Love how they call themselves the "Science Research Foundation" yet they demonstrate a complete lack of understanding regarding basic tenants of science....thus.....they do no research.
Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
59 Comments - 1690 Views
Interesting News. (FOX News and Wal Street Journal)
Submitted By bigdog on 09/03/25
FreeHovind, bigdog, General
"Darwin and his theory are dead," says Mr. Oktar, founder and honorary president of the Science Research Foundation.
(READ ARTICLE)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123724852205449221.html
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
Kevin Lyon (physicist)
1 day - 1,818v
Posted 2009/03/26 - 2:39 GMT
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
http://singlebarbed.com/2008/03/10/you-may-want-to-airbrush-out-the-fish-hook-if-youre-determined-to-prove-your-point/
OMG THE FLY!!! but srly.. how does this support your point? just some person who has no idea of zoology writing loads of BS just so he can take a piss on something that doesn't conform with his beliefs. next time READ the article before posting.
OMG THE FLY!!! but srly.. how does this support your point? just some person who has no idea of zoology writing loads of BS just so he can take a piss on something that doesn't conform with his beliefs. next time READ the article before posting.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
I highly doubt that Dawkins would waste his time debating Oktar - it would make as much sense as having Stephen Hawking debate the nutball who runs timecube.com.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
Oktar is a huge liar, check out his unbelievably brazen lies:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZ17X6AoE7M
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQ82QncHqr0&NR=1
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
How can I read the article ? Please
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
"How can I read the article ? Please"
ehm ?copy paste link into browser?
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
Don't listen to Joe. I've caught him in a major lie.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
bigdog
"Sorry. The chalk layer is not millions of years old either.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v8/i1/chalk.asp"
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v8/i1/chalk.asp"
"Roth10 suggests that in the surface layers of the ocean these carbonate-secreting
organisms at optimum production rates could produce all the calcareous ooze
on the ocean floor today in probably less than 1,000 or 2,000 years. He argues
that, if a high concentration of foraminifera of 100 per litre of ocean water
were assumed,11 a doubling time of 3.65 days, and an average of 10,000
foraminifera per gram of carbonate,12 the top 200 metres of the ocean
would produce 20 grams of calcium carbonate per square centimetre per year,
or at an average sediment density of 2 grams per cubic centimetre, 100 metres
in 1,000 years"
ehm..L2 MATH!!!
Chalk, solid
2499 kg/m^3
http://www.simetric.co.uk/si_materials.htm
20 gram per cm^2
sooo you say that's 2 gram per cubic cm?
soo thats 2000 kg per cubic metre, that's
2000/2499= 0.8 so that's 0.8 cubic metre per year soo thats 0.8x1000= 800 metres per 1000 years.
now why do i find this hard to believe>?
not to mention you think that fotosynthesis would still under a 5 metre carpet of algea.
....GO BACK TO SCHOOL ROTH!!!!
"Then using Roth’s calculation
of a 100 metre thickness of coccoliths produced every 200 years, Woodmorappe
found that"
so they suddenly increase their "value" by a factor of.... gr8 science.
but srly, this is so BS.
"Nevertheless, both Woodmorappe and Roth recognize that even today
coccolith accumulation is not steady-state but highly episodic, for under the
right conditions significant increases in the concentrations of these marine
microorganisms can occur, as in plankton ‘blooms’ and red tides. For
example, there are intense blooms of coccoliths that cause ‘white water’
situations because of the coccolith concentrations,11 and during
bloom periods in the waters near Jamaica microorganism numbers have been reported
as increasing from 100,000 per litre to 10 million per litre of ocean water.18"
LOOOOOOOOL . are you trying to kid me? is says nothign about the
surface area!!!! not only that, but i highly boudt that a layer of
fotosynthisizing plankton could reach more then 4 metres...AS THE TOP
WOUL BLOCK OUT THE SUN!!!! PROHIBITING GROWTH!
L2 biology and L2ecology
it isn't called a ecological equilibrium for nothing.
any1 please correct my if i miscalculated.
YAY! i figuered something out!
"..ocean
would produce 20 grams of calcium carbonate per square centimetre per year,
or at an average sediment density of 2 grams per cubic centimetre"
the conversion to gramsper cm squared to grams per cubic cm is
IMPOSSIBLE. or at least it deifeis my understanding of mathematics.
however i discovered soemthign fun.
lets do that math again
20 grams per square cm so 20x 10 000= 2x10^5 grams per square metre
now lets add a thousand years and turn it into kg...x1000 and /1000
so it stays 2x10^5
2x10^5/ 2499= 80.03 cubic metre of chalk per 1000 years...ITS STILL NOT 100!!! :D!
not only that, accordign to the context, shells disovle too, so
either it's LESS than 100 ...OR 77.5% of the shells dissolve... WHICH
IS IT?!
still this renders the other claim bunk, as they suddenly increased the value by a factor of 5.
oh and for the metric maths pplz my . is your ,
so when i say 0.5 I say 1/2 and not 5 in some mangled way."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coccolithophore
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photic_zone
now im just gonna go ahead and cut you off, if you wanted to post
this as counter agrument to my statement of the photic layer being less
than 200 metres (ignoring the context of maximum algea saturation that
is....)
the Photic zone CAN comprise of 200 metres in the open ocean. but
it greatly depends on the shallowness of the water..AND THE AMOUNT OF
ALGEA!!!.
so the creationist reasoning of 200 metres of algea producing
20grams of calciumcarbonate when all 200 metres are saturated with the
algea, and not to forget, its nutrients and the extra co2 required. of
course we must also ignore the fact that that situation if eutrifieric
adn will result in the annihalation of all marine life, withing the
span of a few months.
but back to the sujbect at hand. 200 metres of maximum alge
saturated water? no way. the top layer of about 10-20 metres would
pretty much block out al the light at maximum saturation. not to
mention that if the entire ocean was coveren in sucha layer pretty
much anything that hunts on sight is doomed to starve.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
SHOW ME THE LIE YOU SNAKE!
im gonna keep posting that everytime you say you caught me in a lie on this, and ever time im gonna ask you to show me where the miscalculation or the ecology fail is.
and my hypothesis is......YOU WON'T EVER RESPOND TO THAT REQUEST.
the maths easy, any 1 could spot a miscalculation if it's in there.
» Reply to CommentThe moral character of the Dog...
Isn't this an interesting form of rhetoric? BigDog, like so many creationist, lies through his teeth however he seems to believe that so long as he continually and falsely accuses others of the transgressions he is guilty of somehow no one will notice he lacks any level of moral character. Kent Hovind does the same...Seriously Bigdog...Jesus is watching you...
» Reply to CommentRe: The moral character of the Dog...
Maybe the Cretionists here should start a new movement: Pathological Liars for Jesus.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
Don't listen to Joe. I've caught him in a major lie.
Was that before or after you demonstrated that you can't tell the difference between scientific theories and absurdist comedy (even when it's filled with obvious puns and ends with the words "Happy April 1st)?
By the way, I'm STILL waiting for you cite the science textbook which mentions the "Clambasaur."
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
I think your right, Dawkins will pass. He has a nasty habit of avoiding debates and presenting his less then half truths on an unlit stage for all the world to imagine.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
Behe and NBC are still waiting for him.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
No guts no glory
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
Perhaps that's why Kent Hovind has repeatedly refused to engage in any written debates:
Could that also be why Kent Hovind has refused to make his "PHD" thesis publicly-available?
No guts indeed.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
Perhaps someone should remind Behe that is best argument (and, really, his only argument) - irreducible complexity - was already torn to shreds two or three years ago by Ken Miller.
He wasn't even able to meet the relatively lax statements of proof of a court of law - so what makes him, or anyone else, think that he would be able to meet the much more stringent standards of scientific inquiry?
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
I think your right, Dawkins will pass. He has a nasty habit of avoiding
debates and presenting his less then half truths on an unlit stage for
all the world to imagine."
you do know that when he engages in a scientific debate with unscientific arguement he's actually giving them unwanted credebility, despite their crap arguements.
please learn the actual reasons why dawkins won't debate creationists or IRC people...instead of just bashing him for something he does with good reason.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
He has a nasty habit of avoiding debates and presenting his less then
half truths on an unlit stage for all the world to imagine.
I would ask you to elaborate on or give examples of those half-truths - but if your posting history is any indication, you would simply dodge the question.
Those of us who aren't blinded by fundamentalist religious convictions are able to comprehend that it's a waste of time for any reputable scientist to debate creationists - or proponents of any other pseudo-science, for that matter. The only purpose it serves is to give charasmatic snake-oil salesmen (like Kent Hovind, Ken Ham, et al) more attention than they - or their ideas - deserve.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
You might get farther if you actually gave Dawkins reason for not debating the subject. He doesnt have a firm enough understanding of biology. If you want the reference go to the trial sight you have been quoting from.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
Lets take a vote here. Does anyone else find Dawkins use of a TV camera in his explanation of the evolution of the eye slightly missleading? Where do TV cameras first appear in evolutionary development. You guys shouldnt jump to conclusions until you see where you are jumping. Insults coming from an intellect like yours are certainly flattering 325. You say more stupid things then anyone I know.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
ehm kent, have you even noticed that the other kent does....well
-quotemine
-misrepresent
-does not understant wtf thermodynamics applies too
-does not have any idea of what DNA is
-lacks basic intellectual honesty
-actually states he's out to convert and not enlighten
-thinks that a cameleon and a triceratops are the same.
- thinks that a ice comit will cool the earth (LOL XD)
- thinks tha big bang was an actual bang
-thinks that a dot is a singularity
-ect
oh and he does all that on his projector btw.
so look in the mirror, before looking at others.
"You guys shouldnt jump to conclusions until you see where you are jumping."
you might want to reconsider....
Insults coming from an intellect like yours are certainly flattering.
that deserves to be copy pasted as a non quote.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
Face ---> palm. You might want to look up a little-known concept called "analogy."
Insults coming from an intellect like yours are certainly flattering 325. You say more stupid things then anyone I know.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
He doesnt have a firm enough understanding of biology. If you want the
reference go to the trial sight you have been quoting from."
did you just now...say that professor Dawkins, who is a widely respected scientist and has written numerous paaper and books, has no fucking idea what he's been talking about all these many, many years ?..
i call BULLSHIT
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
You might get farther if you actually gave Dawkins reason for not debating the subject.
What? Two of us have posted it already - try reading for comprehension next time.
He doesnt have a firm enough understanding of biology.
Please, stop - my sides hurt from laughing! You haven't demonstrated that you understand even the most BASIC, fundamental aspects of science. So what on earth makes you think you're the LEAST bit qualified to question Dawkins' understanding of biology?
If you want the reference go to the trial sight you have been quoting from.
Sorry, that's not how it works. You make the claim, you provide the reference. Unless, of course, you're simply talking out of your... well, "posterior opening of the alimentary canal."
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
"If you want the reference go to the trial sight you have been quoting from."
would you be a bit more specific. like which link and what part of it.
at least say give the link. you don't need to quote the part from the site per se.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
No I didnt say that as I made clear Dawkins said that look it up. I dont have a tv camera so be a little accurate with your accusations. Big dog was certainly right about your honesty.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
Could you at least TRY to offer something more substantial than cheap, ad-hominem attacks? You're really making it way too easy to point out the flaws in your arguments.
Sadly, I suspect I already know the answer to that question.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
No I didnt say that as I made clear Dawkins said that look it up. I
dont have a tv camera so be a little accurate with your accusations.
Big dog was certainly right about your honesty."
hAHAHAHa......k for starters i attacked your hypocritical claim that dawnkins is manipulating the audience with snappy camera work. simpy because the creationist side manipulate a hell of a lot more. and YES we have CLEARLY outlined those manipulations NUMEROUS times.
bigdog about my honesty?ehm you do know that he still hasen't told me wtf my "lie" is and WHY it was a lie.
unless you take "i found that exact same calculation on an old earth website" as adiqate, in which case i can expose him for the dishonest mentally depraved scumba....creationist that he by simple stating.
"your holy book says we gotto kill babies!"
following your line of evidence requirement....
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
""""""""""Insults coming from an intellect like yours are certainly flattering 325. You say more stupid things then anyone I know. """"""""
I agree.
I agree.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
""""""""""Insults coming from an intellect like yours are certainly
flattering 325. You say more stupid things then anyone I know. """"""""
funny that kent edited that after i quote responded the original.
oh and mylon, weren't you taking the moral highground and saying "stop insulting"? if you actually HAD done that, you would have just flamed me AND kent AND everyone else for insulting, doesn't look like you're ding that..
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
Why dont you guys just keep on posting and not reading your heroes own words. Are you really that afraid of what he will say?
Are you really trying to show me how to do research? Because both of you are incapable of reading let alone research. You cant baffle me with your bullshit. Now we have established that you are the only ones confused here and that you are quite happy in your confusion please roll on in your dillusionary world and deny all prudent facts.
What a bunch of researchers. If science were to rest in your hands the world would certainly be in big trouble. Do you really think you are revealing someone elses dishonesty by being dishonest? I cannot comment on your observations about those creationists having never reviewed the work in question but seeing as your off topic I dont plan to.
You raised a question about why a debate never took place, i supplied ypur answer and told you where to reference it. Neither of you came back with your results, instead 325 accused me of dishonesty which leaves me with the very obvious conclusion that neither one of you could read a paper let alone write a resarch paper to save your life so please do not further embarass yourself by trying to tell me how to do it.
No on second thought go ahead. Just keep on pointing out how right I am because Im lovin it. Dawkins was certainly wise to refuse to debate. He might have come across looking like you. What is your discipline? What do you guys hold a degree in mud pies? You obviously know nothing about science beyond that and perhaps I am being liberal.
Are you really trying to show me how to do research? Because both of you are incapable of reading let alone research. You cant baffle me with your bullshit. Now we have established that you are the only ones confused here and that you are quite happy in your confusion please roll on in your dillusionary world and deny all prudent facts.
What a bunch of researchers. If science were to rest in your hands the world would certainly be in big trouble. Do you really think you are revealing someone elses dishonesty by being dishonest? I cannot comment on your observations about those creationists having never reviewed the work in question but seeing as your off topic I dont plan to.
You raised a question about why a debate never took place, i supplied ypur answer and told you where to reference it. Neither of you came back with your results, instead 325 accused me of dishonesty which leaves me with the very obvious conclusion that neither one of you could read a paper let alone write a resarch paper to save your life so please do not further embarass yourself by trying to tell me how to do it.
No on second thought go ahead. Just keep on pointing out how right I am because Im lovin it. Dawkins was certainly wise to refuse to debate. He might have come across looking like you. What is your discipline? What do you guys hold a degree in mud pies? You obviously know nothing about science beyond that and perhaps I am being liberal.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
"Are you really trying to show me how to do research? Because both of
you are incapable of reading let alone research. You cant baffle me
with your bullshit. Now we have established that you are the only ones
confused here and that you are quite happy in your confusion please
roll on in your dillusionary world and deny all prudent facts."
"we" meaning creation proponents and "you" meaning creation opponents.....i kinda get the impressions that this is just is gonna be a load of bashing..
"You cant baffle me
with your bullshit."
oh yes! math and exposing logical fallacies are bullshit! might as well say statistics and peer reviewed articles and of course understanding ecology, biology and chemesty BS!
" please
roll on in your dillusionary world and deny all prudent facts.""
like the "fact" that a creationist think a transitional fossil is somethign you call a "crocoduck"? or that everytime you make some "commen descent claim" you claim we descended form amodern organism...which proves that you have no clue as to wtf a common ancestor is?
or the "fact" that over 99% of the world biologists accept the theory of evolution while about 66% of them believe in a deity, proving that evolution and religion aren't mutually exclusive or that being a proponent of evolution isn a religion?
and of ofcource we have the "fact" that placed under the most basic of scrutiny most creationist agruments fall to pieces...
oh yes i like my "illusion".
"What a bunch of researchers. If science were to rest in your hands the world would certainly be in big trouble."
you do understand that ID supporters need to change the definition of science to make their "research" scientific. don't you?
"instead 325 accused me of dishonesty"
noooo i accused you of hypocrasy at claiming Dawkins manipulated the viewers while it is the creation proponents who do a whole lot more manipulating. cherry picking science blunders any1? or quotemining?
"What is your discipline? What do you guys hold a degree in mud pies?"
actually i don't hold any degrees *yet. im still finishing of my secondary school which is rife with all that stuff you call science..like biology, chemestry and physics. of course we also had the nessecary education on what science actually is wiht a few years of philosophy and general education of natural science (the history and meanign of science).
*i've enrolled in an accredited university in my country to study biotechnology. and no, its not some "evolution university" in the way you have bible universities.
lets just say my university has the largest medical lab in the country.
"You obviously know nothing about science beyond that and perhaps I am being liberal."
somehow i think that's not exactly fair to say.....ecspecially form someone who refused to give me the definition of science. (THE TOPIC KENT!)
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
Are you really trying to show me how to do research?
Not at all - I'd probably have more success trying to explain quantum physics to a goldfish.
Because both of you are incapable of reading let alone research.
Please... stop! Can't... breathe... laughing... too... hard!
You cant baffle me with your bullshit.
Hmm, that line sounds familar for some reason. You wouldn't just be copy-pasting from one of my posts, now would you?
dillusionary
What in the world is "dillusionary?" A delusional visionary?
As for the rest of your rambling, nonsensical post? It's clear that you're just resorting to the tired old creationist 'monkey see, monkey do" tactic. You've just taken criticisms that were aimed at you and tried to turn them back onto your "opponents." You could have saved yourself a great deal of typing if you'd simply written "I know you are, but what am I?" It certainly couldn't have made you sound any less mature.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
"""""""""did you just now...say that professor Dawkins, who is a widely respected scientist and has written numerous paaper and books, has no fucking idea what he's been talking about all these many, many years ?..""""""""""
YES YES Yes,I do.!!!!!! All he is interested in is MONEY, and laughing all the way to the bank, If I had the amount of knowledge Darftkins has, I would actually agree with what he says.
Kent has said he has not the time or typing ability, to give written debates, but unlike Darftkins, he is willing anytime to verbally debate anyone.
Double standards here again, Darftkins gets excuses from his idol worshipers,for not wanting to debate, yet Kent Hovind gets critisized for not doing Written debates, which I can understand fully if he typed like me, or 325 for that matter.
YES YES Yes,I do.!!!!!! All he is interested in is MONEY, and laughing all the way to the bank, If I had the amount of knowledge Darftkins has, I would actually agree with what he says.
Kent has said he has not the time or typing ability, to give written debates, but unlike Darftkins, he is willing anytime to verbally debate anyone.
Double standards here again, Darftkins gets excuses from his idol worshipers,for not wanting to debate, yet Kent Hovind gets critisized for not doing Written debates, which I can understand fully if he typed like me, or 325 for that matter.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
Hovind doesn't want a written record I imagine...also, if one were to take away his "charm" he would be stripped of his only rhetorical advantage. With no substance to fill the void he would be crucified...and he knows it. This could prove to be detrimental to hovind's paycheck...thus he will not engage in a text debate. As for Dawkins...well...I am sure a debate with professor dawkins would look extreamly impressive on Kent Hovind's CV...not so much the other way around.
Kevin
Kevin
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
Kent has said he has not the time or typing ability, to give written
debates, but unlike Darftkins, he is willing anytime to verbally debate
anyone."
OOH that's jsut weak
you do realize that a wirtten debate won't allow him to wriggle out on his views do you? and you do realize that a written article or debate is the thing that's peer reviewed.
it's is much more likely, seeing as hovind's histroy of not understanding basic science and the scientific method, his misrepresentation and downright manipulation of the audicen (quotemining, strawmanning) that he KNOWS he will never win in an written debate.
PS: seeign as he's written a theisis (which he won;t let anyone see) he SHOULD posses the ability for a written debate. and if he did not, he could always hire a writer to help him write it.
the excuse is a bitchslap in the face of hovind's "scientific credibility"
"Double standards here again, Darftkins gets excuses from his idol
worshipers,for not wanting to debate, yet Kent Hovind gets critisized
for not doing Written debates, which I can understand fully if he typed
like me, or 325 for that matter."
a written debat is not a spoken debate (due to the severity and "you can't deny this" of a written statement in a debate). saying it is a true double standard is a false comparison and therefor a fallacy.
YES to someone who is a proponent of kent it is a tempting target. but in all debating truth, hovind's reluctance to not initiate in a written scientific peer reviewed debate when discussing science, is much more severe then Dawkins not wanting to debate in a spoken debate, which has a fixed time limit, an small audience which reacts to the debateand hovind can rethorically wriggle his way out of his (verbally claimed) positions.
(imagine a room full of creationists who don't understand squat about genetics having to ask Dawkins the same old debunked arguemtns...that's just waste of time and sidesteps exposign hovinds flawed logic)
"All he is interested in is MONEY, and laughing all the way to the bank,"
coming from the guy who supports someone who was put into jail because of fraud....irony
but srly, when we look at who's backing up hovind and how, it's unlikely dawkins makes as much money as hovind does with his speeches and material. and if you think he does. give sourced evidence.
you made the claim, now back it up.
"If I had the amount of knowledge Darftkins has, I would actually agree with what he says."
you do know that this is a very serious accusation for against a scientist don't you? because what you are in fact doing is calling the entire part of the scientific community (a large majority that is otherwise he could never have been so respected) a bunch of idiots.
so not only are you insulting Dawkins, you are also insulting all the other people who respect him as a scientist.
also before you could even make ANY sucha claim on a whim. it might be better that you gain the same or more respect then Dawkins within the scientific community.
i don't care if you call me an idiot, but don't even try to touch peer review.
those claims are almost alwayst of the same level of validity as saying "the entire scientific community hate god and christians, thats why they mercelissly crush creationist arguements!"
For which any scientist would either laugh himself to death, or he'll get really angry.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
YES YES Yes,I do.!!!!!!
And we should just take your word for it? Since you haven't backed up that claim in any way, that is.
Kent has said he has not the time or typing ability, to give written
debates, but unlike Darftkins, he is willing anytime to verbally debate
anyone.
Who is "Darftkins?" Is that some sort of attempt to be clever? If so, I'm afraid it failed.
As for Hovind - "debate" is a very generous way of describing his snake-oil sales pitch. He seems more like a cross between a used car salesmen and mediocre standup comic than a debater/lecturer.
Double standards here again, Darftkins gets excuses from his idol
worshipers,for not wanting to debate, yet Kent Hovind gets critisized
for not doing Written debates,
First of all: why in the world would Dawkins waste his time debating someone who clearly has no idea what he's talking about.
Second of all, you do realize that the written word is how proper scientists debate differences of opinion, right? Hovind's inability to touch-type is a really poor excuse - has he never heard of transcription?
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
I am so terrified that I just laughed myself to death BYE BYE
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
good that you could appreciate humor Maylon ^^ but please you must realize the absurdity and severity of the accusation.
signing a contract is much more binding then saying you agree with some point.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
""""""""""Hovind doesn't want a written record I imagine...also, if one were to take away his "charm" he would be stripped of his only rhetorical advantage. With no substance to fill the void he would be crucified...and he knows it. This could prove to be detrimental to hovind's paycheck...thus he will not engage in a text debate. As for Dawkins...well...I am sure a debate with professor dawkins would look extreamly impressive on Kent Hovind's CV...not so much the other way around."""""
Double Double standards again. Kent has given good reason why he does not do written debates. How can a written debate be more dangerous than debating on film and all the videos open to anyone, anywhere, to do with as they please. I think Darftkins would look a fool next to Kent in a verbal debate, "and he knows it" He has not got the IT factor ""Charm""" he really is very boring.
Written to me, must be easier, as you can actually say what you like, nobody changing the discussion, by interrupting, getting angry or going of topic or whatever. That is why I come here to learn, LOL not working either. Have you ever had a verbal discussion with anyone who does not agree with you, it is always a waste of time. They just walk out the room. That is what I have discovered anyway.
Double Double standards again. Kent has given good reason why he does not do written debates. How can a written debate be more dangerous than debating on film and all the videos open to anyone, anywhere, to do with as they please. I think Darftkins would look a fool next to Kent in a verbal debate, "and he knows it" He has not got the IT factor ""Charm""" he really is very boring.
Written to me, must be easier, as you can actually say what you like, nobody changing the discussion, by interrupting, getting angry or going of topic or whatever. That is why I come here to learn, LOL not working either. Have you ever had a verbal discussion with anyone who does not agree with you, it is always a waste of time. They just walk out the room. That is what I have discovered anyway.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
Double Double standards again. Kent has given good reason why he does not do written debates.
No, he's just given an obvious and convenient excuse.
Dawkins, on the other hand, has several valid reasons for not engaging in verbal debate with creationists. It would make about as much sense as Karl Sagan debating someone from the Flat Earth Society, or Stephen Hawking debating the TimeCube.com nutball.
How can a written debate be more dangerous than debating on film and
all the videos
For one, because written debate would allow fact-checking of Hovind's claims. For another, it would give his opponent time to properly research his responses, rather being limited to what they can remember off the top of their head.
Sadly, there are plenty of people who are gullible enough to be
taken in by complete and utter BS - just as long as the person spouting
it does so charismatically and with confidence.
Look at the success of David Eicke if you don't believe me.
open to anyone, anywhere, to do with as they please.
At least until Eric Hovind and other infantile creationists fraudulently make DMCA complaints against them, that is.
He has not got the IT factor ""Charm""" he really is very boring.
You're basically proving Kevin's point for him.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
no you meaning you 325. You made this personal so now put on your half wit hat and try to shift the blame to people who actually have some intelligence? You really need to be more responsible for your actions.
From some of the stuff I have seen passed off as fossils over the years crocoduk is a thing of beauty but you wouldnt know that being as incapable of reading as you are writing. Over 99% Thank you for proving my statement. Lying never makes up for research, may you learn this some day. I might accept that figure if it came from an honest researcher but coming from you with your track record I would have to see the pole. I dont have a challenge with the conclusion I have a challenge with your mentality. You are the only thing falling apart on this site. 325 is that why you misspell so many words and cant put structurally sound statements together much of the time so no one can hold you responsible for what you write? Gotta admit though your grtting better the last few posts I have actually been able to decode. Seems you are trying to say Dawkins is a respected member of the scientific community, is that a statement? I apologize I wasnt aware of that. Back it up. Lets see you find 10 statements defending his position on one particular subject and I am not referring to the paid commercials on the dust covers of his books, his wife or his mother. Does he have a wife? alwayst- nope cant find that word in the dictionary either. Just keep threatening people you incompetent. Maylon I dont think hes ever had a conversation with anyone who understood what he was trying to say let alone agreed with him.
From some of the stuff I have seen passed off as fossils over the years crocoduk is a thing of beauty but you wouldnt know that being as incapable of reading as you are writing. Over 99% Thank you for proving my statement. Lying never makes up for research, may you learn this some day. I might accept that figure if it came from an honest researcher but coming from you with your track record I would have to see the pole. I dont have a challenge with the conclusion I have a challenge with your mentality. You are the only thing falling apart on this site. 325 is that why you misspell so many words and cant put structurally sound statements together much of the time so no one can hold you responsible for what you write? Gotta admit though your grtting better the last few posts I have actually been able to decode. Seems you are trying to say Dawkins is a respected member of the scientific community, is that a statement? I apologize I wasnt aware of that. Back it up. Lets see you find 10 statements defending his position on one particular subject and I am not referring to the paid commercials on the dust covers of his books, his wife or his mother. Does he have a wife? alwayst- nope cant find that word in the dictionary either. Just keep threatening people you incompetent. Maylon I dont think hes ever had a conversation with anyone who understood what he was trying to say let alone agreed with him.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
I'm starting to think that you have a terminal case of TL;DR syndrome.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
Kevin and 325 you do realize you are arguing against each other and neither one of you are making sence? I guess its not impossible. Aint confusion grand? Thats where false accusations get you. If you keep up your innacurate attacks on Hovind you are gona have him cannonized within a few weeks. Saint Kent. Hmm gotta admit it has a ring.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
"Kevin and 325 you do realize you are arguing against each other and
neither one of you are making sence? I guess its not impossible. Aint
confusion grand? Thats where false accusations get you."
no...... we are not.
kevin outlined the credibility issue.
i explained to maylon that his "double standards" was false comparison. and why a written debate carries more merit then a spoken one. and why hovind refusing written is worse then dawkins refusing spoken.
but no, you didn't really read that did you. you just read 2 different things about the same phenomena and then thought they excluded each other, while they actually cover 2 different aspects of the phenomena.
"If you keep up your innacurate attacks on Hovind you are gona have him
cannonized within a few weeks. Saint Kent."
apart form the fact that connonizing doesn't neccesarily prove the correctness of a document, you need a bit more then just "spreading the word" if you plan getting it "cannonized" in science or the schools. even with us "bashing" him.
"Hmm gotta admit it has a
ring."
so does "little prisonbitch Hovind "
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
For the record I find 325's posts a damn sight more comprehensible than yours - English isn't even his first language, yet he still appears to have a better grasp of basic punctuation than you do.
Every time I read one of your posts, this is what it makes me think of:
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
""""Gotta admit though your grtting better the last few posts I have actually been able to decode""""
Actually Kent I agree, and have also noticed that, 325`s typing, and spelling is much better. Well done 325, and I am not being sarcastic here I mean it.
Actually Kent I agree, and have also noticed that, 325`s typing, and spelling is much better. Well done 325, and I am not being sarcastic here I mean it.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
"Actually Kent I agree, and have also noticed that, 325`s typing, and
spelling is much better. Well done 325, and I am not being sarcastic
here I mean it."
but why would i care?
as long as certain constonants stand in certain palces you can still perfectly understand what is being said no matter how many typo's i make. somehtign to do with word recognition. oh and i forgot to mention CONTEXT.
but my REAL problem isn't spelling. it's grammar, and the insanely lon gand detailed scentences i make. as any languege teacher wil ltell you.
and THAT grammer, is something i picked up from latin texts.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
I love the Christian love on display.
Why would Dawkins debate? He gets nothing out of it and he gives a lot publicity to a crackpot. I don't think Dawkins will debate a flat worlder or the guys that think the bumps on your head has a special meaning (phrenologists?).
Why won't Kent agree to an email debate? His son could type it for him or he can get a service to do so. I would pay if he would agree to debate me. The real reason is he enjoys stating that articles say that a specimen is 20K yo in one location and 35K yo in another or other such. Thing is those are all lies as have been pointed out. In a spoken debate you don't have the ability to find the article, read it, and then point out his error. In a written debate you can do that very thing.
Creationists don't get to debate people like Dawkins for the same reason Green, Communist, and Reform part candidates do not get invited to presidential debates. It adds nothing and just gives the fringe publicity that they do not normally garner. He should ask Miller for a debate. Miller is more than happy to debate Creationists for the most part. I think because he is so religious and he wants those people to reject the idiocy that is Creationism.
Why would Dawkins debate? He gets nothing out of it and he gives a lot publicity to a crackpot. I don't think Dawkins will debate a flat worlder or the guys that think the bumps on your head has a special meaning (phrenologists?).
Why won't Kent agree to an email debate? His son could type it for him or he can get a service to do so. I would pay if he would agree to debate me. The real reason is he enjoys stating that articles say that a specimen is 20K yo in one location and 35K yo in another or other such. Thing is those are all lies as have been pointed out. In a spoken debate you don't have the ability to find the article, read it, and then point out his error. In a written debate you can do that very thing.
Creationists don't get to debate people like Dawkins for the same reason Green, Communist, and Reform part candidates do not get invited to presidential debates. It adds nothing and just gives the fringe publicity that they do not normally garner. He should ask Miller for a debate. Miller is more than happy to debate Creationists for the most part. I think because he is so religious and he wants those people to reject the idiocy that is Creationism.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
Why don't you challenge Kent's son to a public debate? He's not in jail.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
"Why don't you challenge Kent's son to a public debate? He's not in jail."
I will. just tell him to get skype and a some live blog software.
im not a scientist so they won;t get any credibility for it.
no loss, no gain. just good debatin!
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
No. I mean on stage, one on one, like the classic honest way of doing it. Like the way Hovind did it.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
"No. I mean on stage, one on one, like the classic honest way of doing it. Like the way Hovind did it."
HAHAHA are you serious?!!
you call that HONEST?
SPECIFIC AUDIENCE MAN!!! almost all of hovind's crowd is creationist and has a very limited understanding of science.
thats not fair. that's RIGGED. the man could claim cows are bison and they would applaud him!
no, if he doesn't wan to do it on a written level, then the next best thing IS a live blog, where the ENTIRE internet can watch and judge the debate. and i can link article's so he can't wriggle out of misrepresentations and poor knowledge of science.
or maby you could convince them to pay my travel expenses and do their debate in a neutral environment..you know somewhere OUTSIDE the bible belt.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
Do you think that is fair to Eric? I am no scientist but he would truly be out of his element.
I will send him an email and see if he is agreeable. I would be willing to do so in Pensacola if he wants to put me up for the night.
Two people on a stage is not honest if one person pulls out lies. That would make sense if it were a debate on ideas such as what would be considered proof of God. Having it broadcast live would be best as the rational community could immediately post when "errors" are made.
I will let you know if I get a response.
I will send him an email and see if he is agreeable. I would be willing to do so in Pensacola if he wants to put me up for the night.
Two people on a stage is not honest if one person pulls out lies. That would make sense if it were a debate on ideas such as what would be considered proof of God. Having it broadcast live would be best as the rational community could immediately post when "errors" are made.
I will let you know if I get a response.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
Please let us know. I always like to see a good boxing match.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
Why don't you challenge Kent's son to a public debate?
I'd be happy to. I'm not going to travel to the US just to do it, but I'd certainly be willing to do a debate by exchanging videos.
Of course, I doubt that would happen. I strongly suspect that Hovind (both of them) doesn't just have a phobia of written debate, but of any debate format where his opponent has time to fact-check & research his responses.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
He should ask Miller for a debate. Miller is more than happy to debate
Creationists for the most part. I think because he is so religious and
he wants those people to reject the idiocy that is Creationism.
I would pay good money to watch a debate between Ken Miller and Kent Hovind. In terms of public speaking ability, Miller is easily as engaging / charasmatic as Hovind - yet unlike Hovind, Miller actually knows what he's talking about.
Of course, any scientist debating Hovind is like having a contest between a world-class fencer and a soccer hooligan with a lead pipe. No matter how skilled the fencer is, he'll be put at a disadvantage when his opponent isn't "hampered" by rules or compunctions about fighting dirty. E.g., Hovind's debate with Dr. Matthew Rainbow - where Hovind's idea of a counter-argument was to claim that Rainbow was going to hell for teaching evolutionary biology.
» Reply to CommentRe: Muslim Challenges Dawkins To Evolution Debate
so? no words from eric hovind about debating 325? :(
Legal: none of this site's content is copyrighted unless it specifically says otherwise.
