Evidence for God from Science

Some of it seemed suspicious to me even when I was a YEC. But at least he did win souls to God, that's good.

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:Some of it seemed suspicious to me even when I was a YEC. But at least he did win souls to God, that's good.

I will say this eventhough I disagree with YEC he has suffered severe persecution for his views and I like how it has not deterred his faith despite everything that has been done to him.But he just used the wrong creation interpretation against evolution. If he had been a Gap Theorist and knew how to blend the science into it he would have destroyed evolution,but he used the wrong weapon against evolution.Because he was a YEC he was great at pointing out why evolution is wrong but pushing the YEC interpretation evened eveything out to where it came down to who you believed with neither side providing evidence and so it was a tie at best in his debates and evolution won the war and now creationism is in a crisis because of YEC being so popular.He could have made alot more money too if he had used the Gap Theory instead of YEC.

This is how he could have destroyed evolution if he had used Gap Creationism instead of YEC. You cannot just point out why evolution is wrong when you don't really have evidence to back up your interpretations.It then comes down to who the people believe. By using Gap Creationism he would have been able to point out why evolution is wrong and since he was so good at it and no evolutionist ever really provided evidence evolution is true to counter him instead of offering YEC he could have took the very same evidence evolutionist use but used it instead for evidence that a former "lost world" existed that has been overlooked. So that it then is whether there was a former world that perished or evolution is true based on much of the same evidence. And since no evolutionist ever really provided evidence to show evolution is true a former "lost world" would be more believable based on the same evidence.So he would have defeated every evolutionist willing to debate him.

A little secret that people don't know about and cannot be verified with evidence as far as I can tell but in the 1980's knowledgable Gap Creationists were defeating evolutionists in debates in colleges so that it got to where the evolutionists would not debate Gap Theorists.They would only debate other creationists because they lost so many debates.

abelcainsbrother wrote:

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:Some of it seemed suspicious to me even when I was a YEC. But at least he did win souls to God, that's good.

I will say this eventhough I disagree with YEC he has suffered severe persecution for his views and I like how it has not deterred his faith despite everything that has been done to him.But he just used the wrong creation interpretation against evolution. If he had been a Gap Theorist and knew how to blend the science into it he would have destroyed evolution,but he used the wrong weapon against evolution.Because he was a YEC he was great at pointing out why evolution is wrong but pushing the YEC interpretation evened eveything out to where it came down to who you believed with neither side providing evidence and so it was a tie at best in his debates and evolution won the war and now creationism is in a crisis because of YEC being so popular.He could have made alot more money too if he had used the Gap Theory instead of YEC.

This is how he could have destroyed evolution if he had used Gap Creationism instead of YEC. You cannot just point out why evolution is wrong when you don't really have evidence to back up your interpretations.It then comes down to who the people believe. By using Gap Creationism he would have been able to point out why evolution is wrong and since he was so good at it and no evolutionist ever really provided evidence evolution is true to counter him instead of offering YEC he could have took the very same evidence evolutionist use but used it instead for evidence that a former "lost world" existed that has been overlooked. So that it then is whether there was a former world that perished or evolution is true based on much of the same evidence. And since no evolutionist ever really provided evidence to show evolution is true a former "lost world" would be more believable based on the same evidence.

abelcainsbrother wrote:

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:Some of it seemed suspicious to me even when I was a YEC. But at least he did win souls to God, that's good.

I will say this eventhough I disagree with YEC he has suffered severe persecution for his views and I like how it has not deterred his faith despite everything that has been done to him.But he just used the wrong creation interpretation against evolution. If he had been a Gap Theorist and knew how to blend the science into it he would have destroyed evolution,but he used the wrong weapon against evolution.Because he was a YEC he was great at pointing out why evolution is wrong but pushing the YEC interpretation evened eveything out to where it came down to who you believed with neither side providing evidence and so it was a tie at best in his debates and evolution won the war and now creationism is in a crisis because of YEC being so popular.He could have made alot more money too if he had used the Gap Theory instead of YEC.

This is how he could have destroyed evolution if he had used Gap Creationism instead of YEC. You cannot just point out why evolution is wrong when you don't really have evidence to back up your interpretations.It then comes down to who the people believe. By using Gap Creationism he would have been able to point out why evolution is wrong and since he was so good at it and no evolutionist ever really provided evidence evolution is true to counter him instead of offering YEC he could have took the very same evidence evolutionist use but used it instead for evidence that a former "lost world" existed that has been overlooked. So that it then is whether there was a former world that perished or evolution is true based on much of the same evidence. And since no evolutionist ever really provided evidence to show evolution is true a former "lost world" would be more believable based on the same evidence.So he would have defeated every evolutionist willing to debate him.

A little secret that people don't know about and cannot be verified with evidence as far as I can tell but in the 1980's knowledgable Gap Creationists were defeating evolutionists in debates in colleges so that it got to where the evolutionists would not debate Gap Theorists.They would only debate other creationists because they lost so many debates.

He made some strawmen (like saying do they think that or do they know that, when talking about pterosaurs or something and millions of years) which goes with your statement that he didn't have good evidence to back up his position.
He was blunt so ik why he suffered from persecution, but a lot of the crap he and others got is just plain immature and ridiculous. He's out of jail for tax fraud now, has he changed?

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:Some of it seemed suspicious to me even when I was a YEC. But at least he did win souls to God, that's good.

I was going to speak out against him, but I don't believe it would be right. There's more here than his YECness. He has more than paid his due in my opinion, and his case would prove many Anarchists right about government.

Kurieuo wrote:

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:Some of it seemed suspicious to me even when I was a YEC. But at least he did win souls to God, that's good.

I was going to speak out against him, but I don't believe it would be right. There's more here than his YECness. He has more than paid his due in my opinion, and his case would prove many Anarchists right about government.

So you think anarchy is better? Or just that the American gov't needs fixing? If it's the latter, then yes it does.

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:Some of it seemed suspicious to me even when I was a YEC. But at least he did win souls to God, that's good.

I was going to speak out against him, but I don't believe it would be right. There's more here than his YECness. He has more than paid his due in my opinion, and his case would prove many Anarchists right about government.

So you think anarchy is better? Or just that the American gov't needs fixing? If it's the latter, then yes it does.

In some respects Anarchism is better, in other respects no. US Government most definitely has too much control over private affairs of people, yet at the same time is needed to up-keep facilities, curtail evil, and present an international front so the country isn't just overrun by another.

Kurieuo wrote:

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:Some of it seemed suspicious to me even when I was a YEC. But at least he did win souls to God, that's good.

I was going to speak out against him, but I don't believe it would be right. There's more here than his YECness. He has more than paid his due in my opinion, and his case would prove many Anarchists right about government.

So you think anarchy is better? Or just that the American gov't needs fixing? If it's the latter, then yes it does.

In some respects Anarchism is better, in other respects no. US Government most definitely has too much control over private affairs of people, yet at the same time is needed to up-keep facilities, curtail evil, and present an international front so the country isn't just overrun by another.

I agree, we can't have a totalitarian system yet not too lax of a system either.

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:Some of it seemed suspicious to me even when I was a YEC. But at least he did win souls to God, that's good.

I was going to speak out against him, but I don't believe it would be right. There's more here than his YECness. He has more than paid his due in my opinion, and his case would prove many Anarchists right about government.

So you think anarchy is better? Or just that the American gov't needs fixing? If it's the latter, then yes it does.

In some respects Anarchism is better, in other respects no. US Government most definitely has too much control over private affairs of people, yet at the same time is needed to up-keep facilities, curtail evil, and present an international front so the country isn't just overrun by another.

I agree, we can't have a totalitarian system yet not too lax of a system either.

Btw, since following US politics the past year or so (seems everyone was right?), I sometimes seem to forget I'm in Australia. What I say of the US can often be taken as 1:1 for Australia too, I mean no slant against "just" the US.

We may not have the same powerful intelligence agencies here (though they probably piggyback largely off US intelligence sharing), but our government, likely all governments, overstep. Anarchism I do find some of its ideals appealing, because I value independence, yet I see weaknesses as well.

Governments it seems want us all to be dependent upon them, and structures are in place to keep it that way. While some people might find comfort in that, it doesn't feel very freeing to me. Those who seriously do not want to bow to government, there is no real "opt-out" and associated withdrawal from any government benefits taxes are meant to cover. I doubt, that's the reason Hovind didn't want to pay taxes though. Many want government benefits, but don't wish to contribute, and that is wrong too.

The issue is rather, we have no real choice but to accept our leaders and government. Any form of resistance is often met with harsh punishment such as being thrown behind bars, even if no one was really harmed due to such resistance. What I really fear are "nanny states" who remove more and more control from parents over their families. Governments interfere with families, in many instances justifiably; others they definitely overstep to try to usurp parents values and beliefs.

If anyone thinks Hovind is innocent, please listen to the prison audio for yourself.

What is it with prominent YECs and KH initials?

Philip wrote:What is it with prominent YECs and KH initials?

He's a famous guy in creation circles. Same with Ken Ham, etc.

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:

Philip wrote:What is it with prominent YECs and KH initials?

He's a famous guy in creation circles. Same with Ken Ham, etc.

He is a Creationism master to YEC's.

RickD wrote:If anyone thinks Hovind is innocent, please listen to the prison audio for yourself.

There's corruption yes in the gov't, but i think it was wrong of him to evade taxes.
As a side thought, why do creationists get such hate? Even flat earthers don't get this level of hate, and they did apparently try to put their view in schools. I've actually seen terrorist level hate on youtube, one comment said they should be publicly humiliated and another said "creationists should be shot". Absolutely pees me off. They have called me nearly every name under the sun back when i was a YEC, though i'll admit that i was an idiot often, willfully ignorant too, and i did troll a guy pretty bad so some of it was deserved.