![]() |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
This guy is one of the best out there, and I hope he's successful in his defense of the Bible. I like how he's so neutral in his arguments and takes all the facts into consideration. <font color="white"> Wow, just try saying that with a straight face. </font> [/ QUOTE ] This guy has very flawed thinking. He contradicts himself constantly and makes the most absurd points to argue for creation. Unfortunately the other guy doesn't do a good job of attacking his arguments, but rather decides to go off on tangents. Some ridiculous arguments he makes: -The Grand Canyon was created in a day -People believe in evolution because it is all they are taught.( umm hello? ) - says evolutionists use circular reasoning and then uses the bible to argue that creation must be real. - He says that dinosaurs still exist in swamps in Africa |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] This guy is one of the best out there, and I hope he's successful in his defense of the Bible. I like how he's so neutral in his arguments and takes all the facts into consideration. <font color="white"> Wow, just try saying that with a straight face. </font> [/ QUOTE ] This guy has very flawed thinking. He contradicts himself constantly and makes the most absurd points to argue for creation. Unfortunately the other guy doesn't do a good job of attacking his arguments, but rather decides to go off on tangents. Some ridiculous arguments he makes: -The Grand Canyon was created in a day -People believe in evolution because it is all they are taught.( umm hello? ) - says evolutionists use circular reasoning and then uses the bible to argue that creation must be real. [/ QUOTE ] Check the white text, I pretty much agree with you. It's almost like the two of them are arguing for the wrong team. The creationist's arguments are ridiculous, and the geologist's arguments are so tangential and boring and he really isn't adressing many important points at all. (from the first video link) Edit: HAHAHAHA. The creation guy just said that dinosaurs still live in Africa. Oh wow, that was incredible. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] This guy is one of the best out there, and I hope he's successful in his defense of the Bible. I like how he's so neutral in his arguments and takes all the facts into consideration. <font color="white"> Wow, just try saying that with a straight face. </font> [/ QUOTE ] This guy has very flawed thinking. He contradicts himself constantly and makes the most absurd points to argue for creation. Unfortunately the other guy doesn't do a good job of attacking his arguments, but rather decides to go off on tangents. Some ridiculous arguments he makes: -The Grand Canyon was created in a day -People believe in evolution because it is all they are taught.( umm hello? ) - says evolutionists use circular reasoning and then uses the bible to argue that creation must be real. [/ QUOTE ] Check the white text, I pretty much agree with you. It's almost like the two of them are arguing for the wrong team. The creationist's arguments are ridiculous, and the geologist's arguments are so tangential and boring and he really isn't adressing many important points at all. (from the first video link) Edit: HAHAHAHA. The creation guy just said that dinosaurs still live in Africa. Oh wow, that was incredible. [/ QUOTE ] yeah the geologist really sucked |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
EDIT: oh and "Dr." should probably be taken out too IMO [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] He has a doctorate in Christian Education from an unaccredited university. Make of that what you will. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Being a "creation scientist" forces you to fight really hard to prove to yourself that the facts disputing creation aren't true. I have never seen someone stretch it so far. Most creationist would just dismiss it with some "god works in mysterious ways" spiel.
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] This guy is one of the best out there, and I hope he's successful in his defense of the Bible. I like how he's so neutral in his arguments and takes all the facts into consideration. <font color="white"> Wow, just try saying that with a straight face. </font> [/ QUOTE ] This guy has very flawed thinking. He contradicts himself constantly and makes the most absurd points to argue for creation. Unfortunately the other guy doesn't do a good job of attacking his arguments, but rather decides to go off on tangents. Some ridiculous arguments he makes: -The Grand Canyon was created in a day -People believe in evolution because it is all they are taught.( umm hello? ) - says evolutionists use circular reasoning and then uses the bible to argue that creation must be real. [/ QUOTE ] Check the white text, I pretty much agree with you. It's almost like the two of them are arguing for the wrong team. The creationist's arguments are ridiculous, and the geologist's arguments are so tangential and boring and he really isn't adressing many important points at all. (from the first video link) Edit: HAHAHAHA. The creation guy just said that dinosaurs still live in Africa. Oh wow, that was incredible. [/ QUOTE ] It is entirely possible that the geologist was chosen as the 'opponent' for just those reasons. It also continues to amaze me that any scientists even bother submitting to this debate-style circus. Its like Michael Jordan agreeing to play me in basketball, but we have to do it blind-folded and from our knees in order to negate his edge. Yeah, he might still beat me, but if I DO 'win' it doesn't really say much about my superiority as a basketball player. Its a format that is specifically chosen to favor fancy rhetoric and emotional pleas, as well as shield the audience from having to actually learn anything in any sort of depth. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In the video 'Creationist Kent Hovind Reveals The Truth About Evolution' he keeps giving arguments against evolution that don't make much sense, because evolution isn't a belief system or religion obviously. But the arguments he gives are perfect counter-arguments to whatever he believes and is saying.
Does this guy actually believe what he's saying? |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
He does, but he also believes he is exempt from federal tax laws.
http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/new..._7_14_2006.asp "Kent Hovind, the evangelist who styles himself "Dr. Dino" and runs the Creation Science Evangelism ministry as well as Dinosaur Adventure Land, a small creationist theme park in Pensacola, Florida, was arrested on July 13, 2006, on fifty-eight federal charges. The Pensacola News-Journal (July 14, 2006) reports that in court Hovind professed not to understand the basis for the indictment: "I still don't understand what I'm being charged for and who is charging me," he said. The News-Journal adds that Hovind "has been sparring with the IRS for at least 17 years on his claims that he is employed by God, receives no income, has no expenses and owns no property."" |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] EDIT: oh and "Dr." should probably be taken out too IMO [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] He has a doctorate in Christian Education from an unaccredited university. Make of that what you will. [/ QUOTE ] Ah! That must mean he is a scientist of real repute! |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
He does, but he also believes he is exempt from federal tax laws. http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/new..._7_14_2006.asp "Kent Hovind, the evangelist who styles himself "Dr. Dino" and runs the Creation Science Evangelism ministry as well as Dinosaur Adventure Land, a small creationist theme park in Pensacola, Florida, was arrested on July 13, 2006, on fifty-eight federal charges. The Pensacola News-Journal (July 14, 2006) reports that in court Hovind professed not to understand the basis for the indictment: "I still don't understand what I'm being charged for and who is charging me," he said. The News-Journal adds that Hovind "has been sparring with the IRS for at least 17 years on his claims that he is employed by God, receives no income, has no expenses and owns no property."" [/ QUOTE ] That is awesome. Although you could make a comparison to consciencious objector status, I suppose. |
![]() |
|
|