Is Dr. Dino (Kent Hovind) a total joke?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
thecreationtutor said:
Horse evolution - is that the false sense that we went from 3 toes to one toe, or is it that we had flip that around and go from one toe to 3 toes (hoofs that is)

What about the peppered moth? 25 years of research, and Kettlewell only saw 2 moths naturally on the tree, that he didn't bait.

What about Lucy, how they purposely give her a human spine in order to make her stand erect? Oh and break her hips so that they are finagled in a way to show that she walked upright. Wouldn't want her pelvis to be that of an ape, where the muscle connections point her legs in a 4 legged walking position either
Click to expand...
Correct, I can vaguely rember many more fakes that the good ole evo cult contrived to spread their phony mess.
 
thecreationtutor said:
If the antagonists really believed they Evolved, why would they care what we thought?

It just shows that they don't really believe it themselves, because they think they have significance

At least significance enough to tell someone else they have no significance

So, what is the significance of them trying to do this

HYPOCRITE - is that the proper term here?
Click to expand...
Oh,I thought true science was the art of suppression????
Jettison the obvious is the road to bliss. Just ak any professor.They say "no" but run like a scalded ape (no pun intended) from I.D. input.
 
popeye said:
This is for you jack;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaVoGfSSSV8
FF to 3;40
bacterial flagellum. It has a working outboard motor,a marvel of engineeriing,that darwin only saw as a blob of jelly.

That motor spins at 10,000 rpm and propels it through the liquid.

The tiny motor has a stator,a ujoint,a driveshaft,a rotor.
IRREDUCIBLE COMPLEXITY.......................poor guy,you are nailed by this discovery ,even worse than the fossil record.

But lo,I relent,my ford truck has been dated to 10 million years old,so mechanicle motore must have all evolved.
I wonder how big an explosion i will need to upgrade to a 2015 new truck????
Click to expand...

Do you know who that is talking in the video you wanted me to watch?

And what makes you think he makes a credible expert witness?
 
popeye said:
:D:D:D....................:D:D:D
Click to expand...

How fond are you of Dr. Dino (Kent Hovind)?

Just wondering because you really do remind me of him.

And I'm not just talking about your grammar.

see Dr. Dino butcher grammar in his Ph.D thesis.

And that ain't all he butchered.
 
Origin said:
I can show you a caterpillar change into a butterfly
Click to expand...

I can show you anime cartoons where they evolve - this is pretty weak

A catapillar is changing into a butterfly - not evolving - do you even understand evolution - your using the bait and switch fallacy


This would also be a piss poor example - since the animal is breaking itself down and making itself something completely different in a matter of a very short time, you do a discredit to those trying to prove Evolution - yikes
 
popeye said:
As I remember it microevolution (correct me if I am wong) would occur within the same species. Dod breeding would be an example,which I would agree is viable and proven viable.
Click to expand...

I must vehemently object to the credibility of your sources.

You got that dod evolution from Sigourney Weaver in Aliens.

Dod in a pod.
 
Evolution - the gradual development of something, especially from a simple to a more complex form.

Sighhhh
 
thecreationtutor said:
I take Him at His word, when it says in 6 days God Created. If you do the genealogies it's roughly 6-10,000 at best.
Click to expand...

Did you do the genealogies yourself or do you agree with Ussher or who?

If you are going to stretch it to 10,000, why can't you stretch it to 100,000?

Do you believe the bible is inerrant?

If so, then the genealogies should be accurate to the extent that there is not a 4,000 year margin of error, right?
 
JackH said:
Did you do the genealogies yourself or do you agree with Ussher or who?

If you are going to stretch it to 10,000, why can't you stretch it to 100,000?

Do you believe the bible is inerrant?


T

If so, then the genealogies should be accurate to the extent that there is not a 4,000 year margin of error, right?
Click to expand...


I am going to go on that the genealogies are accurate - if it's 6,000 - I will fall straight under that, I will not change my thoughts towards Christless dribble trying to extend it to 100,000.


The Bible is inerrant and is to be followed, obeyed for correction, reproof and binding to yourself regardless if you believe it is or not.

It says what it means, it means what it says
 
thecreationtutor said:
I am going to go on that the genealogies are accurate - if it's 6,000 - I will fall straight under that, I will not change my thoughts towards Christless dribble trying to extend it to 100,000.


The Bible is inerrant and is to be followed, obeyed for correction, reproof and binding to yourself regardless if you believe it is or not.

It says what it means, it means what it says
Click to expand...


What bible is inerrant, exactly?

The King James, the Septuagint (LXX), what bible, exactly?

You are going to go on that the genealogies are accurate - if it's 6,000 - you will fall under that?

Whose word are you going to take on the genealogies?

Ussher's?

Lightfoots?

That of Answers in Genesis?

Or that of he Institute for Creation Research?

And if you say God's genealogies, please tell me what date God assigned to the creation of the earth, the creation of man, and the global flood.
 
JackH said:
What bible is inerrant, exactly?

The King James, the Septuagint (LXX), what bible, exactly?

You are going to go on that the genealogies are accurate - if it's 6,000 - you will fall under that?

Whose word are you going to take on the genealogies?

Ussher's?

Lightfoots?

That of Answers in Genesis?

Or that of he Institute for Creation Research?

And if you say God's genealogies, please tell me what date God assigned to the creation of the earth, the creation of man, and the global flood.
Click to expand...


The Bible in it's original language, I am pretty sure we can trust a God who promises to keep His word, to preserve His word for ever tribe, tongue, and nation as he promises too.


That's funny you ask for a specific date but evolutionists can't get a specific date - +_ 200,000 years here or there.

If I wanted to go through myself with the timeline I could, I'd come up with something close to Ussher's.

Nitty gritty, you refuse to come to Jesus so that you may have life - no amount of arguing will work for you - may God smash your idols and get you to a place of repentance
 
thecreationtutor said:
The Bible in it's original language, I am pretty sure we can trust a God who promises to keep His word, to preserve His word for ever tribe, tongue, and nation as he promises too.


That's funny you ask for a specific date but evolutionists can't get a specific date - +_ 200,000 years here or there.

If I wanted to go through myself with the timeline I could, I'd come up with something close to Ussher's.

Nitty gritty, you refuse to come to Jesus so that you may have life - no amount of arguing will work for you - may God smash your idols and get you to a place of repentance
Click to expand...

What is the original language of the bible?

How could you know whatever your answer is for sure since there are no original documents.

You are saying that God's words are true because God says so.

Isn't that one of your logical fallacies you are so quick to point out, even though yours are highly suspect?

I don't need a specific date for how old the earth is or much of anything else. I don't care if the earth is 4.6 billion years old or 2 billion years old. I'll go with what the overwhelming evidence of the vast majority of credible scientists is. If that age of the earth changes, fine with me.

YECs, however, can not deviate much from around 6,000 years old for the age of the world, earth, animals, humans et al.

If they do deviate from around 6,000 years, everything falls apart even more than it already has. Think Egypt, as only one problem area.

Most YECs and Answers In Genesis (which you referred to today), Institute for Creation Research, and the ilk stick with Ussher's chronology. Not exactly to the date of creation as 4004 BC but generally to the tune of around 6,000 years for the date of creation.

Ussher's chronology was in the King James bible, and many others, for several hundred years.

Why do suppose it was taken out?

With respect to your last sentence, who are you talking to?

Are you referring to me?
 
JackH said:
I must vehemently object to the credibility of your sources.

You got that dod evolution from Sigourney Weaver in Aliens.

Dod in a pod.
Click to expand...


Wow,you really are soooo scientific.

You got to be a baby. 16? ,17?
 
JackH said:
How fond are you of Dr. Dino (Kent Hovind)?

Just wondering because you really do remind me of him.

And I'm not just talking about your grammar.

see Dr. Dino butcher grammar in his Ph.D thesis.

And that ain't all he butchered.
Click to expand...

Appears all you got left is juvenile attacking.

Run along junior,the forum is for the adults
 
https://answersingenesis.org/fossils/transitional-fossils/those-fossils-are-a-problem/

Are there any Transitional Fossils?

None of the five museum officials whom Luther Sunderland interviewed could offer a single example of a transitional series of fossilized organisms that would document the transformation of one basically different type to another.
Dr Eldredge [curator of invertebrate palaeontology at the American Museum] said that the categories of families and above could not be connected, while Dr Raup [curator of geology at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago] said that a dozen or so large groups could not be connected with each other. But Dr Patterson [a senior palaeontologist and editor of a prestigious journal at the British Museum of Natural History] spoke most freely about the absence of transitional forms.

https://answersingenesis.org/fossils/transitional-fossils/those-fossils-are-a-problem/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back