Evolution Is A Hoax!

[TruthSeeker777]

Most people today are brainwashed into believing that we were created from nothing into something billions of years ago.
That is not quite what God told us .
Evolution is not science,it's a religion,you choose to believe it,there is no evidence!
I believe God Created The earth and all thats on it.
If you still don't believe that The earth was created +- 6000 years ago
Here's a very good video worth seeing .
But if you want to believe you come from a rock....just stop

[url="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8463129851563631666&q=dr+kent+hovind"]Creation[/url]

[Maggyie]

To be fair, I don't think all evolutionists believe we came from a rock... just the radical, atheistic ones...

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Truthseeker777' post='1206064' date='Feb 28 2007, 11:04 PM']Most people today are brainwashed into believing that we were created from nothing into something billions of years ago.
That is not quite what God told us .
Evolution is not science,it's a religion,you choose to believe it,there is no evidence!
I believe God Created The earth and all thats on it.
If you still don't believe that The earth was created +- 6000 years ago
Here's a very good video worth seeing .
But if you want to believe you come from a rock....just stop

[url="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8463129851563631666&q=dr+kent+hovind"]Creation[/url][/quote]

THe idea that was earth is 6000 years old was invented by a protestant preacher: Dr. John Lightfoot, Vice-Chancellor of the University of Cambridge, and one of the most eminent Hebrew scholars of his time, declared, as a result of his most profound and exhaustive study of the Scriptures, that "heaven and earth, centre and circumference, were created all together, in the same instant, and clouds full of water," and that "this work took place and man was created by the Trinity on October 23, 4004 B.C., at nine o'clock in the morning."

[Urib2007]

I kindly suggest watching the video posted by Truthseeker before commenting. It's actually a really good video and it's not boring for those who suffer from ADD. :-) I actually laughed quite a bit throughout his lecture.
Just take the time to learn something new. Learn both sides of an issue before making conclusions.
The world has not been around for billions of years. That is my opinion and you'll see why I believe that when you see the video.

[bonoducchi]

[quote name='Truthseeker777' post='1206064' date='Feb 28 2007, 10:04 PM']Most people today are brainwashed into believing that we were created from nothing into something billions of years ago.
That is not quite what God told us .
Evolution is not science,it's a religion,you choose to believe it,there is no evidence!
I believe God Created The earth and all thats on it.
If you still don't believe that The earth was created +- 6000 years ago
Here's a very good video worth seeing .
But if you want to believe you come from a rock....just stop

[url="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8463129851563631666&q=dr+kent+hovind"]Creation[/url][/quote]

Did you read Ratzinger's book?

[Urib2007]

Mother of Pirl, maybe you can be the winner of $250,000!

[b][size=3]Dr. Hovind's $250,000 Offer[/size][/b]

Author: Dr. Kent Hovind
Formerly $10,000 offered since 1990

I have a standing offer of $250,000 to anyone who can give any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My $250,000 offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more than a religious belief.

[b]Observed phenomena:
[/b]
Most thinking people will agree that..

A highly ordered universe exists.
At least one planet in this complex universe contains an amazing variety of life forms.
Man appears to be the most advanced form of life on this planet.
Known options:

[b]Choices of how the observed phenomena came into being..
[/b]
The universe was created by God.
The universe always existed.
The universe came into being by itself by purely natural processes (known as evolution) so that no appeal to the supernatural is needed.
Evolution has been acclaimed as being the only process capable of causing the observed phenomena.

[b]Evolution is presented in our public school textbooks as a process that:
[/b]
Brought time, space, and matter into existence from nothing.
Organized that matter into the galaxies, stars, and at least nine planets around the sun. (This process is often referred to as cosmic evolution.)
Created the life that exists on at least one of those planets from nonliving matter (chemical evolution).
Caused the living creatures to be capable of and interested in reproducing themselves.
Caused that first life form to spontaneously diversify into different forms of living things, such as the plants and animals on the earth today (biological evolution).
People believe in evolution; they do not know that it is true. While beliefs are certainly fine to have, it is not fair to force on the students in our public school system the teaching of one belief, at taxpayers’ expense. It is my contention that evolutionism is a religious worldview that is not supported by science, Scripture, popular opinion, or common sense. The exclusive teaching of this dangerous, mind-altering philosophy in tax-supported schools, parks, museums, etc., is also a clear violation of the First Amendment.

[size=3][b]How to collect the $250,000:
[/b][/size]
Prove beyond reasonable doubt that the process of evolution (option 3 above, under "known options") is the only possible way the observed phenomena could have come into existence. Only empirical evidence is acceptable. Persons wishing to collect the $250,000 may submit their evidence in writing or schedule time for a public presentation. A committee of trained scientists will provide peer review of the evidence offered and, to the best of their ability, will be fair and honest in their evaluation and judgment as to the validity of the evidence presented.

If you are convinced that evolution is an indisputable fact, may I suggest that you offer $250,000 for any empirical or historical evidence against the general theory of evolution. This might include the following:

The earth is not billions of years old (thus destroying the possibility of evolution having happened as it is being taught).
No animal has ever been observed changing into any fundamentally different kind of animal.
No one has ever observed life spontaneously arising from nonliving matter.
Matter cannot make itself out of nothing.

[b]My suggestion:
[/b]
Proponents of the theory of evolution would do well to admit that they believe in evolution, but they do not know that it happened the way they teach. They should call evolution their "faith" or "religion," and stop including it in books of science. Give up faith in the silly religion of evolutionism, and trust the God of the Bible (who is the Creator of this universe and will be your Judge, and mine, one day soon) to forgive you and to save you from the coming judgment on man’s sin.
*NOTE:

[b]When I use the word evolution, I am not referring to the minor variations found in all of the various life forms (microevolution). I am referring to the general theory of evolution which believes these five major events took place without God:
[/b]
Time, space, and matter came into existence by themselves.
Planets and stars formed from space dust.
Matter created life by itself.
Early life-forms learned to reproduce themselves.
Major changes occurred between these diverse life forms (i.e., fish changed to amphibians, amphibians changed to reptiles, and reptiles changed to birds or mammals).
Answers to Commonly Asked Questions about the $250,000 Offer

Students in tax-supported schools are being taught that evolution is a fact. We are convinced that evolution is a religion masquerading as science and should not be part of any science curriculum. It has nothing to do with the subject of science. There are at least six different and unrelated meanings to the word “evolution” as used in science textbooks.

Cosmic evolution- the origin of time, space and matter. Big Bang.
Chemical evolution- the origin of higher elements from hydrogen.
Stellar and planetary evolution- Origin of stars and planets.
Organic evolution- Origin of life from inanimate matter.
Macroevolution- Origin of major kinds.
Microevolution Variations within kinds- Only this one has been observed, the first five are religious. They are believed, by faith, even though there is no empirical evidence to prove them in any way. While I admire the great faith of the evolutionists who accept the first five I object to having this religious propaganda included in with legitimate science at taxpayer’s expense.
Even a quick review of a typical public school textbook will show that students are being deceived into thinking all six types of evolution above have been proven because evidence is given for minor variations called micro-evolution. The first five are smuggled in when no one is watching.

This deception is a classic case of bait and switch. One definition of evolution (such as “descent with modification”) is given and the others are assumed to be true by association. The first five meanings are believed by faith, have never been observed and are religious. Only the last one is scientific. It is also what the Bible predicted would happen. The animals and plants would bring forth “after their kind” in Genesis 1.

Many have responded to my offer of $250,000 for scientific proof for evolution. The terms and conditions of the offer are detailed very clearly on my web site www.drdino.com. Here are some answers to some commonly asked questions.

The offer is legitimate. A wealthy friend of mine has the money in the bank. If the conditions of the offer are met, the money will be paid out immediately. My word is good.
The members of the committee of scientists that will judge the evidence are all highly trained, have advanced degrees in science as well as many years of experience in their field. For example: there is a zoologist, a geologist, an aerospace engineer, a professor of radiology and biophysics, and an expert in radio metric dating to name a few. They are busy people and do not wish to waste time on foolish responses. Nor do they wish to waste time arguing with skeptics and scoffers who seem to have nothing else to do than ask silly questions when they really don’t want answers (so far this has been the typical response to the offer). I will not reveal their names for this reason. Any legitimate evidence will be forward to them and they will respond. At that time they may identify themselves if they choose. The merit of the evidence presented and the reasonableness of their response does not depend on who they are.
Evidence of minor changes within the same kind of plant or animal does not qualify as evidence and will not be sent to the committee to waste their time. For example, doubling the chromosome number of a sterile hybrid does not add additional genetic information; it duplicates what is already present in the parent plant. Because of the absence of additional genetic information the resultant plant can't be classified as different or new species. The plant may differ in a number of ways - bigger, vigorous as observed in any polyploid plants. Such easily recognizable phenotypic changes have confused many. Some evolutionists have jumped to the conclusion that a new species has been evolved. The key is that no new genetic information has been added. Even a new “species” is not proof for evolution as the offer calls for. See the conditions of the $250,000 offer on the web site. Some have insisted on a precise definition of the word “kind”. The Bible defines “kind” as those that are able to “bring forth” or reproduce. Those animals that were originally able to reproduce were of the same kind. There may be diversity now, 6000 years later, that could cause some varieties of the original kind to not be able to reproduce now. For example, I understand that rabbits from Alaska cannot breed with rabbits from Florida yet they are still the same kind of animal. It is obvious that a dog and a wolf are the same “kind” of animal (they are currently classed as different “species” yet are inter-fertile-- hmmm, what is the precise definition of “species”?) where a dog and a fish are not. While there may be some blurry areas that would be worthy of research in defining the original kinds, rather than muddy the issue with these type questions it would be wise to focus on the obvious cases like the dog/fish comparison. These are obviously different “kinds” of animals. So, for the sake of clarity, prove the dog and the fish evolved from a common ancestor. The honest scientist would be wise to admit that no evidence exists that could begin to prove the dog and the fish have a common ancestor. He may believe that they are related but that is not science and that is my point in the offer. Some believe this type of evolution happens but it should not be presented to innocent students as a “fact”. Further, it certainly is not evidence that the other four definitions of evolution have occurred.
The idea that the majority of scientists believe in the theory is not evidence either. Majority opinion is often wrong and must be corrected. History is full of examples.
Anonymous letters will be ignored.
Rather than simply sending in scientific evidence for evolution, some have wasted lots of their time and mine sending letters demanding to know who is on the committee, what bank account the money is in, asking Bill Clinton type questions about the definition of words like “is”, etc. When I do not respond the way they want me to they post notices on their web sites claiming that I owe them the money or that the offer is a sham! It is obvious they are using the Red Herring tactic to draw attention away from the fact that they have no evidence to support the religion of evolution. I tell everyone who inquires, if you have some evidence, send it in, don’t beat around the bush. Give us the best you have on the first try please to save time.

Many have offered evidence of microevolution and assumed that the other 5 meanings of the word are somehow magically connected. They don’t seem to realize that they are blinded to the obvious. Treat the $250,000 offer as a lawyer would treat a ‘who-done-it’ case. It is your job to prove that what is being taught to our kids as fact (all six meanings of the word evolution above), is indeed a fact. If this cannot be done then it should be admitted that evolution is a religion but not a science. Some say it is unfair to define evolution including the origin of the universe. They say it only has to do with “change in gene frequency over time.” All you need to do is read your local textbook and see that all 6 meanings of the word are part of what is taught as evolution theory. If these nay Sayers are agreeing that it should not be included then they should help me get it out of the books, if they are genuine.

Over the years I have heard many evolutionists say, “Evolution is a theory like gravity is a theory. Don’t you believe in gravity?” They repeat this mantra as if repetition will make it true. Their example is silly of course. We can all observe gravity every moment of our lives. We can do tests and experiments to verify the theory of gravity. No one has ever seen an exception to it. By the same token, no one has ever observed evolution nor been able to demonstrate any evolution beyond minor variations within the kind. To try to make evolution science by associating it with theories like gravity is ridiculous.

Nearly all responses to my $250,000 offer go something like this: “Of course no one can prove evolution, can you prove creation?” This response is what I expected and wanted. Neither theory of origins can be proven. Both involve a great deal of faith in the unseen. So my next logical question is: “Why do I have to pay for the evolution religion to be taught to all the students in the tax supported school system?” Since all taxpayers are being forced to pay for evolution to be taught exclusively in public schools and evolutionists have had the last 130 years and billions of dollars in research grants to prove their religion, the burden of proof is on them to supply proof of their theory.

I do not have time or interest in getting involved in long e-mail debates, but I will talk to anyone by phone or debate with any qualified scientist (even a panel of evolutionists) in a public forum at a university, on radio or TV, as long as there is equal time for each position not each person. If you call, please have a list of topics to discuss or questions to ask and feel free to record the conversation if you like. Just inform me that you are recording please. I hope this response is satisfactory.

I have taught for years that evolution is nothing but a religion mixed in with real science. Many have been duped into believing in it. There is no evidence that any plant or animal ever can or did change to any other kind or creature. It is time that intelligent people the world over began to admit that the king has no clothes! There is no evidence for changes between kinds of animals. The Bible teaches that God made them to “bring forth after their kind.” This is all that has ever been observed. The same Bible teaches that everyone will face the Creator one day to be judged for everything they have said, done or thought. I recommend that everyone prepare for that day by taking advantage of God’s mercy and forgiveness afforded through the free salvation offered to any who will confess their sin and receive Jesus Christ as their Lord. If you are interested in learning more about becoming a Christian, please call me. I travel a lot but always take time for calls when I am in the office. I am most often in Wednesday through Friday at 850-479-3466. Check my itinerary on my web site for my location if you need to talk with me while I am out speaking. If possible, attend a seminar. Seminars are free and we always have a question answer time for those who attend.

Sincerely,
Kent Hovind

[Fixxxer]

I don't think evolution is a hoax, it's pretty obvious we have evolved. Couldn't have God started all creation that later evolved? Also, I think believing the earth is only about 6000 years old is pretty stupid, we can prove such things like dinosaur fossils are much older than 6000 years old.

Edited March 1, 2007 by Fixxxer

[Maggyie]

[quote name='VaticanIILiturgist' post='1206126' date='Mar 1 2007, 01:06 AM']Did you read Ratzinger's book?[/quote]

Did the Cardinal write a book specifically about this? ::Continues obsession with collecting Benedict XVI's works::

[jswranch]

[quote name='Truthseeker777' post='1206064' date='Feb 28 2007, 09:04 PM']Most people today are brainwashed into believing that we were created from nothing into something billions of years ago.
That is not quite what God told us.[/quote]
So you are saying we were created from something vs. nothing? That is evolution. Either God created us from nothing or a different Demi-God created some form of matter from which our God then formed us.

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='jswranch' post='1206183' date='Mar 1 2007, 12:48 AM']So you are saying we were created from something vs. nothing? That is evolution. Either God created us from nothing or a different Demi-God created some form of matter from which our God then formed us.[/quote]

No, what ther person is suggesting is that it's a little of both.

I believe that it's important to address the issue of Micro Evolution and Macro Evolution. Defining those key terms is important because if you're suggesting that nothing evolves, that's ridiculous, but also to suggest that everything evolves with no scientific proof is also ridiculous. Most of Darwin's perceptions of evolution was based upon his experience [and time spent] at the Galapagos Islands. It was there that Darwin found animals [such as Panguins] that were normally artic animals, living in a tropical climate. This was the breaking point in Darwin's theories, which sadly Darwin went to the most extreme with later in life, but the theories of things naturally [thou I'd argue is with the power of God] evolving isn't contradictory at all.

If you'd really like to get specific in regards to Genesis, it says say that the earth was created in a specific standard of time, but that can be defined differently.

1.) Who says that God's "week" is equivilent to our "week" in regards to duration of time, etc. God is much more powerful, so we can't possibly suggest that our standards, dictate his standards.
2.) After Adam and Eve were created [thou Eve wasn't named eve yet but woman], it doesn't specify the duration of time that they'd spent in the Garden of Eden, until they were removed from the garden of eden. It could have been that Adam and Eve lived in the Garden of Eden thousands upon thousands upon thousands [possibly over 100,000?] of years before they'd sinned and were thrown from the Garden of Eden. Therefore to suggest that the earth is merely 4,000 years is to presume that you know God in his entirety.

In regards to the "Big Bang" and other theories... I'd say that without proof, we should just leave them as just that... "theories" but if an individual was curious and would like to speculate, it wouldn't be wrong to assume that God made the Big Big theory [among the others] happen to begin with and that was the method that was used to create. I mean, think about it... when human beings create, we use our hands, but when God creates, I'd imagine that he'd just made it happen by his power, strength and might.

Dont forget that our very breathe and everything that goes with that alone is just allowed to happen because of God. If it weren't for God and his power, we wouldn't even be able to take a simple breathe... its not a mistake that we're able to continue in life.

Reza

[TruthSeeker777]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1206097' date='Mar 1 2007, 07:25 AM']THe idea that was earth is 6000 years old was invented by a protestant preacher: Dr. John Lightfoot, Vice-Chancellor of the University of Cambridge, and one of the most eminent Hebrew scholars of his time, declared, as a result of his most profound and exhaustive study of the Scriptures, that "heaven and earth, centre and circumference, were created all together, in the same instant, and clouds full of water," and that "this work took place and man was created by the Trinity on October 23, 4004 B.C., at nine o'clock in the morning."[/quote]
I beg to differ dearest mother of da Pearl.
Dr. Lightfoot whoever he was,was indeed very intelligent.
He must have used the Bible,see how long Adam and his sons lived untill Noah and the flood, where all the dead Dinosaurs were layered into mud with all the other fosils
Then calculated how long Noah's sons lived and there sons until Jesus was borned,and the rest is easy to work out,2000 years later is Today +-.

Evolutionist biggest prove is 'IN TIME' this or that must have happened
If you believe that something must, should or could have happened its not science anymore,its a RELIGION.

Science can be proven,evolution can't.
Some Dinosaurs species still lived in this century,there's just to much prove to hide it from everyone.

The congo swamp in Africa is 55000 sq/m uninhabited swamps.Locals still to this day spot Plesosauruses,(the same as Nessie the Loch nest monster) in the swamps.
The beast is known to feast on Hippo's and Eliphants.

Talking about Nessie,the game warden of Loch ness in Scotland spotted Nessie over 40 times in his life.
And that exclude the thousands of other credible witnessess,and all described Nessie as a Plesosaurus.

The're is prove and facts and a True God YAWEH behind the creation,i believe the bible from cover to cover.

For me there is a TRULY AMAZING DESIGNER.

I do not believe i came from a soup or a rock or a squid.

Who's behind evolution????

[RezaMikhaeil]

Well I havn't seen you prove with facts that creationism is true and evolution is false either...

[cmotherofpirl]

Genesis teaches us God is the author of all existance. However Genesis one is not a science book, and never claims to be. Science can propose theories as to how we got here, Scriptures collected by the Church tell us why.

Sitting on my desk is a piece of petrified tree dug out of the local hillside, definitely more than 6000 years old. The hills here are filled with fossils of animals plants and trees that are long extinct. They are also covered with arrrowheads which are dated more to be twice that age[12,000 years old]
And please do not give me the line about how God created things just to look old, a God that sets out to deceive is not a God anyone should worship.

The more science I study the more I am filled with awe for the Creator of all things. So if God started the process 5 billion years ago, and the earth is millions of years old, and creation evolved , and at one point God picked a pair of humans to be the ancestor of all people, that is fine by me. It is also far more interesting and Godlike than your version.

Here is a link to some of the wonders of God's Creation: [url="http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/archivepix.html"]http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/archivepix.html[/url]

[desertwoman]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1206097' date='Mar 1 2007, 02:25 AM']THe idea that was earth is 6000 years old was invented by a protestant preacher: Dr. John Lightfoot, Vice-Chancellor of the University of Cambridge, and one of the most eminent Hebrew scholars of his time, declared, as a result of his most profound and exhaustive study of the Scriptures, that "heaven and earth, centre and circumference, were created all together, in the same instant, and clouds full of water," and that "this work took place and man was created by the Trinity on October 23, 4004 B.C., at nine o'clock in the morning."[/quote]


No wonder I'm so special. The world was created on my birthday!!!!!!!!

[TruthSeeker777]

There is not one test that can prove a dating system that holds water.
Dinosaur bones ,stones and rocks had no dates on them.
All of these dating systems have flaws and are corrupted.

The carbon dating system is completely off and very flawed.
They found a mammoth dating 22 000 years old on the skin and 55 000 years on the Tusks

They also found human footprints walking along dinosaur footprints in a riverbed in Texas.
We know from the bible humans and animals lived in harmony together before the flood.

You see,God created the heavens (3 what we know of in the bible) and earth and ALL that was in it.

That means Adam must have seen Dinosaurs.

Evolutionists tell us dinos lived millions of years ago,so someone must be lying?

Reptiles never stop growing.
So, if Adam lived to be 900 years old, there must have been reptiles who lived to be 900 years old. Which means that your average lizard will grow to be pretty big. Why did they find roach fossils that were 19 inches long? Every fossil species unearthed were bigger than what we have today. 

Something very special was around the earth before the flood.
The answer is in Genesis and will explain
everything you ever wondered about.

Anyone that figured this out????