What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Are you taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need

    https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/

  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

    Read The Gospel Online.

  • Looking to grow in the word of God more?

    See our Bible Studies and Devotionals sections in Christian Growth

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

    Read daily articles from Focus on the Family in the Marriage and Parenting Resources forum.

  • Have questions about the Christian faith?

    Come ask us what's on your mind in Questions and Answers

[_ Old Earth _] Is macro evolution scientific?

E

Eve777

Guest
If macro evolution is scientific, then why don’t you debate Kent Hovind publicly and he will pay you $250,000 if you can prove macro evolution?
 
Noone would do that because that would be impossible for anyone to defeat his challenge. Some people take it very seriously. He is obviously trying to make a point, not expecting anyone to defeat him.

Hes just making a point.
 
Hovind's "challenge" is not to prove macroevolution. Indeed, that was first observed before 1920.

Hovind constructed a straw man, and has challenged people to knock it down. Just to be safe, he has announced that the decision of a "secret board of impartial experts" will be final. No one is permitted to know the identity of the board, or even whether or not Hovind just says there is one.

Since he's been found to have made false depositions in federal court, it seems unlikely that anyone would trust him until he does the following things:

1. Revise his challenge to fit what evolutionary theory really says.

2. Demonstrate that he actually has the money and will put it in bond.

3. Demonstrate the existance and impartiality of the judges.

I suspect that will never happen. Which, I think is what Hovind wants.

http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/kent ... llenge.htm
 
His challenge is unbeatable, and rightly so. He's making and point(very clearly, I might add) but people are whiners about that.

However, if he didn't have the money to give away, if his challnge was beaten, he never should ha ve done it. Beatable challenge or not.
 
Featherbop said:
His challenge is unbeatable, and rightly so. He's making and point(very clearly, I might add) but people are whiners about that.

However, if he didn't have the money to give away, if his challnge was beaten, he never should ha ve done it. Beatable challenge or not.
Click to expand...
Once again Bop, you prove yourself to be an unscalable wall of ignorance. You haven't listened to a single thing said since you last posted and given that I really can't see why you posted again.
 
an unscalable wall of ignorance
Click to expand...


Wow! What a great put down line....You sure can't say that about atheists however....when they come to a wall they can't get over, , they just move the wall back another million years or so. :P
 
Eve777 said:
If macro evolution is scientific, then why don’t you debate Kent Hovind publicly and he will pay you $250,000 if you can prove macro evolution?
Click to expand...

First off, you dont debate him publicly but send in the evidence to him. Hovind's challenge is designed to be impossible because it deals with things other than tToE, like the big bang, which has nothing to do with evolution. Hovind also says that he gets to hand pick a panel of anonymous judges and can screen any evidence he wants before the judges can get a look at it.

Now how about I make my own challenge modelled after Hovinds, yes?
Challenge: I am offering $10 to anyone who can provide any empirical evidence for the existence of God. This evidence must show that God directly caused the evidence. The evidence will be judged by a group of hand picked indiviuals and they will determine wether or not it meets the criteria. This challenge is meant to show that God doesn't exist.

Note- to not waste the time of the judges that I will anonymously hand pick for this challenge I have the right to screen any evidence that is either knowingly false or doesn't meet the criteria.

Another note- when I say God I dont mean the Judeo-Christian God but rather Zeus.
Good Luck!
 
Another note- when I say God I dont mean the Judeo-Christian God but rather Zeus.
Good Luck!
Click to expand...


Well now, you had me right up to the end there....
The father of gods and men as Homer calls him, was no doubt that.....

When people willfully choose evil, they become the "children of the devil" (John 8:44; Acts 13:10; 1 John 3:10). Thus multitudes of people either knowingly or unknowingly help Satan in his role as "the god of this world."
 
This is essentially what Hovind has done. He's kept the whole decision process secret, so you can't tell if he cheated or not, and then to make doubly sure, he challenges one to prove something that isn't even part of evolutionary theory.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out what's going on.
 
SyntaxVorlon said:
Featherbop said:
His challenge is unbeatable, and rightly so. He's making and point(very clearly, I might add) but people are whiners about that.

However, if he didn't have the money to give away, if his challnge was beaten, he never should ha ve done it. Beatable challenge or not.
Click to expand...
Once again Bop, you prove yourself to be an unscalable wall of ignorance. You haven't listened to a single thing said since you last posted and given that I really can't see why you posted again.
Click to expand...

How do you listen to a post? :lol:

The two posts after mine to not get it, so I added my second post. :D

Do you understand yet, or do I need to point it out again?
 
It's pretty simple. Hovind constructed his own version of the Cartoon Theory of Evolution, and he wants scientists to defend it.

They want to defend the real one, but Hovind isn't about to play that game.
 
I would give someone one of my new kittens if they could tell me where the very first living cell came from?


I'll give you the kitten anyway. I live on a dead end road in the country and people keep dropping off their little pregnant cats.....some people are so cruel...third little stray this year...It's getting expensiive to have them fixed and so hard to find homes for them. I hope I don't have to take these little ones to the pound...we've been lucky so far and found homes
 
Quite simple Eve, it came from Earth. Beyond that, it's impossible for me or even anyone to know.
 
The origin of life isn't part of evolution, but abiogenesis is found in Genesis. The YE creationists say life began Ex nihilo. But God says that the earth brought forth living things.
 
hey, kent hovind, i love that man, he so good at this. lol. to answer the question. no. macro evolution is not scientific. it is theoretical. they have absolutely NO proof for macro evolution. they do have some for micro evolution, and that i beleive. all that is is someone adapting to it's climate, which is reasonable enough. but macroevolution. not quite.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top