Kent Hovind vs Michael Shermer Debate
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 24 ก.ย. 2024
- Jesus Christ, Encouragement, Love, Blessing, Helping each other, Kindness unto to each other, comfort of love, like-minded, Word Of God, Word of Encouragement, and much more God Bless Brothers & Sisters
Romans 12:10 Love one another with brotherly affection. Outdo one another in showing honor.
......║\.
......║▒\.
......║▒▒\
......║░▒║
......║░▒║
......║░▒║
......║░▒║
......║░▒║ ▀█▀ █▀ █_█ ▀█▀ █▬█
......║░▒║ ~ WILL MAKE US FREE ~
......║░▒║
......║░▒║
......║░▒║
......║░▒║
.▓▓▓▓▓▓▓
.......]█▓[
.......]█▓[
.......]█▓[
B.I.B.L.E. Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth!
![The Origin of Life: Evolution vs. Design [Full Debate]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/2CnZ3n8I5b8/mqdefault.jpg)
![Does God Exist? William Lane Craig vs. Christopher Hitchens - Full Debate [HD]](/img/n.gif)
The ones not laughing hate truth.
Or they hate how ignorant Hovind is lol
you must be impressed with very simpleton arguments then. Hovind is embarrassing. I watched another debate in which he didn’t even know that gravity was a law and a theory and didn’t even seem to know the difference between the two and this dude taught HS science! 😂 how scary! The dude is a hack and is 100% wrong. Don’t let Bible blinders blind you from actual truth and critical thinking
This was very good! I hope everyone watches this.
I came here to hear
Mr. Kent Hovind , I'm very pleased what I hear of him !
Thank to you , just wanted to let you know I'm here with you in the same big room (hall) !
Perhaps we'll have a chat at the Wedding Dinner Feast in the joy , rejoicing for eternity in Jesus in the Heavenly Kingdom of God , very pleased to meet you 😅😊
Until there:
God bless you with all of your family and dear friends 🥰😇😍
@@rolandboeing7477ou must be impressed with very simpleton arguments then. Hovind is embarrassing. I watched another debate in which he didn’t even know that gravity was a law and a theory and didn’t even seem to know the difference between the two and this dude taught HS science! 😂 how scary! The dude is a hack and is 100% wrong. Don’t let Bible blinders blind you from actual truth and critical thinking
th-cam.com/video/b9bcJRHt1kc/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=RealStories please stop listening to kent hovind about science. Hes a convicted fraud man and beats his wife.
Hovind's best evidence for creation is that it's impossible for it to have been created without a creator. Brilliant.
Shermers evidence is based on something that wasn’t observed and then calls it science and fact..science must be observed.
@@baize96 yes
Creation testifys to a creator!
@@Guthix198 No, it doesn't. Did your god "create" Covid?
@@baize96 yup, absolutely correct. Quantum mechanics? Not science. Geology? Are u kidding? Cosmology? Nope. It's common knowledge that science only includes things that are directly observed. Like an apple falling from a tree. This is why I don't believe in ancient Egypt. Has anyone actually observed it?
Kent's explanation is far above the standard evolutionists. He says fossils count for nothing. Thats blows evolution out of the water.
Почему такой жалкий звук ? Я в наушниках ,в городе и ничего не слышу. Неужели в подвал нужно забираться, что бы что то услышать.?
Beneficial mutations absolutely do happen. For example: Individuals who have the thymine (T) nucleotide are lactose tolerant and can digest milk products in adulthood. Most people in the world are lactose intolerant, but a genetic mutation where a cytosine (C) nucleotide in a person's DNA is replaced with a thymine (T) nucleotide allows them to digest milk
It already existed in the 🧬
@@immanuelhavneraas Hi Immanuel. Actually there have been documented cases of mutations gaining more dna as well as losing some. This means it did not already exist in the DNA. It was brand new.
Take Care! I hope you and yours are well this holiday season!
@@immanuelhavneraas this is where Down syndrome happens - both copies of chromosome 21 wind up in the germ cell, meaning that there are three at conception. This is a change in your genome, ADDING INFORMATION to it. HYDIN2 is a UNIQUE gene to humans. How do you explain that?
@@justinrutlandI needed to edit. I'm not sure this is some new kind of information. Being lactose intolerant I believe is just the body turned off one of the genes so it doesn't work in order to protect the body somehow. A lot of countries have had bad milk or heat it up too much homogenized... When a milk is heated up it takes away the lactas enzymes which breaks the lactos down and thus if you have been inbreeding or having a lack of enzymes in food during growing up the body might be more susceptible to lactose tolerance. But it's an interesting topic. I'm Scandinavia specially Sweden we drink probably the most milk in the world but more and more becomes lactos intolerant. I personally believe GMO has some part in it.
But down syndrome giving lactose tolerance: its not like there are not others who aren't lactose intolerant.
Besides, do you truly believe down syndrome is beneficial and not an error in the genes? We humans as well as everything else is only a copy of a copy of a copy.. we only gather more diseases and our languages become dumber and more simple. Everyone becomes more dumb.
Down syndrome disproves evolutionism as a whole.
But again, to the copy thing.. if we toss the bad copies away, which is natural selection, and don't let them breed nor reproduce then we'll stay with a better quality of copies for a longer time but that is micro evolution in that case: only minor differences. Anything else than this is purely science fiction and can't be observed or tested. But maybe in the future humans are able to mix human genes with animals and possibly be able to create something idk.. but that too would prove that you need intelligence to do that cus it would not come naturally.
@@unholycheeseburgerAre they still human?
You can't predict something you already know.
You can't eat with out a mouth either but what are you getting at?
Michael spent his time trying to make Kent look bad instead of giving facts to prove his point . Thanks Kent
What are you talking about? Shermer went first for 25 minutes and presented a ton of facts. And after, sure, it's a debate, so if Hovind said some nonsense (which he does all the time), Shermer will shut that down.
@@hongotedesco8931 your ignorance shows
i dont think we watched the same debate
You dont have to try to make Hovind look bad he does a good job of that on his own.
@@cesarepelaschier4829 based upon your ignorance , let me guess your a dimocrat
Despite having no scientific credentials or even an accredited degree, Hovind presents himself as someone who understands the science of evolution better than people with advanced science degrees who research in labs and publish peer-reviewed papers. During his presentations, he sounds like a stand-up comedian when he attacks evolution, or a used car salesman when he is attempting to make a point by getting his audience to buy a video or book from him. Many of his slideshows read like a top 10 list of commonly seen (and refuted) arguments for creationism that contain little to no actual data or proof. These arguments are interjected with painfully unfunny "jokes" and anecdotes, which are topped off with a healthy serving of mined quotes.
The saddest part of this debate is that a respected academic such as Michael Shermer, is giving the liar/ex convict Kent Hovind legitimacy and a platform.
You disparage the messenger because you can't find fault in the message.
@@s.e.wagger3888 I disparage the messenger because he lies. For example, I have seen him say hundreds of times in various debates and calls "A dog always produces a dog" in order to imply evolution is ridiculous. I have also seen him corrected on this many, many times. Aron Ra for example explained to him that according to evolution, a dog will only ever produce a dog, and that in fact, if a dog ever produced something that was not a dog, it would invalidate evolution. Mr. Hovind has been corrected on this specific point many, many times, yet still uses the phrase "a dog always produces a dog" to try and attack evolution.
That is just one example of his dishonesty. There are many, many more.
@@unholycheeseburgerbut I think even pro-evolutionists agree with me that evolution is next level of humor
Truth Wins ❤️
Yep truth wins, the lie of the evolution religion loses like it always does.
@@chucklesdarwinwaswrongevol236 whats your strongest evidence that evolution doesnt happen
@@GametimeeithDavid molecules to man fish to man pure chance no via mechanism for evolution the fossil record punctuation equilibrium theory debunked easily evolution is a big joke
@@GametimeeithDavid his strongest evidence is probably that his username says so…
@@herlihy 😂😂 its incredible they believe this
I'm reading the comments and i'm wondering how so many people could come out of this thinking that Hovind won...
Religion us 4 ppl who don't know demselves
They aren't religious zealots I imagine. And what's funny is you guys are literally pushing a religious doctrine of the catholic church by pushing your antiscience religion. The ultimate irony of the atheists life.
He's a master huckster, showman that knows just enough about science to poke fun at it but not enough to actually understand it. Reminds me of an old time snake oil salesman.
Because you can't think logically. Like a handicap.
Science is the definition of manScience is the definition of man Wanted to claim everything was not God but yet science keeps proving God, Look at DNA, Every human being has the signature of God in his DNA In between every bridge there is a series Of segments that are 10 5,6,5, Using the Hebrew language that applies a letter to every number you come out with YHVH, The signature of God , You see man wants to discredit God because he wants to be his own God, And now Man has created their own God called A.I.
Damn it.. I came here to listen to Shermer.. but left thinking about everything kent said. 😕
Are u still thinking about it
Yeah right dude. You aren't fooling anyone (and I'm being serious). Anyome who listens to Shermer is only gonna laugh at someone like Hovind and not take anything he says seriously. So what happened was you came to listen to Hovind (being that it's on a Christian TH-cam channel), then you couldn't stop thinking about what Shermer said (good for you). Then you were embarrassed that maybe you had the wrong ideas and Shermer started to open your mind, and you felt the need to make your side look stronger by saying what you did in the comments. Hilarious.😮
@@johnkaminski3209it seems you just did what u accused the other guy of. Maybe I misunderstood but if you are not a Christian why are you on this channel🤔 The same reason the other guy was on here to watch a particular person🤔. I know I just typed a name in not a channel to find this. Just because someone has opened their mind to the truth who are you to question his motives in writing a comment about how he perceived what he watched. Im sorry you just make no sense kinda like evolution saying we are related to broccoli since we all came from one simple organism.
Same here. Hovind actually changed my life. I realised the atheist scientists only have a theory and a weak one at that. The Genesis account is actually true.
It stood out to me that Shermer did not answer to the challenge of the non-existing beneficial mutation and the impossibility of chemical evolution. And then he misquoted Hovind severely too, as if Hovind said that science is a religion. I see through this guy easily.
Kent comes prepared. Shermer was not prepared in the same way. He did not have details to back up his points. It is funny it is usually Shermer who is insulting and sarcastic about Christian views and very energetic.
And remember he viewed all kents previous debate and came with counter arguments and still got smoked....
Wow... His "predictions" at the beginning are simply ridiculous.
I feel so Sorry for you Michael Shermer
He is so rude
How is he rude? @@joejacobs3537
In 2023 you never see debates anymore.
It is everywhere.
Sterner would rather believe we were “tinkered” from the bottom up? The bottom of what? Who? I chose to believe in God who “created” me rather than something?who tinkered around and stumbled upon me
Comments like these make me so scared of people like you. You will happily refuse to understand anything and think that a magical God claim will bring you salvation. I do not understand where you lot find the arrogance needed to think that way. It's terrifying just how unintelligent the everyday human can be. Choosing to remain ignorant will always be a strange choice.
I was a skeptic, which is a good thing. And Jesus is real and creation is real. If you are an honest skeptic, in time you will know truth. If you are a skeptic with a motive against God without an open mind, then you will never get to the simple truth.
Signs and symptoms
The following can indicate a delusion:[17]
The patient expresses an idea or belief with unusual persistence or force, even when evidence suggests the contrary.
That idea appears to have an undue influence on the patient's life, and the way of life is often altered to an inexplicable extent.
Despite their profound conviction, there is often a quality of secretiveness or suspicion when the patient is questioned about it.
The individual tends to be humorless and oversensitive, especially about the belief.
There is a quality of centrality: no matter how unlikely it is that these strange things are happening to the patient, he/she accepts them relatively unquestioningly.
An attempt to contradict the belief is likely to arouse an inappropriately strong emotional reaction, often with irritability and hostility. They will not accept any other opinions.
The belief is, at the least, unlikely, and out of keeping with the patient's social, cultural, and religious background.
The patient is emotionally over-invested in the idea and it overwhelms other elements of his/her psyche.
The delusion, if acted out, often leads to behaviors which are abnormal and/or out of character, although perhaps understandable in light of the delusional beliefs.
Individuals who know the patient observe that the belief and behavior are uncharacteristic and alien.
Additional features of delusional disorder include the following:[17]
It is a primary disorder.
It is a stable disorder characterized by the presence of delusions to which the patient clings with extraordinary tenacity.
The illness is chronic and frequently lifelong.
The delusions are logically constructed and internally consistent.
The delusions do not interfere with general logical reasoning (although within the delusional system the logic is perverted) and there is usually no general disturbance of behavior. If disturbed behavior does occur, it is directly related to the delusional beliefs.
The individual experiences a heightened sense of self-reference. Events which, to others, are nonsignificant are of enormous significance to him or her, and the atmosphere surrounding the delusions is highly charged.
@@DavidmByrd evidence for a person with mental disorders are beliefs that rocks exploding created 50 million highly coded DNA cells that posess tons of information as in each human being as well as mindless matter created perfect laws of gravity and mass
@@slidefootballers6237 Who says exploding rocks created DNA?
That sounds like something a young Earth creationist would say when they are lying about science.
Believe whatever you want, but sheesh, you don't have to lie about science, do you? Is that a requirement of your belief system?
I'll answer that for you: Yes. Yes, it is. You *cannot* be a young Earth creationist and argue against science without lying, misrepresenting, quote mining, etc.
No field of science supports the young-earth belief. That's why it's called a belief.
Lol. "Dr." Hovind. What a joke.
"Hi, my name is Kent Hovind..."
Everything loosely hangs on Kent's use of "kind", that's why he refuses to discuss species and speciation.
Did professor Dave tell you that....you know because Dave is a professor.
@@shaunb2110 Just an observation.
@Double Vision I wasn't stating it as fact. And, you are entirely correct, it is my opinion. Is there a problem with that? Do you think it's wrong for people to offer their opinion on what they observe, particularly in a forum designed for sharing and discussing opinions?
Also, It's not up to me to prove him wrong, he is making the claim. It's up to him to bring the evidence which supports his claim. So far, he hasn't done this.
And who is saying a cat produces anything different than a cat?
If you think that is an assertion made by evolutionary biologists, you're very much mistaken.
@Double Vision So, a Great Dane can give birth to a Chihuahua then?
They're both dogs. They're the same species. They're the same *_KIND_* .
Did you know that most of the dog breeds we recognise today are only 150 years old? Humans created them all, spurred on by what's known as the "Victorian Explosion", influenced by recent Darwin publications.
How was that possible. That alone is proof of evolution.
It's a fact, evolution is observable. The faster the reproduction and incubation period, the easier it can be influenced, and it's effects can be observed.
As dogs can have several litters, and the offspring reach sexual maturity quickly. You can choose which traits of the offspring you wish to encourage, continue to breed those together, and so on.
All those differences bred into them were because mankind wanted them to serve different purposes.
A Golden Retriever will retrieve hunted birds.
Terriers will go down rabbit holes.
Greyhounds will chase down a hare.
Dobermans will ward off.
German shepherds will protect and intimidate.
Etc, etc.
If you were to carry on with that level of genetic manipulation for another 1000 years, eventually some of the breeds would be so far removed from one another that they would no longer be able to breed with eachother. This is called speciation, they both still dogs but they've become different species, because the genetic lineage has changed so much that they're too different to be compatible.
Either way, the original dog has long since died, and all the millions of dogs since have individually each given birth to their own kind, but none of the breeds are the same as eachother, how can this be?
Because the human reproduction cycle is fairly slow and women are generally limited to one offspring per term. With sexual maturity coming decades after birth and with no external influences pressuring any genetic goals, it's less observable.
Evolution is a fact. If humans can exert that level of change in such a short span of time, imagine what hundreds of millions of years, and millions of different natural, climate and environmental changes could do to influence speciation.
But, I guess you're not interested in imagining that, are you?
You started with God and the Bible and now you're ignorantly working backwards and dishonestly trying to make everything fit.
Science starts with a clean sheet, and makes the discoveries along the way. And each step of that method has, slowly but surely disproven, most religious claims.
People used to believe that a deity carried the sun across the sky on a chariot. When we discovered that the earth orbits the sun, that God went away.
We used to think thunder and lightning were caused by Thor's anger. Then, when we found out it was the build up and release of static electricity in the clouds, Thor went away.
Eventually your God will go away too, just like the 3,000 other gods that came before him.
Unless, con artists like Hovind are able keep convincing gullible sheep like you.
In the history of mankind, nobody has ever brought any worthwhile evidence of any God to the table. Why do you think this is?
@Double Vision "You don't have to prove faith"???
I'm not asking him to prove faith, I'm asking him to prove God.
Faith is the excuse people give when they don't have any evidence, if they had evidence they wouldn't need faith.
Science doesn't use faith, it makes predictions based on *_EVIDENCE_*
This must be deeply embarrassing to educated Christians everywhere
Really? How?
@@aservant2287 I rest my case
@@PJToxophilus ok, I rest in the Lord. I'll take that forcing myself on people any day
Do you mean indoctrinated?
Whats embarrassing is thinking humans evolved from tadpoles
We make mistakes all the time but yet we can't give God the ability to make any mistakes what an arrogant species we become
40:34 “it didn’t happen, there’s no evidence for it”. Sounds like Kent is talking about six day creation!
Yep evolution didn’t and doesn’t happen.
Kents only argument is to misrepresent evolution.
When atheist argue against creationism they usually know the claims made in Genesis. Like that we are made from dirt and earth and plants were created before the sun lol
I have NEVER seen a creationist understand evolution and make an argument against it.
Kent is a complete con man.
Wow! Have you read what happened in those 6 days?.
@@jesuslovesyou.repent.4473 Yeah. Lots of times. I'm the son of. Young earth creationist minister and was gonna be one myself. Yes I know what the Bible says. I know it well.
At least we know Michael Shermer earned the right to be called Dr. Shermer.
with a foundation of things that never happened and passed on as fact, yea, i agree with you.
and yet in the kingdom of heaven that will matter nothing and the souls that the Lord saved through hovinds ministry will matter though. God is good buddy, he really does love all of us.
Privilege. But still.
@@dramacydal1776 Uh huh. So tell us all about these plagues that hit Egypt but is only recorded in the bible. Or the 40 year Jewish diaspora in the desert with no evidence to back it up.
You have to first teach these Christians how to think, what logical fallacies are etc.
These people don't know how to think. So this guy can make irrational and illogical fallacy after fallacy and these people don't know any better.
No it's you evolutionists who don't know how to think. In fact you're as dumb as dogs' balls. Your reasoning is circular from start to finish.
"he said pope believe in evolution.
Kent: thats because pope has not attended my seminar."
The best line.
I'm Catholic and completely agree. I think the Pope's have been surrounded by bad people much of the time, and the current one is likely not even Catholic -_-
He didn’t attend the seminar for good reason, as a matter of fact.
@@chriskastner1938 like you? Well we found the missing link between apes and humans. And that really proves evolution.
@@edenvideos5447 I don’t even know what you’re talking about. I wasn’t even discussing human ape missing link. Are you agreeing here? Are you just sarcastic?
@@chriskastner1938 oh so you are not evolutionist?
Yes all those things are in the Bible because back then he was trying to show us what perfection about being a human is and that we could never maintain it that's why we had to receive the Holy Spirit that's why Jesus had to die on the cross because we cannot become worthy
I don't like Dr Michael Shermer...
Gonna tell my kids Kent Hovind is Jordan Peterson
Nah, JP is way funnier
@@Yoursoulismine814 I don't think I've ever laughed at anything JP has said....ever
@@ArticruciA Really? Even his pathetic malding over being kicked off Twitter? Or how about, "Up yours woke moralists! We'll see who cancels who!" JP is such a lol cow.
😂
Both fools
Wow why would a university give time to hear the lies and miss information of a crazy person like Kent. I can't understand how he could have a PHD
He doesn't. He got a piece of paper from a non accredited diploma mill. He doesn't have a recognized PhD.
Answer: he doesn’t have a PhD. Look up patriot University. It’s a trailer in the desert. His doctoral dissertation was leaked years ago, and that alone should have buried him for good, but since it didn’t, that speaks volumes about his followers.
It's a bought PhD.
Shermer did not answer the morality question at all. He instead questioned the morality of the Bible. Nice try Shermer, nice try.
That's because the Bible is immoral. Duh
I think he didn't answear because morality has nothing to do with evolution. Evolution is a cientific process. Ciencie doesn't give a shit about morality.
Thank you God for a faithful servant. Beating back the deception of the enemy, Evilution.
Raise up those cogent in biblical Apologetics. Setting free the captives to this insult to your majesty as creator God. Amen.
In no way did he even prove evolution all he did was blabber instead of trying to disprive Kent.
Its very CLEAR Kent has the TRUTH on his side. Jesus saves. I can see now. Thank you Jesus for your mercy and grace.
😂
No.
@@pleaseenteraname1103 yes
@@skylarhillman1455 everything Micheal said was dunked on
@@joelcarter2535 I mean it’s been a long time since I’ve seen this debate, but it’s Kent Hovid, The guy still thinks that evolution teaches that humans come from strawberries.
Did anyone catch that Kent said explicitly that snakes don't talk? But Genesis says...
So the Bible was ignorant or lying?
Neither. It was a metaphor. Similarly, when you say that someone speaks with a forked tongue, you don't mean that literally.
@@lawrence1318 I am proud of you for reading the Bible as metaphor! 👏🏽 Now, this is debate with Kent Hovind so you should read my comment in context, right? Hovind reads the Bible literally and then contradicts his premise by saying "snakes don't talk." Well, HE just said the Bible lied about a talking snake....
Every time Hovind speaks you hear a snake snake speak
@@CaptPeon Snakes don't talk. In Genesis it doesn't say all snakes talked or did it? That snake was the devil, we also see an occasion where donkey spoke too in the Bible, that doesn't mean all Does. It happen due to divine intervention or simply put higher dimensional forces acting on it. Same Goes for miracles 🤷.
@@kavisbreaker1946 Genesis never said that the serpent was the devil, that may be your assumption but that's not what the Bible says. The issue is that Hovind claims a literal interpretation... So at least one snake spoke... And a donkey, as you pointed out.
Its honestly sad that I already know what kent is going to say before he says it. He's been repeating the same incoherent nonsense for 20 years. Just creates straw man arguments no one even believes.
Only a fool says there is no God.
@@davidinchcliff4560 and only a fool says there is definitely a god. :)
What's the point in changing what he says if Evolutionists still cant contest it? At that point hes just trying to win over the crowd and make Evolutionists look like fools (which they are).
@@angel.v39 Evolutionists have debunked his claims many times over. He just doesn't listen.
@@michaelshort2388 Which claims specifically have they debunked? Have they proven their fossil dating to be accurate? Have they found concrete evidence of transitional fossils? Or are they still picking and choosing like they've always done?
1:04:25 Kent says that if they tell you The appendix is vestigial they are either confused or they are lying. The same could be said about him because vestigial does not mean useless, it means that it no longer has its original function. So is Kent confused or is he lying?
Hovint criticizes everything and has evidence for nothing.
Now apply the same standards to the Atheistic EVILutionists of Skeptic Magazine and all these major universities and public schools getting billions in taxpayer money stolen from everyone else at government gunpoint to shove their religion down the throats of everyone else’s children. Done so as if it’s absolute scientific fact to the complete exclusion of any Christian Creationist counter narrative given equal weight and time in required course curriculum.
46:26 Kent is going on about how there are no good mutations and criticizes sickle cell anemia. Yet it is a mutation that is advantageous and that it allowed them to live long enough to reproduce, so by Kent criticizing it he acknowledged that it actually was a beneficial mutation. And decades ago there was the mutation that allowed bacteria to consume nylon, which was advantageous. There are other beneficial mutations that increase human bone density making them several times harder than most of our bones. But Kent has already acknowledged the existence of a beneficial mutation.
Lol you failed to provide any evidence that sickle cell is advantageous …. If that’s all you have to refute the overwhelming evidence Kent provided your rebuttal is lacking !!
@@scottyboi76 I hope you aren’t one of these one shot wonders, useless little trolls that offer one ridiculous objection and then you run along on your way never to interact. But you’re a Christian and a creationists, so I don’t expect much from you.
1:08:30 Kent says that Every vestigial structure is losing something and therefore is not evolution. After listing six definitions of evolution, Kent should be well aware that none of those definitions included the mandatory addition of something, but merely the change in something. So Kent is either ignorant or he is lying. But since he has been doing this for decades and has six definitions of evolution, it seems highly unlikely that he is simply ignorant and mistaken.
He's saying that even if they were vestigial its a loss of information not a different coding in the cpu to change the DNA molecule. Which is him saying its not imperical evidence for evolution which its not its an inference because it's trying to debunk a creator not give evidence for evolution. Next, the vestigial structures they claimed have since been seen to have functions we thought didn't. The whales "hind legs" are used in the reproduction of the whale offspring.
@@brennenhammer2415 When ordering a combo meal at Burger King, do you give less information while ordering a small and more information while ordering a large? In the same way, your small whale legs doesn’t mean a loss of information, it means different information. So it’s not a loss of information, it’s just information.
Vestigial does not mean a thing has zero function, It refers to something that has a lesser, diminish, and sometimes different function from what it was originally.
Scientist identifying vestigial structures is in no way an attempt to debunk a creator; science doesn’t care about your creator because your creator is not present And available for observation. So that is also a false statement.
Do yourself a favor and don’t take Kent‘s word on matters of science. If you check what he says against actual science, you will see that he gets everything wrong. He gets very basic things wrong. He gets things wrong that are easy to show how wrong he is. He has been corrected on these things numerous times over the decades, yet he tells the same lies. I don’t usually call someone a liar, but when it becomes so abundantly clear that they are not concerned with accurate information then I have no choice but to think they are saying these things intentionally.
@@mrhyde7600 a vestigial structure doesn't exist. Give me one example. All the ones they thought had no use or "lesser use" ended up having a clear function like the whale. But they have to keep it in the textbooks because if they took everything proven wrong out there would be nothing left and they know it. I've seen all of Kent's debates every last one I've never seen anyone give evidence that lasted the test of time. The evolutionists has changed thier answers over the past 40 years. So do science a favor and be open minded. There's things like the flood that causes hydraulic sorting which could be the case for a lot of what we see in geology that causes layers. Nobody knows if it took millions of years or a flood took place and the evolutionist wants to say thier theory is the only one that's true and the disgrace of that tyrannical worldview is trying to make it seem like nobody is wrong but what the mainstream teachings are I bet you watch CNN. Over 700 scientists have signed a document stating evolution has no evidence. They can't come forward because they will all lose thier job for thier worldview because it doesn't match thier attack on religion as many scientists have. Its ran by liberal democrat atheists who can't come to grips with a God and thier bad morality so they have to believe it. Look up Stephen meyer.
@@brennenhammer2415
Vestigial Structures
Yes. They exist. It’s a thing that’s been identified and given a label. If we have IDENTIFIED it, then it’s a REAL thing. And you already have an example - whale legs. Those BY DEFINITION are vestigial. Does JOT mean they have NO function - stop listening to that idiot fool Hovind.
It’s All Proved Wrong
When you are trying to figure out how something works, do you think you have it put together correctly, you make a prediction that this configuration will do this thing, and you try it and it works, then you feel pretty good about being correct. Evolution has been doing that for over a century. It has been literally The basis and foundation of modern biology and medicine for decades. So if what you say is correct, that evolution is wrong about everything, there are some miraculous coincidences going on that allows evolution to be as indispensably useful as it is. Can you explain that? No you can’t.
Evolutionist changes the answers.
Do you know what science does? Answer is no you don’t. You think we shouldn’t find better medicines and better surgeries and better testing, we shouldn’t make better automobile engines, everything should stay the same, because science shouldn’t change. Do you know what that sounds like? That sounds like the stupidest thing I’ve heard today. It’s not just the evolutionist as you call it, it’s literally every aspect of science that changes daily, because unlike religious people, science is about learning new things and making corrections and improving. It’s an exercise in humility, something else religious people don’t comprehend. Sure it’s a word you pay lipservice too, but the practice of it amongst the religious is shit.
Hydraulic sorting
You haven’t spent five minutes looking at what actual science says about your supposed flood. You don’t know a damn thing about anything you are talking about. Absolutely everything you are saying is simply repeating the stupidest dumb shit that these idiots have been saying for years.
I want you to answer this one question for me: have you ever tried researching the actual science from the scientists, instead of listening to what your Christians tell you about the science?
@@brennenhammer2415 I didn’t even finish reading your comment but I happen to see that thing about the 700 scientists. You haven’t researched anything ever have you?! That list has been debunked for decades! Some of those guys aren’t even scientists! I think one of the guys to sign it was a groundskeeper for a park. I saw a video years ago where a number of those we had signed that document recanted and wish to have their names removed because they had no idea how their signature was going to be used. If I’m not mistaken, the verbiage was changed after they signed it, but I could be mistaken on that. Either way, everyone who has been available for contact has said that they absolutely support the theory of evolution and had they known the organization that had approached them was so dishonest and opposed to science they never would have signed it. I’m sorry, but you really need to learn to think a little and do a little research. It is sad to see a human mind in the condition yours is. It could become healthy again with the input of some relevant information, but stuck at the bottom of the pond with the rest of the bottom feeders soaking up their shit is not beneficial. Supposedly you guys are against abortion, but you have no problem aborting human brains.
Who let all these haters out of mommy and daddy's house?
So because some roaches don’t die from roach poisoning they are evolving? that’s not a beneficial mutation or evidence of anything
Another absolute slam dunk from Kent. He’s still undefeated.
If you believe that I would like to sell you some NFTs.
Undefeated? When it comes to science, he's a chronic liar. If you think lying is a good thing, well then, sure, I guess he's undefeated🙄
Hahahaha Kent is the best!
The best embarrassment to Christianity.
@@mgscheue You’re the best embarrassment to your mother
@@dominicferro8314 this coming from the thinking intolerant!🤣
IKR?!?!? he's such a good comedian, never breaks character even once
At being the most wrong in the shortest amount of time.
Michael shermer get out of there!! You are clearly getting destroyed!
you missed spelled Kent Hovind.
@@michaelshort2388 I made absolutely no mistakes. What are you referring to?
@@opengates777 He means you spelled out Shermer's name instead of Hovind's, cuz it's clear Kent is a whackjob.
@@opengates777 Hahaha You may actually be less sharp than Hovind.
@@CulturedWhiteBoy I take it you are a Atheist, and you are not interested in facts? Evolution is the biggest laughing stock since Kent Hovind destroyed Michael Shermer with key points! Lol 🤣
TRUTH IN KENT
The argument that the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics doesn't apply because the sun adds energy is absolutely ridiculous. I am seriously in pure disbelief that anyone can actually take this nonsense seriously. What is wrong with humanity
Thank you Brother Hovind, how do we get hold of your videos outside America. To be specific in Africa?
There are plenty here on youtube. Alao there is his website.
Dr Kent Hovind OFFICIAL is the youtube channel for him.
Pray to the hula Mvula gods and the Nigerian scammers will manifest at your front door and give them to you. They won’t steal anything, Ken’s videos are the biggest scam they could do you.
@@mrhyde7600 lovely but it's not just Nigerians doing it
@@clarkporter1340 yeah I know, but I kind of use that as the generic term to refer to that type of really bad thinking. It's kind of like Coke with a small C. Tylenol with a small tT
As a scientist who strives to follow the moral guidelines of Jesus, I find no reason to believe the Bible’s description of the Universe is more accurate than that of modern science. It IS possible to believe in Jesus and still form conclusions of existence upon evidence that aren’t explicitly stated in the Bible.
Then you believe in a God with limitations, not all powerful
Sean, Jesus' authority was the Bible. He quoted Genesis. He quoted Deuteronomy. Genesis 1 makes it clear. God created the world in six days. Science is consistent with the Bible.
I never get tired of Kent not understanding or at least pretending not to understand that something isn’t a prediction if you knew about it beforehand
Shermer speaks non sense in both or maybe in three things: in the bible, in science, and in trying to comunicating with people.
Every time I have to listen to Hovind I feel just a little dumber.. He has never put forward one single shred of evidence in any of his "debates". Kent just tries to argue with people whose thinking has not progressed beyond that of a 5 year old. Add to that over simplification of everything plus a large amount of lies and insults.
You are Atheist you are clearly not interested in true facts 💯!
@@opengates777 How do you know that? Old-earth creationists would agree with everything petereuk52 just said.
@@drazenkekovic3012 Kent Hovind shown some strong evidence through his presentation! Evolution is just the biggest lie ever all based on assumptions!
@@opengates777 No he didn’t. Constructing your own “definition” of evolution that’s easier to knock down, rather than addressing the actual theory itself, is called a straw man fallacy. If you want to see Kent corrected on his definition, watch this:
th-cam.com/video/wHPmUszztGU/w-d-xo.html
@@opengates777 'evolution is just the biggest lie ever'
Evolution is just population genetics. In biology, any change in the inherited characteristics or traits of a population of organisms through successive generations is evolution. This includes adaptation, of course.
So, if you would take some time to learn biology from biologists instead of apologists, you probably wouldn't have a problem with biological evolution, as it is an observed fact of nature.
People like Kent Hovind strawman biological evolution all the time.
There's a reason he does that, ya know? Ask yourself why he has to misrepresent and lie about science.
I absolutely love Kent Schooling em! Lets goo!
He's a great teacher
🤣🤣 Kent. “Schooling” people. 🤣🤣
@@greypaladin7361 lol... your emojis.. express a different emotion than you were intending
After the flood, everyone's property became waterfront property.
Fact
46:06 Kent is adamantly making a point that these fossils cannot show anything except that something died, and in the same breath tries to tell you those fossils show how those things died and when they died. A little hypocritical that the fossils can’t show anything that the scientific data says they show but then they get to show for him religious believes that he agrees cannot be proved. He makes a big deal about religious beliefs not being able to be proved and confirmed and shouldn’t be taught in school, but it’s OK if it’s his religious view, right?
If this wasn't so old and both didn't get more precise on thier science this would be amazing
People still fog brained about this back then.
Is it just me or in every Kents debate there is a scientist talking talking talking and yet they dont really say anything?
They beat Kent over the head with facts. Although I would say Hovind talks alot without bringing anything of substance
I was thinking the same, when I saw this vid... Hovind told facts and more facts, and the "scientist" just talked about nothing.
@@stripedfrog1122 Hovind knows zero scientific facts. He still says Evolution teaches that animals give birth to other animals. Hovind, as he puts it, is either lying or stupid.
@@anunknownentity1637 simplifying things doesn't mean lying.
Anyway, we both can have our opinion. What I saw was a lot of facts and citates from Hovind amd a lot of eeeh- s from the other guy.
@@stripedfrog1122 simplifying things, lol.
Hovind is essentially saying that scientists are saying that
Dog + Dog= Cat
Which isn't what they're saying. Scientists say that features and traits of animals can change slowly over time through genetic mutation. For an analogy it would be like me saying this.
You're a Christian and all Christians want atheists to go to Hell.
Now imagine I say this in a bunch of debates. And imagine every time the Christian corrects me and tells me that Christians want everyone to go to heaven, I ignore it and keep lying. Imagine I've debated hundreds of times, have said this hundreds of times, and every time I was corrected. At that point I'm not simplifying, I'm lying to people.
Btw I'm a Christian
Hovind wins, and it's not even close. The opening argument...it's over. Good job Kent.
Wins what? I don't think "Dr" Kent has ever read a peer reviewed study in his life. What he does well is speak with confidence which makes him seem correct when if you break down what he says you could tell that he's either lying, or just doesn't know what he's on about.
@@KXNGT3KK
Hey King. DEBATE HIM
@@alienchaser636 I don't think I would be able to keep my cool with this phoney.
hahaha are you serious? kent has no education whatsoever and michael shermer shouldn't waste his time with him
@@samuela9237 yes bro kent is a kid against real people with knowledge
Im gonna answer the one question that nobody can answer. Which came first the chicken or the egg. The answer is the egg.
There's no egg without a chicken.
@@UnexpectedWonder The chicken evolved from a common ancestor which laid eggs like DINOSAURS which evolved into birds BUT are still Dinosuars
Yeah it was eggs but the one that laid an egg was an half dinosaur and half chicken there is evidence through fossil records
@@sreenathjohnsonsaysnotolgbtq where is THAT evidence?
@@jillyg931 uuh fr
There were no mammoths found in Colorado creek,there were 2 mammoths found together in the 1990s but in goldstream valley AK ,with several samples from each mammoth they dated them both to 17,000 years.
Hovind says dont lie to the kids and then goes and tells the kids that noahs f;ood really happened and the earth is 6000 years old.Makes you want to laugh.
Michael sweating. Nervous. Go Kent. Praise Jesus.
35:30 Kent thinks trees have to fall down in five or six years. Kent, allow me to introduce you to petrified forest. I like science.
I like science also … so tell me how does the petrification process occur ?
@@scottyboi76 That is irrelevant to the fact that trees can stand for much longer than five or six years. I am under no obligation to explain the petrification process in order to state for a fact that dead trees stand longer than five or six years.
@@scottyboi76 Do trees stand longer than 5yrs after dying?
Yes or No
@@mrhyde7600
How about 5 billion years...?
@@vegestaples It’s possible, in the right conditions. We won’t be finding any of those.
waiting to see some live dinasours today :))
Go to Africa 😊
Evolution must be the very definition of humor
The thumbnail looks like that presidential candidate Howard Dean shouting "YEAHHHH"
Creationism in New Zealand? Wtf? I know it's a little bit anecdotal, but i've lived in NZ for 40 years and not come across even the mention of a person who is a creationist. Take it back Shermer!
If you’re Christian then you are a Creationist by default… you believe that God created the universe
@@denniswilkerson5536 yes, though the term will usually - or often, be applied to people who think the earth is 6,000 years old...."young earth" creationists, I think they're called.
@@curious1053 I hate you.
@@JimChap Can’t be because there is a term called “Old Earth Creationists as well”
A creationist is just a believer in the Scientific Theory of Creationism.
@@denniswilkerson5536 No shit. Hovind is a young earth creationist and that is the topic of this debate.
i taught science for 15 years. now i teach science fiction
Fiction?
@@joelcarter2535 yeah, fiction.
I didn't know Shermer the Squirmer taught science for 15 years.
@@gottmituns1938 😄
@@Abzero-mx2pb don't mind me 😄
I don't believe KH cares much about engaging is actual intellectual discourse - it's absolutely ridiculous for him to spend the first few minutes basically acting out his sleazy infomercial scam adverts & scam-baiting the audience & any future listeners with many of his sham-revenue streams while displaying related information onscreen.
I'd LOVE to know of ANY other credible individual who does this DURING a formal debate.
The Fairbanks creek mammoth has been carbon dated more recently with improved techniques that produce more reliable and consistent results,it dates back about 11,800 years.
So Mr. Sherman was a member of the latter day saints that's why he went door-to-door and he realized that that organization is not correct I could have told you that all you had to do was ask they have taken the word of God and they have twisted Ito the wrong motives and desires just like and preconstantine did with Christianity. So instead of concluding that the might have actually been a better version of understanding God he just credits them all together you see that's what satan does he'll mix the truth with like to just credit it all together instead of waiting out the lies
1:49:00 Kent's argument here is fallacious. Carbon dating is typically not used beyond a certain age range. If proximal biological matter is giving you inconsistent dates then you must use dating with elements higher in the periodic table. You essentially use the element lowest on the periodic table that gives the most consistent dates. Creationists obtusely ignore this fact and pretend that carbon is the only element used in radiometric dating. They do this because they know they can get wildly inconsistent dating with carbon with dates older than 20k years. There's literally half a dozen or more better radiometric dating methods. Carbon is the worst. Gettin' real tired of this shit.
Ask any scientists how atoms are held together. Everything should literally explode. Truth is most scientists who try to disprove the bible by using science they become believers. You have a choice to believe or not to believe but I can show with scripture how Everything in the news you see happening now is predicted in the bible to the letter. It's been right 100% of the time. You think Everything came from nothing, a third grader could tell you that's not logical. The reason why most people don't want to believe what the bible says is because they don't want to give up their rights to do whatever they want. These are the simple facts in a few words
@@aservant2287 Fallacy: non-believers want to do whatever comes to their mind without consequences.
Sir, if the only thing keeping you decent is the expectation of heaven, then deep down you're a selfish person. Imagine what you'd be capable of if you randomly had the delusion that murder was god's will.
I, on the other hand, wish to leave the world a better place than where I found it. Is this too much to ask from people without invoking the boogey man?
@@troybonner91 I love God because I choose to and because He first loved me. Being a Christian isn't all about keeping the rules, it's a relationship that's built on love that you're receiving do much you have to give it out. Before I was a Christian I couldn't sleep, I sold dope to minors, I would beat down guys on roofs, lied, stole, live in misery and bitterness. I'm not going to heaven because how good I am, I'm going because of what Christ did on the cross. I deserve Hell like anyone else but the only difference is I'm forgiven.
@@aservant2287 Just because that is how you chose to live your life without religion doesn't mean that is how others live it. You are the one who started talking about the ethics of non-religious people, not me. I was raised in it, I don't care about your preaching.
@@troybonner91 I'm not preaching, I'm just asking a question. If science proves there's no God then how do atoms hold together? No scientist can explain how because Gods smarter than man by many times. He knew that you and I would be talking about this and knows about your bitterness towards His things but yet still loves you and has a plan for your life.
Kent is the best, both wise and educated.
🤣🤣 Kent is neither wise nor educated.
I understand why you are saying so, because he keep on debunking evolutionists and that makes you a little bit uncomfortable.
@@THABISOMAEKO “Keeps on” claims that he has. Which he hasn’t. He’s had what evolution _actually_ is explained to him in excruciating detail. By _actual_ scientists. He doesn’t care. He still peddles his nonsense to dullards who don’t question anything the bible tells ‘em, yet think a retarded hick with no education likely beyond high school (at best) knows about evolution.
Then there’s how Kent is as a person. Married multiple times. All his ex wives and children has stated that he’s a violent egotist. That he only cares about himself. The fact he expected Eric to just hand everything over to him after he got out of prison for the 50+ counts of tax fraud, speaks about his (lack of) character. As does his sociopathic reaction of not caring at all when that kid died at DAL. Even bragging about how the family will be back.
This is someone you _admire?_ That’s sad.
So Hovind best evidence for creationism is the impossibility of evolution and it’s impossible for there not to be a creator ? No evidence for evolution means it’s has to be creationism.
Sort of like the lack of evidence of a god is enough evidence there is no god
So we can conclude that when Mr. Sherman became an evilical Christian he didn't receive the Holy Spirit cause he would have believed it and it would have been lighting him to maybe the faults within the institution that evangelized him. How can you say it one time you're born again and then end up not being born again how did that happen
I really enjoyed hearing Michael Shermer talk. Thank you! 😁
Yeah , he made me go to bed faster .
He is boring...
The theory of evolution suggests that charlatans wear tacky sports coats. Therefore by the theory of evolution I predict that Not Doctor Kent Hovind will be wearing a tacky beige sports coat in this debate.
Lo and behold, Kent Hovind is wearing a tacky sports coat. The theory of evolution is proven.
I win the debate.
Wow good point. Not.
If it was proven it wouldn’t be a theory dumby
Darwin didnt even have an undergraduate degree in biology.
@@wilsontexas So?
@@TheJimicus the science religion thinks you must have a degree to be qualified to speak on science topics.
Shermer must regret until today debating with Kent! Poor guy not only lost the debate but also is loosing the gift of eternal life. Sadly he walk away from the Lord and is trying so hard to take away as many people with him.
Hovind is WISE!!!
Kent Hovind strengthen my faith in God, I really respect him, he cleared my doubt and I was about to turn into athiest how silly I was.
Eg: we study about evolution in class 10 I started to doubt Bible but now I'm not.
And yeah why do evolutionist hate him
I would seriously encourage to watch people breaking down Kents videos/debates before trusting what he says
I really like logicked. It’s a little crude but has good research
You must be slow or some shit.
Good decision. We have also fulfilled prophecy in the bible.
Shermer a perfect example of some being taught what to think and not how to think. What a silly simple minded man 😂
Kent had his time. One of the warriors God used
Yea, also a tax criminal.
@@gerardjayetileke4373 really ?
@@gerardjayetileke4373
So were the founders. 😂
@@mementomori5374 He was sentenced to 10 years in jail for tax evasion
and now he has 4 ex-wives and endorsed a kiddie diddler...check out the video of "truck drivin' kid billy
The Atheist debater was just saying there are lots of evidence of evolution but doesn’t present examples just like how Kent presented visual examples and therefore Kent is absolutely compelling as Truth Teller.
Exactly I was screaming at my phone like prove it give me examples but he never does
You want examples of things that take time? Longer than our life spans? Sorry it doesn't work like that he's given you plenty of patterns. That's all we can work with of now.
Sn: when did Kent give any examples of a god ever existing?
Did you guys all just skip his opening statement?
@@thatskasherso just patterns and then faith in a theory based on those oatterns
What's really telling is what Kent won't talk about. If Noah had a boat big enough to fit two of every animal, where is it? Where is the spot where it landed? If Moses plagued Egypt with locusts, frogs, etc. Why is there no mention of any of it in any Egyptian writings? Why is there no evidence of a great flood? Kent will never answer those questions and he pivots hard if you try to ask.
he’s literally answered these questions in other seminars…
@@yvisorlando1568 do you have a link? I'd be interested in seeing it
@@Yoursoulismine814 look up his seminars. i dontt really which one specifically, but i know he talks about it.
@@yvisorlando1568 I don't think I can take wading through thousands of hours of this guy's content for that info. Could you summarize for me?
Shermer sounds like James White a bit.. just close your eyes and only listen to the voice
Kent only has a claim. That God did it with no ability to explain or prove how he knows he is right. Which makes his claim useless. And therefore can be dismissed.
Oh yeah Michael, real convenient for you to dismss God when you know Hes going to judge you one day. Coward lol
I claim that everything you see happening in the news was predicted in the bible to the letter I can provide scriptures proving that. If that's not convincing then you don't want to believe because you don't want to give up your rights to do whatever you want. These are the facts
Lol I still don’t understand how they come up with the age of the earth lol
@@marcgrizzly7457 we believe what bible says. You believe we came from nothing. Sorry but that takes more faith than to believe that God created everything. Your scientists can't agree on anything and has more holes than swiss cheese. We have confidence and peace that passes all understanding your theory teaches that the weak don't survive and that humans will be extinct. You theory teaches that there's nothing beyond this life but something inside tells that's not true. Be blessed Bro, I'll be praying for you
@@aservant2287 dude I believe in Jesus
Kent wants to make up his own definitions for words and hold everyone else to the standards that he himself alone has erected. He wants to tell the scientific community what is and isn’t science, he wants to tell everyone else in the world what is and isn’t religion, he tried to tell the US government what the tax laws are, they told him he was wrong.
How many more times are you going to comment on the same video? 😆 You seem a little agitated.
@@MultiVersusWB Is it a good thing or a bad thing to warn other people of bad information? And if they see a plethora of bad information coming from the same source, what might people be likely to do?
@@MultiVersusWB Agitated? Can you show where I’m “agitated”? Or are you annoyed that I’ve got so much to correct on what your demigod says? I hope I get a response from you, cause it would be nice to have a Christian ACTUALLY show me where my corrections are wrong….but you’ve no intentions of doing that do you….😂
Hovind just kills it man, this other guy talked well thought it was gonna be tough for Kent. Boy was I wrong😂 go creationists✊🏻
Creationism is moronic
get well soon!
you must be impressed with very simpleton arguments then. Hovind is embarrassing. I watched another debate in which he didn’t even know that gravity was a law and a theory and didn’t even seem to know the difference between the two and this dude taught HS science! 😂 how scary! The dude is a hack and is 100% wrong. Don’t let Bible blinders blind you from actual truth and critical thinking
You can't win telling an indoctrinated Genocide agreed delusional person to get well soon? they won't listen even if they thought the scriptures had flaws.@@monk_cs2
Are you kidding? Kent is an embarrassment. My 6 year old has a greatly grasp on reality than this fool
Kent destroyed shermars arguments.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
If dinosaurs was wiped out completely millions of years ago how did animals today "evolve" from dinosaurs??
The theory is that sea animals survived the impact of the asteroid, so life evolved from them. In other words, dinosaurs weren't the only animals on earth during that time.
@@znhait this is what doesn't make since to me in one theory sea animals like whales from example they say use to be land animals and then they say sea animals that survived the impact evolved to land animals
I predict things that we already know....Way to go Kent..
Yes...but the Bible talked about things we know now, waaaaaayyy before we knew them. :)
Think you missed the point
@@dorelilovan7108 not really.
I'm always learning something different in evolution, but it's always the same old dribble from creationists... nothing more to learn.
Evolutionists are always changing their theories because their other ones were wrong. Creationists don't change their facts because their facts are always right :)
@@charles7_457 no its called updating the information with new evidence. Something your cult has zero of!
@@deeschoe1245 Evolutionists start with stupid assumptions that don't make sense. That's why they change their ideas. Creationists start with truth that they have evidence for. Evolution is one of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard of!
@@charles7_457 yeah its amazing the stupodity creationists make up for their whole belief!
Abd the stupodity they think when it comes to actual science snd its methodology!
But you go ahead and believe a magic sky daddy farted everything into existence, ill go where the evidence actually points!
If your cult had any "truth" we wouldn't be having this conversation.
@@charles7_457 Did you just say that there's evidence for creationism??? Like what?
Was this in 2004 ?
Kent actually lied the name Kent does not mean bright in welsh
hahaha so true, it means r3t4rded in ancient greece
it also sounds like cunt
Such a good argument, I absolutely loved hearing Shermers points and Kent trying to defend himself against it. It’s funny that most of the creationists don’t know what their talking about so they just resort to saying “Well they’re wrong and lying to you.”
Kent's best debate imo he was in absolute goblin mode. Almost felt bad for Shermer...almost
1:55:00 Real cute with the skateboard analogy... I see him use that in every debate. Problem with Kent's reasoning is that the percentage of DNA shared between species (no matter which species you pick to compare: humans to mice, mice to dogs, lizards to butterflies, etc.) happens to match perfectly with the evolutionary tree in their distance or proximity to others. That would be too coincidental for the "they just share the same designer" argument... Kent doesn't dare go into the percentages of relationship between other species besides humans and chimps because his argument would fall apart. It baffles me as to why every person that debates him doesn't nail him down with the specific percentages and watch him try to weasel out of that.
Problem with your reasoning is that you have none.
@@joshuacruz4244 Ad hominem... means you likely have no argument.
@@troybonner91 No, your arrogance is deserving of condemnation. And I will gladly scorn it. You never have an argument on the platform on which you stand, but you folks swear you do. And always try your hardest to make something that makes no sense make sense that's what's hilarious. Because you insist and look really funny doing it 🤷♂️
@@troybonner91 your whole essay you wrote is an ad hominem attack on hovind and then you accuse me of an ad hominem attack ? You need to get your priorities straightened out my friend.
@@joshuacruz4244 In many instances logical fallacies are only fallacious if they are your only argument, or if your argument relies on them in any way. Read my post again. I brought up a specific argument outside of ad hominem. My argument against Hovind does not rely on my ad hominem in any way. But yes, I also used an ad hominem because Hovind is essentially the car salesman of creationism.
It's hard to believe their is no God than their is God
You got that backwards.