Are we living on the planet of the apes?

So the answer is no, he doesn't have it. A "friend" does.Given that Hovind has lied in the past and failed to retract erroneous statements, do you still trust his "word" about his friend? The truth is, his word is not good - he's a charlatan and a fraud.What a world of credulity you must live in.The so-called "evidence" you have presented has been refuted at this board a hundred times. Take any single point you care to address and open a new thread,and we can talk about it. This is the wrong thread to do so.Most of your evidence rests on unproven, erroenous assumptions, bad data, and flat-out deception. We can debate every point on your list, if you like, but it'll take time. We should do it a point at a time, so start a new thread with whatever point you feel most able to defend. It's up to you (as it would hardly be fair of me to decide where to start.) If you don't start a new thread I'll assume you have no interest in defending this nonsense.

I am a newbie around these here parts and have not had the time to read over the hundred refutes sorry... Take a chill back off with your anxiety attacks already.So for My zero factor concept from this crowd all I get is a "I think it's a clumsy attempt to squeeze the text of the Bible into the cosmological data in a sad effort to preserve the perceived inerrancy of a 2000-year-old book."?
What a bunch of Einstein’s you all turned out to be[This message has been edited by Jagz Beach, 01-11-2004]

Hi,A few people have suggested that the creation days are 'God days' i.e. they are of an undetermined timespan. Some would maintain that a day is like a thousand years to the Lord, so each creation day was a thousand years long.An evening and a morning suggests that it was a 24 hour period, but, since there is no morning or evening on the 7th day perhaps these 'days' are of an undetermined time.However, there are a few problmes with this, in most cases the word 'yom' can mean nothing other than a 24 hour day off the top of my head I'd say Numbers 7:12-83, the 12 days of dedications to the tabernacle, has to mean 24 hours, the Hebrew 'yom' is used in every instance of 'day' in these verses.I think you are making a mistake by thinking that evolution negates creation, they are compatible as evolution does not present an explanation as to where the first lifeform came from, it is only used to explain the diversity of life.I would say that things evolve, and that evolution of life is the most documented and authenticated fact in all of human history.Brian.

"I think you are making a mistake by thinking that evolution negates creation, they are compatible as evolution does not present an explanation as to where the first lifeform came from, it is only used to explain the diversity of life."Doesn't the second law of thermodynamics debunk that theory?

JagzCheck out this website for someone who has answered the challenge by hovind for the $250,000.
http://www.faithreason.org/farmprov.htm Ok let us check up and see where this leads.From the bibleIn the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.Gen 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness [was] upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.Gen 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.Gen 1:4 And God saw the light, that [it was] good: and God divided the light from the darkness.http://www.astro.ubc.ca/people/scott/cmb_intro.html
Now we will check up on sciences understanding of it.The big bang theory shows us that the temperature of the universe at origin was extreme to say the least.[100000000000 K] At this temperature the universe is incapable of producing any form of electromagnetic radiation not to mention visible light. It is not until about 300,000 years after the big bang that the hydrogen and helium nuclei can capture electrons to become stable atoms.At this time the first visible light is available and the universe becomes transparent.In Genisis earth and water was already in existence before light was created.The universe did not contain atoms other than hydrogen and helium at the time light occured so therefore the earth could not exist before light since the elements within it occured at a later time.Now as to your question of how long it took in genesis. It here indicates that evening and morning were occuring after the making of light but it does not give any indication of how long it took to lead up to the first evening.So that is open to choice however it does not show why the Genesis account of creation is in conflict with the physics of the bib bang.Balls in your court now.

---

"I am not young enough to know everything. "
Oscar Wilde

So, what you're saying is that you didn't actually do any research before you said "evolution is supported by no evidence."Well, that's fine. Shoot your mouth off for all I care. I guess I'm not in the habit of letting outraegously wrong statements go uncorrected. So sue me. Well, you have to understand that I don't see the Bible as any more significant a literary work than Shakespeare's Hamlet. So attempts to make it "right" seem pointless to me. The Bible is already mythically true, so why does it need to be more true than any other work of fiction?If that hypothesis floats your boat, fine. I guess it could be true if you squeezed the words around like that. Somehow I doubt that's what the original author intended, but that doesn't make your own interpretation any less valid.

In what way?I have a theory: all human beings start off as a single cell at conception, and then grow into full grown adults. Does the second law of thermodynamics debunk my "embryo theory"?

Hi No, what makes you think that it does?Brian

Maybe you could try to explain how you feel that is the case?

In triplicate no less!Brian

Well, that's what you get when you push the Second Law Hot Button.

"In Genisis earth and water was already in existence before light was created.The universe did not contain atoms other than hydrogen and helium at the time light occured so therefore the earth could not exist before light since the elements within it occured at a later time."Your missing my point here. The sun already existed, let there be light merely removed the clouds so it could shine through..."I have a theory: all human beings start off as a single cell at conception, and then grow into full grown adults. Does the second law of thermodynamics debunk my "embryo theory"?The cell is programmed to divide and yadda yadda to get to the form of a man. While on the other hand the so-called "simple cell", is not programmed as thus and as a result of the law, could in no way, shape or fashion evolve to such status. "All processes (left to themselves) go toward a greater state of disorder, disorganisation, disarrangement and less complexity."."So, what you're saying is that you didn't actually do any research before you said "evolution is supported by no evidence."No, that is not what I am saying at all. In case you haven't noticed this is not the only forum in the universe.[This message has been edited by Jagz Beach, 01-11-2004]

Hi,I really have noe idea which Bible you use, first you get the number of creation days wrong and now your bible has the creation of stars on day one, yet every Bible I have has stars created on day four.In case you are not sure, the sun is a star, stars were created on day four, the two lights in the sky, the sun and the moon were created on day four, you need to rethink your theory in my opinion as scripture explicity contradicts you.Brian.

That's not the second law. For instance, how would you measure "complexity" or "disorder"?Thermodynamically speaking, a finished house is less ordered - greater entropy - than when it was organized piles of lumber on the lawn.

"In Genisis earth and water was already in existence before light was created.The universe did not contain atoms other than hydrogen and helium at the time light occured so therefore the earth could not exist before light since the elements within it occured at a later time." I am sorry but you gave the impression that you were equating Creation with the big bang. The Genesis account holds that God created Earth before light and this is in contradiction of the big bang theory.Here is your statement. In my post I showed how the two accounts Big bang and Genesis creation are incompatible.[This message has been edited by sidelined, 01-11-2004][This message has been edited by sidelined, 01-11-2004]