No, you did not understand my question at all.  It has nothing at all to do with erosion.

 

The question is: since the underlying rock upon which my building was built has obviously been placed under extreme stress which both transformed the layers of horizontal limestone into folded, faulted and metamorphosed marble, a 4000 year old time frame means that this process must have happend very very quickly or is still on-going.  If it is ongoing, my building foundation would have many cracks or would be completely unstable.  It isn't.  So what started the process of folding and metamorphasizing and what stopped it?

Thank you, mike. Great supplication. And welcome to freehovind.com forum, a place for Dr. Hovind fans came come to discuss how ignorant evolution is and how much we admire Dr. Hovind.

All that stuff is complete nonsense, not to mention it doesn't answer my question.

 

Why do you assume I'm an athiest?

I really like #4:

 

"4. Cambrian explosion debunks Atheistic claims of slow macro evolutonary change."

 

So your argument is that the rapid diverisification of life 530 million years ago proves a youg earth.  Nice logic.

"!. The moon, only 1,000,000 years ago, would be close enough to boil the earth and no life would ever been possible."

 

ehm...actually i can do that calculation for you.

distance to the moon (min) 363 104  km

recedence 3.8 m per 100 years.

that's 0.0038 km per 100 years.

sooo 363 104/ 0.0038= 9 555 368 421 years

that's 9.55 BILLION YEARS BEFORE IT WOULD REACH THE CORE.

now lets not forget THAT THE AGE OF THE EARTH IS (about) 4.5  BILLION YEARS.

 

but that's not what you're referring to, are you?

no dice.

 

"2. polystraight fossils. If they layers are billions of years old, then how does a rootless tree stand upside down through millions of years of rocks."

 

XD debunked.

the appear in 1 LAYER.

or link me the articles where it says "several strata layers"

and, FROM PEER REVIEW.

 

"3. Where's all the billions of years of moon dust Doc?"

 

debunked 

READ

 

"4. Cambrian explosion debunks Atheistic claims of slow macro evolutonary change."

 

ehm.. no they don't?

it's quite well know that evolution quite frequently happens in fits.

and better yet, we have a very good hypothesis as to why the cambruim explosion happened.

OXYGEN.

 

"5. We have less then 10,000 years of salt in the oceans."
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

good one....what? you're SERIOUS!??!?

.....

mineral recycling.

we might have 10 000 years of alt in the ocean, but we have plenty of sea salt deposits in the earth too. let's not forget the changes in the amount of liquid water over the (many) years.

 

but i digress.

YOU CAN TAKE THE INPUT AND IGNORE THE OUTPUT.

 

"6. Go to mt st helens for a geology lesson the Atheistic evolutionaries wish would go away. If it took millions of years in the grand canyon, but only a few weeks at mt st helen? yea, right."

 

have you ever HAD a geology lesson?

the grand canyon is carved by the colorado river in the 6 million years.

how do we know it wasn't a flood? shape.

but what does a river formed canyon have to do with a volcano?

 

" You see Doc, that is the difference between Atheists and Christians. Christians say we believe in God because no one can prove origins and God is a reasonable conclusion."

lets ignor the fact that the majority of scientist are theists and that they almost all accept the scientific concensus.

 

ANY conclusion of "god didit" is BY DEFAULT an argument from ignorance. why?

i can't fidn a natural explination, therefore  god.,..

 

" We only observe life from life, and kind from kind. Which scientifically and observationally disproves Macro-evolution."

YAY HOVINDISTS!!!

 

no srly.

1 ) what is a Kind? (we have STILL to get an full answer for this)

2) what is life? (any person with a basic understanding of biology will tell you it's just organic chemistry.

 

 

". Because, if you extrapolate back in the evolutionary mindset to the origins, then evolution gets proven wrong by observational evidence."

ehm...im beginning to think that you think evolution = abiogensis.... which it doesn't......we've been over this....sooooo many times.

 

" Whereas you Atheists say there is no God and anyone whom doesn't believe in macro-evolution is stupid, sick, or evil."

noooo we call em scientific illitarates and delusional because everything must conform to their personal beliefs of a holy book.

 

"And yet you monkeys can never disprove God like evolution has been disproven"

 

only absolute proof lies withign math and logic, since god isn't found in math, lets do logic, to disprove the literal bible version of god.

 

god is omnicient, omnipotend and all loving (or so i've been told by the evangelicals)

but.....

god created evil by giving us free will knowing full well that he would doom us to sin and hell.

thus god is internally inconsistant.

either hes:

not omniscient. (he didn't know the consequences)

not omnipotent.(he didn;t fix things)

not all loving. ( he didn't care that we would be doomed to sin)

 

and this is just a SIMPLIFICATION

many atheists have been over this.

and many christians have been over the literal interpretation of the old testament.

 

oh and why are you calling us monkies? you're just as much a monkies as us.

or aren't u human?

 

"Although God may not be real, he is still very plausible"

no. but A GOD doesn't mean YOUR GOD.

do you have ANY idea how many version of "God" are out there?

 

"But we know macro-evolution is NOT possible, until a chicken pops out of a goose egg."

HAHAHAHA I KNEW IT!

you have no idea how macro evolution works.

GO STUDY and THEN COME BACK.

 

"Mike"

 

Douche

"The moon, only 1,000,000 years ago, would be close enough to boil the earth and no life would ever been possible."
- How the hell did you make this up?! seriously, why the hell would the earth BOIL if the moon came to close?! If it would be very close it would have fallen out of the sky and crash with the earth cuz of the gravity. And the last time i checked it was still there.

"3. Where's all the billions of years of moon dust Doc?"
- WTF is moon dust?! could you be any more vague?

"5. We have less then 10,000 years of salt in the oceans."
- How would we mesure this if you hate all the scientific methods of mesuring age in the nature as it doesn't support your belief? As far as i know there's no way to tell how long the salt has been there or anything. How can we mesure that?! We can mesure what it is now.

"6. Go to mt st helens for a geology lesson the Atheistic evolutionaries wish would go away. If it took millions of years in the grand canyon, but only a few weeks at mt st helen? yea, right."
- I think someone said it before, but no volcanos in the grand canyon.

"Because, if you extrapolate back in the evolutionary mindset to the origins, then evolution gets proven wrong by observational evidence. We only observe life from life, and kind from kind. Which scientifically and observationally disproves Macro-evolution."
- You sir are not a scientist. Stop acting like you know when you don't. You don't even know OUR mindset or why science says that god didn't made us. Look up Miller-Urey experiment. Our genome is made out of organic molecules such as suger molecules.

"But we know macro-evolution is NOT possible, until a chicken pops out of a goose egg."
- Everything you creationists claim that god made is pure bullshit. It's always the "It's to complex for me to understand so god dunnit" argument. GO READ DARWINS BOOK FFS. Maybe you woun't be so ignorant and learn a thing or 2. Or read an article from a REAL scientific magazine with PEER REVIEW.



The thread that shows why Hovind is NOT a Ph.D.
http://forum.freehovind.com/view-id-3774-c-0#c0

"“The moon, only 1,000,000 years ago, would be close enough to boil the earth and no life would ever been possible.”"

 

i think mike is referring to the enhanced tidal friction that a closer moon would bring.

however i think i linked an TO article that debunked that, or something along those lines of "closer moon, therefore no 4.5 bil year oly earth"

No man, the heat would come with the geometric increase in the earth's magnetic field. Because of course the moon is receeding so we extrapilate back in time. As the moon gets further away our manetic field around the earth weakens. The moon also keeps us on our axis, when the moon receeds enough, the earth will wobble more and more and our spinning will slow. Atheists were worried there was several meters of moondust and actually lengthened the captsules legs when they did their billions of years calculations. All that is needed is one artifact to depunk Atheistic evolution and we have thousands folks. I don't care how smart they think they are. We may not be able to PROVE God, but we sure debunked evolution. And what makes them so angry is they know they can't disprove God, but they just know there can be no God in their hearts. (brainwashed!) *cough* :)

"It's important to understand there is a difference between 'conceptual philosophy' and 'science'. Some individuals claim that in the nexus of science lies the great and revered "THEORY OF EVOLUTION". I can respect that, people should be allowed to have their opinions. But unfortunately, evolution itself has little to do with science.'

 

ehh......

you;re right one one thing.

evolution (as decribed by the theory of evolution) has nothing to do with science. it has to do with observable reality.

now the THEORY has to do with science. as it EXPLAINS observable reality.

 

"Curious, where some might see Evolution as the driving force of the universe, go figure, The rest of us actually see 'Design' and 'Architecture'. The detriments of Creation as a concept, really explain a lot."

ID argument.

just because it appears designed doesn't mean it is designed.

look at the homologeus genes that code for...lets say the eye.

the IRC argument just compeltely fall apart in light of the amazing homology of genes in living organisms.

there are plenty of cases where out of seeming chaos order emerges.

that order emerges because of certain properties of matter.

 

(don;t say "god gave those propeties, therefore god exists" that's just an argument form pure ignorance.

 

"Similar designs in DNA, Conventional classifications of animals that define lineage and ancestry, Archetypes for the mechanisms of the first life, patterns in organic growth and elemental designation."

 

and then they are destributed so that they indicate commen ancestory AND the function of intermediate form prove that they can come about by natural selection?

no dice

 

link me 1 IRC claim that hasn't been debunked already.

 

" To say that all technology and science is a result of evolution or evolutionary thinking is just silly."

we never claimed that.

we just said they come from the knowledge gathered form the scientific method, a method that ID has to rape into a different definition and form for it to be called science.

and the method is something that will never allow creationism to be science.

 

"Computers, electricity, plumbing, cars, planes, boats,"

all things that have NOTHING to do with biology.

 

"processed food,"

a bit closer,, but that's germ and cell THEORY, not evolution.

try things like....

anti virals, new medicines, biological cencer treatments, paternity tests, hereditary diseases, genetic modification, ect

 

just about anything that deals with living organisms.

 

"Not this imaginary evolution.

 

"Now thats science! This is where computers and cars and tv comes from!"

 

electronics, mechanics, thermodynamics, chemestry.

no living things here....

 

" I don't see how you people don't realize it's ingenious nature! We see this happen all the time!"

 

and i fail to understand how you can keep postulating your screwed view of evolution as it beign the actual theory (the one we "evolutionists" accept), and not be comsumes by the guilt of breaching one of your commandments.

 

"thou shalt not bear false witness.."

ring a bell?

 

 

" Some individuals claim that in the nexus of science lies the great and revered "THEORY OF EVOLUTION"."
- The scientific methods for research is all the same. All cars, computers, medicins came from this method http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

If you don't accept how it made evolution then you don't accept how we got medicin for example. Same principles.

"But unfortunately, evolution itself has little to do with science."
- You got nothing to support this. You don't seem to know what science is since you don't recognize it when it worked.


"Curious, where some might see Evolution as the driving force of the universe..."
- Nope, the driving force of all life is survival. Evolution works on survival! how hard is it for you to understand?! It's the reason why we like to fuck and eat and i sure hope you enjoy that. Those "rewards" our genes and bodies give us when we do things that is important for our survival is what makes us reproduce and evolve. If someone got a slight upper hand in survival and got more children than the others ofc that's gonna get selected for! "Design" and "architecture" is flawed and vague it's unbelivable.

"The detriments of Creation as a concept, really explain a lot."
- Nope, nothing. You can't even say what it is?

"Similar designs in DNA, Conventional classifications of animals that define lineage and ancestry, Archetypes for the mechanisms of the first life, patterns in organic growth and elemental designation."
- If our DNA would have been designed after one blueprint, we would all be dead by now. The genetic diversity is what makes us survive diseases and such. If we where all alike and one got sick everyone else would get it. If Adam and his what? 200 kids. Say 1 got a virus that killed him, that would spread to others. No one would have the genetic anomolies to be able to survive the virus. That is why cloning crops isn't a good thing because if one plant get a disease, the whole harvest gets destroyed.

"As a whole, one really identifies a design and working system as a universal driving force."
- Still proof or stfu/gtfo. You never say exactly what and no sources (atleast not ICR ones).

"To say that all technology and science is a result of evolution or evolutionary thinking is just silly. "
- You got it. I have no idea how you made that conclusion of anything we've said. How would technology have anything with evolution to do? except the scientific method ofc.

"Computers, electricity, plumbing, cars, planes, boats, processed food, etc. is a result of, you guessed it, science! Not this imaginary evolution."
- You forgot ecology, biology and biochemistry. That's a couple of scientific fields that has evolution to thank. What area of science has the creation bullshit (oh sorry, "research") given us anything?

"Nothing ---> Blob ---> Grass ---> Monkey ---> Man"
- Extreme over-simplification. This only shows that you don't have the faintest clue of what evolution does and that it does not cover biogenesis. I can do the same over-simplification to illustrate how sad it is.
"carbon+hydrogen+oxygen+nitrogen+sulfur ---> 9tails" OR
"nothing + overnatural being+ more nothing ---> the world"

9tails watch this video so you might understand what we are trying to say. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_RXX7pntr8