Dr. Dino locked up for 10 years

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 22 2008 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by theindependentjournal
 


The truth is that most people who said something against Dr. Hovind, attack his person, not his science evidence. He might be wrong sometimes, but he always assumed the responsibility for what he is saying.




posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 12:56 PM
link   
Anyone remember "Heaven Can Wait"???


"The probability of someone being right increases in direct proportion to the intensity others are trying to prove him wrong."

If Hovind was to say the Milky Way was made of Skittles barely anyone would bother to tell him he's wrong.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 04:13 AM
link   
The incarceration of Hovind is not a criticism of the science he promotes, any more than the incarceration of Nelson Mandella or John the Baptist. The facts speak for themselves. Science has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the beginning of life is impossible. The difference between ID and Science: ID doesn't leave you empty-handed. By the way, the Bible also notes these are "oppositions of science, falsely so called." In other words, there are no oppositions in science. Science proves that life is impossible. You figure out the rest. The great atheist Anthony Flew did recently, and Richard Dawson also admitted design in his recent tv interview. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear (a quote from someone really important).



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 04:50 AM
link   
Hovind claims to have taught science in school for over a decade and that he had a PHD.

I've seen his videos, he hasn't a clue about what he's talking about. It's so very clear that he'd never taught anything of the kind. It's absolute tosh.

He got sent to prison for fraud, this time it was about tax. But it's just more fraud.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 04:30 PM
link   


I've seen his videos, he hasn't a clue about what he's talking about. It's so very clear that he'd never taught anything of the kind. It's absolute tosh.


what exactly did he talk about in ignorance? he always ensures that his point of few is religious be believes that its supported by scientific laws and theories supported by these laws.

what exactly is wrong with his videos? what about his seminars is inaccurate?

~Meth



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Oh... Kay. So the number of people who promote equality over hate speech, or really any number of actual debates, the underdog is right then?
Being proportional, if the number of people trying to prove you wrong are in actual proving you right...



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 05:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Anyone remember "Heaven Can Wait"???


"The probability of someone being right increases in direct proportion to the intensity others are trying to prove him wrong."

If Hovind was to say the Milky Way was made of Skittles barely anyone would bother to tell him he's wrong.


So you are saying that by corollary that equal number of "evolutionists" and "creationists" are both right or wrong?



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 06:07 PM
link   
It is a waste to lose a mind over money and if you think it isnt you aint worth the the ink that is printed on it. Talk about an insult, a man now has to live in a little cell over some worthless pieces of paper.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Methuselah
 


His seminars are devoid of science and facts. He claimed to teach science for over 10 years, but he doesn't know any!



posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 02:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Methuselah


I've seen his videos, he hasn't a clue about what he's talking about. It's so very clear that he'd never taught anything of the kind. It's absolute tosh.


what exactly did he talk about in ignorance? he always ensures that his point of few is religious be believes that its supported by scientific laws and theories supported by these laws.

what exactly is wrong with his videos? what about his seminars is inaccurate?

~Meth


His $250,000 challenge on evolution is based completely on a strawman. At times he contradicts himself every 2 minutes in his videos.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 07:35 PM
link   
i have never seen any contradictions in his videos. if you listen to the context when he is speaking. these contradictions you see will make more sense...

he references scientific laws a lot, scientific principles...
there is a lot to learn from his videos.

I have a few of his debates on video... dude, he makes everyone look stupid!

and what is the strawman? the fact that whenever an evolution is confronted with science vs religion stigma they freeze?

its simple and logical... you cant predict something based on what you see and call it science when its never been witnessed before...

bacteria becoming resistant to pesticides... that process will not change single celled organisms into everything we see today over millions of years... where is the proof?
you call that a straw man but thats only because you dont like the alternative...

all of hovinds claims make logical and scientific sense to me... most of them are just predictions but some can be proven by user experience or testimonials... like the prevention measure/cure for cancer...

scientific theories, principles and laws do not contradict hovinds claims..... they do not directly support this claims but they provide more support than non-support.

i dont see how you all dont see it... it makes perfect sense... some things are just not provable.

and like ive said before... evolution doesnt present itself today at all. its a belief... you predict it happens and yet see nothing, you beleve it takes place if given enough time yet you cant prove that either...

evolution is a joke.

~Meth



posted on Oct, 17 2008 @ 12:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Methuselah
 


Have you ever actually looked for any contradicting evidence of Hovinds claims or have you just listened to him and thought "Yup, that makes sense to me. dur.".

I seem to remember that he once claimed that water covered the earth completely like a shell. Well this claim is impossible.

He also said to try and justify the claim that in theory a single drop of water could cover the earth. No it couldn't. if there was a single-molecule-thick layer of water encasing the earth all that water would not be a drop but somewhere in the region of ten tonnes of water.


He's an other BS claim: "I have a phD."



Hovind preys on the ignorant because to them, his claims seem to make sense, but when exposed to actual science, he gets shown to be fraudster and nothing more. It wouldn't even surprise me if he didn't even believe the garbage he spins, because he, like all the other influential preachers, make a lot of money. It's a scam, an exploitative scam.

Remember, he got convicted for fraud.



posted on Oct, 17 2008 @ 06:37 PM
link   
ok I think the first one theory you are reffering to is the canopy theory...
how you know thats impossible idk... have you ever tried putting a layer of ice or water around the world? didnt think so

there is scientific principles that can support the theory, we dont claim this as fact, we just claim it as supporting evidence for our theory... which is still a theory and still based on faith which is something we have been saying all along.

please give a reference to the "drop of water" theory you are talking about. the only think I ever heard him mention is that a tablespoon of water could fill the oceans at the scale of a standard classroom globe and no one really argues that because its only to prove a point.




He's an other BS claim: "I have a phD."

ok so what, he does... who cares... get over it. just because its not from an accredited school doesnt mean its not real.
if you want to pick on that, you are desperate!

actualy science is not hard to learn. and basic/undeniable principles are in support of the creation theory, im sorry but im not a retard and im not ignorant. science is one of my favorite subjects. and hovind is not the only person making this claim... others dont announce it as boldly as he does because they would lose their job in a heartbeat.

hovind was convicted for fraud? no no no, he was convicted for tax fraud which is totally different from fraud itself. tax fraud or tax evasion is considered stealing from the government although they have in the small print the exemptions and loopholes you can jump through to be tax exempt... he did and they didnt like it because the government was losing a lot of money from just one person. (note, the US is in an economic crisis right now, imm not suprised they would rip anyone apart for the slightest tax fraud/evasion no matter the justification)

hovind is not a fraud, taxes are against the law anyway.... do some research on that one. the reason we get taxed is because we have too much government spending too much of our money. which is another issue.

~Meth



posted on Oct, 17 2008 @ 07:51 PM
link   
I'll specifically look at this:


Originally posted by Methuselah
ok I think the first one theory you are reffering to is the canopy theory...
how you know thats impossible idk... have you ever tried putting a layer of ice or water around the world? didnt think so

there is scientific principles that can support the theory, we dont claim this as fact, we just claim it as supporting evidence for our theory... which is still a theory and still based on faith which is something we have been saying all along.



How do we know it's not possible? A number of reasons, firstly water melts. Ice (even in cold space) will melt due to solar microwave radiation at an extremely fast rate.

Second, thermodynamics don't support such a model. Observe; boats float because they are less dense than water, rock sinks because it is denser than water, thus at the centre of our planet the densest material will gather with less and less dense working it's way out. So air cannot form above air.

Third, pressure. The weight of a case of ice will pressurise all life on earth. When the canopy comes down, the rapid de-pressurisation would literally make us ad all other animals explode!

Forth, light. An ice canopy will leave the world in a permanent state of winter-night, which would kill us.

And lastly, the moon. You understand the tides and their relation to the gravity due to the moon, well now apply that to an ice shell. It would shatter and gargantuan pieces of glass like ice would come down.



IT CAN NOT WORK.


There are other claims that don't work as well. The man with dinosaurs hypothesis is a good one. For instance, consider your lungs. They have a certain capacity and are big enough to keep your oxygen supply in life supporting levels. Well, an examination of dinosaur fossils reveals that compared to us (scale) they had small lungs. Why? Because the oxygen levels from when they were alive were far, far higher, requiring smaller lungs to keep the dinosaur alive.

This means that humans and dinosaurs could not have been around in the same time.

[edit on 10/17/2008 by Good Wolf]



posted on Oct, 18 2008 @ 05:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Methuselah

ok so what, he does... who cares... get over it. just because its not from an accredited school doesnt mean its not real.
if you want to pick on that, you are desperate!

actualy science is not hard to learn. and basic/undeniable principles are in support of the creation theory, im sorry but im not a retard and im not ignorant. science is one of my favorite subjects. and hovind is not the only person making this claim... others dont announce it as boldly as he does because they would lose their job in a heartbeat.

hovind was convicted for fraud? no no no, he was convicted for tax fraud which is totally different from fraud itself. tax fraud or tax evasion is considered stealing from the government although they have in the small print the exemptions and loopholes you can jump through to be tax exempt... he did and they didnt like it because the government was losing a lot of money from just one person. (note, the US is in an economic crisis right now, imm not suprised they would rip anyone apart for the slightest tax fraud/evasion no matter the justification)

hovind is not a fraud, taxes are against the law anyway.... do some research on that one. the reason we get taxed is because we have too much government spending too much of our money. which is another issue.

~Meth


No, because of the fact he has a piece of paper from a diploma mill doesn't mean he has a Ph.D. In addition, none of his degrees give him any substantial scientific authority.

You're right Science isn't that hard to learn, but you need to not pick and choose what aspect you think are right.

I could call taking a crap on your chest a "love offering" but at the end of the day I'm still taking a crap on your chest. This is in affect what Hovind did. Instead of going through the proper channels to try and get tax exemption, I mean honestly if Scientology can get it anybody can, he tried to weasel his way out of it. Also Hovind was convicted well before our current Economic crisis.

Yes I have done research on "Illegal taxes" and its all either quote mines or stretching something to the point its about to break.



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 05:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Methuselah
actualy science is not hard to learn. and basic/undeniable principles are in support of the creation theory, im sorry but im not a retard and im not ignorant. science is one of my favorite subjects.


What principles, where? The principles determine the nature of the universe and hardly any have any bearing on the early universe.



hovind was convicted for fraud? no no no, he was convicted for tax fraud which is totally different from fraud itself.



Fraud, tax fraud, the difference is context, man not in bottom line. But this hardly matters as the point I was making was that his sentence sortof mirrored his general livelihood and teachings, fraudulent.


By the way have you seen the "Why do people laugh at creationists" series on youtube by Thunderf00t? It takes a scientific approach to allot of creationist claims mostly from Venomfangx and Hovind, therein you will find the "drop of water" claim from Hovind.

Here is another scientific breakdown of creationism and it's garbage, this time by Aron Ra.

[edit on 10/19/2008 by Good Wolf]



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Good Wolf
 


im going to reply to your first post. ill leave the others alone because I simply do not care about the issue there. his ministry is still at work and he doesnt mind it in prison, because he gets to spread the same message to people looking for an answer. tax fraud is an issue that america shouldnt have to deal with because charging tax is supposedly illegal anyway. but who is going to set that straight? no one, because america is too worried about being the bigger and the better country with more money than anyway one else... instead of doing things the right way and taking care of their people.... (ill end there before I go off into left field)

so the whole canopy theory...
are you 100% sure about all the claims you just made???
are you sure dinosaurs prove that humans and dinosaurs lived in different eras? or are you assuming your claims are correct based on a theory that is based on complete and blind faith??? just as blind and creation itself.

see what I believe is that dinosaurs and humans have always lived together. and also I believe that dinosaurs are still alive today, just a little smaller and less of them altogether. problably living in places where their are very few, if any, humans around.

I believe that the earth did have a canopy of water or ice allowing for a more dense atmosphere with highier oxygen content and air pressure which would allow two things... dinosuars to breathe and allow humansa to grow to be larger/taller and live longer like the bible says.

basic principle that would support the canopy their is the meisner effect. supercold water/ice is slightly magnetic. so it could be that the earths magnetic field suspended the canopy. there is no way to falsify that, i take it on faith.

the point is, you have never (no one has ever) experimented with this stuff. of course it is impossible to setup the experiment. but the same thing was said about flight... people thought that was obsurd. but then the wright brothers proved everyone wrong. as a matter of fact, there are a lot of things in history that were taught as fact when they were 100% wrong.
and people are still forgetting that Darwin had no scientific authority at all. he was studying to become a preacher. which has nothing to do with science at all.

although Hovind was convicted of tax fraud, the message he preaches, the lessons he teaches, the videos, the seminars... everything he teaches still stands... and its not really about him. he is just the messenger. and the debate series... you watch those and learn that college professors and people with the same education or higher do not stand a chance against the arguments that Hovind puts in front of them.

I can understand poeple not wanting to believe in a video with unknown or unfamiliar sources... but watch a debate video. he crushes their reasoning, their logic and it appears that he just shuts them up and they have no argument.

I take these on faith, not just Hovinds stuff (although I think he does a superb job at talking about it) but other creationist sites, not even creationists. even the general science (real and honest scientists who are not biased) material convinces me that the bible is more than just a book. it convinces me that life is impossible to create by natural means.
the bibles says that animals will bring forth after their kind and thats all we have ever observed. bible says a lot of things that are true, most things to not become true to most of us becuase we do not apply it to our lives.

im ranting so im gonna end post here.

~Meth



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 10:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Methuselah
 


I did explain that a canopy couldn't exist.

You ignored the fact that ice melts and the gravity of the moon produces the tides and would do the same in ice in the atmosphere. You ignored that and still have faith that it can happen. You ignored the fact that a break in the ice will make air pressure plumit and kill us due to an extreme case of "the bends". You are biased!

You have preconceived conclusions and you are willing to ignore logic and evidence and fundamental Laws of nature to uphold that preconceived conclusion.

Therefore you will never be able to see reality for what it is because you want it to be a certain way.


I mean, for goodness sake, how the hell is ice supposed to get there in the first place? Gravity will not allow it to form in the atmosphere because it's denser than air. The laws of thermodynamics (which you creationists often try to use against evolution) will no allow it.

It didn't happen, and I don't need to do any experiments to prove it.

But that is only one of Hovinds many lies and misrepresentations. Another is "Super Evolution" required to explain how everything there is today could have come from all the species that could have fit on the very limited Ark. Let me tell you, you would run out of space on the Ark once you had put two out of every species of Beetle and Ant. YOu would have no room for anything else.


The thing I really hate about not just Hovind but Ken Ham and all those other creationist big shots is that they do not mind indoctrinating kids. That should be a serious offence. They are abusing the fragile and impressionable minds of children! EVIL!



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 12:35 PM
link   


I did explain that a canopy couldn't exist.

You ignored the fact that ice melts and the gravity of the moon produces the tides and would do the same in ice in the atmosphere. You ignored that and still have faith that it can happen. You ignored the fact that a break in the ice will make air pressure plumit and kill us due to an extreme case of "the bends". You are biased!


ice melts, ok, but in those conditions would it? have you tried and proved it? no you have not i dont know what form water took up there, but I can speculate and come up with some theories that could be supported by basic scientific principles.

the moon controls the tides, yes. a huge body of water in other words a huge mass. indeed. the ice or water vapor canopy would not be of equal mass and perhaps not attracted due to its stabilzer (earths magnetic field)

air pressure is an issue? if it broke we would all explode? well you are talking about miles of atmosphere here. you dont know if it organisms explode ot not. you dont know at what rate the earths atmosphere would lose pressure. there are a lot of things you are not taking into consideration.



I mean, for goodness sake, how the hell is ice supposed to get there in the first place? Gravity will not allow it to form in the atmosphere because it's denser than air. The laws of thermodynamics (which you creationists often try to use against evolution) will no allow it.


of course gravity would not let it form, of course you are aassuming that the earth evolved.... you are ingoring that piece of the puzzle. God created the earth that way for a reason.
take a look at hyberbaric treatment and tell me that that that sort of environment would not support what the bible teaches. Giants and people living of long age.

the big bang theory goes against the first law of thermodynamics. matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed by any natural means. therefore the earth was created.



It didn't happen, and I don't need to do any experiments to prove it.

ok, Evolution did not and does not happen and I dont have to do any either to prove that.




But that is only one of Hovinds many lies and misrepresentations. Another is "Super Evolution" required to explain how everything there is today could have come from all the species that could have fit on the very limited Ark. Let me tell you, you would run out of space on the Ark once you had put two out of every species of Beetle and Ant. YOu would have no room for anything else.


and here is a step in the road that goes you evolutionists confused.. I mean real confused... Noah brought all the kinda of animals not all the different species... by the time Noah had to do all of this, the earth was only about 2000 years old. in other words, animals have only been around for 2000 years. not too much time for variations within kinds of animals (speciation).
as long as you get two of each kind, your good. a zebra is a horse, and a horse is a zebra, so get two horses and call it a day. the varieties are in the gene pool already and mutations are bound to happen.
there is no hard eveidence against this theory... it is assumed to take a long time but thats not what we see in everyday life. obviously the evolution theory is wrong when it comes to micro evolution.



The thing I really hate about not just Hovind but Ken Ham and all those other creationist big shots is that they do not mind indoctrinating kids. That should be a serious offence. They are abusing the fragile and impressionable minds of children! EVIL!

uhm what do you think teaching ONLY evolution in schools is doing? what do you think about books asking loaded questions? schools are only giving the students one option when it comes to science, and that one science is not even supported by truth. its supported be much false information and many hoaxes.

i tell you what, the biggest reason people fall for evolution is because it gives them a false sense of freedom, freedom from responsibility and accountability.

~Meth



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Methuselah
ice melts, ok, but in those conditions would it? have you tried and proved it?

Yes it would melt. Ice melts with heat. Infrared light is VERY good at heating things. Have you ever looked closely at an astronauts suit? Notice the blinder? If someone went up into space and looked at the sun without the blinder down, the visible light would blind them and the infrered light would literally ROAST their face. Heat from direct sun light would VAPORISE the ice rapidly.


the moon controls the tides, yes. a huge body of water in other words a huge mass. indeed. the ice or water vapor canopy would not be of equal mass and perhaps not attracted due to its stabilzer (earths magnetic field)

That has nothing to do with it. The moons gravity acts on EVERYTHING equally. The more freemoving mass you have, the greater the apparent effect. No matter what, that ice will flex and shatter under the pull of the moon. And even IF the earth was able to protect the ice via the magnetic field (and thats a big IF) gravity is a TOTALLY different force and the magnetosphere will not make it exempt.

It will melt and shatter PERIOD. I don't even think it could last an hour.


air pressure is an issue? if it broke we would all explode? well you are talking about miles of atmosphere here. you dont know if it organisms explode ot not. you dont know at what rate the earths atmosphere would lose pressure. there are a lot of things you are not taking into consideration.

It doesn't matter at what distance away from the surface of the earth the ice is it will greatly pressurise the atmosphere. If it is close, its weight will certainly give us pressurisation issues when it breaks. If it's far, it's size and weight will increase exponentially CRUSHING the atmosphere. IT DOES NOT MATTER. It WILL kill us.

And what's more once the icewater is down where does it go? The world can not be flooded and in the future not be flooded in this model because you have excess water that cant simply disappear.


the big bang theory goes against the first law of thermodynamics. matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed by any natural means. therefore the earth was created.


Not only does that same law violate the creationist belief, it's not violated by the big bang. I would bet you do not even understand the concept of the big bang. It doesn't suggest "something from nothing". Look it up cos I aint spelling it out for you.


Noah brought all the kinda of animals not all the different species...


Right here, right now, define "kind".


the earth was only about 2000 years old. in other words, animals have only been around for 2000 years. not too much time for variations within kinds of animals (speciation).

So you recognise speciation? This is puzzling. Do you know how many generations it takes for a speciation event to occur. Do you realise that if the flood myth were true, there would have to be a speciation event every few days to explain all the species until this very day. THAT is impossible.


as long as you get two of each kind, your good.
But Noah didnt did he? He got 7 of all the clean animal, further reducing the space on the ark extensively.


a zebra is a horse, and a horse is a zebra, so get two horses and call it a day.
A zebra is not a horse you silly twit. A child can tell you that.


the varieties are in the gene pool already and mutations are bound to happen.

So wait a minute. You recognise speciation and micro evolution AND mutation.

You sir are technically an evolutionist. Therein you have all the components of evolution.


there is no hard eveidence against this theory... it is assumed to take a long time but thats not what we see in everyday life. obviously the evolution theory is wrong when it comes to micro evolution.

Or more logically the bible is wrong about micro evolution. Afterall If science were wrong about micro evolution, then the hundreds of lab studies would see the different rate of micro evolution. And hard evidence? How about the fact that geology has never EVER found any evidence of a global flood?



uhm what do you think teaching ONLY evolution in schools is doing? what do you think about books asking loaded questions? schools are only giving the students one option when it comes to science, and that one science is not even supported by truth. its supported be much false information and many hoaxes.


Do you some how think that science has an agenda to drive out God? Because it doesn't, and since it doesn't it has no interest in passing off garbage for truth. Evolution is part of biology, which is a science, hence it is taught in science class. Creationism is not science, hence it is not taught in science class. There is no alternate to evolution. There is no theory supported by anywhere near as much evidence as evolution. There is not a scrap of evidence outside of the bible for creationism. WHY teach something in science class that has NO evidence?

Evolution has had hoaxes, yes. They have been exposed for what they are in favour of the real thing each time. The classic example is piltdown man. Exposed BY SCIENCE in the 50s.

Evolution is also supported by the entire of the rest of biology, especially genetics. Genetics, by itself, makes creation laughable.

But I wonder why do you actually believe in creationism? Considering me exposing your hypocritical close mindedness, because the bible told you so right? I mean if you were not a christian you'd believe evolution, surely.

Why take literally a book that man wrote when it is your belief that man is incapable of being perfect? A book written almost 2 millennia ago. Lets think about this for a moment.

God created the universe.
Man created the bible (albeit on the "inspiration" of God).

Studying which of these 2 things, are you going to get the best understanding of the universe and how things happened? The universe itself (and hence the evidence) or the bible (a subjective narrative)?

Just about every division of Christianity have realised that putting man's work (the bible) above God's work (the universe itself) is just stupid. They have learned to distinguish doctrine from deity which you have not.

There is nothing wrong with Theistic Evolution.



[edit on 10/22/2008 by Good Wolf]





new topics
top topics
 
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join