A Review of Creationist Web Sites

Sir Louis Pasteur said: "a little bit of science estranges men from God, but much science leads them back to Him."I have never heard of a better thought-out single sentence. This is true in every experience of my life as long as I have been a creationist.You see, the Smithsonian is responsible for hiding a lot of evidence that goes against evolution, so I've heard.
Also, National Geographic refuses to publish any legitimate pro-creation articles, and the even refuse to apologise when some of their "science" is revealed as fraudulant.
You see, I love God and I will continue to believe the Bible until it is proven wrong, (yes, and you'd better look into BOTH sides of the argument before you question the Bible's validity).
So, if Webster describes science as "knowledge through observation and experimentation" then why do they claim evolution is 'science' when they are hiding evidence against it. To me, illegitimate anti-creationist articles GO AGAINST the true concept of science.

Interesting how you always ask the CREATIONISTS to site their sources. I haven't seen any sources cited about your 'ozone' argument or your 'there was no oxygen in the atmosphere during the birth of life' or I see no sources cited whatsoever when the evolutionsts are trying to throw negative remarks against me. I asked "which evolved first, male or femal," and you didnt cite your source when you said, "they evolved together". Then I said ozone isn't formed naturally without oxygen in the atmosphere, and you didn't cite your source when posting your anti-creationist remarks on that one either. In fact, any argument I've read on this forum, so far, that was posted by an evolutionists DOESN'T site their own sources.TRY FOLLOWING YOUR OWN ADVICE. Besides, if there REALLY IS evidence for evolution, I'd expect you people to cite it like crazy because you'd want everyone to know about it. why haven't you?
Just wondering,
Booboo

Evolutionists, particularly the ones in this forum, are among the most close-minded, biased people I've ever heard of. First off, there is no proof against the Bible, so you have no business ridiculing or otherwise tampering with the legitimacy of actual Bible-believers.
Also, Kent Hovind IS a doctor.
All the bogus riff-raff about Kent Hovind's degree is just a back-and-forth rumor between the evolutionists.
I KNOW you will disagree, but I have seen Patriot's policies, I have SEEN WITH MY OWN EYES Dr. Hovind's PhD diploma, I have talked with Dr. Hovind personally, and I have even read the 'crap' that says Patriot University is a 'degree mill.' Whether it is a degree mill or not, (you'd have to be more specific) is not your business, and you need to understand that all the anti-Hovind personnal comments are based off of a photograph of a house in Colorado, sayind "that's Patriot University."
I have read up on Patriot University (it is not a secular college but that has nothing to do with the matter) and I have seen course descriptions of their degrees in education.
Don't you remember ANYTHING from high school? Dr. Hovind has the PERSONALITY of a high-school teacher if you ever get the chance to talk with him (if you ever have the integrity or courage to call him). I'd never mistake a high-school teacher's personality for any other type of scientist!Even if Dr. Hovind WASN'T a doctor that wouldnt mean he doesn't have the righ to run CSE (which is NOT a government-controlled corporation). Also, any TRULY open-minded, educated person who is not arrogant or ignorant will admit that Dr. Hovind's degrees are legitimate.Also, if you are looking for what YOU would call a "professional" creation scientist, get Dr. Robert Gentry's book "Creation's Tiny Mystery." Or get Dr. John Morris' book "Young Earth." Of get Dr. Comninellis' book "Creative Defense: Evidence AGAINST Evolution."You always seem to have anti-creationist crap posted on the web, but I've never seen any evolutionists stand up to a publicised book by a true creation scientist--read through those three books, check their sources, AND ONLY THEN tell me that you can stand up to so-called "dumb" creation scientists!!!Booboo, (By now the furious 'booboo' because of your arrogant personal attacks against creationists) FOLLOW YOUR OWN ADVICE--most evolutionists are just full of personnal attacks and accusations against creationists, AND THEN THEY demand THE CREATIONISTS to be 'professional!!!

My point again:
Every SINLGE time you post something against me, you focus on ONE part. (I doubt you even read my whole comment, for you would have surely taken an interest in what else I had to say). Kent Hovind is the source of a lot of evolutionists' anger and prejudice, but when I rebuked your anti-Hovind crap you IGNORED IT in your next comment.It would be the wisest decision (on my part) to just get off this stupid forum (evolutionists are using the same arguments against the Bible: "you can't prove a negative.") Well, then, why CAN'T you prove evolution--because that would PROVE the Bible is lying.
Why CANT you prove the earth is billions of years old?
Why CANT YOU prove Jesus was lying?
Why CANT you prove that stars can form?
Why CANT you prove Hovind isn't a real doctor?
Why CANT you prove we evolved, or are still evolving--the variations in modern species might just be the result of radiation from the sun following Noah's Flood (afterall, a canopy of water around the earth has evidence supporting it, AND that would have blocked out solar radiation).
Also, when you said that there is evidence against the Bible, I HAVE NEVER HEARD A BIGGER LIE!
The Bible is what guided many modern discoveries and advancement in Science! In the book of Job (1400 B.C.) God asks Job about the 'springs of the sea.' Did you know that oceanic springs were not even discovered until 1977?
The book of Isaiah (700 B.C.) mentions God 'stretching out the heavens.' SO, the fact that we document the universe expanding could be proof for the Bible JUST AS easily as it could be proof for the Big Bang.
The Book of Revelation (70 AD) mentions God sitting upon the 'circle of the earth.' Did you know that most non-Christian and non-Jewish scientists in those days thought the world was flat, when the Bible knew it was round all along?

Where is your evidence against the Bible?
Next, I'm not going to open up a creationist geology 101 course for you, but read Gentry's book: "Creation's Tiny Mystery"
His book is thorough and sound.
Where is the evidence against the Bible? I have read BOTH sides of almost EVERY SINGLE argument about the origin of the earth--his book is more sound than you know. He has done up-to-date and thorough research on radiopalonium halos. Where is the evidence against the Bible?
By the way, don't bother telling me about the 'contradictions' in the Bible--I can take apart that crap from the atheist websites in a few minutes, they are really ignorant, and they only pay attention to what jumps out in front of them and not reading the WHOLE Bible.
Also, the Bible DID know the earth was a circle (again your speedy anti-booboo comments lack research).In Revelation the Bible says that the angels "traveled to the four corners of the earth" Circles AND shperes are circular, IN FACT: the Hebrew word used for 'Circle' in the original text simply meant 'round object'
So how would a round object have FOUR corners? Simple: North, South, East, and West. Don't try to analize that for mistakes, I have had endless Biblical discussion on these topics with a number of Christian doctors, Creationist scientists, Pastors, etc.