Creationists - Jack Chick, Kent Hovind, etc.

exball said:
c-no said:
Surtur said:
As far as I know, it was shut down after Mr. Hovind got busted for tax evasion. And yes, serious acadimics and any one with two brain cells thinks creationism is a joke.
Click to expand...
So Hovind has been busted for evading taxes? When did that happen?I may as well be an idiot since I believe in creationism. At least I don't sperg about evolution being wrong unlike my early teenage years.
Click to expand...
Out of curiosity, how do you explain dinosaurs? I've always been curious.
Click to expand...
In creationism? God made them all and according to some, the flood either stunted them from being giant lizards or they all drowned.
 
exball said:
*SIGH* Noah must've run out of space on the Ark. Old man didn't plan far enough ahead.
Click to expand...
That or God didn't want dinosaurs roaming the earth. If they did, we might be living under fear of our giant reptilian overlords. Unless the flood caused some kind of climate change. Even then, why should I bother mentioning this, I remember the basics of creationism along with evolution. If anything, we need to discuss how Kent Hovind was arrested for tax evasion. Why would he do that? Did he say all the money belonged to God? Did he think the IRS are demons from Hell?
 
Surtur said:
They believe dinosaurs were called dragons and hunted into extinction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind#Legal_problems

He is currently serving a Ten Year sentence.
Click to expand...
I remember hearing about dinosaurs being called dragons but hunted into extinction? The humans better of been intelligent enough to know how to kill something like a T-Rex.
Also related to Hovind, I found this from the Dinosaurs are Dragons page on TV Tropes.
Kent "Dr Dino" Hovind claims that dinosaurs were dragons, breathed fire, rode on Noah's Ark and may still be alive in remote places (and was possibly the inspiration for the Waterloo Road example above). That even other creationists don't want much to do with Hovind's hypotheses should give you an idea how crazy they are.
Though some others do claim dragon legends come from human and dinosaur co-existence (mainly young-earth creationists, as opposed to old-earth or progressive creationists, who are more likely to say that it was just the fossils that were the inspiration). It's just that hardly any make the much larger jump from "dragons are inspired by dinosaurs" to "dinosaurs breathed fire."
Recent billboards for the Creation Museum have been using dinosaurs to attract children to the venue. Among the dinosaur signs is a fire breathing dragon.
Click to expand...
Just below the Hovind point was this.
Many of the old, outdated reconstructions of dinosaurs, pterosaurs and other Mesozoic reptiles were made to resemble the traditional appearance of dragons. They often sported lizardlike heads with rows of spines running down their backs. Good examples include the theropod in this picture◊, this◊, this (somewhat)◊, and the theropod in this picture◊, who is also Groin Attacking his prey. Ironically, the more accurate later dinosaur reconstructions wound up reshaping the way dragons were envisioned, making them appear more dinosaur-like.
Click to expand...
That can be why some people would think dinosaurs are dragons. Still if dinosaurs were shown to people in a time where dragons were famous such as the Middle Ages, they probably would think those are dragons.
 
No one ever accused them of being very bright.
 
c-no said:
John Titor said:
Surtur said:
I have actually been to Hovinds "museum" I have some pics.


http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a110/PsychoKittyNet/02650018.jpg
Click to expand...

lol, they used a confirmed hoax in their exhibit.
Click to expand...
A confirmed hoax? What kind of hoax were those stones? Just wondering.
Click to expand...

Ica stones.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ica_stones

tl;dr - Supposedly ancient rock art that depicted dinosaurs and anachronistic items in Pre-Columbian times. Creationists used them as evidence that humans coexisted with dinosaurs.
 
I've debated a creationist before. I don't know if they're all the same or not but he soundly believed in the young Earth theory, with his "proof" and argument being that radiometric dating isn't accurate. Myself and several others explained that it's extremely accurate and that we've dated rocks well over three billion years old. His response was basically "lol nope". Later I pointed out how birds evolved from non-avian dinosaurs. His response was that that has been long proved to be false (unfortunately this was shortly before scientists moved birds into the dinosaur family). Then he said that dinosaurs can't be old because soft tissue was found in a tyrannosaur fossil, and actually linked to an article (for once). One glance however told that the article was extremely biased and misleading with the fact. I explained that we don't fully know what's preserved in the fossilization process since we typically try to preserve the fossil rather than damage it, and then linked to proper articles regarding that particular tyrannosaur fossil. He responded that it was my articles that were flawed because they believed in SCIENCE! not God. I decided this guy wasn't worth debating with not long after (particularly after he accused me of being racist towards Asians when I said people have been growing taller on average).

As for the megaphone student preacher, I don't remember anything specifically said seeing as how it was so long ago. If he was seriously hoping to convert people, whether to his specific branch or Christianity in general, he really went about one of the worst ways to do it. Who would want to be interested in anything when some guy is effectively screaming in your face and blocking your way to basically threaten you to do it?
 
Actually, I am fairly certain we have found T-Rex soft tissue, I know Jack Horner was one of the people who was involved. That being said, it just shows that its possible for soft tissue to survive longer than we thought.
 
MysticMisty said:
I've debated a creationist before. I don't know if they're all the same or not but he soundly believed in the young Earth theory, with his "proof" and argument being that radiometric dating isn't accurate. Myself and several others explained that it's extremely accurate and that we've dated rocks well over three billion years old. His response was basically "lol nope". Later I pointed out how birds evolved from non-avian dinosaurs. His response was that that has been long proved to be false (unfortunately this was shortly before scientists moved birds into the dinosaur family). Then he said that dinosaurs can't be old because soft tissue was found in a tyrannosaur fossil, and actually linked to an article (for once). One glance however told that the article was extremely biased and misleading with the fact. I explained that we don't fully know what's preserved in the fossilization process since we typically try to preserve the fossil rather than damage it, and then linked to proper articles regarding that particular tyrannosaur fossil. He responded that it was my articles that were flawed because they believed in SCIENCE! not God. I decided this guy wasn't worth debating with not long after (particularly after he accused me of being racist towards Asians when I said people have been growing taller on average).

As for the megaphone student preacher, I don't remember anything specifically said seeing as how it was so long ago. If he was seriously hoping to convert people, whether to his specific branch or Christianity in general, he really went about one of the worst ways to do it. Who would want to be interested in anything when some guy is effectively screaming in your face and blocking your way to basically threaten you to do it?
Click to expand...
As a guy who believes in creationism (or some form of it), I'm sure there are creationist that do not accept the young Earth theory. As for the megaphone preacher, I wonder if he has been chewed out by any Christians for his behavior, screaming in peoples faces with a megaphone and blocking their way.
 
The T-Rex soft tissue "proof" pisses me off. The scientist who discovered the tissue is an evangelical Christian (although she accepts evolution) and was saddened at how poorly she and her work were treated by the creationists.

As an evangelical Christian who accepts evolution, that hits close to home. When I saw that, any thought that the creationists were well-meaning but misguided people ceased.
 
We know that DNA can last for 521 years, so yea.
 
GrandNumberOfPounds said:
The T-Rex soft tissue "proof" pisses me off. The scientist who discovered the tissue is an evangelical Christian (although she accepts evolution) and was saddened at how poorly she and her work were treated by the creationists.

As an evangelical Christian who accepts evolution, that hits close to home. When I saw that, any thought that the creationists were well-meaning but misguided people ceased.
Click to expand...
So would the thought of me being misguided cease then? I honestly don't care about the soft tissue proof since I'm not interested in science (due to being more interested in playing vidya and browsing the internet) but really, seeing how she and her work were treated by creationist, I just don't know what to say.

Surtur said:
We know that DNA can last for 521 years, so yea.
Click to expand...
210230_slide.jpg

Thanks to Cracked, I learned about how long DNA last. Then again it's not like Cracked would be 100% correct.
 
When I said "creationists" I meant the professional creationists, who I think know exactly what they're doing but decide to be dishonest for a religious agenda. I have nothing but contempt for them.

The rank and file creationists, as long as they aren't obnoxious about their beliefs, can believe whatever they want. It's none of my business what others believe, after all.

tl;dr - if you believe in creationism, that's cool - just don't force public schools to teach it until you have evidence (creationists don't have any evidence)

I hope that clears that up

Apologies, guys, for not linking to the article. It's been 5 years since I've read it.

That Cracked article is pretty cool 8-)

If you don't believe Cracked, read the article in the link - it's a highly-regarded peer-reviewed journal
 
GrandNumberOfPounds said:
When I said "creationists" I meant the professional creationists, who I think know exactly what they're doing but decide to be dishonest for a religious agenda. I have nothing but contempt for them.

The rank and file creationists, as long as they aren't obnoxious about their beliefs, can believe whatever they want. It's none of my business what others believe, after all.

tl;dr - if you believe in creationism, that's cool - just don't force public schools to teach it until you have evidence (creationists don't have any evidence)

I hope that clears that up

Apologies, guys, for not linking to the article. It's been 5 years since I've read it.

That Cracked article is pretty cool 8-)

If you don't believe Cracked, read the article in the link - it's a highly-regarded peer-reviewed journal
Click to expand...
I agree regarding the dishonest creationist, especially when they deny something out of religious agenda as well as the possibility of them wanting to be right instead of wrong. Still if only many people followed the believe what you want as long as you aren't obnoxious. As for Cracked, all I can say is that there can be some error but even then it can be accurate compared to others, especially if they cite a source.
 
MysticMisty said:
I've debated a creationist before. I don't know if they're all the same or not but he soundly believed in the young Earth theory, with his "proof" and argument being that radiometric dating isn't accurate. Myself and several others explained that it's extremely accurate and that we've dated rocks well over three billion years old. His response was basically "lol nope". Later I pointed out how birds evolved from non-avian dinosaurs. His response was that that has been long proved to be false (unfortunately this was shortly before scientists moved birds into the dinosaur family). Then he said that dinosaurs can't be old because soft tissue was found in a tyrannosaur fossil, and actually linked to an article (for once). One glance however told that the article was extremely biased and misleading with the fact. I explained that we don't fully know what's preserved in the fossilization process since we typically try to preserve the fossil rather than damage it, and then linked to proper articles regarding that particular tyrannosaur fossil. He responded that it was my articles that were flawed because they believed in SCIENCE! not God. I decided this guy wasn't worth debating with not long after (particularly after he accused me of being racist towards Asians when I said people have been growing taller on average).

As for the megaphone student preacher, I don't remember anything specifically said seeing as how it was so long ago. If he was seriously hoping to convert people, whether to his specific branch or Christianity in general, he really went about one of the worst ways to do it. Who would want to be interested in anything when some guy is effectively screaming in your face and blocking your way to basically threaten you to do it?
Click to expand...
Reminds me of this one time this Christian Hipster (if you can believe that) said evolution is bullshit because if it was true, "then how come there are no fossils of those millions of species all over the place". I pointed out that fossils do not work like that (because, you know, animal and plant remains don't necessarily get preserved)*. Of course the debate didn't last long since he rolled his eyes and said "whatever". You know, if you're going to spread your idiotic bullshit, at least have the balls to back them up.

* I could be wrong though since I don't keep up with fossils or how many there are. I suppose someone else can better explain why so many fossils are lost forever.
 
The problem is that its really hard to make a fossil. The body has to be in the right place under the right conditions to form.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: ASoulMan and John Titor
John Titor said:
As for the megaphone student preacher, I don't remember anything specifically said seeing as how it was so long ago. If he was seriously hoping to convert people, whether to his specific branch or Christianity in general, he really went about one of the worst ways to do it. Who would want to be interested in anything when some guy is effectively screaming in your face and blocking your way to basically threaten you to do it?
Click to expand...
Reminds me of this one time this Christian Hipster (if you can believe that) said evolution is bullshit because if it was true, "then how come there are no fossils of those millions of species all over the place". I pointed out that fossils do not work like that (because, you know, animal and plant remains don't necessarily get preserved)*. Of course the debate didn't last long since he rolled his eyes and said "whatever". You know, if you're going to spread your idiotic bullshit, at least have the balls to back them up.

* I could be wrong though since I don't keep up with fossils or how many there are. I suppose someone else can better explain why so many fossils are lost forever.[/quote]
Hipsters can be irritating right? Somehow, with how the Christian hipster acted, I can't but help feel as though that guy is going to get punched in the face if he acts like that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back