www.soundwaves2000.com/rammaker.asp?id=121b
>
> Earth First!!! We'll mine the other planets later.
> Save trees, eat beavers.
> Blaming guns for school shootings is like blaming spoons for Rosie
> O'Donnell for being fat.
>
> God kicked Adam from the Garden of Eden for eating the wrong apple.
> The moral standerd to get into Heaven is a lot stricter. John 6:23
> Andy Flom
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.486 / Virus Database: 284 - Release Date: 5/29/03
Steve B.
throp:
1. To speak against on a religious or emotional basis
contrary to logical or evidential conclusions.
Don't you have a Creationist to English dictionary?
Bobby D. Bryant
> God kicked Adam from the Garden of Eden for eating the wrong apple.
> The moral standerd to get into Heaven is a lot stricter. John 6:23
Hope there's not a spelling standerd.
--
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
Michael Painter
> radio program that is on every weekday from 1pm-2pm called "The
> Creation Scince Hour." I myself am a young earth Creationist Christian
> who will debate and defend the Bible at all cost. I have seen many
> websites and chat rooms that think they have evidence for evolution
> and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me. These sites claim they
> could kill Hovind in a debate. HERE IS YOUR CHANCE!!! The main
> purpose of Hovind's Radio Program (I think) is to get athiest(which
> God doesn't believe exist) to call in and to show them there is no
> evidence exist for evolution, which none does exist, and to strenghin
> my faith and those of my blood brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ.
> He still has his $250,000 reward for concrete evidence for evolution.
Debate?
Let's debate gravity.
You be against it and I'll be for it.
I'll let you win and we'll all float away happy.
Compare Randi's million dollar challenge with Hovinds, then get back to us.
Andy Flom
Please tell me how they are lying and I will listen.
Andy
Andy Flom
Can you tell me what honest man would link lines 1 and 2 and 3 and 4
with 5 with reality? If so how?
Andy Flom
If the thing that you don't believe exists doesn't believe you exist.
I do hope your stronger then Him. Because those who aren't his
children, He will cast from his presence.
Andy
Andy Flom
Don't talk to me about gravity, talk to Hovind! 1pm-2pm weekdays.
Bring you courage.
Andy
Andy Flom
> On Fri, 20 Jun 2003 19:37:18 +0000, Andy Flom wrote:
>
> > God kicked Adam from the Garden of Eden for eating the wrong apple.
> > The moral standerd to get into Heaven is a lot stricter. John 6:23
>
> Hope there's not a spelling standerd.
Me to, udderwise i wood half bean send two Hell along timago.
By Grace, through Faith.
Andy
Andy Flom
Isaiah 1:18 "Let us reason together," saith the Lord.
Andy
Andy Flom
So how does my being a Creationist violate logic. Think men. Earth
is an open system, it gets it's energy from the sun. The only thing
on earth that the sun isn't distructive to is cloriphil(or however
it's spelt). one cell from a plant is more complex then a city. Can I
get an explination for this.
Andy
Andy Flom
I'd like to know how.
Andy
Andy Flom
> flom...@yahoo.com (Andy Flom) wrote in
> news:b3941d14.03062...@posting.google.com:
>
> > Creationist and Evolution thropper Dr. Kent Hovind now has a internet
> > radio program that is on every weekday from 1pm-2pm called "The
> > Creation Scince Hour." I myself am a young earth Creationist Christian
> > who will debate and defend the Bible at all cost.
>
> Including, no, *especially* outright lying and general bufoonery, if you
> are a Hovind fan.
How is he lying?
>
> I wonder how long it's going to take ya'll to get the idea this is doing
> just the opposite?
>
> > I have seen many
> > websites and chat rooms that think they have evidence for evolution
> > and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me. These sites claim they
> > could kill Hovind in a debate. HERE IS YOUR CHANCE!!! The main
> > purpose of Hovind's Radio Program
>
> ....that Hovind controls the screening and content of, yes? Where did you
> get the idea such a thing could be called a "debate?"
>
Call in and prove me wrong.
> > (I think) is to get athiest(which
> > God doesn't believe exist)
>
> God told you this?
Ask him yourself.
> What if a Christian called in instead?
>
> > to call in and to show them there is no
> > evidence exist for evolution,
>
> That's Hovind's job, isn't it? Granted he sucks at it, but...
Saying this, you now have absolutely no excuse for not calling in.
Your a coward and a hyocrite if you don't.
>
> > which none does exist, and to strenghin
> > my faith and those of my blood brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ.
> > He still has his $250,000 reward for concrete evidence for evolution.
>
> And he is still unable to defend *any* proposition using the same set of
> rules, up to and including the sun rising in the west in the morning. I
> wonder when his fans are going to stop being impressed by that sham?
So why should your theory be taxpayer supported and ours not? Huh?
HYP-O-CRITE!!!
Andy Flom
> > Sen jälkeen, kun Perry Mason oli pahoinpidellyt
> > häntä, Andy Flom yllätti tuomarin todistamalla:
> >
> >> God kicked Adam from the Garden of Eden for eating the wrong apple.
> >> The moral standerd to get into Heaven is a lot stricter. John 6:23
> >> Andy Flom
>
> What a nice god you have.
God makes me, graciousness.
God loves me. graciousness.
God continues to let me breath, today. graciousness.
God runs this world and lets me be here. graciousness.
God asks us not to eat a simple fruit and we disobey.(would a good
judge let a hitler get away without punishment? NO!!!) Compared to God
you and I are no different then hitlet.(period))
Thou shall have no other gods before me.
Thou shall not make any graven images.
Thou shall not take the Lords name in vain.
Thou shall honor the sabith and keep it holy.
Thou shall honor your father and mother
Thou shall not kill(if you hate anyone unjustly, your a
murder.(period) and I am too.)
Thou shall not commit adultry.(if you look at someone and lust after
them you are a hore.(period)and I am too.)
Thou shall not steal.
Thou shall not lie.
Thou shall not covet.
Then God sends his son to pay my penilty.
HE IS GOOD!!!
Eric Gill
> Eric Gill <eric...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:<Xns93A0A12B3E8Ee...@24.28.95.154>...
>> flom...@yahoo.com (Andy Flom) wrote in
>> news:b3941d14.03062...@posting.google.com:
>>
>> > Creationist and Evolution thropper Dr. Kent Hovind now has a
>> > internet radio program that is on every weekday from 1pm-2pm called
>> > "The Creation Scince Hour." I myself am a young earth Creationist
>> > Christian who will debate and defend the Bible at all cost.
>>
>> Including, no, *especially* outright lying and general bufoonery, if
>> you are a Hovind fan.
>
> How is he lying?
Starting with his worthless "credentials," bought from a spli-level
degree mill.
Let me guess - you didn't bother to actually check to see if this bunk
can be confirmed, did you?
>> I wonder how long it's going to take ya'll to get the idea this is
>> doing just the opposite?
>>
>> > I have seen many
>> > websites and chat rooms that think they have evidence for evolution
>> > and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me. These sites claim they
>> > could kill Hovind in a debate. HERE IS YOUR CHANCE!!! The main
>> > purpose of Hovind's Radio Program
>>
>> ....that Hovind controls the screening and content of, yes? Where did
>> you get the idea such a thing could be called a "debate?"
>>
> Call in and prove me wrong.
You didn't answer the question. Why would such a censorship mill be
called a "debate?"
>> > (I think) is to get athiest(which
>> > God doesn't believe exist)
>>
>> God told you this?
>
> Ask him yourself.
Be happy to. Introduce me.
>> What if a Christian called in instead?
Well?
>> > to call in and to show them there is no
>> > evidence exist for evolution,
>>
>> That's Hovind's job, isn't it? Granted he sucks at it, but...
>
> Saying this, you now have absolutely no excuse for not calling in.
> Your a coward and a hyocrite if you don't.
That's a very nice evasion. Hypocrisy, indeed.
>> > which none does exist, and to strenghin
>> > my faith and those of my blood brothers and sisters in Jesus
>> > Christ. He still has his $250,000 reward for concrete evidence for
>> > evolution.
>>
>> And he is still unable to defend *any* proposition using the same set
>> of rules, up to and including the sun rising in the west in the
>> morning. I wonder when his fans are going to stop being impressed by
>> that sham?
>
> So why should your theory be taxpayer supported and ours not?
You have a theory? Last I checked, Hovind had some amazing buffonery to
attempt to justify his own favorite reading of his favorite brand of
mythology. That's not even up to the level of "wild assed guess," much
less theory as science uses it.
> Huh?
BTW - of the five things one must "prove" as a condition of Hovind's
Challenge, only one has anything to do with Evolution.
Even the title is a lie. Didn't you notice this? Or do you care?
> HYP-O-CRITE!!!
Why don't *you* attempt to defend your alleged theory - using Hovind's
rules? Review them carefully and tell me if you think it would be
possible.
Hell, as a bonus, such a thing would undoubtedly fulfill the Randi
Foundation's Supernatural Challenge - and it's worth four times what
Hovind's is - and you can even confirm that the money exists, unlike
Hovind's. Quite a deal, eh? Makes you wonder why Hovind never tried it.
(Remember you'll have to come up with a real Theory of Creation, too.
Don't worry that you'll be the first - I'm SURE you're up to the task.)
Eric Gill
<snip>
> If the thing that you don't believe exists doesn't believe you exist.
> I do hope your stronger then Him. Because those who aren't his
> children, He will cast from his presence.
Great! Why don't you learn from that example and bugger off, too?
Lane Lewis
"Andy Flom" <flom...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b3941d14.03062...@posting.google.com...
> "Lane Lewis" <lanej...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<GPNIa.112116$cm4.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>...
> >
> > From the website.
> > * NOTE:
> > When I use the word evolution, I am not referring to the minor
variations
> > found in all of the various life forms (microevolution). I am referring
to
> > the general theory of evolution which believes these five major events
took
> > place without God:
> >
> > 1.. Time, space, and matter came into existence by themselves.
> > 2.. Planets and stars formed from space dust.
> > 3.. Matter created life by itself.
> > 4.. Early life-forms learned to reproduce themselves.
> > 5.. Major changes occurred between these diverse life forms (i.e.,
fish
> > changed to amphibians, amphibians changed to reptiles, and reptiles
changed
> > to birds or mammals).
> > [end]
> >
> > Can you tell me why a honest man would include lines 1 and 2.
> > Note that 3 is abiogenesis not evolution.
> >
> > Lane
>
> Can you tell me what honest man would link lines 1 and 2 and 3 and 4
> with 5 with reality? If so how?
>
Why didn't you answer the question, what does 1 (Big Bang Theory) have
to do with Darwin's theory. The fact is that Hovinds offer is just a scam
and the people who follow this guy are supporting it. Do you agree that a
person explaining evolution should also have to explain the Big bang Theory?
Lane
rich hammett
So if I create artificial life, I am "good" if I arbitrarily make
it suffer, kill its children because of errors, etc?
I mean, especially if it refuses to acknowledge that I am its God,
of course!
rich
Andy Flom
Taxonomic
Before I can give my answer I need for you to explane scientificly(Lab
experiment) how these plants,animals came into existance from nonliving matter.
First First Horse, then cart.
Genetic
Before I can give my answer I need for you to explane scientificly(Lab
experiment) how DNA and it's emense complexity came into existance.
First Horse, then cart.
Morphological
Before I can give my answer I need to know scientificly(Lab experiment) how the
things we see in nature came into existance.
First Horse, then cart.
Fossil
Before I can give my answer I need to know scientificly(Lab experiment) how the
fossils that died into existance.
First Horse, then cart.
Biogeographical
Before I can give my answer I need to know scientificly(Lab experiment) how the
regions that support life were setup.
First Horse, then cart.
Observed
Before I can give my answer I need to know scientificly(Lab experiment) how
Natural Selection, Mutations and Algorithms started.
First Horse, then cart.
I can continue...but my God who loves you doesn't want me to unfairly bombard you
with more information then you can handle. He loves you and is seeking your
humility, He made you. So here are the questions of the first site I visited.
When you die, one of two things is going to happen.
Your going to be regirgitated into a plant(or something else),
or your going to stand before God and give an account of your sins.
Are you ready for both?!
Read Carefully:
You shall have no other gods before me.
You shall not make for yourself an idol.
You shall not misuse the name of the LORD your God.
Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy.
Honor your father and your mother.
You shall not murder.
You shall not commit adultery.
You shall not steal.
You shall not give lie.
You shall not covet.
Know Jesus, No Hell.
No Jesus, Know Hell.
Andy tSSbG(the Sinner Saved by Grace)
Andy Flom
> > radio program that is on every weekday from 1pm-2pm called "The
> > Creation Scince Hour." I myself am a young earth Creationist Christian
> > who will debate and defend the Bible at all cost. I have seen many
> > websites and chat rooms that think they have evidence for evolution
> > could kill Hovind in a debate. HERE IS YOUR CHANCE!!! The main
> > God doesn't believe exist) to call in and to show them there is no
> > evidence exist for evolution, which none does exist, and to strenghin
> > my faith and those of my blood brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ.
> > He still has his $250,000 reward for concrete evidence for evolution.
>
> opportunities for jokes to be accidental. Then, after he spouts the "blood
> brothers" line and claims to be familiar with evolutionary defenses, he
> drags up the tired old $250,000 reward hogwash. At best, he'll make a
> couple passing replies but will probably disappear forever.
Good day,
This is Andy the beloved troll of the good shepard.
I'll play. I ask now to fight you finest soldger(as with David and
Goliath). Give me your ONE best shot of evidence you think best proves
your theory. Give my your best shot. I'm here. I ain't disapearing.
Put up or repent(don't be a coward). Here's mine.
Explane how cloraphil came into existance. The earth is an open
system getting its energy from the sun's light. The sun's light is
destructive to everything on earth but cloraphil. One Cell from a
plant is more complex then an entire city. The bibles explination
appears to work scientificly.
>
> > The Creation Science Hour.
> > 1pm-2pm Weekdays
> > http://www.soundwaves2000.com/rammaker.asp?id=121b
> >
> > Earth First!!! We'll mine the other planets later.
> > Save trees, eat beavers.
> > Blaming guns for school shootings is like blaming spoons for Rosie
> > O'Donnell for being fat.
>
> No, blaming guns for all *deaths* would be like assigning causation of
> Rosie's size to spoons. Those would be two instances of taking instruments
> capable of assisting in a task and claiming they cause the task to be
> performed. But any way you put it, it's a bad analogy. But that was the
> point wasn't it?
It's the finger that pulls the triger, maybe we should ban fingers.
By the way, you sure now how to say nothing very artistly.
>
> > God kicked Adam from the Garden of Eden for eating the wrong apple.
> > The moral standerd to get into Heaven is a lot stricter. John 6:23
> > Andy Flom
>
> I thought it was a banana.
Bible doesn't say it was or wasn't.
Here's something to think about
Andy Flom
> In article <b3941d14.03062...@posting.google.com>, flom...@yahoo.com wrote...
> >
> >Creationist and Evolution thropper Dr. Kent Hovind
>
> "Thropper"?
>
> <http://www.google.com/custom?q=hovind&sa=Search&sitesearch=www.talkorigins.org>
> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/
> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind.html
> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/faqs.html#hovind
>
> might suggest some other colorful words for him.
>
> now has a internet
> >radio program that is on every weekday from 1pm-2pm called "The
> >Creation Scince Hour."
>
> Was "The Oxymoron Hour" already taken?
Guts Coward?!)
>
> >I myself am a young earth Creationist Christian
> >who will debate and defend the Bible at all cost.
>
> Fine. But many Christians seem to have no problem rejecting
> "young earth Creationism" while keeping their beliefs.
>
> I have seen many
> >websites
>
> Like
>
> http://www.talkorigins.org/
> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs.html
> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/outline.html
> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-qa.html
> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-mustread.html
> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html
> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-intro-to-biology.html
> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/other-links-gensci.html
> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/other-links.html#evolution
> ?
> >and chat rooms that think they have evidence for evolution
>
> Websites and chatrooms. Ever seen a classroom or a science
> book?
>
> >and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me.
>
> Great. This is just the place to debate them. Go for it.
> What aspects of which bits of evidence for evolution do
> you dispute, and why? Why should the scientists agree with
> you? Show us. Be very specific, with citations of the
> actual evidence. If you need a few example to start, see:
I'll tell you what and do you a favor. If you think evolution is
true, then stop giving me links and think for yourself(if that's what
you claim you do). Give me you ONE best shot that proves Evolution.
You best shot. (Got guts Goliath(coward)!?) Fight me like a man and
not a coward. God rejects the prowd but gives grace to the humble.
>
> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
>
> and its links
>
> These sites claim they
> >could kill Hovind in a debate. HERE IS YOUR CHANCE!!!
>
> Sites would have a hard time debating [they don't talk].
>
> The main
> >purpose of Hovind's Radio Program (I think) is to get athiest(which
> >God doesn't believe exist)
>
> Then it sounds like the belief's mutual?
Then I hope your intelect is stronger then Gods because I would hate
to be at the recieveing end of his judgement.
>
> to call in and to show them there is no
> >evidence exist for evolution,
>
> Umm, you do know that evolutionary biology isn't
> about atheism? Plenty of devout theists are "evolutionists"
> and vice-versa
Then show me how evolution is true. If you can't get it out of the
text books.
>
> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-god.html
> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/interpretations.html
> http://www.glenn.morton.btinternet.co.uk/dmd.htm
> http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~lindsay/creation/voices/
> http://www.religioustolerance.org/evolutio.htm
> http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_denom.htm
> http://www.faithreason.org
> http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/2027_statements_from_religious_orga_1_26_2001.asp
> http://www.goshen.edu/bio/Biol410/Biol410SrSemPapers97/millerl.html
> http://www.asa3.org/index.html
> etc
>
> which none does exist, and to strenghin
> >my faith and those of my blood brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ.
> >He still has his $250,000 reward for concrete evidence for evolution.
>
> If this is a loki troll, well done.
I try.
By the way,
Kleuskes & Moos
> I'll tell you what and do you a favor. If you think evolution is
> true, then stop giving me links and think for yourself(if that's what
> you claim you do).
First thought: lots of other people have studied the subject for *years*
lets see what they have to say.
> Give me you ONE best shot that proves Evolution.
When in rome, do as the romans, just spam the entire talk.origins site.
Creationists do it all the time, so it should be acceptable.
> You best shot. (Got guts Goliath(coward)!?) Fight me like a man and
> not a coward. God rejects the prowd but gives grace to the humble.
Your rant does not exactly strike me as 'humble'.
--
Woart oe vuur leu dee moar een beukske kent.
TomS
<b3941d14.03062...@posting.google.com>, flom...@yahoo.com
stated..."
[...snip...]
>I'll play. I ask now to fight you finest soldger(as with David and
>Goliath). Give me your ONE best shot of evidence you think best proves
>your theory. Give my your best shot. I'm here. I ain't disapearing.
>Put up or repent(don't be a coward). Here's mine.
OK, here's a theory:
The theory is that the earth moves through space.
Is there anybody out there who can give their one best shot of
evidence for that theory?
That the earth turns on its axis is just the "micro-" version
of the "moving earth" theory. What I want is evidence for the
"macro-" version of the theory.
Tom S.
Bruce
> So how does my being a Creationist violate logic. Think men. Earth
> is an open system, it gets it's energy from the sun. The only thing
> on earth that the sun isn't distructive to is cloriphil(or however
> it's spelt). one cell from a plant is more complex then a city. Can I
> get an explination for this.
What if the city has plants in it?? WHAT THEN?
--
Bruce Labbate | Metaphor for a missing moment,
shiftless layabout | Pull me into your perfect circle.
| One womb, one shape, one resolve.
| - A Perfect Circle
Bruce
> God loves me. graciousness.
> God continues to let me breath, today. graciousness.
> God runs this world and lets me be here. graciousness.
Aww, what a sweetie.
> God asks us not to eat a simple fruit and we disobey.(would a good
> judge let a hitler get away without punishment? NO!!!) Compared to God
> you and I are no different then hitlet.(period))
Would a good judge create Hitler in the first place? Maybe we're all a
bunch of hitlets running around down here, but if your God made us ...
> Thou shall not kill(if you hate anyone unjustly, your a
> murder.(period) and I am too.)
Hating is killing? Weird. It's a good thing nobody's ever killed in
the name of your God!
--
Bruce Labbate | Although you threw away my name
shiftless layabout | From your mind I have to try
| Although my heart is bruised by
| Your words sometimes - Sunny Day
Andy Flom
> flom...@yahoo.com (Andy Flom) wrote in
> news:b3941d14.03062...@posting.google.com:
>
> > Eric Gill <eric...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:<Xns93A0A12B3E8Ee...@24.28.95.154>...
> >> flom...@yahoo.com (Andy Flom) wrote in
> >> news:b3941d14.03062...@posting.google.com:
> >>
> >> > Creationist and Evolution thropper Dr. Kent Hovind now has a
> >> > internet radio program that is on every weekday from 1pm-2pm called
> >> > "The Creation Scince Hour." I myself am a young earth Creationist
> >> > Christian who will debate and defend the Bible at all cost.
> >>
> >> Including, no, *especially* outright lying and general bufoonery, if
> >> you are a Hovind fan.
> >
> > How is he lying?
>
> Starting with his worthless "credentials," bought from a spli-level
> degree mill.
> Let me guess - you didn't bother to actually check to see if this bunk
> can be confirmed, did you?
Did you?!
Many schools have only one or two students for there PHD program and
they work out of someones house. There's nothing wrong with that. The
house people put on there websites Hovinds never been in. Check his
website. By the way, Innocent til proven guilty, the burden of proof
is on your sholders. Don't give me any links to any third party.
>
> >> I wonder how long it's going to take ya'll to get the idea this is
> >> doing just the opposite?
> >>
> >> > I have seen many
> >> > websites and chat rooms that think they have evidence for evolution
> >> > and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me. These sites claim they
> >> > could kill Hovind in a debate. HERE IS YOUR CHANCE!!! The main
> >> > purpose of Hovind's Radio Program
> >>
> >> ....that Hovind controls the screening and content of, yes? Where did
> >> you get the idea such a thing could be called a "debate?"
> >>
> > Call in and prove me wrong.
>
> You didn't answer the question. Why would such a censorship mill be
> called a "debate?"
Burden of proof isn't on me. Have you yourself called in to see if you
could get a crack at the $250,000 grand. Until Put-up or shut-up,
repent.
>
> >> > (I think) is to get athiest(which
> >> > God doesn't believe exist)
> >>
> >> God told you this?
> >
> > Ask him yourself.
>
> Be happy to. Introduce me.
Phone # is on his website www.drdino.com, now you have no excuses,
coward.
>
> >> What if a Christian called in instead?
>
> Well?
Then we fellowship together.
Hovinds reward is "for" evidence of evolution. What a stupid therory.
>
> >> > to call in and to show them there is no
> >> > evidence exist for evolution,
> >>
> >> That's Hovind's job, isn't it? Granted he sucks at it, but...
> >
> > Saying this, you now have absolutely no excuse for not calling in.
> > Your a coward and a hyocrite if you don't.
>
> That's a very nice evasion. Hypocrisy, indeed.
If I am being hypocrital, tell me and explain it to me, don't just
call me one.
Put-up, shut-up, or repent.
>
> >> > which none does exist, and to strenghin
> >> > my faith and those of my blood brothers and sisters in Jesus
> >> > Christ. He still has his $250,000 reward for concrete evidence for
> >> > evolution.
> >>
> >> And he is still unable to defend *any* proposition using the same set
> >> of rules, up to and including the sun rising in the west in the
> >> morning. I wonder when his fans are going to stop being impressed by
> >> that sham?
> >
> > So why should your theory be taxpayer supported and ours not?
>
> You have a theory? Last I checked, Hovind had some amazing buffonery to
> attempt to justify his own favorite reading of his favorite brand of
> mythology. That's not even up to the level of "wild assed guess," much
> less theory as science uses it.
I'm still waiting for a good scientific theory from the evolutionist.
The theory from 10 years ago is different from the one today. Don't
put it in the text books if it will be pulled out later.
My theory is just as religious as yours.
>
> > Huh?
>
> BTW - of the five things one must "prove" as a condition of Hovind's
> Challenge, only one has anything to do with Evolution.
Then prove it, here, now.
>
> Even the title is a lie. Didn't you notice this? Or do you care?
How so?
>
> > HYP-O-CRITE!!!
>
> Why don't *you* attempt to defend your alleged theory - using Hovind's
> rules? Review them carefully and tell me if you think it would be
> possible.
>
No one's attacking my theory, "The Bible."
> Hell, as a bonus, such a thing would undoubtedly fulfill the Randi
> Foundation's Supernatural Challenge - and it's worth four times what
> Hovind's is - and you can even confirm that the money exists, unlike
> Hovind's. Quite a deal, eh? Makes you wonder why Hovind never tried it.
>
Myself and Hovind are not God and don't pretend to be. The heathen
seek a sign and won't get one.
> (Remember you'll have to come up with a real Theory of Creation, too.
> Don't worry that you'll be the first - I'm SURE you're up to the task.)
I don't have to come up with squat. Till you can prove Evolution. Get
it out of the science books and into religious classes.
Andy Flom
If you create anything, artificial or not. You can do what ever you
want and your creation still has to call you good.
Just so happens that your creator has given you a chance to be with
him, but if you don't give Him the glory. he will delete you like a
computer program.
Andy
Andy Flom
I'm waiting for "YOU" to give me your "ONE" best shot. Tick Tock Tick Tock.
Andy
Andy Flom
My point exactly, Eutil you have the evidence to prove evolution, GET
IT OUT OF THE SCHOOL TEXTBOOKS!!!
Andy
Andy Flom
Big bang theory has nothing to do with evolution. Now answer my question.
Andy
Eric Gill
> Eric Gill <eric...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:<Xns93A36742FBC67...@24.28.95.190>...
>> flom...@yahoo.com (Andy Flom) wrote in
>> news:b3941d14.03062...@posting.google.com:
>>
>> > Eric Gill <eric...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> > news:<Xns93A0A12B3E8Ee...@24.28.95.154>...
>> >> flom...@yahoo.com (Andy Flom) wrote in
>> >> news:b3941d14.03062...@posting.google.com:
>> >>
>> >> > Creationist and Evolution thropper Dr. Kent Hovind now has a
>> >> > internet radio program that is on every weekday from 1pm-2pm
>> >> > called "The Creation Scince Hour." I myself am a young earth
>> >> > Creationist Christian who will debate and defend the Bible at
>> >> > all cost.
>> >>
>> >> Including, no, *especially* outright lying and general bufoonery,
>> >> if you are a Hovind fan.
>> >
>> > How is he lying?
>>
>> Starting with his worthless "credentials," bought from a spli-level
>> degree mill.
>
>> Let me guess - you didn't bother to actually check to see if this
>> bunk can be confirmed, did you?
> Did you?!
Yes. Patriot "University" is someone's house, last I checked.
> Many schools have only one or two students for there PHD program and
> they work out of someones house.
Like *who*?
> There's nothing wrong with that.
Other than no oversight to gurantee academic integrity, you mean?
> The
> house people put on there websites Hovinds never been in. Check his
> website. By the way, Innocent til proven guilty, the burden of proof
> is on your sholders. Don't give me any links to any third party.
My, my my - for such an observer of forms, you sure are fussy about
everybody else doing so when asked if you have. Why is that?
>> >> I wonder how long it's going to take ya'll to get the idea this is
>> >> doing just the opposite?
>> >>
>> >> > I have seen many
>> >> > websites and chat rooms that think they have evidence for
>> >> > evolution and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me. These
>> >> > sites claim they could kill Hovind in a debate. HERE IS YOUR
>> >> > CHANCE!!! The main purpose of Hovind's Radio Program
>> >>
>> >> ....that Hovind controls the screening and content of, yes? Where
>> >> did you get the idea such a thing could be called a "debate?"
>> >>
>> > Call in and prove me wrong.
>>
>> You didn't answer the question. Why would such a censorship mill be
>> called a "debate?"
>
> Burden of proof isn't on me.
Why not?
> Have you yourself called in to see if you
> could get a crack at the $250,000 grand. Until Put-up or shut-up,
> repent.
>
>>
>> >> > (I think) is to get athiest(which
>> >> > God doesn't believe exist)
>> >>
>> >> God told you this?
>> >
>> > Ask him yourself.
>>
>> Be happy to. Introduce me.
>
> Phone # is on his website www.drdino.com, now you have no excuses,
> coward.
God's phone number is on Kent Hovind's website?
Where?
>> >> What if a Christian called in instead?
>>
>> Well?
> Then we fellowship together.
I doubt it. I'm willing to bet a Jesuit would have the same opinion of
Hovind's foolishness.
> Hovinds reward is "for" evidence of evolution. What a stupid therory.
Where in the hell did *that* come from? Are you even paying attention as
you write?
<snip>
>>
>> >> > which none does exist, and to strenghin
>> >> > my faith and those of my blood brothers and sisters in Jesus
>> >> > Christ. He still has his $250,000 reward for concrete evidence
>> >> > for evolution.
>> >>
>> >> And he is still unable to defend *any* proposition using the same
>> >> set of rules, up to and including the sun rising in the west in
>> >> the morning. I wonder when his fans are going to stop being
>> >> impressed by that sham?
>> >
>> > So why should your theory be taxpayer supported and ours not?
>>
>> You have a theory? Last I checked, Hovind had some amazing buffonery
>> to attempt to justify his own favorite reading of his favorite brand
>> of mythology. That's not even up to the level of "wild assed guess,"
>> much less theory as science uses it.
>
> I'm still waiting for a good scientific theory from the evolutionist.
*Sure* you are.
> The theory from 10 years ago is different from the one today.
Yes, they all are, up to and including the theory of gravity.
> Don't
> put it in the text books if it will be pulled out later.
>
> My theory is just as religious as yours.
When was the last time the Bible was modified to fit reality?
>> > Huh?
>>
>> BTW - of the five things one must "prove" as a condition of Hovind's
>> Challenge, only one has anything to do with Evolution.
>
> Then prove it, here, now.
That Hovind's chellenge has almost nothing to do with evolution?
That's trivial. Biological evolution, by definition, starts after the
beginning of life. Four of his five points are at the beginning of life
or earlier.
>> Even the title is a lie. Didn't you notice this? Or do you care?
>
> How so?
He's been told. He doesn't care.
>>
>> > HYP-O-CRITE!!!
>>
>> Why don't *you* attempt to defend your alleged theory - using
>> Hovind's rules? Review them carefully and tell me if you think it
>> would be possible.
>>
> No one's attacking my theory,
*What* theory?
> "The Bible."
....is a collection of sacred writings. If you mean that you have an idea
that the Bible is an accurate description of events that would meet
Hovind's challenge, then by all means we can set up for it.
>> Hell, as a bonus, such a thing would undoubtedly fulfill the Randi
>> Foundation's Supernatural Challenge - and it's worth four times what
>> Hovind's is - and you can even confirm that the money exists, unlike
>> Hovind's. Quite a deal, eh? Makes you wonder why Hovind never tried
>> it.
>>
> Myself and Hovind are not God and don't pretend to be.
Be what? Coherent?
> The heathen seek a sign and won't get one.
Pretty nasty to send those heathens to hell, then, isn't it?
But wait - do I hear you're not willing to take the Randi Foundation
Challenge? One that's worth *four times* Hovind's alleged prize? One that
has conditions that are agreed on by *both* parties, instead of just
Hovind?
Pray - why is that?
>> (Remember you'll have to come up with a real Theory of Creation, too.
>> Don't worry that you'll be the first - I'm SURE you're up to the
>> task.)
>
> I don't have to come up with squat.
No, you *cannot* come up with anything substantial, never mind anything
that would meet Hovind's challenge. You're just trying to ape your heor
Hovind and bluster your way through.
Too bad you can't cut my mike or hang up on me on the usenet, isn't it?
Andy Groves
What about carotenoids and phycobilins?
Andy
P.S. Your evidence appears to amount to "Plants are complicated,
therefore Genesis is true". Is that it?
Pip R. Lagenta
>Taxonomic
>Before I can give my answer I need for you to explane scientificly(Lab
>experiment) how these plants,animals came into existance from nonliving matter.
>First First Horse, then cart.
As you well know, your statement is false: you have purposefully told
a lie. The true reason that you can't state any reason for calling
evolution into question is that you are ignorant of even the basics of
how evolution works.
[Snip repeated deceit]
>I can continue...but my God who loves you doesn't want me to unfairly bombard you
>with more information then you can handle. He loves you and is seeking your
>humility, He made you. So here are the questions of the first site I visited.
Yes, you can continue to evade reality via deceit, but what good does
that do?
Here, be less ignorant. Try:
<http://www.nap.edu/html/creationism/evidence.html>
<http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-qa.html>
<http://www.skeptictank.org/hs/factfaq.htm>
<http://www.ebonmusings.org/evolution/evoevidence.html>
<http://www.abarnett.demon.co.uk/atheism/evolution.html>
<http://www.evolutionhappens.net/>
<http://home.houston.rr.com/bybayouu/Tenets_of_evolution.html>
<http://www.gly.uga.edu/railsback/1122science2.html>
<http://www.gly.uga.edu/railsback/1122science3.html>
<http://www.gly.uga.edu/railsback/1122science7.html>
<http://www.gly.uga.edu/railsback/1122sciencedefns.html>
<http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~lindsay/creation/evo_science.html>
<http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/>
<http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-research.html>
>When you die, one of two things is going to happen.
>Your going to be regirgitated into a plant(or something else),
>or your going to stand before God and give an account of your sins.
>Are you ready for both?!
Do you understand the concept of the false dichotomy?
<http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?FalseDichotomy>
It is a form of deceit. You seem to do that a lot. Are you forced to
deceit because you don't have any facts to work from?
>Read Carefully:
[snip]
>You shall not give lie.
Uh oh! You're in trouble now.
<http://home.attbi.com/~galentripp/CHRIST.html>
LOL
Crwydryn
Great Scott, he really didn't get it, did he? No Andy, that wasn't
your point. Tom's point and your point are completely different. Go
back and reread his post and think about its logical consequences.
--
Kevyn Winkless kevyn at the-winkless.net
Any life, no matter how long and complex it may be, is made
up of a single moment - the moment in which a man finds
out, once and for all, who he is.
-Jorge Luis Borges
Dick C
> Sen jälkeen, kun Perry Mason oli pahoinpidellyt
>> Then God sends his son to pay my penilty.
>> HE IS GOOD!!!
>
> So if I create artificial life, I am "good" if I arbitrarily make
> it suffer, kill its children because of errors, etc?
>
> I mean, especially if it refuses to acknowledge that I am its God,
> of course!
Hey, if your sons go and play with your created life, you can get
mad at the life and kill it off.
That is the reason for Noah's flood, according to the bible.
--
Dick #1349
"Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it."
Andre Gide, French author and critic (1869-1951).
Home Page: dickcr.iwarp.com
email: dic...@localnet.com
mel turner
wrote...
>mtu...@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu (mel turner) wrote in message
news:<bd02gu$o9l$1...@gargoyle.oit.duke.edu>...
>> In article <b3941d14.03062...@posting.google.com>,
flom...@yahoo.com wrote...
>> >Creationist and Evolution thropper Dr. Kent Hovind
>>
>> "Thropper"?
>>
<http://www.google.com/custom?q=hovind&sa=Search&sitesearch=www.talkorigins.org
>
>> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/
>> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/faqs.html#hovind
>>
>> might suggest some other colorful words for him.
>Call him and tell him
Is he worth it? He seems very near the bottom of the creationist
barrel. Even other creationists seem to agree:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/1011hovind.asp
>> now has a internet
>> >radio program that is on every weekday from 1pm-2pm called "The
>> >Creation Scince Hour."
>>
>> Was "The Oxymoron Hour" already taken?
>Call him and ask him why he didn't name his program that. 1pm-2pm (Got
>Guts Coward?!)
Don't get "internet radio". Can you present and defend here any of
his claims that you found especially persuasive?
>> >I myself am a young earth Creationist Christian
>> >who will debate and defend the Bible at all cost.
>>
>> Fine. But many Christians seem to have no problem rejecting
>> "young earth Creationism" while keeping their beliefs.
>>
>> I have seen many
>> >websites
>>
>> Like
>>
>> http://www.talkorigins.org/
>> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs.html
>> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/outline.html
>> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-qa.html
>> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-mustread.html
>> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html
>> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
>> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-intro-to-biology.html
>> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/other-links-gensci.html
>> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/other-links.html#evolution
>> ?
>> >and chat rooms that think they have evidence for evolution
>>
>> Websites and chatrooms. Ever seen a classroom or a science
>> book?
>Still (rubbish)debateable.
So, debate already. What'cha got? What's "rubbish" about it, or don't
you understand any of it well enough to begin to criticize it?
>> >and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me.
>>
>> Great. This is just the place to debate them. Go for it.
>> What aspects of which bits of evidence for evolution do
>> you dispute, and why? Why should the scientists agree with
>> you? Show us. Be very specific, with citations of the
>> actual evidence. If you need a few example to start, see:
>
>I'll tell you what and do you a favor. If you think evolution is
>true, then stop giving me links
Those links contain many references to the actual scientific literature.
Y',know, the papers that present and discuss all that evidence stuff and
its interpretation.
>and think for yourself
How sweet. You try it first.
(if that's what
>you claim you do). Give me you ONE best shot that proves Evolution.
Why just one? The evidence is there, throughout biology. If you want
me to generalize about the most compelling type of evidence for common
descent, it's the "twin" [really multiple] nested hierarchical patterns
seen throughout the groups of life. Group within groups, within groups,
within groups. Why such all-pervasive patterns? Evolution explains and
requires them, creationism really can't and basically doesn't.
>You best shot. (Got guts Goliath(coward)!?) Fight me like a man and
>not a coward.
[Sheesh...] What, are you twelve? Can't you even try discussing
things calmly? If not, then 'bye.
>God rejects the prowd but gives grace to the humble.
That's nice. Maybe you should go work on that humility.
>> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
>>
>> and its links
>>
>> These sites claim they
>> >could kill Hovind in a debate. HERE IS YOUR CHANCE!!!
>>
>> Sites would have a hard time debating [they don't talk].
>>
>> The main
>> >purpose of Hovind's Radio Program (I think) is to get athiest(which
>> >God doesn't believe exist)
>>
>> Then it sounds like the belief's mutual?
>Then I hope your intelect is stronger then Gods because I would hate
>to be at the recieveing end of his judgement.
Non sequitur. I merely made a wry comment on your "athiest(which God
doesn't believe exist)".
>> to call in and to show them there is no
>> >evidence exist for evolution,
>>
>> Umm, you do know that evolutionary biology isn't
>> about atheism? Plenty of devout theists are "evolutionists"
>> and vice-versa
>Then show me how evolution is true. If you can't get it out of the
>text books.
It's science, and belongs in the science books and science classrooms.
It's very well supported by all the available evidence. If new evidence
requires modifying parts of the current version of the science, we will.
That's how science works.
Anyway, what exactly do you mean by "Then show me how evolution is
true." Show you that the genetic makeup of populations of organisms
can and does change over generations? [the basic definition of
"evolution"]. It's observed to happen and easily demonstrated. Show
you that new traits can arise in an evolving lineage? It's also
observed to happen, and also readily demonstrated.
Show you that new species can arise from an ancestral species? [the
minimal definition of "macroevolution"]. It's observed to happen. Show
you that groups of related species can arise from a common ancestral
species? [also macroevolution]. It's well supported by very strong
evidence. Show you that all known groups of life have arisen from
early common ancestors? The common origin of all life is also supported
by strong evidence, but that particular result wasn't any requirement
of the idea of evolution. We could have found that there were
independent types of life, but it simply wasn't the case.
So, then, how are we supposed to show you any or all of these things
without referring to links? Would you prefer citations of textbooks
you should read, or the original scientific journal articles that
reported the findings? Have you access to a university library?
cheers
Florian
> rich hammett <bubba...@warmmail.com> wrote in message news:<vfeapro...@corp.supernews.com>...
> > Sen jälkeen, kun Perry Mason oli pahoinpidellyt häntä, Andy Flom yllätti tuomarin todistamalla:
(snip)
> > > Then God sends his son to pay my penilty.
> > > HE IS GOOD!!!
> >
> > So if I create artificial life, I am "good" if I arbitrarily make
> > it suffer, kill its children because of errors, etc?
> >
> > I mean, especially if it refuses to acknowledge that I am its God,
> > of course!
>
> If you create anything, artificial or not. You can do what ever you
> want and your creation still has to call you good.
How about if you have children? Can you do whatever you want to them?
> Just so happens that your creator has given you a chance to be with
> him, but if you don't give Him the glory. he will delete you like a
> computer program.
And when Andrea Yates deleted her children like computer programs, were
they still obliged call her good, even if other people would regard the
deed at best misguided, and at worst atrocious?
--
quadam autem die cum venissent filii Dei ut adsisterent coram Domino
adfuit inter eos etiam Satan
Andy Flom
> > is an open system, it gets it's energy from the sun. The only thing
> > on earth that the sun isn't distructive to is cloriphil(or however
> > it's spelt). one cell from a plant is more complex then a city. Can I
> > get an explination for this.
>
> What if the city has plants in it?? WHAT THEN?
I thought evolution was a part of science. Guess I was wrong. Would
somebody with intelegence give me an answer to my just question.
Put-up, Shut-up, or repent.
Andy
Earle Jones
flom...@yahoo.com (Andy Flom) wrote:
> Creationist and Evolution thropper Dr. Kent Hovind now has a internet
> radio program that is on every weekday from 1pm-2pm called "The
> Creation Scince Hour." I myself am a young earth Creationist Christian
> who will debate and defend the Bible at all cost. I have seen many
> websites and chat rooms that think they have evidence for evolution
> and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me. These sites claim they
> could kill Hovind in a debate. HERE IS YOUR CHANCE!!! The main
> purpose of Hovind's Radio Program (I think) is to get athiest
[...]
*
Stop there.
Evidently you are unaware of Internet Usenet posting rule No.
VII-7.b.6-a, which states that "if you cannot spell atheist, you
cannot post to this newsgroup."
earle
*
Andy Flom
Your making an accusation. I want evidence from an unrevokeable
source.
>
> >> >> I wonder how long it's going to take ya'll to get the idea this is
> >> >> doing just the opposite?
> >> >>
> >> >> > I have seen many
> >> >> > websites and chat rooms that think they have evidence for
> >> >> > evolution and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me. These
> >> >> > sites claim they could kill Hovind in a debate. HERE IS YOUR
> >> >> > CHANCE!!! The main purpose of Hovind's Radio Program
> >> >>
> >> >> ....that Hovind controls the screening and content of, yes? Where
> >> >> did you get the idea such a thing could be called a "debate?"
> >> >>
> >> > Call in and prove me wrong.
> >>
> >> You didn't answer the question. Why would such a censorship mill be
> >> called a "debate?"
> >
> > Burden of proof isn't on me.
>
> Why not?
Your making an accusation. This is america, if you want to accuse
someone of wrong doing, you bring the proof.
>
> > Have you yourself called in to see if you
> > could get a crack at the $250,000 grand. Until Put-up or shut-up,
> > repent.
> >
> >>
> >> >> > (I think) is to get athiest(which
> >> >> > God doesn't believe exist)
> >> >>
> >> >> God told you this?
> >> >
> >> > Ask him yourself.
> >>
> >> Be happy to. Introduce me.
> >
> > Phone # is on his website www.drdino.com, now you have no excuses,
> > coward.
>
> God's phone number is on Kent Hovind's website?
>
> Where?
Sorry, my miscommunication. At the last post I thought you were
asking me to intoduce you to hovind. My fault. If you don't think God
exists and he doesn't think you exist, You better spend a good deal of
time thinking if your intelect has the power to cast you to hell. God
has the intelect to do that to you. Be patient, he's right beside you
trying to speek to you.
>
> >> >> What if a Christian called in instead?
> >>
> >> Well?
>
> > Then we fellowship together.
>
> I doubt it. I'm willing to bet a Jesuit would have the same opinion of
> Hovind's foolishness.
Do you know the mind of Jesus? He knows yours.
>
> > Hovinds reward is "for" evidence of evolution. What a stupid therory.
>
> Where in the hell did *that* come from? Are you even paying attention as
> you write?
Show me some evidence. If you got a hole slew of it on another
website. Bring your best peace and lets discuss it. If you have
none, Shut-up and repent.
>
> <snip>
>
> >>
> >> >> > which none does exist, and to strenghin
> >> >> > my faith and those of my blood brothers and sisters in Jesus
> >> >> > Christ. He still has his $250,000 reward for concrete evidence
> >> >> > for evolution.
> >> >>
> >> >> And he is still unable to defend *any* proposition using the same
> >> >> set of rules, up to and including the sun rising in the west in
> >> >> the morning. I wonder when his fans are going to stop being
> >> >> impressed by that sham?
> >> >
> >> > So why should your theory be taxpayer supported and ours not?
> >>
> >> You have a theory? Last I checked, Hovind had some amazing buffonery
> >> to attempt to justify his own favorite reading of his favorite brand
> >> of mythology. That's not even up to the level of "wild assed guess,"
> >> much less theory as science uses it.
> >
> > I'm still waiting for a good scientific theory from the evolutionist.
>
> *Sure* you are.
Yep, tell me one.
>
> > The theory from 10 years ago is different from the one today.
>
> Yes, they all are, up to and including the theory of gravity.
Why hasn't the bible then changed?
>
> > Don't
> > put it in the text books if it will be pulled out later.
> >
> > My theory is just as religious as yours.
>
> When was the last time the Bible was modified to fit reality?
I haven't heard of when. It doesn't violate science. It violates the
religion of evolution.
>
> >> > Huh?
> >>
> >> BTW - of the five things one must "prove" as a condition of Hovind's
> >> Challenge, only one has anything to do with Evolution.
> >
> > Then prove it, here, now.
>
> That Hovind's chellenge has almost nothing to do with evolution?
Then go get he $$$.
>
> That's trivial. Biological evolution, by definition, starts after the
> beginning of life. Four of his five points are at the beginning of life
> or earlier.
Show me scientificly(Lab test) How a non-dog can change into a dog.
>
> >> Even the title is a lie. Didn't you notice this? Or do you care?
> >
> > How so?
>
> He's been told. He doesn't care.
Tell me, I care.
>
> >>
> >> > HYP-O-CRITE!!!
> >>
> >> Why don't *you* attempt to defend your alleged theory - using
> >> Hovind's rules? Review them carefully and tell me if you think it
> >> would be possible.
> >>
> > No one's attacking my theory,
>
> *What* theory?
>
> > "The Bible."
>
> ....is a collection of sacred writings. If you mean that you have an idea
> that the Bible is an accurate description of events that would meet
> Hovind's challenge, then by all means we can set up for it.
Lets go. Start a new forum and let me know where it's at.
>
> >> Hell, as a bonus, such a thing would undoubtedly fulfill the Randi
> >> Foundation's Supernatural Challenge - and it's worth four times what
> >> Hovind's is - and you can even confirm that the money exists, unlike
> >> Hovind's. Quite a deal, eh? Makes you wonder why Hovind never tried
> >> it.
> >>
> > Myself and Hovind are not God and don't pretend to be.
>
> Be what? Coherent?
>
> > The heathen seek a sign and won't get one.
>
> Pretty nasty to send those heathens to hell, then, isn't it?
It's there own fault, God slayed his son so he does have to slay
heathen. But if they really want to stay away from God. God loves them
so much he will grant their wish. HIS OWN SON!!!
>
> But wait - do I hear you're not willing to take the Randi Foundation
> Challenge? One that's worth *four times* Hovind's alleged prize? One that
> has conditions that are agreed on by *both* parties, instead of just
> Hovind?
>
> Pray - why is that?
Lets say that I called down Gods power against his will and tempted
him. And made something maraculs happen before your eyes. What's
preventing you from saying that its an illusion that I did by the help
of a movie studio and a magic trick. The moneys not winable by the
definition of the judge.
>
> >> (Remember you'll have to come up with a real Theory of Creation, too.
> >> Don't worry that you'll be the first - I'm SURE you're up to the
> >> task.)
> >
> > I don't have to come up with squat.
Show me what's wrong with the bible.
>
> No, you *cannot* come up with anything substantial, never mind anything
> that would meet Hovind's challenge. You're just trying to ape your heor
> Hovind and bluster your way through.
Your religion of evolution is tax payer supported. My goal is to stop
that. Not to get another religion in science class. True science
will lead people to christ.
>
> Too bad you can't cut my mike or hang up on me on the usenet, isn't it?
>
This is fun. Count it joy when you suffer tribulation. I still
waiting for the tribulation though. I keep hunting for a computer to
continue.
rich hammett
Have you ever thought it odd that your God seems to have the
same moral failings as we glandular humans?
rich
> Andy
Andy Flom
I'm not fighting for Genesis right now. I'm trying to get a stoopid
religion of evolution out of the schools.
Someone have guts and brains and show me how my question fits in an
evolutionary module. Put-up, Shut-up, or repent.
Dave Thompson
> > "Frank Reichenbacher" <fr...@bio-con.com> wrote in message
> > news:fdKdnXbSb7S...@speakeasy.net...
> So how does my being a Creationist violate logic.
If you want a list you can find plenty here.
Think men. Earth
> is an open system, it gets it's energy from the sun.
So why don't creationists admit this when discussing thermodynamics?
Hmmmm?
The only thing
> on earth that the sun isn't distructive to is cloriphil(or however
> it's spelt).
I don't know why anyone should bother with you if you can't run a spellcheck
for clorophyl. But to answer your question: Have you ever heard of Vitamin
D? Maybe you also haven't heard the news that the sun keeps us from freezing
solid.
one cell from a plant is more complex then a city. Can I
> get an explination for this.
Actually a city is much more complex. It contains many plants. And humans!
Andy Flom
>
> <snip>
>
> > If the thing that you don't believe exists doesn't believe you exist.
> > I do hope your stronger then Him. Because those who aren't his
> > children, He will cast from his presence.
>
> Great! Why don't you learn from that example and bugger off, too?
A challenge, Think.
Give me a logical reason why I should stop defending my faith and stop
attacking your "FAITH". If your faith is so scientific and accurate,
SHOW ME SOME OF YOUR STOOPID EVIDENCE, COWARDS. I've asked several
times to show me your ONE BEST PIECE of evidence. Get it from your
other sites and bring it here if you know how to defend you stupid
theory. I'm waiting. Tick. Tock. Tick. Tock.
Andy
Eric Gill
> Eric Gill <eric...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:<Xns93A36A953325A...@24.28.95.154>...
>> flom...@yahoo.com (Andy Flom) wrote in
>> news:b3941d14.03062...@posting.google.com:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> > If the thing that you don't believe exists doesn't believe you
>> > exist. I do hope your stronger then Him. Because those who aren't
>> > his children, He will cast from his presence.
>>
>> Great! Why don't you learn from that example and bugger off, too?
>
> A challenge, Think.
Talking o your *other* imaginary friend, bub?
> Give me a logical reason why I should stop defending my faith
"Defending" is an odd term for screaming incoherently. Do you have your own
dictionary, too? Biblically-based, I presume?
But you didn't answer the question. If it's good enough for your god, why
isn't it good enough for you?
<snip>
catshark
wrote:
>Bruce <sol...@gehennom.net> wrote in message news:<bd7ni3$jma$1...@news-int.gatech.edu>...
You have been pointed to the evidence which you refuse to read (which is
part and parcel of your general reseach habits - if you bothered to take
your spelling of "cloriphil" to http://www.m-w.com/home.htm and entered it,
it would have easily given you the correct spelling).
Why should we bother talking to somebody with their fingers knuckle deep in
their ears and humming the 1812 Overture at the top of their lungs? Read
the websites you've been pointed to or, better yet, go to a library and
read some small portion of the thousands of books containing the evidence
for evolution.
You won't, of course, because you think science is something we should
repent of. I don't suppose you've considered, then, that you shouldn't be
typing on that computer . . .
---------------
J. Pieret
---------------
Science has proof without any certainty.
Creationists have certainty without any proof.
- Ashley Montague -
Dick C
> Eric Gill <eric...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:<Xns93A36742FBC67...@24.28.95.190>...
>> > How is he lying?
>>
>> Starting with his worthless "credentials," bought from a spli-level
>> degree mill.
>
>> Let me guess - you didn't bother to actually check to see if this
>> bunk can be confirmed, did you?
> Did you?!
>
> Many schools have only one or two students for there PHD program and
> they work out of someones house.
Yeah, they're called diploma mills.
There's nothing wrong with that. The
Nothing wrong as long as the so called student does not expect to
get an education, or have a PhD that is worth anything.
> house people put on there websites Hovinds never been in. Check his
> website. By the way, Innocent til proven guilty, the burden of proof
> is on your sholders. Don't give me any links to any third party.
The so called school is not an accredited college, it offers PhD's
for just a few hundred dollars and very little work. It meets the
definition of a diploma mill.
Eric Gill
Well?
>> > There's nothing wrong with that.
>>
>> Other than no oversight to gurantee academic integrity, you mean?
Well?
>> > The
>> > house people put on there websites Hovinds never been in. Check his
>> > website. By the way, Innocent til proven guilty, the burden of
>> > proof is on your sholders. Don't give me any links to any third
>> > party.
>>
>> My, my my - for such an observer of forms, you sure are fussy about
>> everybody else doing so when asked if you have. Why is that?
>
> Your making an accusation. I want evidence from an unrevokeable
> source.
Pray, what is an "unrevokeable" source?
And while we're on it - I don't recall claiming that Hovind was ever at
"Patriot University," just that he bought his "degree" from them.
>>
>> >> >> I wonder how long it's going to take ya'll to get the idea this
>> >> >> is doing just the opposite?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > I have seen many
>> >> >> > websites and chat rooms that think they have evidence for
>> >> >> > evolution and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me. These
>> >> >> > sites claim they could kill Hovind in a debate. HERE IS YOUR
>> >> >> > CHANCE!!! The main purpose of Hovind's Radio Program
>> >> >>
>> >> >> ....that Hovind controls the screening and content of, yes?
>> >> >> Where did you get the idea such a thing could be called a
>> >> >> "debate?"
>> >> >>
>> >> > Call in and prove me wrong.
>> >>
>> >> You didn't answer the question. Why would such a censorship mill
>> >> be called a "debate?"
>> >
>> > Burden of proof isn't on me.
>>
>> Why not?
>
> Your making an accusation.
I was asking a question.
> This is america, if you want to accuse
> someone of wrong doing, you bring the proof.
Where did you get the idea such a thing could be called a "debate?"
>> > Have you yourself called in to see if you
>> > could get a crack at the $250,000 grand. Until Put-up or shut-up,
>> > repent.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> >> > (I think) is to get athiest(which
>> >> >> > God doesn't believe exist)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> God told you this?
>> >> >
>> >> > Ask him yourself.
>> >>
>> >> Be happy to. Introduce me.
>> >
>> > Phone # is on his website www.drdino.com, now you have no excuses,
>> > coward.
>>
>> God's phone number is on Kent Hovind's website?
>>
>> Where?
>
> Sorry, my miscommunication. At the last post I thought you were
> asking me to intoduce you to hovind. My fault. If you don't think God
> exists and he doesn't think you exist, You better spend a good deal of
> time thinking if your intelect has the power to cast you to hell. God
> has the intelect to do that to you. Be patient, he's right beside you
> trying to speek to you.
IOW, no, you cannot, and you want to blame everyone but yourself and your
imaginary friend. Good job.
What does that have to do with science updating to include new knowledge?
>>
>> > Don't
>> > put it in the text books if it will be pulled out later.
>> >
>> > My theory is just as religious as yours.
>>
>> When was the last time the Bible was modified to fit reality?
>
> I haven't heard of when.
I've never seen evidence that it has. I've seen plenty of evidence it's
been changed for a number of other reasons, mostly to do with the
political leanings of the redactor
> It doesn't violate science.
Still treating leprosy with pidgeon blood?
> It violates the religion of evolution.
And the "religion" of cosmology, physics, geology, paleontology...
>>
>> >> > Huh?
>> >>
>> >> BTW - of the five things one must "prove" as a condition of
>> >> Hovind's Challenge, only one has anything to do with Evolution.
>> >
>> > Then prove it, here, now.
>>
>> That Hovind's chellenge has almost nothing to do with evolution?
>
> Then go get he $$$.
How would I get Hovind to cough up by showing you that his "challenge"
isn't about what he claims it is?
>>
>> That's trivial. Biological evolution, by definition, starts after the
>> beginning of life. Four of his five points are at the beginning of
>> life or earlier.
>
> Show me scientificly(Lab test) How a non-dog can change into a dog.
What does that have to do with Hovind's "Challenge" having little to do
with Evolution?
>>
>> >> Even the title is a lie. Didn't you notice this? Or do you care?
>> >
>> > How so?
>>
>> He's been told. He doesn't care.
>
> Tell me, I care.
I have, several times. You obviously care nothing about anything but
Lying for Jesus.
>> >>
>> >> > HYP-O-CRITE!!!
>> >>
>> >> Why don't *you* attempt to defend your alleged theory - using
>> >> Hovind's rules? Review them carefully and tell me if you think it
>> >> would be possible.
>> >>
>> > No one's attacking my theory,
>>
>> *What* theory?
>>
>> > "The Bible."
>>
>> ....is a collection of sacred writings. If you mean that you have an
>> idea that the Bible is an accurate description of events that would
>> meet Hovind's challenge, then by all means we can set up for it.
>
> Lets go. Start a new forum and let me know where it's at.
"Start a new forum?" No, no, this will be fine. First, *I* have to pick a
sercret panel of judges.
>>
>> >> Hell, as a bonus, such a thing would undoubtedly fulfill the Randi
>> >> Foundation's Supernatural Challenge - and it's worth four times
>> >> what Hovind's is - and you can even confirm that the money exists,
>> >> unlike Hovind's. Quite a deal, eh? Makes you wonder why Hovind
>> >> never tried it.
>> >>
>> > Myself and Hovind are not God and don't pretend to be.
>>
>> Be what? Coherent?
>>
>> > The heathen seek a sign and won't get one.
>>
>> Pretty nasty to send those heathens to hell, then, isn't it?
>
> It's there own fault, God slayed his son so he does have to slay
> heathen.
Oh, sure THAT'S logical. First, the omnipotent Creator of everything
blames his creations for not being what He wanted, then comes up with an
unimaginable toture for them, then breaks off a piece of himself,
tortures it a bit and kills it to make up His own mistakes, and now
you're telling me this *requires* said omnipotent diety to kill anyone
who doesn't buy this silly fable?
> But if they really want to stay away from God. God loves them
> so much he will grant their wish. HIS OWN SON!!!
>>
>> But wait - do I hear you're not willing to take the Randi Foundation
>> Challenge? One that's worth *four times* Hovind's alleged prize? One
>> that has conditions that are agreed on by *both* parties, instead of
>> just Hovind?
>>
>> Pray - why is that?
>
> Lets say that I called down Gods power against his will and tempted
> him.
Then you'd have a pretty pathetic god.
<snip>
> The moneys not winable by the
> definition of the judge.
....of Hovind's "challenge," yes. Less than honest, that.
>>
>> >> (Remember you'll have to come up with a real Theory of Creation,
>> >> too. Don't worry that you'll be the first - I'm SURE you're up to
>> >> the task.)
>> >
>> > I don't have to come up with squat.
>
> Show me what's wrong with the bible.
For what? You'll have to be a lot more specific - that's the point.
>> No, you *cannot* come up with anything substantial, never mind
>> anything that would meet Hovind's challenge. You're just trying to
>> ape your hero Hovind and bluster your way through.
<snip>
>>
>> Too bad you can't cut my mike or hang up on me on the usenet, isn't
>> it?
>>
> This is fun. Count it joy when you suffer tribulation. I still
> waiting for the tribulation though. I keep hunting for a computer to
> continue.
Actually, it sounds like you've smoked more than enough "Tribulation"
already.
Dana Tweedy
> > > Good day,
> > > This is Andy the beloved troll of the good shepard.
> > >
> > > I'll play. I ask now to fight you finest soldger(as with David and
> > > Goliath). Give me your ONE best shot of evidence you think best proves
> > > your theory. Give my your best shot. I'm here. I ain't disapearing.
> > > Put up or repent(don't be a coward). Here's mine.
> > >
> > > Explane how cloraphil came into existance.
Biochemistry.
>>> The earth is an open
> > > system getting its energy from the sun's light. The sun's light is
> > > destructive to everything on earth but cloraphil.
That's not true. Where did you get that idea?
> >
> > What about carotenoids and phycobilins?
> >
> > Andy
> >
> > P.S. Your evidence appears to amount to "Plants are complicated,
> > therefore Genesis is true". Is that it?
>
> I'm not fighting for Genesis right now. I'm trying to get a stoopid
> religion of evolution out of the schools.
Evolution is not a religion, it's a scientific theory. You do know the
difference, don't you?
>
> Someone have guts and brains and show me how my question fits in an
> evolutionary module. Put-up, Shut-up, or repent.
Your question doesn't fit into a "evolutionary module", because it's merely
personal incredulity. Chlorophyll is a photoreceptive chemical molecule.
There is no reason to suspect that it could not have formed by perfectly
natural chemcial reactions. Please refer to :Introduction to Organic
Chemistry, Streitweiser and Heathcock (MacMillan, New York, 1981). There
are many close relatives of chlorophyll used by living organisms. A slight
alteration of an already existing chemical is the most likely route for the
original formation of chlorophyll in living cells. For more information,
please see the following websites
http://scifun.chem.wisc.edu/chemweek/chlrphyl/chlrphyl.html
http://www.sb-roscoff.fr/Phyto/Reprints/LaRoche_et_al_96.pdf
http://www.cib.nig.ac.jp/nemi3/talk.18.html
For your other request for evidence for evolution, I direct you to the
genetic evidence for evolution. Once you deal with these sources, we can
discuss the anatomical, biochemical, molecular, and fossil evidence for
evolution.
http://www.salmar.com/scipageswftl/allpages/37.html
http://bob.nap.edu/readingroom/books/creationism/evidence.html
http://www.gate.net/~rwms/EvoEvidence.html
http://www.nal.usda.gov/pgdic/
DJT
>
Dana Tweedy
"Andy Flom" <flom...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b3941d14.03062...@posting.google.com...
snipping
> >
> > Andy, You're hanging out with the wrong crowd. Liars and weaselers have
> > little to recommend them. I mean Hovind. Because he presents ideas
that
> > are consistent with yours does not make him respectable.
> >
> > Bob
> > >
>
> Please tell me how they are lying and I will listen.
Hovind generally lies by not telling the truth. As others have pointed out,
he falsely uses the title PhD, which he did not earn. He also cheats on his
taxes. He repeats claims that have been refuted, that he KNOWS have been
refuted, meaning that he can't simply claim ignorance. He quotes out of
context, which is lying by omission. He has perjured himself in court
doucuments, and he has made a bad faith offer of $250,000 for "proof" of
evolution, for which he will never accept any evidence. Even other
Creationists have accused Hovind of lying. For more information about
Hovind, and his shameful record of lying for God, see:
http://www.positiveatheism.org/mail/eml9639.htm
http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/kent_hovind's_lies.htm
http://www.natcenscied.org/resources/articles/6756_unmasking_the_false_proph
et_of_9_1_1999.asp
http://members.cox.net/ardipithecus/evol/HovindLie.html
http://www.nmsr.org/hovind.htm
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~barry.og/cindex/creationist_lies.html
Now, I suspect you will neither listen to, or consider this evidence of
creationists lying.
DJT
Michael Painter
news:<GPNIa.112116$cm4.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>...
> > * NOTE:
> > When I use the word evolution, I am not referring to the minor
variations
> > found in all of the various life forms (microevolution). I am referring
to
> > the general theory of evolution which believes these five major events
took
> > place without God:
> >
> > 1.. Time, space, and matter came into existence by themselves.
> > 2.. Planets and stars formed from space dust.
> > 3.. Matter created life by itself.
> > 4.. Early life-forms learned to reproduce themselves.
> > 5.. Major changes occurred between these diverse life forms (i.e.,
fish
> > changed to amphibians, amphibians changed to reptiles, and reptiles
changed
> > to birds or mammals).
> > [end]
> >
> > Can you tell me why a honest man would include lines 1 and 2.
> > Note that 3 is abiogenesis not evolution.
> >
> > Lane
>
> Can you tell me what honest man would link lines 1 and 2 and 3 and 4
> with 5 with reality? If so how?
All the evidence points to that.
There is no evidence for a god, any god and since the people who make up the
concepts of gods claim it is more complex how can an honest man not ask
where the god came from.
Lane Lewis
Scientifically we have no other evidence for anything else and the steady
state theory doesn't explain the universe's expansion rate
2.. Planets and stars formed from space dust.
The original stars were formed from hydrogen that the big bang released, as
these stars exploded or died out some became the space dust that forms the
solar systems of today. Note this can be observed with the Hubble telescope.
3.. Matter created life by itself.
This is yet to be confirmed but no other rational explanation has been put
forward.
4.. Early life-forms learned to reproduce themselves.
Again yet to be confirmed but we do have fossil evidence of primitive cells
reproducing 2.5 to 3.5 billion years ago. Note that we have no evidence of
anything else be it aliens or whatever teaching cells to divide.
5.. Major changes occurred between these diverse life forms (i.e., fish
changed to amphibians, amphibians changed to reptiles, and reptiles changed
to birds or mammals).
The fossil record demonstrates some of this along with corroborating
evidence from genetics and observations of existing life on our planet. We
have evidence of fish developing legs over time and reptiles developing into
mammals, in fact we can trace back the bones in our ears to the jawbones of
reptiles and fish through the fossil record.
And that is pretty solid evidence but my favorite is the trilobite with
no eyes whatsoever but still has the location clearly marked where the eyes
should be fixed just like their identical relatives with eyes. It even has
what they call sutures so the trilobite can molt without harming the eyes it
doesn't have. Now if your concerned about rational thinking please give me a
reason besides evolution that would explain this.
So we have evidence for some but not all, but explaining the Big Band,
Formation of the stars and Life is a Huge thing to ask.
Lane
Aron-Ra
> Creationist and Evolution thropper Dr. Kent Hovind now has a internet
> radio program that is on every weekday from 1pm-2pm called "The
> Creation Scince Hour." I myself am a young earth Creationist Christian
> who will debate and defend the Bible at all cost. I have seen many
> websites and chat rooms that think they have evidence for evolution
> and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me. These sites claim they
> could kill Hovind in a debate. HERE IS YOUR CHANCE!!!
Hovind consistently refuses any debate in which evidence may be examined
or his claims researched. He's a snake-oil salesmen who earns his living
shoveling absufrdities to a gullible public.
Were he to agree to a written debate with me, (for example) his career
would be at an end, and he'd have to resort to multilevel marketing scams
from that point on.
TomS
<j14ffvs5fbbn4klq1...@4ax.com>, Crwydryn stated..."
I will try to spell this out in more detail.
I think that it is an impossible demand, that we offer the "one
best shot" at demonstrating something scientific. Even something as
simple, and as widely accepted, as the scientific proposition that
the earth is moving through space. Something which, I hope, no one
wants to remove from the school textbooks. There is no one thing
which we can offer in a few words in a discussion which would
convince someone who is deeply, religiously, committed to the idea
that the earth is fixed (and everything else moves around it).
Yet the motion of the earth is one of the fundamental facts
about astronomy. Yes, it's a *fact*. Just as evolution is one of
the fundamental facts of biology.
And it's just as easy to demonstrate evolution as is to
demonstrate the motion of the earth. Actually, I think that it's
easier to demonstrate evolution. Actually, the evidence for it is
so overwhelming that there are these responses by the evolution-
deniers:
1. Whenever we get a demonstration of some facts about evolution,
a demonstration that is so overwhelming that even the evolution-
deniers can't ignore it, they will tell us that "that is only
*micro*evolution". (That's why I made the joking reference to
micro-motion of the earth.) They won't tell us, though, just
what the difference is between "micro-" and "macro-"evolution is.
All it seems to be is a shifting boundary dependent upon the most
recent evidence. Not something that corresponds to facts about
the world of life on earth.
2. Another reaction is the radical one, represented by the question,
"How do you know, were you there?" If this question were to be taken
seriously, this would mean that the evolution-deniers are willing to
throw out vast amounts of our knowledge about the world (not only
about the world of life, but about anything that they can't see),
just to deny evolution. This, I think, amounts to a concession that
the evidence is so overwhelming that only way to deny evolution is
to deny just about all knowledge.
3. The third way is the *ad hominem* argument, such as we see in
the report of Hovind in this newspaper item. That is, that evolution
is false because some evil people appealed to evolution. Rather than
getting to the question about whether evolution actually happens, the
ground is shifted to whether evil people believed in it. (I don't
think that these people that Hovind mentions *did* believe in
evolution, by the way. I don't think that they had the least idea
what evolution *is*, and I don't think that they *cared*, and I think
that what they said shows that they didn't know and didn't care.)
This, too, amounts to an admission that the evidence for evolution
cannot be denied, for the only way to attack evolution is to smear
those of us who are not afraid of the facts about evolution.
Yes, there is ovewhelming evidence for evolution. And it is out
there for anyone who really cares enough to make the least amount of
effort to find that evidence.
Tom S.
Andy Flom
> Andy Flom wrote in talk.origins
>
> > Eric Gill <eric...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:<Xns93A36742FBC67...@24.28.95.190>...
> >> > How is he lying?
> >>
> >> Starting with his worthless "credentials," bought from a spli-level
> >> degree mill.
>
> >> Let me guess - you didn't bother to actually check to see if this
> >> bunk can be confirmed, did you?
> > Did you?!
> >
> > Many schools have only one or two students for there PHD program and
> > they work out of someones house.
>
> Yeah, they're called diploma mills.
>
> There's nothing wrong with that. The
>
> Nothing wrong as long as the so called student does not expect to
> get an education, or have a PhD that is worth anything.
>
> > house people put on there websites Hovinds never been in. Check his
> > website. By the way, Innocent til proven guilty, the burden of proof
> > is on your sholders. Don't give me any links to any third party.
>
> The so called school is not an accredited college, it offers PhD's
> for just a few hundred dollars and very little work. It meets the
> definition of a diploma mill.
I'll tell you what, what science has Hovind brought that he is lying
with. Aren't you a scientific person with a brain?
Andy
Andy Flom
If you can't debate with someone who can't run a spell check then you
are "Gutless", shouldn't I be easy pray.
Please show me scientificly(lab test) how clorophyl and vitamon(I like
spelling words wrong) D came into existance.
if evolution is true, this should be an easy question, right?
Andy
Andy Flom
I've never tried to get a phd so I don't know. But if Hovind is lying
to me scientificly, please show me where and what he is saying. You do
have a brain for science, do you not?
>
> >> > There's nothing wrong with that.
> >>
> >> Other than no oversight to gurantee academic integrity, you mean?
>
> Well?
I've never tried to get a phd so I don't know. But if Hovind is lying
to me scientificly, please show me where and what he is saying. You do
have a brain for science, do you not?
>
> >> > The
> >> > house people put on there websites Hovinds never been in. Check his
> >> > website. By the way, Innocent til proven guilty, the burden of
> >> > proof is on your sholders. Don't give me any links to any third
> >> > party.
> >>
> >> My, my my - for such an observer of forms, you sure are fussy about
> >> everybody else doing so when asked if you have. Why is that?
> >
> > Your making an accusation. I want evidence from an unrevokeable
> > source.
>
> Pray, what is an "unrevokeable" source?
Something I have to take as fact and can't refrute, example: a web
page from patriot university that list Hovinds PHD as frodulent.
By the way...
I've never tried to get a phd so I don't know. But if Hovind is lying
to me scientificly, please show me where and what he is saying. You do
have a brain for science, do you not?
>
> And while we're on it - I don't recall claiming that Hovind was ever at
> "Patriot University," just that he bought his "degree" from them.
>
> >>
> >> >> >> I wonder how long it's going to take ya'll to get the idea this
> >> >> >> is doing just the opposite?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > I have seen many
> >> >> >> > websites and chat rooms that think they have evidence for
> >> >> >> > evolution and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me. These
> >> >> >> > sites claim they could kill Hovind in a debate. HERE IS YOUR
> >> >> >> > CHANCE!!! The main purpose of Hovind's Radio Program
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> ....that Hovind controls the screening and content of, yes?
> >> >> >> Where did you get the idea such a thing could be called a
> >> >> >> "debate?"
> >> >> >>
> >> >> > Call in and prove me wrong.
> >> >>
> >> >> You didn't answer the question. Why would such a censorship mill
> >> >> be called a "debate?"
> >> >
> >> > Burden of proof isn't on me.
> >>
> >> Why not?
> >
> > Your making an accusation.
>
> I was asking a question.
You were accusing Hovind of having a frodulent degree, that is a very
serious charge and need to back it up with evidence.
>
> > This is america, if you want to accuse
> > someone of wrong doing, you bring the proof.
>
> Where did you get the idea such a thing could be called a "debate?"
Bring your proof.
Where did you get the idea that you could accuse someone of a serious
offence(having a frodulent PHD) and not need to bring evidence and
have me except you word as fact.
>
> >> > Have you yourself called in to see if you
> >> > could get a crack at the $250,000 grand. Until Put-up or shut-up,
> >> > repent.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> >> > (I think) is to get athiest(which
> >> >> >> > God doesn't believe exist)
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> God told you this?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Ask him yourself.
> >> >>
> >> >> Be happy to. Introduce me.
> >> >
> >> > Phone # is on his website www.drdino.com, now you have no excuses,
> >> > coward.
> >>
> >> God's phone number is on Kent Hovind's website?
> >>
> >> Where?
> >
> > Sorry, my miscommunication. At the last post I thought you were
> > asking me to intoduce you to hovind. My fault. If you don't think God
> > exists and he doesn't think you exist, You better spend a good deal of
> > time thinking if your intelect has the power to cast you to hell. God
> > has the intelect to do that to you. Be patient, he's right beside you
> > trying to speek to you.
>
> IOW, no, you cannot, and you want to blame everyone but yourself and your
> imaginary friend. Good job.
I apologised for a misscommunication, I'm blaming you for having tax
payers support a religion called evolution.
"New Knowledge" If Old evodence, that was tought to children, was
thrown out and replaced by "New evodence", then you have been "LYING"
to children. Examples: Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man.
And God will judge you for that.
>
> >>
> >> > Don't
> >> > put it in the text books if it will be pulled out later.
> >> >
> >> > My theory is just as religious as yours.
> >>
> >> When was the last time the Bible was modified to fit reality?
> >
> > I haven't heard of when.
>
> I've never seen evidence that it has. I've seen plenty of evidence it's
> been changed for a number of other reasons, mostly to do with the
> political leanings of the redactor
I am here with my King James Version, please show me how it's corrupt.
>
> > It doesn't violate science.
>
> Still treating leprosy with pidgeon blood?
Find someone who has leprosy and try it.
I don't try to fix deseases I don't have, that's the job of evolution.
>
> > It violates the religion of evolution.
>
> And the "religion" of cosmology, physics, geology, paleontology...
cosmology- day 4 of creation, no problem with the bible.
physics- How does this conflict with the bible
geology- If there was a world wide flood, there would be sedimentary
rock all over the world with billions of fossils in it.
paleontology-You don't get a fossil if the object isn't burried
quickly, like by a flood. Go into the west and you will not find one
fossil of a buffalo that was killed in the bugginnig of the railroads.
No problem with the bible.
Lots of problems for "the religion" of evolution.
>
> >>
> >> >> > Huh?
> >> >>
> >> >> BTW - of the five things one must "prove" as a condition of
> >> >> Hovind's Challenge, only one has anything to do with Evolution.
> >> >
> >> > Then prove it, here, now.
> >>
> >> That Hovind's chellenge has almost nothing to do with evolution?
> >
> > Then go get he $$$.
>
> How would I get Hovind to cough up by showing you that his "challenge"
> isn't about what he claims it is?
If you haven't called hovind and talked with him and repost on this
subject, you are the biggest coward I have ever chatted with.
>
> >>
> >> That's trivial. Biological evolution, by definition, starts after the
> >> beginning of life. Four of his five points are at the beginning of
> >> life or earlier.
> >
> > Show me scientificly(Lab test) How a non-dog can change into a dog.
>
> What does that have to do with Hovind's "Challenge" having little to do
> with Evolution?
If you got proof that a non-dog produced a dog it's worth $250,000. If
not, shut-up and get your stupid religion of evolution out of the
classroom.
>
> >>
> >> >> Even the title is a lie. Didn't you notice this? Or do you care?
> >> >
> >> > How so?
> >>
> >> He's been told. He doesn't care.
> >
> > Tell me, I care.
>
> I have, several times. You obviously care nothing about anything but
> Lying for Jesus.
I must be stupid then, so help me. Put them here, spacifics, tell me
again in ALL CAPITAL LETTER SO IT STANDS OUT.
>
> >> >>
> >> >> > HYP-O-CRITE!!!
> >> >>
> >> >> Why don't *you* attempt to defend your alleged theory - using
> >> >> Hovind's rules? Review them carefully and tell me if you think it
> >> >> would be possible.
> >> >>
> >> > No one's attacking my theory,
> >>
> >> *What* theory?
> >>
> >> > "The Bible."
> >>
> >> ....is a collection of sacred writings. If you mean that you have an
> >> idea that the Bible is an accurate description of events that would
> >> meet Hovind's challenge, then by all means we can set up for it.
> >
> > Lets go. Start a new forum and let me know where it's at.
>
> "Start a new forum?" No, no, this will be fine. First, *I* have to pick a
> sercret panel of judges.
Your job is to convince me, not someone else. If you resond on hovinds
challenge being frodulent and haven't submitted a challenge to him and
repost here on this subject, then you are the biggest coward I have
ever seen.
>
> >>
> >> >> Hell, as a bonus, such a thing would undoubtedly fulfill the Randi
> >> >> Foundation's Supernatural Challenge - and it's worth four times
> >> >> what Hovind's is - and you can even confirm that the money exists,
> >> >> unlike Hovind's. Quite a deal, eh? Makes you wonder why Hovind
> >> >> never tried it.
> >> >>
> >> > Myself and Hovind are not God and don't pretend to be.
> >>
> >> Be what? Coherent?
> >>
> >> > The heathen seek a sign and won't get one.
> >>
> >> Pretty nasty to send those heathens to hell, then, isn't it?
> >
> > It's there own fault, God slayed his son so he does have to slay
> > heathen.
>
> Oh, sure THAT'S logical. First, the omnipotent Creator of everything
> blames his creations for not being what He wanted,
God created you with the ability to make decision without god. That's
Love or Hate. It comes no other way.
> then comes up with an unimaginable toture for them, then breaks off a piece of himself,
If you create something, it has a responsibility to obey you and call
you good, no matter how you treet it.
> tortures it a bit and kills it to make up His own mistakes
God wasn't the one who ate off the tree, Your Grandfather did that,
and because of that you and I know how to sin.
>, now
> you're telling me this *requires* said omnipotent diety to kill anyone
> who doesn't buy this silly fable?
John 3:36 "He who has the son has life, he who doesn't have the son
has not life but the wrath of god apides on him."
One of two things is going to happen when you die.
You will be regergitated into a plant or backteria,
or you will stand before God and give an account for you sins(Ten
Commandments will help you see what is sin).
Are you ready for both?
If you create something, it has a responsibility to obey you and call
you good, no matter how you treet it.
>
> > But if they really want to stay away from God. God loves them
> > so much he will grant their wish. HIS OWN SON!!!
> >>
> >> But wait - do I hear you're not willing to take the Randi Foundation
> >> Challenge? One that's worth *four times* Hovind's alleged prize? One
> >> that has conditions that are agreed on by *both* parties, instead of
> >> just Hovind?
> >>
> >> Pray - why is that?
> >
> > Lets say that I called down Gods power against his will and tempted
> > him.
>
> Then you'd have a pretty pathetic god.
Your's is even worse, yours doesn't promise you anykind of security,
has broken many promises "piltdown man, nebraska man", gives you no
assurance of the future, and no comfort for when you die. If I
worshiped your god I couldn't sleep at night. But if I die in my
sleep. I will be in paradice. What do you have?
>
> <snip>
>
> > The moneys not winable by the
> > definition of the judge.
>
> ....of Hovind's "challenge," yes. Less than honest, that.
If you have not yet submitted to hovind and can show me "your"
documenation that it is false. SHUT-UP.
>
> >>
> >> >> (Remember you'll have to come up with a real Theory of Creation,
> >> >> too. Don't worry that you'll be the first - I'm SURE you're up to
> >> >> the task.)
> >> >
> >> > I don't have to come up with squat.
> >
> > Show me what's wrong with the bible.
>
> For what? You'll have to be a lot more specific - that's the point.
>
Show me an error. Any, One, From anywhere in that book.
> >> No, you *cannot* come up with anything substantial, never mind
> >> anything that would meet Hovind's challenge. You're just trying to
> >> ape your hero Hovind and bluster your way through.
>
> <snip>
Put-up, shut-up, or repent.
>
> >>
> >> Too bad you can't cut my mike or hang up on me on the usenet, isn't
> >> it?
> >>
> > This is fun. Count it joy when you suffer tribulation. I still
> > waiting for the tribulation though. I keep hunting for a computer to
> > continue.
>
> Actually, it sounds like you've smoked more than enough "Tribulation"
> already.
I'm just starting.
What's your eternal hope?
Andy
Andy Flom
I have read point one and will not continue until you give me some of
that overwelming evidence. Put-up, Shut-up, or Repent. Until then get
the stupid theory out of the classroom.
Andy
Andy Flom
> On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 17:39:03 +0000 (UTC), flom...@yahoo.com (Andy
> Flom) wrote:
> >"Pip R. Lagenta" <morbiu...@attbi.com> wrote in message news:<tu17fvsl27e7dfh9p...@4ax.com>...
> >> On Fri, 20 Jun 2003 19:37:18 +0000 (UTC), flom...@yahoo.com (Andy
> >> Flom) wrote:
> >>
> >> >Creationist and Evolution thropper Dr. Kent Hovind now has a internet
> >> >radio program that is on every weekday from 1pm-2pm called "The
> >> >Creation Scince Hour." I myself am a young earth Creationist Christian
> >> >websites and chat rooms that think they have evidence for evolution
> >> >and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me.
> >>
> >> "Debateable", huh? O.K. Give it your best shot:
> >> <http://www.ebonmusings.org/evolution/evoevidence.html>
> >> <http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-research.html>
> >> Remember, if you want to cast doubt on evolution, then you have to
> >> have an alternate explanation for *all* the evidence. Which means
> >> that you first have to show an UNDERSTANDING of the evidence. To help
> >> you with that understanding, there is this:
> >> <http://www.abarnett.demon.co.uk/atheism/evolution.html>
> >> <http://www.evolutionhappens.net/>
> >> <http://home.houston.rr.com/bybayouu/Tenets_of_evolution.html>
> >> Good luck!
> >> (Also, please remember that "ignorance" is not a valid reason to
> >> abandon science. Please do not display ignorance in your debate.
> >> Thank you.)
>
> >Taxonomic
> >Before I can give my answer I need for you to explane scientificly(Lab
> >experiment) how these plants,animals came into existance from nonliving matter.
> >First First Horse, then cart.
>
> As you well know, your statement is false: you have purposefully told
> a lie. The true reason that you can't state any reason for calling
> evolution into question is that you are ignorant of even the basics of
> how evolution works.
No one know how evolution works. You don't know how evolution works.
No one was there millions of years ago to docuemnt it. No one know
how to get a non-dog to produce a dog through natural causes.
>
> [Snip repeated deceit]
>
> >I can continue...but my God who loves you doesn't want me to unfairly bombard you
> >with more information then you can handle. He loves you and is seeking your
> >humility, He made you. So here are the questions of the first site I visited.
>
> Yes, you can continue to evade reality via deceit, but what good does
> that do?
Someone please show me how evolution is a part of reality. Get some
evidence and show me. Put-up, Shut-up, or repent. COWARDS!!!
>
> Here, be less ignorant. Try:
> <http://www.nap.edu/html/creationism/evidence.html>
> <http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-qa.html>
> <http://www.skeptictank.org/hs/factfaq.htm>
> <http://www.ebonmusings.org/evolution/evoevidence.html>
> <http://www.abarnett.demon.co.uk/atheism/evolution.html>
> <http://www.evolutionhappens.net/>
> <http://home.houston.rr.com/bybayouu/Tenets_of_evolution.html>
> <http://www.gly.uga.edu/railsback/1122science2.html>
> <http://www.gly.uga.edu/railsback/1122science3.html>
> <http://www.gly.uga.edu/railsback/1122science7.html>
> <http://www.gly.uga.edu/railsback/1122sciencedefns.html>
> <http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~lindsay/creation/evo_science.html>
> <http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/>
> <http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-research.html>
>
> >When you die, one of two things is going to happen.
> >Your going to be regirgitated into a plant(or something else),
> >or your going to stand before God and give an account of your sins.
> >Are you ready for both?!
>
> Do you understand the concept of the false dichotomy?
> <http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?FalseDichotomy>
> It is a form of deceit. You seem to do that a lot. Are you forced to
> deceit because you don't have any facts to work from?
>
> >Read Carefully:
> [snip]
> >You shall not give lie.
>
> Uh oh! You're in trouble now.
> <http://home.attbi.com/~galentripp/CHRIST.html>
> LOL
>
> 內躬偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,
> Pip R. Lagenta Pip R. Lagenta Pip R. Lagenta Pip R. Lagenta
> �虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌
>
> -- Pip R. Lagenta
> President for Life
> International Organization Of People Named Pip R. Lagenta
> (If your name is Pip R. Lagenta, ask about our dues!)
>
> <http://home.attbi.com/~galentripp/pip.html>
Andy Flom
> In article <b3941d14.0306...@posting.google.com>, flom...@yahoo.com
> wrote...
> >mtu...@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu (mel turner) wrote in message
> news:<bd02gu$o9l$1...@gargoyle.oit.duke.edu>...
> >> In article <b3941d14.03062...@posting.google.com>,
> flom...@yahoo.com wrote...
>
> >> >Creationist and Evolution thropper Dr. Kent Hovind
> >>
> >> "Thropper"?
> >>
> <http://www.google.com/custom?q=hovind&sa=Search&sitesearch=www.talkorigins.org
>
> >> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/
> >> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/faqs.html#hovind
> >>
> >> might suggest some other colorful words for him.
>
> >Call him and tell him
>
> Is he worth it? He seems very near the bottom of the creationist
> barrel. Even other creationists seem to agree:
>
> http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/1011hovind.asp
Romans 3 "Let God be called true and every man a liar."
Truth is not defingned by majority opinion.
If hovind is wrong in an area, I will try geting ahold of him and see
if I can convice him. Bring evidece cowards.
>
> >> now has a internet
> >> >radio program that is on every weekday from 1pm-2pm called "The
> >> >Creation Scince Hour."
> >>
> >> Was "The Oxymoron Hour" already taken?
>
> >Call him and ask him why he didn't name his program that. 1pm-2pm (Got
> >Guts Coward?!)
>
> Don't get "internet radio". Can you present and defend here any of
> his claims that you found especially persuasive?
>
Hovinds not God, I represent God and seek to defend Gods word. Hovind
has provided me with knowledge to be in these discussions to help
defend Gods book.
If you have evidence for your theory, put-up shut-up,or repent
cowards.
> >> >I myself am a young earth Creationist Christian
> >> >who will debate and defend the Bible at all cost.
> >>
> >> Fine. But many Christians seem to have no problem rejecting
> >> "young earth Creationism" while keeping their beliefs.
> >>
> >> I have seen many
> >> >websites
> >>
> >> Like
> >>
> >> http://www.talkorigins.org/
> >> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs.html
> >> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/outline.html
> >> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-qa.html
> >> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-mustread.html
> >> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html
> >> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
> >> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-intro-to-biology.html
> >> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/other-links-gensci.html
> >> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/other-links.html#evolution
> >> ?
> >> >and chat rooms that think they have evidence for evolution
> >>
> >> Websites and chatrooms. Ever seen a classroom or a science
> >> book?
>
> >Still (rubbish)debateable.
>
> So, debate already. What'cha got? What's "rubbish" about it, or don't
> you understand any of it well enough to begin to criticize it?
>
Let me narrow it down for you.
Cosmic evolution(big bang)
Chemical evolution(Elaments evolving from hydrogen)
Organic Evolution(life arising through natural processes)
Macro Evolution(Non-dog changing to a dog)
This should give you a good start. Put-up, Shut-up, or repent.
> >> >and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me.
> >>
> >> Great. This is just the place to debate them. Go for it.
> >> What aspects of which bits of evidence for evolution do
> >> you dispute, and why? Why should the scientists agree with
> >> you? Show us. Be very specific, with citations of the
> >> actual evidence. If you need a few example to start, see:
> >
> >I'll tell you what and do you a favor. If you think evolution is
> >true, then stop giving me links
>
> Those links contain many references to the actual scientific literature.
> Y',know, the papers that present and discuss all that evidence stuff and
> its interpretation.
Go to the site, get some of that precious information, and defend it
yourself coward.
>
> >and think for yourself
>
> How sweet. You try it first.
If you have no evidence for your theory of evolution, Shut-up.
>
> (if that's what
> >you claim you do). Give me you ONE best shot that proves Evolution.
>
> Why just one? The evidence is there, throughout biology. If you want
> me to generalize about the most compelling type of evidence for common
> descent, it's the "twin" [really multiple] nested hierarchical patterns
> seen throughout the groups of life. Group within groups, within groups,
> within groups. Why such all-pervasive patterns? Evolution explains and
> requires them, creationism really can't and basically doesn't.
Here's why just one. If evolution is true and every other religion is
false. You should be able to give me one fact that I can't dispute.
Like this, Please explane how a DNA (which has the storage copasity of
over a trillion(1,000,000,000,000) CDs worth of data in the size of a
hair, came into existance. To me the only reasonable answer that
makes sense is "God did it"
>
> >You best shot. (Got guts Goliath(coward)!?) Fight me like a man and
> >not a coward.
>
> [Sheesh...] What, are you twelve? Can't you even try discussing
> things calmly? If not, then 'bye.
I am calm, I use words like coward to get people to try to answer my
questions. I person acually went and got evidence. He isn't a coward.
My not understand true science or truth, but not a coward.
if you have evidence, put-up shut-up, or repent.
>
> >God rejects the prowd but gives grace to the humble.
>
> That's nice. Maybe you should go work on that humility.
I am standing humbley before my God try to reach a lost generation
that is so blind that they can't even see to bring evidence for their
theory for discussion.
>
> >> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
> >>
> >> and its links
> >>
> >> These sites claim they
> >> >could kill Hovind in a debate. HERE IS YOUR CHANCE!!!
> >>
> >> Sites would have a hard time debating [they don't talk].
> >>
> >> The main
> >> >purpose of Hovind's Radio Program (I think) is to get athiest(which
> >> >God doesn't believe exist)
> >>
> >> Then it sounds like the belief's mutual?
>
> >Then I hope your intelect is stronger then Gods because I would hate
> >to be at the recieveing end of his judgement.
>
> Non sequitur. I merely made a wry comment on your "athiest(which God
> doesn't believe exist)".
If the believe is mutual, then your admiting that God exist and he
doesn't believe in you. Your in a bad position, may I suggest you
repent before he casts you out of his sight. He's gracious to let you
breath right now.
>
> >> to call in and to show them there is no
> >> >evidence exist for evolution,
> >>
> >> Umm, you do know that evolutionary biology isn't
> >> about atheism? Plenty of devout theists are "evolutionists"
> >> and vice-versa
>
> >Then show me how evolution is true. If you can't get it out of the
> >text books.
>
> It's science, and belongs in the science books and science classrooms.
> It's very well supported by all the available evidence. If new evidence
> requires modifying parts of the current version of the science, we will.
> That's how science works.
Show me your evidence, Give me your best shot coward. Science is
things you can see, observe, test, and deminstrate. Jesus Died, the
deciples and romans(who wanted Jesus dead), confermed his
death.(observation) Three days later, the deciples saw Jesus
ALIVE.(observation and seeing) The fed him to confirm he is alive and
not a Goast(Testing). Thomas felt the wonds in his
hands(demonstration). Science conirms the bible.
>
> Anyway, what exactly do you mean by "Then show me how evolution is
> true." Show you that the genetic makeup of populations of organisms
> can and does change over generations? [the basic definition of
> "evolution"]. It's observed to happen and easily demonstrated. Show
> you that new traits can arise in an evolving lineage? It's also
> observed to happen, and also readily demonstrated.
>
Give me you number one best evidence you have. Put-up, Shut-up, or
repent.
> Show you that new species can arise from an ancestral species? [the
> minimal definition of "macroevolution"]. It's observed to happen. Show
> you that groups of related species can arise from a common ancestral
> species? [also macroevolution]. It's well supported by very strong
> evidence. Show you that all known groups of life have arisen from
> early common ancestors? The common origin of all life is also supported
> by strong evidence, but that particular result wasn't any requirement
> of the idea of evolution. We could have found that there were
> independent types of life, but it simply wasn't the case.
Please demonstarate scientificly(Lab Test) How a non-dog and produce a
dog by natural processes. Put-up, Shut-up, or repent.
>
> So, then, how are we supposed to show you any or all of these things
> without referring to links? Would you prefer citations of textbooks
> you should read, or the original scientific journal articles that
> reported the findings? Have you access to a university library?
>
> cheers
Here's how without referring to links?
Step 1: Go to your links.
Step 2: Find the one best piece of evidence you can muster.
Step 3: Come back here and defend you God like a true saint, setting
you life on the line.
Thou shall not lie
Exodus 20:16
Know Jesus, No Hell.
No Jesus, Know Hell!
Andy
Andy Flom
Hovind has responces to the Non-Science objections you made, I'm not
interested in those. What "science" has he lied about(be spacific).
Put-up, shut-up, or repent.
Andy
Bruce
> Bruce <sol...@gehennom.net> wrote in message news:<bd7ni3$jma$1...@news-int.gatech.edu>...
> I thought evolution was a part of science. Guess I was wrong. Would
> somebody with intelegence give me an answer to my just question.
> Put-up, Shut-up, or repent.
Ah. Intelegence. Apologies.
--
Bruce Labbate | Time is an arrangement.
shiftless layabout | Time is an arranger.
| I am a derangement.
| - The Pixies
Andy Flom
First I would like to congradulat you by calling you a non-coward.
Way to stand up to your believe. You may be wrong or mis-informed,
but you are no coward.
>
> 1.. Time, space, and matter came into existence by themselves.
>
> Scientifically we have no other evidence for anything else and the steady
> state theory doesn't explain the universe's expansion rate
>
That's why Genesis 1:1 is part of my "RELIGION", and not part of my
science.
> 2.. Planets and stars formed from space dust.
>
> The original stars were formed from hydrogen that the big bang released, as
> these stars exploded or died out some became the space dust that forms the
> solar systems of today. Note this can be observed with the Hubble telescope.
>
Do you "know" this or "believe" this.
This concept violates the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.
Yes, Stars blowup. But noone has ever seed a star forming, you don't
know if some space dust moved out of the way and a star was behind it.
Please explain to me the natural process that changed Hypdrogen to
Urnaium.
> 3.. Matter created life by itself.
>
> This is yet to be confirmed but no other rational explanation has been put
> forward.
There is one other, "God did it." Let me explain...
The genetic Information in you and your brothers and sisters is all in
your parents. So your going from a greater about of genetic
information to a smaller about. Now lets go backwards through time
with this thought. You grand parents have more then your parents.
Their parents had more then them. Their parents had more then them.
Their parents had more then them. Their parents had more then them.
Until you get to Adam and Eve. Science has not observed information
coming into existance without an intelegence. It makes logical sence
to start with infinate information that comes from an infinate
intelegence.
>
> 4.. Early life-forms learned to reproduce themselves.
>
> Again yet to be confirmed but we do have fossil evidence of primitive cells
> reproducing 2.5 to 3.5 billion years ago. Note that we have no evidence of
> anything else be it aliens or whatever teaching cells to divide.
You have a major problem, you have two cells that need to evolve:
opposite sex, close by(they got to find each other), need food(what
will the first cell eat?), the two cells got to be interested. Your
more likely to be struck by lightning. If you did, where would you go
if you die?
>
> 5.. Major changes occurred between these diverse life forms (i.e., fish
> changed to amphibians, amphibians changed to reptiles, and reptiles changed
> to birds or mammals).
Please show me scientificly(lab tests) how a non-dog can produce a
dog.
>
> The fossil record demonstrates some of this along with corroborating
> evidence from genetics and observations of existing life on our planet. We
> have evidence of fish developing legs over time and reptiles developing into
> mammals, in fact we can trace back the bones in our ears to the jawbones of
> reptiles and fish through the fossil record.
Lets pretend you are digging for fossils and find a fish with legs.
How can you prove to me that that is a kind of animal God created on
day 5 or 6 that just recently went extinkt.
> And that is pretty solid evidence but my favorite is the trilobite with
> no eyes whatsoever but still has the location clearly marked where the eyes
> should be fixed just like their identical relatives with eyes. It even has
> what they call sutures so the trilobite can molt without harming the eyes it
> doesn't have. Now if your concerned about rational thinking please give me a
> reason besides evolution that would explain this.
Trylobites "with eyes" have-the-most-complex-eye found in nature. Now
if you think a trylobye that may have been born without eyes that
drownd in Noah's flood is evidence. That is not rational thinking.
>
> So we have evidence for some but not all, but explaining the Big Band,
> Formation of the stars and Life is a Huge thing to ask.
>
> Lane
on the subject of stars, Can you explain to me why the galexys still
have their spyrial arms? Should those have been out of their spyral a
long time ago.
Thou shall not lie.
Andy Flom
Here's some evidence.
One stran of DNA has the ability to store the information of 1
trillion CDs the size of a fraction of a hair.
Please explain scientificly(lab test), how INCREADIBLE Complexity,
came into existance out side of an inteligent creator that loves his
creation.
Andy
Chris Ho-Stuart
Andy Flom <flom...@yahoo.com> wrote:
[snip]
>> 2.. Planets and stars formed from space dust.
>>
>> The original stars were formed from hydrogen that the big bang released, as
>> these stars exploded or died out some became the space dust that forms the
>> solar systems of today. Note this can be observed with the Hubble telescope.
>
> Do you "know" this or "believe" this.
Know, in the usual sense of know used in science; which is
supported by all available evidence.
> This concept violates the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.
No, it doesn't. A model which violated such a fundamental law
of nature would never get past first base as a scientific model.
> Yes, Stars blowup. But noone has ever seed a star forming, you don't
> know if some space dust moved out of the way and a star was behind it.
Actually, we can see stars forming just fine. There are millions
upon millions of stars out there, and we can see stars in all the
various stages of formation.
See, for example: <http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101stars.html>
> Please explain to me the natural process that changed Hypdrogen to
> Urnaium.
Basically, it occurs by nucleosynthesis in massive stars,
and then in supernovae.
Here is a relevant page from NASA which explains the models
in an easily accessible form (such as I require!)
<http://helios.gsfc.nasa.gov/nucleo.html>
Hydrogen and helium were mostly formed as matter condensed out
from the hot dense plasma in the very earliest times of the
universe, shortly after the initial singularity. The amounts
of hydrogen and helium in the universe are predicted by Big
Bang cosmology; this is one of the great successes of the model;
and a good scientific basis for confidence about the origins of
light elements.
See: <http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bbtest2.html>
Heavier elements, up to about iron, are formed in massive stars.
Iron is about the most stable element, and hence the natural
end point of fusion processes (a thermodynmic argument applies
here, you may be interested to know!)
Elements heavier than iron are not formed in normal stars,
because they actually have less binding energy per nucleon
than iron. This stage of the process requires a supernova.
See: <http://herschel.jpl.nasa.gov/science/origin01.html>
The scientific model for a supernova explosion is quite specific
as to the various processes involved; and these models are also
well tested by observation.
>> 3.. Matter created life by itself.
>>
>> This is yet to be confirmed but no other rational explanation has been put
>> forward.
>
> There is one other, "God did it." Let me explain...
> The genetic Information in you and your brothers and sisters is all in
> your parents. So your going from a greater about of genetic
> information to a smaller about. Now lets go backwards through time
> with this thought. You grand parents have more then your parents.
> Their parents had more then them. Their parents had more then them.
> Their parents had more then them. Their parents had more then them.
> Until you get to Adam and Eve. Science has not observed information
> coming into existance without an intelegence. It makes logical sence
> to start with infinate information that comes from an infinate
> intelegence.
This is rather suspect, theologically speaking. Most churches
now recognize the problems with a God og the Gaps argument, in
which Gods action is contrasted with natural processes.
A good way to start thinking of the implications here is to
ask who made ME. Not "humans" generally, but me, as a unique
human individual. Did God make me?
If so, then you have recognized that "God did it" is not, in
general, an *alternative* to natural processes. To say "God
made me" is to recognize that God is responsible for all the
world, and it is to see God's hand in the natural processes
studied by science in which I am formed, as a unique human
individual.
Science has, in fact, observed new information being added
to the genome by evolutionary processes; it is simply not true
to say that science has not observed information coming into
existence without an intelligence. The universe, in fact, seems
to be finely tuned for the spontaneous emergence of complexity,
on the so called "edge of chaos". Some Christians see God's
creative power in that also; but the implications are that God
created a universe pregnant with infinite possibility.
Nothing is gained, theologically or scientifically, by saying
"God did it" with respect to origins of life. It does not, in
fact, rule out a role for natural processes (as we can see once
it is accepted that God made me also). And it does not recover
a literal interpretation of the bible. That has been conclusively
ruled out by fundamental observations relating to the size and
age of the universe, and the long histories of life revealed by
paleontology.
The question really concerns the history of life on Earth. Even
if we treat God a like a human designer who works within the
constraints imposed by nature to manage design trades offs and
construct life like some kind of human artifact, this is still
a step in a history of events, and needs to fit in the evidence
we have for Earth's history. It is no good proposing any kind of
designer stepping into make fully formed animals with no
antecedents; that view has long since been shown inconsistent
with available evidence.
>> 4.. Early life-forms learned to reproduce themselves.
>>
>> Again yet to be confirmed but we do have fossil evidence of primitive cells
>> reproducing 2.5 to 3.5 billion years ago. Note that we have no evidence of
>> anything else be it aliens or whatever teaching cells to divide.
>
> You have a major problem, you have two cells that need to evolve:
> opposite sex, close by(they got to find each other), need food(what
> will the first cell eat?), the two cells got to be interested. Your
> more likely to be struck by lightning. If you did, where would you go
> if you die?
>
>> 5.. Major changes occurred between these diverse life forms (i.e., fish
>> changed to amphibians, amphibians changed to reptiles, and reptiles changed
>> to birds or mammals).
>
> Please show me scientificly(lab tests) how a non-dog can produce a
> dog.
This comment shows a major misunderstanding of evolution.
Evolution does not made a dog into a non-dog, or a cat into
a non-cat, or a mammal into a non-mammal, or a hythobob into
a non-hythobob (substitute anything you like for hythobob).
What evolution does is make dogs (and cats, and mammals, and
hythobobs) more diverse over time. Mammals, for example, are
all descended from one species which lived a couple of hundred
million years. That species did not change into "something else".
It rather diversified into a spread of forms, with many variations
on the basic theme.
Science does observe this kind of diverficiation going on, right
now, at rates which are consistent with the long histories of life
revealed by paleontologists.
>> The fossil record demonstrates some of this along with corroborating
>> evidence from genetics and observations of existing life on our planet. We
>> have evidence of fish developing legs over time and reptiles developing into
>> mammals, in fact we can trace back the bones in our ears to the jawbones of
>> reptiles and fish through the fossil record.
>
> Lets pretend you are digging for fossils and find a fish with legs.
> How can you prove to me that that is a kind of animal God created on
> day 5 or 6 that just recently went extinkt.
You mean how can I prove it is not?
By such things as dating; and by the strict sorting of fossils into
distinct eras. At the time of the first fish, there were no mammals.
>> And that is pretty solid evidence but my favorite is the trilobite with
>> no eyes whatsoever but still has the location clearly marked where the eyes
>> should be fixed just like their identical relatives with eyes. It even has
>> what they call sutures so the trilobite can molt without harming the eyes it
>> doesn't have. Now if your concerned about rational thinking please give me a
>> reason besides evolution that would explain this.
>
> Trylobites "with eyes" have-the-most-complex-eye found in nature. Now
> if you think a trylobye that may have been born without eyes that
> drownd in Noah's flood is evidence. That is not rational thinking.
>
>>
>> So we have evidence for some but not all, but explaining the Big Band,
>> Formation of the stars and Life is a Huge thing to ask.
>>
>> Lane
>
> on the subject of stars, Can you explain to me why the galexys still
> have their spyrial arms? Should those have been out of their spyral a
> long time ago.
No, there is no particular reason to think spiral arms should
have been lost a long time ago. There is still a lot to learn about
galaxies and their formation; but there is no special problem with
spirals.
Galaxies are very big, by the way. In many cases, light takes a
hundred thousand years or more just to get from one side to the
other.
Best wishes -- Chris
Dick C
> Dick C <dic...@localnet.boo.com> wrote in message
> news:<Xns93A3BF3EEC81...@216.168.3.50>...
>> Andy Flom wrote in talk.origins
>> > house people put on there websites Hovinds never been in. Check his
>> > website. By the way, Innocent til proven guilty, the burden of
>> > proof is on your sholders. Don't give me any links to any third
>> > party.
>>
>> The so called school is not an accredited college, it offers PhD's
>> for just a few hundred dollars and very little work. It meets the
>> definition of a diploma mill.
>
> I'll tell you what, what science has Hovind brought that he is lying
> with. Aren't you a scientific person with a brain?
Leave out the insults, it does your argument no good. However,
virtually everything Hovind has to say is a lie. Just going to his
site, you select science:articles. And you get several articles, very
few of them having to do with science. Eventually you can go to the
article called "Questions for Evolutionists".
The first paragraph starts out with a lie. It states that "some people
think evolution is a reasonable theory to explain man’s questions about
the universe."
And that is the first lie, nobody thinks that evolution is explains the
universe. It only explains the diversity of life. Nothing more.
Then Hovind proceeds to make arguments against his version of the theory,
and those are lies, since the real theory does not say anything that
he claims it does.
That should start you out. Oh and you never answered my points about
the diploma mill that Hovind bought his degree from. Why is that?
Dick C
> TomS <TomS_...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
What does repenting have to do with the Theory of Evolution? Since
many Christians accept the Theory as the best scientific explanation
of the diversity of life, it seems to me that repenting has nothing
to do with it. And since the bible says nothing about it either, it
seems to me that you are the one that needs to repent, or at least
convert to Christianity.
As far as evidence for the theory, try the genetic similarities and
differences of life, and the nested hierarchy it forms. And the
physical similarities and differences of all life the nested hierarchy
that forms. And the fact the two hierarchies fit together so well that
one can look at the physical hierachy and make predictions about the
genetic hierarchy. The fossil record.
Oh, and they aren't your schools, they are our schools.
SneakyPete
>snipped<
>
> Someone please show me how evolution is a part of reality. Get some
> evidence and show me. Put-up, Shut-up, or repent. COWARDS!!!
>
Do you bear any resemblance to you parents?
SneakyPete
> snipped<
Andy searched and searched until he found a brain cell
and the best he could do was -
> My not understand true science or truth, but not a coward.
What a maroon.
I am impressed by the patience many of you
have shown in dealing with this cretin.
He hardly deserves that much respect.
_SneakyPete
Pip R. Lagenta
Flom) wrote:
>"Pip R. Lagenta" <morbiu...@attbi.com>
>wrote in message news:<qn1ffvk9sqop7mi0e...@4ax.com>...
>> On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 17:39:03 +0000 (UTC), flom...@yahoo.com (Andy
>> Flom) wrote:
>> As you well know, your statement is false: you have purposefully told
>> a lie. The true reason that you can't state any reason for calling
>> evolution into question is that you are ignorant of even the basics of
>> how evolution works.
>
>No one know how evolution works. You don't know how evolution works.
The basics of evolution are well understood. You could understand it
yourself, if you wanted to.
I understand the basics of evolution, and you could too, if you wanted
to. I think that you *do* understand that you could fully grasp the
ideas behind evolution. However, it is clear to me that you have
purposefully chosen to remain ignorant. Further, it is abundantly
clear to all that you have personally chosen to abandon decency and
honesty for the deceit and falsehoods that are creationism.
>No one was there millions of years ago to docuemnt it. No one know
>how to get a non-dog to produce a dog through natural causes.
We all understand that you have the ability to parrot back the old
canards that you have been fed. That you say these things only
demonstrates the depths of your moral and ethical bankruptcy. It is
sad that you have chosen to be ignorant of both evolution, itself,
*and* ignorant of what other people can and do understand *about*
evolution.
All can see the gross dishonesty in your above statements. If all
that you wish to do is impress us with your personal corruption,
consider us duly impressed.
>>
>> [Snip repeated deceit]
>>
>> >I can continue...but my God who loves you doesn't want me to unfairly bombard you
>> >with more information then you can handle. He loves you and is seeking your
>> >humility, He made you. So here are the questions of the first site I visited.
>>
>> Yes, you can continue to evade reality via deceit, but what good does
>> that do?
>
>Someone please show me how evolution is a part of reality. Get some
>evidence and show me. Put-up, Shut-up, or repent. COWARDS!!!
I am sure that all are amazed that you put those words just *above*
the very thing that you ask for. But then, did you even look at them?
Look now:
Mark Isaak
Flom) wrote:
>Eric Gill <eric...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<Xns93A3AD685D9CA...@24.28.95.150>...
>> That Hovind's chellenge has almost nothing to do with evolution?
>
>Then go get he $$$.
You don't get it. Hovind is a fraud. A cheat. A conman. He won't
part with his money under any conditions. God himself could disprove
Hovind's challenge (in fact, He has), and Hovind would not pay up.
Hovind's own website proves he is a fraud. Other evidence proves him
a liar, about his credentials among other things. Police reports and
the reports of his victims show that he also cheats on his taxes and
harbored at least one wanted felon.
It says a lot that you are defending him. It says that creationism is
desperate for any tiny little shred of perceived support it can get.
--
Mark Isaak at...@earthlink.net
"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of
the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are
being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and
exposing the country to danger." -- Hermann Goering
SneakyPete
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > > If the thing that you don't believe exists doesn't believe you exist.
> > > I do hope your stronger then Him. Because those who aren't his
> > > children, He will cast from his presence.
> >
> > Great! Why don't you learn from that example and bugger off, too?
>
> A challenge, Think.
>
> Give me a logical reason why I should stop defending my faith and stop
> attacking your "FAITH". If your faith is so scientific and accurate,
> SHOW ME SOME OF YOUR STOOPID EVIDENCE, COWARDS.
Sorry, science deals in relevant varifiable evidence.
You'll have to go here to get your STOOPID EVIDENCE, moron.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/
>I've asked several
> times to show me your ONE BEST PIECE of evidence. Get it from your
> other sites and bring it here if you know how to defend you stupid
> theory. I'm waiting. Tick. Tock. Tick. Tock.
>
> Andy
Mark Isaak
Flom) wrote:
>[...] The sun's light is destructive to everything on earth but cloraphil.
I don't believe that. Prove it.
Mark Isaak
Flom) wrote:
>gro...@cco.caltech.edu (Andy Groves) wrote in message news:<991ea4ae.0306...@posting.google.com>...
>> flom...@yahoo.com (Andy Flom) wrote in message news:<b3941d14.03062...@posting.google.com>...
>> > Explane how cloraphil came into existance. The earth is an open
>> > system getting its energy from the sun's light. The sun's light is
>> > destructive to everything on earth but cloraphil.
>>
>> What about carotenoids and phycobilins?
>>
>> Andy
>>
>> P.S. Your evidence appears to amount to "Plants are complicated,
>> therefore Genesis is true". Is that it?
>
>I'm not fighting for Genesis right now. I'm trying to get a stoopid
>religion of evolution out of the schools.
>
>Someone have guts and brains and show me how my question fits in an
>evolutionary module. Put-up, Shut-up, or repent.
Someone just did put-up. Why am I not surprised you didn't notice.
Mark Isaak
Flom) wrote:
>Here's some evidence.
>
>One stran of DNA has the ability to store the information of 1
>trillion CDs the size of a fraction of a hair.
That's not true. Not even close.
Your quiz for today, Andy: How many bits of information
(uncompressed, including "junk") are on the longest human chromosome?
Hint: Count the base pairs and multiply by two.
Mark Isaak
<cats...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Why should we bother talking to somebody with their fingers knuckle deep in
>their ears and humming the 1812 Overture at the top of their lungs?
1812 Overture? You give him much too much credit. If he hums any
tune at all, it would be something more along the lines of the
Gilligan Islands theme.
Florian
(snip)
> If you got proof that a non-dog produced a dog it's worth $250,000.
No, it isn't. Go look up the terms of Hovind's "challenge" once again. To
claim the $250k, one would also have to prove that evolution is *the only
possible way* for dogs to have come from nondogs. Among other things, you
would have to prove that God did not perform a miracle and cause a wolf to
give birth to a dog. Empirical evidence only, please.
And once you've done that, heck, you still haven't even started! Turns out
the first "phenomenon" on Hovind's list to be explained is "A highly ordered
universe exists." Now you need to somehow prove that "a highly ordered
universe" came to exist through Hovind's strange caricature of evolution, and
then that that was the *only possible way* for it to have come about. Good
luck with that!
But let's say you somehow managed even that -- perhaps you found an amazing
proof scribbled in a margin of your autographed first edition of _The Origin
of Species_ that exactly answers every aspect of Hovind's challenge! Now you
have to get the man to cough up the dough. Let's see, what's the procedure
again?
Hmm. Apparently, you present the evidence to Hovind himself. He may, at his
option, choose to forward some, all, or none of it to an anonymous panel of
judges that he claims to have appointed. These mysterious judges must (all?)
be convinced that the evidence meets the terms of the challenge and then
pronounce their verdict. It is uncertain whether the verdict will be public,
or whether it too will be relayed via Hovind himself; the judges do not have
to identify themselves.
But let's say it all goes by the book. Here's Hovind, damning verdict in
hand and his entire worldview in ruins, who must now keep his good word and
pay up. What does he do? Why, he calls up his mysterious wealthy friend and
tells *him* to cut you a check for $250k!
What a brave man, this Kent Hovind! Truly the risk he takes in issuing his
$250,000 challenge speaks volumes about the strength of his faith!
> If not, shut-up and get your stupid religion of evolution out of the
> classroom.
Would you have microevolution kept out of the classroom too? You know, like
housecats and lions and tigers and cougars and leopards and lynxes and
sabre-toothed cats coming out of a single pair of cats that Noah had on the
Ark?
What about geology, would you allow it in the classroom? Geologists hold
that the world is 4.5 billion years old, after all. How about astronomy?
Physics? All full of dangerous scientific ideas. Philosophy? Some
philosophers seem to hold the heretical opinion that not all moral values
come from the Bible. History? Teaches all sorts of nonsense about the
Egyptians and the Chinese, when clearly they would all have died in the
Flood.
And should a public school be allowed to teach Hebrew or Greek? After all,
the students might then go read the original Bible instead of the KJV!
(snip rest)
--
ego vidi stultum firma radice et maledixi pulchritudini eius statim
H,R.Gruemm
<snip>
> Here's why just one. If evolution is true and every other religion is
> false.
Category error. Evolution is either a scientific fact or a scientific
theory, but in no case a religion
>You should be able to give me one fact that I can't dispute.
There is no fact which cannot be disputed if the disputer is
sufficiently ignorant.
> Like this, Please explane how a DNA (which has the storage copasity of
> over a trillion(1,000,000,000,000) CDs worth of data in the size of a
> hair, came into existance. To me the only reasonable answer that
> makes sense is "God did it"
A gold-silver alloy has an even higher storage capacity (since every
lattice spot can be occupied by a gold or a silver atom) - and
gold-silver alloys come into existence without the observable action
of any god.
<snip>
> > It's science, and belongs in the science books and science classrooms.
> > It's very well supported by all the available evidence. If new evidence
> > requires modifying parts of the current version of the science, we will.
> > That's how science works.
>
> Show me your evidence, Give me your best shot coward. Science is
> things you can see, observe, test, and deminstrate. Jesus Died, the
> deciples and romans(who wanted Jesus dead), confermed his
> death.(observation)
All we observe are texts whose purported authors *claim* that someone
called Jesus died.
Three days later, the deciples saw Jesus
> ALIVE.(observation and seeing)
All we observe are texts whose purported authors *claim* that the
disciples saw Jesus alive.
The fed him to confirm he is alive and
> not a Goast(Testing). Thomas felt the wonds in his
> hands(demonstration).
All we observe are texts whose purported authors *claim* that Thomas
felt the wounds. No one denies the reality of those texts; but they
are not themselves sufficient evidence to conclude that a violation of
the known behavior of nature has happened; otherwise the Odyssey would
be a scientific demonstration of the existence of Pallas Athene.
> > Show you that new species can arise from an ancestral species? [the
> > minimal definition of "macroevolution"]. It's observed to happen. Show
> > you that groups of related species can arise from a common ancestral
> > species? [also macroevolution]. It's well supported by very strong
> > evidence. Show you that all known groups of life have arisen from
> > early common ancestors? The common origin of all life is also supported
> > by strong evidence, but that particular result wasn't any requirement
> > of the idea of evolution. We could have found that there were
> > independent types of life, but it simply wasn't the case.
>
> Please demonstarate scientificly(Lab Test)
Scientific observations do not require lab tests (which can be
exceedingly difficult in the case of supernovae).
How a non-dog and produce a
> dog by natural processes. Put-up, Shut-up, or repent.
Bacteria of one species (non-nylon-digesting) have become bacteria of
a different species (nylon-digesting) by natural processes (a
frame-shift mutation).
Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses!
HRG.
Andrew Arensburger
> Evidently you are unaware of Internet Usenet posting rule No.
> VII-7.b.6-a, which states that "if you cannot spell atheist, you
> cannot post to this newsgroup."
Isn't that what alt.athiesm is for? (That, and other matters
of concern to illiterate unsaved heathens.)
--
Andrew Arensburger, Systems guy University of Maryland
arensb.no-...@glue.umd.edu Office of Information Technology
Be consistent -- but not all the time.
Boikat
"Mark Isaak" <at...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
news:hq3hfvs4qtor3brrm...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 01:11:32 +0000 (UTC), flom...@yahoo.com (Andy
> Flom) wrote:
>
> >Eric Gill <eric...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns93A3AD685D9CA...@24.28.95.150>...
> >> That Hovind's chellenge has almost nothing to do with evolution?
> >
> >Then go get he $$$.
Andy: I will give you $200.00 if you can prove that I do not exist.
Boikat
Boikat
Does he still claim that the desolved mineral content of the oceans show
that the Earth is only a few thousand years old?
Boikat
>
> Andy
>
mel turner
flom...@yahoo.com [Andy Flom] wrote...news:<bd84mk$la6$1
>@gargoyle.oit.duke.edu>...
>> >> >Creationist and Evolution thropper Dr. Kent Hovind
[snip]
>> Is he worth it? He seems very near the bottom of the creationist
>> barrel. Even other creationists seem to agree:
>>
>> http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/1011hovind.asp
>
>Romans 3 "Let God be called true and every man a liar."
>
>Truth is not defingned by majority opinion.
>If hovind is wrong in an area, I will try geting ahold of him and see
>if I can convice him. Bring evidece cowards.
Then pass along some of those many criticisms of Hovind from those
earlier links.
[snip]
>> Don't get "internet radio". Can you present and defend here any of
>> his claims that you found especially persuasive?
>>
>Hovinds not God,
Do call in and tell him that.
>I represent God and seek to defend Gods word. Hovind
>has provided me with knowledge to be in these discussions to help
>defend Gods book.
Again, can you present and defend some of this "knowledge" [or should
it be "nawlij"? I like your approach to creatively phonetic spelling]
>If you have evidence for your theory, put-up shut-up,or repent
>cowards.
We did already. You didn't seem willing to look at it. No links,
remember?
[snip]
>>>>Ever seen a classroom or a science book?
>>
>>>Still (rubbish)debateable.
>>
>> So, debate already. What'cha got? What's "rubbish" about it, or don't
>> you understand any of it well enough to begin to criticize it?
>>
>Let me narrow it down for you.
>Cosmic evolution(big bang)
What about it? It's cosmology, not evolutionary biology, but both are
well established and well supported by the evidence.
>Chemical evolution(Elaments evolving from hydrogen)
That's not what "chemical evolution" means. Again, the origin of the
elements is something for physicists. For evolutionary biologists,
it's a given that the universe and the earth already got here somehow,
as did life.
>Organic Evolution(life arising through natural processes)
That's not "organic evolution", but is "abiogenesis".
>Macro Evolution(Non-dog changing to a dog)
Finally, you get around to what we mean by "evolution".
Okay, what's a non-dog for this purpose? Are dogs "still wolves"?
Are dogs, wolves, coyotes, foxes, etc all "still dogs"? Do you
want to discuss the evidence that the dog family evolved from
common ancestors with other members of the Carnivora?
>This should give you a good start. Put-up, Shut-up, or repent.
>> >> >and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me.
>> >>
>> >> Great. This is just the place to debate them. Go for it.
>> >> What aspects of which bits of evidence for evolution do
>> >> you dispute, and why? Why should the scientists agree with
>> >> you? Show us. Be very specific, with citations of the
>> >> actual evidence. If you need a few example to start, see:
>> >
>> >I'll tell you what and do you a favor. If you think evolution is
>> >true, then stop giving me links
>>
>> Those links contain many references to the actual scientific literature.
>> Y',know, the papers that present and discuss all that evidence stuff and
>> its interpretation.
>
>Go to the site, get some of that precious information, and defend it
>yourself coward.
Why don't you, "coward"?
>> >and think for yourself
>>
>> How sweet. You try it first.
>
>If you have no evidence for your theory of evolution, Shut-up.
Okay, then we won't shut up, since there's libraries full of the evidence.
>> (if that's what
>> >you claim you do). Give me you ONE best shot that proves Evolution.
>>
>> Why just one? The evidence is there, throughout biology. If you want
>> me to generalize about the most compelling type of evidence for common
>> descent, it's the "twin" [really multiple] nested hierarchical patterns
>> seen throughout the groups of life. Group within groups, within groups,
>> within groups. Why such all-pervasive patterns? Evolution explains and
>> requires them, creationism really can't and basically doesn't.
>
>Here's why just one. If evolution is true and every other religion is
>false. You should be able to give me one fact that I can't dispute.
What a bizarre thing to say. "other religion"? Evolutionary biology
is science, not religion, and this is amply demonstrated by it's being
well accepted by many eople of all religious faiths.
>Like this, Please explane how a DNA (which has the storage copasity of
>over a trillion(1,000,000,000,000) CDs worth of data in the size of a
>hair,
No, it doesn't. Did you just make up that claim, or did Hovind
lie to you about it?
>came into existance.
Prebiotic chemistry. The details aren't well understood, but there
are many ideas. Anyway, evolution isn't about the origin of the first
life. We can take it for granted that the first life got here somehow
[include "Goddidit" as a possibility if you like]. However life may
have got here, it will have evolved ever since.
>To me the only reasonable answer that makes sense is "God did it"
For that to count as an explanation, you should explain exactly
_how_ "God did it", and show us evidence for your interpretation of
the details of the process. Why couldn't "God do it" using natural
processes?
>> >You best shot. (Got guts Goliath(coward)!?) Fight me like a man and
>> >not a coward.
>>
>> [Sheesh...] What, are you twelve? Can't you even try discussing
>> things calmly? If not, then 'bye.
>
>I am calm, I use words like coward to get people to try to answer my
>questions.
Gee, maybe you should try giving "please" and "thank you" a shot.
You know, as in "Hello, I don't understand xxxx. Can someone
please explain xxxx and xxxx to me? Thank you."
The "coward" stuff just looks like silly bluster and childishness.
>I person acually went and got evidence. He isn't a coward.
> My not understand true science or truth, but not a coward.
>if you have evidence, put-up shut-up, or repent.
Tons. You can start with
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
You want to see evidence for what, exactly? The observed fact that
populations of organisms do evolve? The fact that new species can
arise? You yourself claimed to believe in lots of this within the cat
family in your " Your Creationist is here" posts. The origin of the
entire diversity of the Felidae from one type of common ancestors on
the Ark in just few thousand years would be macroevolution on a
explosive scale, that scientists would find ridiculously rapid and
unacceptably unrealistic.
>> >God rejects the prowd but gives grace to the humble.
>>
>> That's nice. Maybe you should go work on that humility.
>
>I am standing humbley before my God
You're so humble that you claim to speak for God?
>try to reach a lost generation
>that is so blind that they can't even see to bring evidence for their
>theory for discussion.
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
[snip]
>> >> The main
>> >> >purpose of Hovind's Radio Program (I think) is to get athiest(which
>> >> >God doesn't believe exist)
>> >>
>> >> Then it sounds like the belief's mutual?
>>
>> >Then I hope your intelect is stronger then Gods because I would hate
>> >to be at the recieveing end of his judgement.
>>
>> Non sequitur. I merely made a wry comment on your "athiest(which God
>> doesn't believe exist)".
>
>If the believe is mutual, then your admiting that God exist and he
>doesn't believe in you.
No, that position "it's mutual" is contained in your own sentence.
>Your in a bad position,
You have no knowledge at all of whatever position I may or may not
be in.
may I suggest you
>repent before he casts you out of his sight. He's gracious to let you
>breath right now.
You presume to judge God? How dare you.
[snip]
>> It's science, and belongs in the science books and science classrooms.
>> It's very well supported by all the available evidence. If new evidence
>> requires modifying parts of the current version of the science, we will.
>> That's how science works.
>
>Show me your evidence, Give me your best shot coward. Science is
>things you can see, observe, test, and deminstrate.
Like evolution and its evidence, which you seem afraid to look at [all
those links]
>Jesus Died, the
>deciples and romans(who wanted Jesus dead), confermed his
>death.(observation)
You mean "legend and hearsay", right?
>Three days later, the deciples saw Jesus
>ALIVE.(observation and seeing)
Is there independent documentation that the disciples even existed?
Nevermind, none of that has anything whatever to do with evolution.
Plenty of devout Christians are "evolutionists".
[snip]
>> Anyway, what exactly do you mean by "Then show me how evolution is
>> true." Show you that the genetic makeup of populations of organisms
>> can and does change over generations? [the basic definition of
>> "evolution"]. It's observed to happen and easily demonstrated. Show
>> you that new traits can arise in an evolving lineage? It's also
>> observed to happen, and also readily demonstrated.
>>
>Give me you number one best evidence you have. Put-up, Shut-up, or
>repent.
You sound like a broken record. You still didn't say "best evidence"
for what, exactly? That populations can and do change? That changes
in traits can occur? That an ancestral species can give rise to
descendant species? That groups of related descendant species can
arise from a common ancestral species? You yourself have already
claimed to believe in all of that. Remember:
"The tiger, lion, cheetah, couger, and house kitten all had
the same common ansester, a cat that came off of Noahs ark that had
the genetic information for ALL of them. Over the last 4000 years the
cat has lost genetic information and had mutations that have caused
problems in the cat population to what we have today, cats that are
so different that they can't interbreed anymore."
That's macroevolution, on an unreasonably rapid grand scale. New
reproductively isolated species, involving changes in structural
features and behaviors, and you said you already believe in it. What
else would you like to see evidence for? Good examples of
"transitional intermediates" that clearly fall between different
higher groups of organisms? We can do that:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html
http://tallship.chm.colostate.edu/gray/miller_figs/Miller.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/
http://www.palaeos.com/Vertebrates/Units/150Tetrapodomorpha/150.100.html#Tetrap
odomorpha
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/transit.htm
http://tolweb.org/tree?group=Acanthostega&contgroup=Terrestrial_Vertebrates
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/archaeopteryx.html
http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/diapsids/birds/archaeopteryx.html
http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/diapsids/avians.html
http://research.amnh.org/vertpaleo/dinobird.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/horses/
>> Show you that new species can arise from an ancestral species? [the
>> minimal definition of "macroevolution"]. It's observed to happen. Show
>> you that groups of related species can arise from a common ancestral
>> species? [also macroevolution]. It's well supported by very strong
>> evidence. Show you that all known groups of life have arisen from
>> early common ancestors? The common origin of all life is also supported
>> by strong evidence, but that particular result wasn't any requirement
>> of the idea of evolution. We could have found that there were
>> independent types of life, but it simply wasn't the case.
>
>Please demonstarate scientificly(Lab Test) How a non-dog and produce a
>dog by natural processes. Put-up, Shut-up, or repent.
Is a dog still a wolf? That's what the first dog breeders started
out with. They started with wild gray wolves and from them we've evolved
pekinese and dachshunds and English bulldogs and chihuahuas and great
danes. of course the "lab tests" took hundreds of years, but it's well
understood.
If you want to object that wolves and dogs are still in the same "kind",
you'll have to give us some clear objective criteria for "kind"
recognition. Othewise, how can we tell if an example fits your demands
or not?
>> So, then, how are we supposed to show you any or all of these things
>> without referring to links? Would you prefer citations of textbooks
>> you should read, or the original scientific journal articles that
>> reported the findings? Have you access to a university library?
>>
>> cheers
>
>Here's how without referring to links?
>Step 1: Go to your links.
>Step 2: Find the one best piece of evidence you can muster.
Okay, but evidence for what, exactly? Is it to be the origin of
very different "kinds" by evolution? Like maybe housecats and tigers?
No, wait, you already accept that.
>Step 3: Come back here and defend you God like a true saint, setting
>you life on the line.
It's amusing how often religious antievolutionists want to falsely
pretend that evolution is a "religion" or a "God", as if that would
be a very bad thing. One might have expected them to be in favor of
religions and God.
If this was a loki troll, you can take a bow now...
cheers
Alan Morgan
Boikat <Boi...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>"Andy Flom" <flom...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:b3941d14.03062...@posting.google.com...
>>
>> interested in those. What "science" has he lied about(be spacific).
>> Put-up, shut-up, or repent.
>
>Does he still claim that the desolved mineral content of the oceans show
>that the Earth is only a few thousand years old?
I thought it was a few hundred years old (or am I using the wrong minerals)?
Alan
--
Defendit numerus
Andy Groves
> > > > "Andy Flom" <flom...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:b3941d14.03062...@posting.google.com...
> > > > > radio program that is on every weekday from 1pm-2pm called "The
> > > > > who will debate and defend the Bible at all cost. I have seen many
> > > > > websites and chat rooms that think they have evidence for evolution
> > > > > and they are all (rubbish)debateable to me. These sites claim they
> > > > > could kill Hovind in a debate. HERE IS YOUR CHANCE!!! The main
> > > > > purpose of Hovind's Radio Program (I think) is to get athiest(which
> > > > > evidence exist for evolution, which none does exist, and to strenghin
> > > > > my faith and those of my blood brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ.
> > > > > He still has his $250,000 reward for concrete evidence for evolution.
> > > >
> > > > I call troll. There's *way* too many ironic mistakes and obvious
> > > > opportunities for jokes to be accidental. Then, after he spouts the "blood
> > > > brothers" line and claims to be familiar with evolutionary defenses, he
> > > > drags up the tired old $250,000 reward hogwash. At best, he'll make a
> > > > couple passing replies but will probably disappear forever.
> > >
> > > Good day,
> > > This is Andy the beloved troll of the good shepard.
> > >
> > > I'll play. I ask now to fight you finest soldger(as with David and
> > > Goliath). Give me your ONE best shot of evidence you think best proves
> > > your theory. Give my your best shot. I'm here. I ain't disapearing.
> > > Put up or repent(don't be a coward). Here's mine.
> > >
> > > system getting its energy from the sun's light. The sun's light is
> > > destructive to everything on earth but cloraphil.
> >
> > What about carotenoids and phycobilins?
> >
> > Andy
You failure to answer my question is noted.
> > P.S. Your evidence appears to amount to "Plants are complicated,
> > therefore Genesis is true". Is that it?
>
> I'm not fighting for Genesis right now. I'm trying to get a stoopid
> religion of evolution out of the schools.
And replace it with what?
> Someone have guts and brains and show me how my question fits in an
> evolutionary module. Put-up, Shut-up, or repent.
People are answering you - you just have your fingers stuffed in your
ears.
We've seen this many, many times before. People like you come into
the group, spout dogma, do not engage in a discussion about evidence,
post URLs from creationist websites for a few weeks and then leave.
Are you going to do better than that?
Andy
Boikat
"Alan Morgan" <amo...@Xenon.Stanford.EDU> wrote in message
news:bdai6h$sqj$1...@Xenon.Stanford.EDU...
That's the whole point. if you use aluminimumnium..mum...the stuff we make
th shiney hats out of..... it's only 100 years old, but if you use
magnesuim, you get 45,000,000, and Sodium "gives an age" of 260,000,000
years.
Boikat
>
> Alan
> --
> Defendit numerus
>
catshark
<at...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 01:41:09 +0000 (UTC), catshark
><cats...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Why should we bother talking to somebody with their fingers knuckle deep in
>>their ears and humming the 1812 Overture at the top of their lungs?
>
>1812 Overture? You give him much too much credit. If he hums any
>tune at all, it would be something more along the lines of the
>Gilligan Islands theme.
Well, I did imagine it as being an endless loop of:
Da da da da DIN da da . . . BOOM . . .
Da da da da DIN da da . . . BOOM . . .
Da da da da DIN da da . . . BOOM . . .
---------------
J. Pieret
---------------
Nunc Id Vides, Nunc Ne Vides
- Unseen University Motto -
Lane Lewis
There's one problem with the God did it explanation, where would we be
if we always used that. Pasture went beyond that explanation to show the
rest of us that animals did not spontaneously form on meat and in fact eggs
were laid and hatched. Now everything changed with this one fact, we could
see that certain diseases were of the same nature, the unseen world came
into focus and was no longer part and parcel of the church. Would anyone
want to undo this, I would hope not, we may have lost the feeling of a god
that protected us from plagues and other disasters but we gained the
knowledge that we held our destiny in our own hands. If we discover the
unknown in space we might also discover new avenues that mankind has to
explore and I think that's the real reason behind science. We can be much
more with each new discovery and no longer live with the fears of our
ancestors.
Lane
lanny budd
> radio program that is on every weekday from 1pm-2pm called "The
> Creation Scince Hour."
It's on right after the Military Intelligence Hour and just before the
Jumbo Shrimp Cooking Show.
Oh, and I've never done caps lock before, but here goes:
LEARN TO SPELL, YOU RETARD!
Earle Jones
mtu...@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu (mel turner) wrote:
> In article <b3941d14.0306...@posting.google.com>,
> flom...@yahoo.com
> wrote...
[...]
>
> >God rejects the prowd but gives grace to the humble.
>
> That's nice. Maybe you should go work on that humility.
*
And a little effort on spelling would make us all "prowd".
earle
*
Here's a suggestion: Give us one piece of simple understandable
evidence that your god exists.
thanks,
ej
*