If man evolved?

by tornapart 427 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Satanus

  JB

  Thanks for putting up a synopsis. Quite a few people copy and paste and paste youtube addresses. Often, they don't understand the material and are being lazy. Why should people then argue w presented material if the posters don't even understand it? If someone is going to push an idea, he should take it upon himself to know about the idea, instead of just posting other hand material.

  Yes, people will argue w you, not hovind. Get used to it. If people like you could paste stuff here for creation, then evolutionists could just paste reams, books and vids for their side of the arguement. The air would be full of information that few understood, from both sides. What is the point of that? If you don't understand stuff, don't put it here.

  I will be considering your synopsis, later.

  S
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  Cool, put me down as one who is not going to watch the video. I'll leave the exchange to others.

  I tried. I really tried. He says he believes the Bible is "the inerrant inspired word of God."

  Once I got to "Nobody has ever seen..." applied to forming stars, life forming from nonliving material, etc. - I was done.
  Nobody has ever seen what happened before humans existed, so we must scrutinize it to the point where it is not excepted.

  All you have to do is apply the same reasoning to anything involving God. Nobody has ever seen Him do anything in creation, and there is no proof that what is claimed to have been seen by any of the faithful has actually occured because of God.

  I could do the same as Kent for anything Christians believe- say it in the most ridiculous way and call it "stupid."
• 

  James Brown

  Satanus, Thank you for your response. I know that if I were to put up one thought or numerous thoughts

  that there are people here who specialize in responding in a way that sends one down a labyrinth of a rabbit

  hole from which they or I will never return.

  And many here do not read or comprehend my responses and just pursue their own atheistic agenda.

  Torn apart the original poster asked some questions and I was putting this out here in response.

  I would recommend to torn apart to watch all of Kent Hovinds videos. We are not going through life together

  we all have different agendas and angles. On this forum the vibe is such that no one will ever get a Godly

  or biblical response. If one wants a Godly or biblical response I would recommend just watching the videos

  and avoid the distracting chatter.

  This sites overall vibe is apostate not just to JW's but to God and the Bible.
• 

  jgnat

  I’ve had the displeasure of watching hours of Hovind’s work. I can’t get those hours back. For quality - works that change the brain - I suggest books like:

  Flow by Czikszentmihalyi and

  QED by Feynman

  Tree rings, though round, are linear. The same with core samples of mud and ice.

  http://www.sonic.net/bristlecone/dendro.html

  The problems with carbon dating is known, and improvements are being made all the time. A carbon date that is, say, plus or minus ten thousand years is still in the correct millions.

  Not every argument has the same value. Hovind’s arguments are glib and unsound.

  When passenger pigeons and mammoths are recreated using principles learned from evolution and genetics, the creationists can go home.
• 

  James Brown

  On the way out that is one thing to keep in mind about atheism being a religion.

  Atheist follow the same thought patterns in deciding what to believe.

  Atheist believe in things happening that they dont or cant see and attribute it to the big bang

  "Everything came from nothing"

  And Theist believe everything came from God.
• 

  jgnat

  I am not an athiest.
• 

  James Brown

  Dating methods are based on circular reasoning.

  When you use circular reasoning you are seeing what you want to see.

  That is not scientific. That describes the hole atheistic evolutionist movement.
• 

  cofty

  James Brown - I too have listened to hours of Kent Hovind and Dwayne Gish and Ken Ham and others.

  I could answer any of their arguments that you wish to mention. They are not just ignorant - that would be forgivable - they are willful liars who deceive children about the facts of science.

  They impress people like yourself who who absolutely nothing about evolution and who prefer to stay that way. It makes you feel like there may be sound reasons for your creationist nonsense.

  The difference between yourself and others is that you know one side of the story and you think that qualifies you to express opinions about science. Others, like myself know both sides and have arrived at a conclusion based on years of hard work.

  The creationists impress people by spouting lots of lies in rapid succession. Its like a competition where one person has 30 minutes to trash your house and then you have 30 minutes to put it all back again.

  If you genuinely think there is a problem with the dating methods and the geological column order yourself "Evolution - What the Fossils Say" by Donald Prothero. Once you have studied that lets have a discussion.

  Alternatively you could read this excellent free article online by Dr. Roger C. Wiens.

  Radiometric Dating

  A Christian Perspective

  This paper describes in relatively simple terms how a number of the dating techniques work, how accurately the half-lives of the radioactive elements and the rock dates themselves are known, and how dates are checked with one another. In the process the paper refutes a number of misconceptions prevalent among Christians today. This paper is available on the web via the American Scientific Affiliation and related sites to promote greater understanding and wisdom on this issue, particularly within the Christian community...
• 

  jgnat

  Dendochronology is not based on circular reasoning. It's linear. Prove me wrong.
• 

  Tater-T