Rick, trust me, I know. The man's very bigt on rhetoric. But he does make some obvious philosophical points regarding evolution to which the evolutionists cannot refute: much of evolution is based on the underlying assumption that it all began with a common ancestor, thus evolution is, in many respects, unscientific. I'm with you on this 24hr days starting point, but he is not debating an OEC and thus could get away with this to a certain extent.RickD wrote:Danny, I started watching that debate, and listened to the first part of Hovind's opening. A lot of his predictions aren't even predictions. A football prediction would be as follows: The Indianapolis Colts have a great offense that no other team can stop, so I predict they will win the 2010 superbowl. The following is equal to a Hovind prediction: I predict the Indianapolis Colts will win the 2007 superbowl because of their great offense. His predictions aren't even predictions. He states that God created everything in 6 24 hour days. He made that as his point of debate. His predictions should be about what we should see in the future if the 6 24 hour day model is correct. He is debating on the premise that a certain evolution model or models are wrong. He should be debating on the premise of his own 24 hour day model being correct. I have a difficult time listening to his lack of knowledge covered up by his sense of humor. I don't really find him funny because some of his jokes are based on wrong interpretations or beliefs. Just my opinion. Maybe I will try to listen to more when I actually have the patience to listen to him.
Anyway, how's the Indianapolis Colts' defence?
I might start checking out this weird game, study the form and have a little wager with you my friend... 