Witness the Worst Argument for a Young Earth...EVER
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 вер 2024
- Kent Hovind has surpassed even his own high standards of nonsense with this argument for a young Earth. You simply have to see this one to believe it.
Enjoy
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @scimandan
Here is the SciManDan website. Please do check it out: scimandan.co.uk/
Dan's opinions shared in this video are supported by verified facts (whether scientific or general) and they should be treated as just that: opinions. All critique and humour are addressed to the words and actions of individuals and not to the individuals themselves, under the Act of Free Speech.
Yaps on for 10 minutes about how animals can't talk, then immediately pulls up the Bible and quotes a Snake talking. You can't make this stuff up folks.
Serpent, not snake. The Bible never says "snake". Just like it never says "apple", only that the Tree of Knowledge bore "fruit." The apple thing only came about because artists had to show something in paintings.
@@khandimahn9687shut up stupid
@@khandimahn9687 Tell me the difference between a serpent and a snake, please.
Serpents are a type of talking snake
@@cyclingslowlytoseethings And humans are a type of talking ape.
Kent: Animals can't talk
Also Kent: The snake spoke
🤦♂
Also Balaam's donkey
To be fair he said the shake spoke because of the Devil. 😅
americans - they're so dim...
serpent not snake
He’s a Wizard, Harry……
He keeps referring to the bible as if that is proof of something. Incredible.
According to the Hitchhikers' Guide series, Earth was built to answer a question, was rebuilt at the behest of its white mouse rulers, and humanity are the descendants of service workers from an advanced planet that subsequently collapsed without its service workers.
I read it in a book, it is therefore real!
It is!!! It's proof that people are stupid enough to believe it😂
He's more underhand and lying and divisive than just that... it has to be his own personal translation and selection of bible stories. Other, differing, translations of the bibles stories are all wrong by him, but as a practicing charlatan and grifter he won't ever admit that this calls into question everything he spouts too.
It seems to escape Kent's trap like intellect that people were speaking to each other long before there was any system of writing and that there are Adam and Eve (names have been changed to protect the indoctrinated 😉) stories that were written before the bible was. So people were speaking and writing before there is any record of a biblical god speaking. There are still people who can speak but are illiterate and civilisations came and went that had no method of reading and writing. How does that mess up his strange ideas? I can't bring myself to call it strange logic, strained logic maybe.
Old myths and firecamps stories found in the bible are what we called Sci Fi nowadays.
There is plenty of good books available to read.... but the bible is a bad one (to say the least) for opening your mind and liberating your imagination. One single old, dusty and moldy book is literally the opposite of anything proof.
My fridge is 6 days old because the milk in it is 5 days old.
Such an underrated analogy
yes
chef's kiss 🤌
"Behold , I have become god " when I open the fridge door I say let their be light , and it was so .
My milk is talking..... it might be time to get a new pack.
"I can prove it scientifically"
Proceeds to prove it religiously.
Well, he didn't really "prove" anything, unless he thinks that the world is only as old as our oldest language.
And why language? Why not clothes, pots, temples, tools, instruments, jewellery, graves, and other human remnants that go back much further in history?
Smells like a cherry-picker to me.
@@fus-ro-dahmore of an apple picker. You know, Adam and eve.
His proof was when language and writing began coincides with the 6000 Bible narrative. But he's ignoring the 1000 1500 year gap conveniently
Didn't even prove it religiously. He just made a few statements based on his personal interpretation of a translation of scripture that was never intended to explain the age of the earth.
For most of these people, proving it "scientifically" means it's in the bible and is therefore scientific.
The sign behind him that says "I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you" is devastatingly perfect.
Came here to say that 😂
The idiot probably thinks that "irony" is a synonym for "metallic."
I actually spoke to Kent in a chat room in Paltalk called "Evolutionists vs Creationists " in 2012
He spewed the same crap in their as he did here the "God said" repeats is a common thing he does
Self-awareness isn't in Kent's wheelhouse
@@Chuck_ELEverything he says he has been saying word for word for 40 years. He copied the script from his mentor whose name I can’t remember currently, but i’ve seen videos of his mentor, and it’s the exact same word for word script that kent still uses today.
“Only humans have language.” “God gave a serpent language.” Pretty sure there was a donkey somewhere that could speak too.
More like a rat, but anyway.
And a bush, don't forget the burning bush that could talk.
I mean, hovind is also talking out of his ass 😁
And the talking eagle who said
“Woe! Woe! Woe to those who live on the Earth that is round, because of the remaining straw man arguments that Kent is about to sound!”
and ants in Islamic mythology.
Are we 100% sure birds aren’t just cussing us out every morning, telling us to get the fk up, and we just haven’t figured out what they’re saying yet? It sure sounds like language…
It’s been proven that corvids have a fully formed language, have names, and also mourn their dead, so you’re probably right lol
@@Jsome13 i have chickens and they do have distinct noices for sertain things and actions they do. Not nearly as complex as any human languages of course.
And i reckon this is the case for a lot more animals
@@Jsome13I couldn't disagree more strongly i'm afraid. Dr Kent Hovind just proved scientifically that this isn't true in the video you see. Only humans have language. God told him so.
As an Australian they're 100% cussing us out, magpies especially
The dumbest part of this video was that he acted like language was so specific, like just English, but in reality it's extremely broad. In this case I think a simple understanding of someone else is interchangeable with language. We can't talk to animals, but we can understand their needs.
"I am going to prove my point scientifically! Now, let me open my bible..."
In the beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth......how did that look? Scientists call it the Big Bang. Call it what you want. Our universe was created out of nothing. Many Christians have been saying this for centuries. What's the problem with opening up a Bible?
The crow is unironically smarter than poor ol Kent.
Evolution and cosmology was explained to Kent so many times he has to understand it by now. He just can't admit that, spreading creation lie is his only source of income.
So is the 3 year old Russian, apparently.
You can say that solving this maze is trained behavior, but I have seen that crows pull off strands from tough, fibrous leaves, cut in a little and pull off some part, so that they get a hook. and then use this tool to for maggots under the bark of trees.
Poking with a stick, that is normal.
But that means one of them must have found out that with one stick it worked better than usual,
then must have thought about "Why?",
identified the cause (some backward bent protrusion),
then thought "How can I get at more of such shapes?",
and found that it can make it herself.
But crows as all animals can't think.
We know that crows have a "theory of mind" - they can think what others think, and use that for their advantage.
When they have something that they want to hide from the others, then they go and pretend they are looking secretly for a hiding place, but so that the other crows can see it.
Then she selects a place and hides her treasure, so that the others think "Great, I have her secret, it's mine!"
And in the moment she leaves all the other crows go for it. While she took her treasure along with her, what she hid from the others.
Why did I say "she"?
Crows are female in german.
Genders in german are a confuse mess - totally natural for native speakers, but must be a catastrophe for foreigners.
A ship is neuter - makes sense. But when it has a name, it is female - with the exception of warships of the imperial german navy, those were male.
Dogs are male, cats are female, lions are male
Birds are male, eagles are male, a chicken is neuter, but a duck, a goose or a crow are female. Where a swan or a turkey are male.
A sparrow is male, but a tit (the bird AND the ...) is female.
A bosom is male, a breast (of a man and a woman) is female. An udder is neuter.
A flower or a blossom are female, a leaf is neuter, a branch is male.
The trunk is male - of course, it is long, always hard, stands always upright, any man's dream.
The same properties apply to the barrels of guns - and a gun is always ready, cock-ed and loaded, always ready to shoot your load as often as you want to (when you bought the high-capacity magazine). For me that is the reason for the US gun fetish.
At least, when I think of these nuts (lol - they have their nuts in their magazine) and have that image in my mind, I just have to grin.
Here in Germany it is usually a "dickes (thick) Auto" that regarded as the dick replacement of the midlife crisis men.
And I have to admit, my after-midlife-crisis toy is also a car, an Opel Calibra, a sports coupe that I did not dare buying 30 years ago.
I know, an endless comment, but hopefully at leas a little interesting in the beginning and amusing in the end.
When we accept the absurdity of life, I find it more tolerable - and easier to have fun and to not care when I do something and it goes wrong. Try again, when it sometimes works out, all is good.
When I deride myself, the others can't deride me.
In a few million years the corvid-descended scientists will be discussing whether those hairless apes in the fossil record were intelligent or not, and citing a carefully restored video of Kent Hovind as evidence against.
I think it's because animals don't have the same level of ego involved. They can simply focus on the actual task rather than letting their biases get in the way.
The kinda sad part is Kent will never realise he is wrong. When he stops existing and nothing happens, he's not here to realise he was wrong
No shot that this is just not a grift. No one is that stupid
THE ONLY THING YOU NEED TO ASK YOURSELF IN ORDER TO BECOME RIGHTEOUS IS THIS "WHAT IF I AM WRONG?"...
@@leonIdas002 You forget to turn of the caps lock off. It's the button on the left side of the keyboard, there is Caps Lock written on it.
(No worries it happens to everyone from time to time.)
And as far as your argument is concerned.
If you don't send me all your money you will eternally suffer in hell since that is the will of the 1 and only omnipotent God the Spaghetti Monster.
To be fair you cant make that statement with any more certainty than he makes his regarding the afterlife. The Bible is easy to disprove, but you cant disprove that some mechanism within eternity could reconstitute the emergent properties that give rise to ones philosophical identity. Imo, if anything is eternal, everything is inevitable.
@@j_117couldn’t agree more. My personal belief is there is no afterlife in which we have any resemblance of self awareness. Rather all the different cells in our body go back into nature and we continue in that way. Forever changing but never as we were.
He could have shorten down the argument by just saying "Earth is 6000 years old cause the bible says so"
That's good enough for me.
The thing is it doesn’t. I’m a Christian and whole heartedly believe God created everything in existence but I do not believe that the first chapters is meant as a scientific and historical breakdown on how God created everything. In fact young earth creationism is a relatively new idea (within the past 200 years). The Bible is not a science text book nor for the most part a history textbook.
"i can prove scientifically Earth is not billions of years old"
The very next sentence
"The bible says..."
😅😅😅😅😅
i know! He literally just disproved the bible.
100%. In the end, trying to use science to argue scientific principles vs. faith will go nowhere because they don't care about the science side, just what's in the Bible.
Yes, but the pen....
In addition to immediately citing the bible to make an argument he promised would be scientific, the first argument he puts forth is that _humans_ haven't been around millions of years so the world can't be billions of years old.
That's like saying my fridge can't be 20 years old because the milk in it isn't rotten (and we know milk doesn't last that long).
@@Albanus35 true, I had forgotten about the pen. It seems it's a 6000 year old pen god himself used to write the Bible in 20th century English.
I don't despise many people, but he makes my blood boil.
I don't see why. He's just a simpleton speaking to other simpletons. It's like getting mad that baboons don't have a more ethical social structure.
You aren’t alone. In fact, I would say it is completely rational to feel angered at Kent’s childish arrogance.
@@markness90s13 I often think it's just grift, like how can someone be that ignorant of the science...
I don'tt wish harm on people as a principle. However, Kent is the exception that makes the rule
I watch Ken content because it makes me laugh like nothing else does.
How does he think animals communicate anything without a form of communication? The most effective form of communication isn't how humans do it, it's how ants do it. They can communicate throughout their entire colony of thousands of individuals with just pheromones alone. Running around screaming isn't exactly the greatest evolutionary development on planet earth.
Communication doesn't equal language.
You canmot prove that animals do or do not have language without making a criteria for what differentiates language from other forms of communication.
Is a smile language? What about saying "ow!"? Is a dog howling at the moon trying to *say* something? Or is it merely responding to stimulus with an instictive reaction?
Are you concerned only with communication within a species? Clearly many animals can be taught to reapond to commands, but that doesn't enable them to understand our language.
This is a very complicated question and it's silly for any of us to pretend as though we know the answer to it.
The vast majority of people would not classify anything that ants do as linguistic. Many people would consider that primates can communicate in a more language like fashion than mice, but we don't *know*.
Don't forget, bees, termites, wales, dolfins, monkeys, elephants etc etc 🧐😂
@@SineN0mine3 You are right, but also wrong. Like pretty much everything, humans have invented their own concepts to better make sense of the world around them, but is is incredibly BIASED. It is similar to concepts of morals or good and evil, NONE of them really exist and they mean nothing in reality yet humans as a whole still seem to subscribe to such nonsense.
The best example is giving another animal the "mirror test." Okay... humans can recognize their own reflection which must be a sign of high intelligence right? So let's see if other animals can do it... Only, what if the animal you test is blind? Does that make them stupid? What if an animal doesn't rely of their eyes to navigate the world? Giving them a visual perceptive test seems unfair and biased. What if they do recognize their reflection, but just don't care? Just because humans like to look at their own reflection, doesn't mean another animal would find it particularly interesting.
Not to mention reflections are practically unheard of in nature as mirrors are a human invention. Why would other animals even learn how to recognize a reflection and know what it is when they are rare to come by and learning about one doesn't really do anything for them? In nature, the closest thing you would get to a mirror is a clear, undisturbed body of water. Human-made mirrors though reflect MUCH better than that so any animal that comes across them would see a perfect image of itself and have to assume it is another one of their kind rather than a reflection.
They don't know what a human mirror is and they have never seen such a pristine reflection before so if they do react to it, it is probably because they don't want to take the chance of believing it is "just a reflection" only for it to be a real creature that takes the opportunity to attack.
Again, how could anyone actually understand the results of ANY of these tests? They CAN'T and that is why they are ALL biased. Humans desperate to make the world something they can understand often try to break things down into something only THEY themselves can understand and when you can only understand things from your perspective, you can't possibly begin to understand things from anyone else's.
Communication requires some kind of language, it can be verbal, sounds, signs, smells, vibration, electrical impulses , communication is merely the action of transmitted information or data, ,🧐
language is a specific type of communication system that involves the use of words and a particular set of rules. I think the way we communicate through language is superior. We create songs with metaphors and similes. We show sarcasm and share very complex messages, history, and science. The things we do and contemplate are bigger than what an ant needs to convey.
He is so enveloped in the idea that humans are superior, that he extends that belief to the age of the earth coinciding with human language history. So close minded and ridiculous.
You don't think humans are superior to animals?
@@MB777-qr2xv no, being smarter than something or someone does not indicate superiority. We are simply the most intelligent animals. Not more important. Are you superior or more important than your child? The idea of superiority of humans over animals is a religious dogmatic idea. We care more about others humans survival simply because we evolutionarily want our species to live on. It’s baked into each species.
Do these people not know that there are human built structures that are older than 6,000 years?
They probably have heard about this, but prefer to go around with their fingers in their ears going "LALALA" or in the no-hope cases "HAHAHA".
Don’t forget we have cave paintings that if I remember correctly are around 35-40 thousand years old
How do you know that?! That is science and science is clearly wrong and evil! You can't trust anything science has to say anyways because it wasn't made by god of course!
This is exactly how these people get this stupid.
oh but haven't you heard? dating techniques only work up to 6000 years. Anything older than that is an error. Obviously.
The weird things people come up with just so their worldview doesn't have to change.
They don't believe in radioisotope dating.
Any argument that pretends to be even remotely rational that includes "The bible says..." or "God said..." is going nowhere.
There's no point even trying to debate with them, they'll just drag you down to their level & beat you with blind ignorance.
It is not ignorance, it is a grift.
@@RocketboyX No, I think he's sincere.
"Animals don't have language! Except for this serpent... " DOH!
Don't forget the donkey also.
@@davidbrigden4194 yes, and also another serpent and possibly a whale.
Epic 'DOH' moment 😂
In the bible even bushes are able to speak. 😂
The first humans named ADAM and EVE. Ironic that theyre English names when English didnt even exist at the time of the first humans.
Those are just English-ised names, I think the originals were less modern. Story's still obviously bull, just for other reasons
And God spake unto Kent “Thou shalt have the intelligence of a walnut”. And God saw that it was good.
On behalf of walnuts, I would like to strongly protest this assertions. Walnuts have a purpose, better morality and most of them are smarter than the criminal Kent Hovind. Also, please do make any indirect comparisons to rocks as they are also getting quite feisty when it comes to comparisons to Hovind's disciple, Matt Powell, and strongly deny any similarities.
@@nickryan3417 quite rightly so. I was originally going to suggest the intelligence of a fruit cake, but that would have required further research on my behalf to list all of the ingredients. Furthermore, a fruit cake may suggest some level of complexity, of which does not apply to Kent in this regard.
@@railfail a fruit loop more like!
😂😂😂
This is the best laugh I’ve had in a long time. Thank you all for these comments . 😂
To give hovid credit, his mind is most likely classified as a mineral.
Surely, it's a vegetable. I have no evidence but I'm pretty sure it's a boiled cabbage leftover from the Irish Famine.
Indeed, his brain is essentially a metamict zircon. :)
A mineral you say. Not a vegetable? Surely it is at least biological in nature. Obviously it is not what you might call an advanced intelligence, or any type of intelligence. I'm thinking cabbage. Any other thoughts? ;)
The man is truly a twit. A bic pen is somehow proof of the age of the earth? WTF?
I was thinking ..a vegetable…;)
Imagine if Hovind died mysteriously, so a coroner opened up his skull and found nothing but a giant dead frog where his brain is supposed to be.
That would be SOOO cool!
Kent's most used argument is "No". That's it. He tends to just say no and move on without no explanation.
That's not strictly true. He usually says, "No. I can show you lots of evidence why you're wrong," and then never does.
"No" and "Dogs generate dogs and cows generate cows"...
@@kingfede1985 I know a lot of cows that speak
Also: "That's dumb"
He’s not a real doctor. He got his phd at an unaccredited university. This is evidence of his “genius” lol
I read portions of his thesis. it has this little gem, "...the Islam religion accepts evolution very readily as a scientific fact..." Although I don't know much about Islam I believe Hovind's claim is counter-factual. I conclude that not only does Hovind not understand evolution, he doesn't understand religion either.
You can tell how prestigious this 'university' is by the size of it's 3 car parking lot. It looks about the size of maybe 3 of what was called, way back in my school days, a portable classroom.
@@quintrankid8045 He doesn't realise that the bible and the quran are likely based on many of the same myths, there certainly are numerous stories of the same people in both.
@@quintrankid8045 You can find his thesis online. I downloaded a copy, my 12 year old daughter read it and said if she handed it in as a school assignment she'd be laughed out of class.
But i do suspect him having a phd in amusing people.
"Civilization started about 5000 years ago." Gobekli Tepi was dated to more than 11000 years ago, meaning that even his scientific "backup" is outdated.
Those are somewhat recent discoveries. Do you expect him to change his view more than once a century? Maybe he will when there's a new Bible version.
If this ja ckass uses the word "scientifically" one more time, I am going to have to do something drastic.
I'm going to forgive him for being one of the most arrogant, destructive, useless people imaginable.
UA-cam will almost certainly delete this comment (if it even posts at all).
Tell you what. If you are reading this in 2025, let me know and we will celebrate a miracle together.
We have farming that is 6000+ years old. We have tools that are 15000 years old. And not as new discoveries
According to the Jewish calendar it's about 5000
@@kaltaron1284 I know you're being sarcastic here, but it is important to note that we have known of what we used to call "prehistoric man" for a very long time now. All my life and I'm an old man now.
It is the head-in-the-sand creationists that just don't keep up. They'll find a way to pretend we can't date Gobekli Tepi.
Because, in the end, they always react to older stuff that way.
The remnants of civilizations like Egypt's are harder for them to deal with because Egypt is actually in the Bible. So are earlier things in Messopotamia. So, it's harder for them to play "let's pretend" about that one. Fortunately for them, recorded civilization only goes back to 3000 BCE (3300 for the Sumerians), so they can contrive a way to pretend it started instantly on that date or otherwise fudge the time from 4004 to 3000/3300.
We'll probably find half a dozen civilizations that are "too old" if we keep looking. There is nothing, apparently, all that remarkable about building out of mud or brick, particularly in the Middle East.
"Animals can't talk! Except for the snake. And that donkey. And the camel I saw when I was tripping balls. And let's not forget that animals have other methods of communicating with one another such as dancing and pheromones. But yeah, Earth is young."
He also ignores that he's quoting the bible in a language invented 500 years after Jesus Christ was supposed to be born. Going with his logig from the pen argument, the bibel can't be 2000+ years old becaise english is only 1500 years old, and thus, the bibel isn't real.
Whale song isn't a language, because it doesn't have words and we can't understand it. Makes sense too
Great time to write a book, trippin balls and listening to a camel. Then hey, why not, use it to start a cult.
(And i would've got away with it too, if it wasn't for those pesky snakes).
@@clockworkvanhellsing372The bible was translated into English for the first time in 1535 apparently. And it occurs to me, that if that translation had never happened, then this idiot and the others like him may have never read it and we would be deprived of the immense entertainment value of their insane ramblings. :)
Hey, I met that talking camel at a Dead show. He was a bit of a dick.
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.”
― Mark Twain
Humans aren't good at admitting their mistakes. Especially when it means they have wasted their entire lives.
The problem with that quote is that I have seen multiple dilemmas in which both sides have, with the utmost confidence, used that exact quote to try and claim the other side is the one being fooled.
@@inertjohnjunk some people just dont underatand what it means. Flerfs and creationists blindly believing some internet people that have no actual evidence - and then think that science believers have been fooled.
no one wants to admit they was took advantage of
@@inertjohnjunkthats what news is good for god forbid they ever start telling us whats going on
I'm still waiting on how language is evidence of the age of rocks
Well, to be fair, in his logic, the Earth got spoken into existence. So to him, language was needed before creation. And because for some weird reason he has "proof" that this was 6000 years ago, the Earth to him can not be older. Because he doesn't seem to understand his 'biblical facts' are not actual facts, his own conclusion based on his imaginary evidence is correct. And we had something to smile about.
@@sandoumir4348 I'll give Kent this, thats an impressive amount of twisted logic to try to prove his point, most dont aim that high for creativity!
Its a disaster, and still misses the mark for the origins of language by a millennium, but its a novel disaster!
The thing that gets me with Kent is how adamant he is about flat earth being ridiculous but can't apply the same logic to his YEC.
Right. Also since quite a chunk of flat-earthers are also YECs, it means he calls a good portion of people who actually believe in his BS stupid. Even better, when he would come across one, he would happily welcome and call out the YEC view of another person but ignore the FE part. So he even applies cherry picking at that level. So they are absolutely right about YEC but completely false about FE. You can't be more stuck in your narrow indoctrinated world view than Kent.
I suspect he would be a flat earther but doesn't think there are enough gullible people who would believe it to scam for enough money.
Z
It is hard for someone to understand a thing, if understanding it means his source of income and ego polishing gets cut off.
If he tells the truth he kills his cash cow.
Ah, gotta love Kent... "I can prove scientifically..." "The Bible says..."
That quote he's reading about civilisation starting around 6,000 years ago must have been written before the discovery of Gobekli Tepe, which is around 12,000 years old. This is the problem with people who only have one book, they never update their ideas.
And sophisticated cave paintings have been found that are at least 40,000 years old.
"Religion was invented when the first con man met the first fool."-Mark Twain
No truer words were ever spoken.
Damn, that quote actually goes hard asf
“Definitely true bro dude!” Jesus, probably
It was a voltaire quote.
@@NickyDunne-l7zAm I supposed to know what that means?
The irony of the sign behind Kent saying "I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you."
🤣🤣
willful ignorance at best.
I saw that and thought "Someone sent that to him, but he misunderstood what they were trying to tell him." 🙄🤦♂️🤦♀️🤦
You said the only thing we have over animals is our intelligence.
I saw an interesting quote the other day;
"There is a considerable overlap between the intelligence of the smartest bears and the dumbest tourists." -Yosemite Park Ranger on why it's hard to design a bear-proof garbage can.
Wow, that IS bleak.
Let's not forget the wily raccoon, many have tried to design raccoon proof garbage cans to no avail. The ability to use language doesn't mean you are intelligent, Hovind proves that.
To be fair - the bear and the raccoon are highly motivated - they’re after food to survive.
@@alexc4300how's that make it 'fair'.
So you're saying humans are getting dumber because it's to 'easy'
I actually agree
Dan used the intelligence thing 'loosely' 😂
The human race are now in a debate of 'what is a women' and people can't even answer that correctly
Human Intelligence is dwindling 😂😂
To think that God wouldn't at the very least be proud of scientists, as people who are the most appreciative and understanding of His work.
fr
Nope, scientists with their annoying "proof" get in the way of the grifts of (not a) Dr. Hovind.. so those must not be "from God", ignoring on that on other occasions he speaks of "the whole of creation coming from God".
It is unbelievable that a real Person actually believes all of that and then tells a COMPUTER that he proves his point using SCIENCE which he basically denies in every breath he Takes.
"Do you think the scientists are smarter than me?" Yes, they gave me electricity, the refrigerator and wifi, you did not.
never mind the camera he recorded his lunacy with, the computer he used to edit it on and the internet he used to make a fool of himself with said video..
Not to mention the average human life span was 30 years old just 200 years ago. Kent most likely wouldn’t even be alive at his age to make his claims without science.
3 year old Russians can speak Russian! Wow!
Years ago in my Spanish class one of the dimmer bulbs asked the teacher how native speakers could possibly remember all the verb tenses, nouns, pronouns, etc. I believe he really though all Spanish speakers learned to speak though classes, and not naturally. Amazing.
Hovind should have the Dunning Kruger shirt as his uniform.
But here's the th8ing though. I don't believe that even Kent himself believes many of the things he says. If you take a second to look past the condescending self important remarks, you can see that he actually DOES his diligent research. He just manipulates what he presents to support his arguments. That's not ignorant per se, it's just that he's an extraordinary con man. I don't think he's as dull witted as most others I've seen. Kent and his disciple Matt Powell are experts at manipulating what others have said and then inventing a secret meaning to help their own narratives. That and just flat out lying about what people actually argue and what they say and believe.
Give him a few minutes and he'll probably try and claim Dunning Kruger is scientific evidence for a young earth.
Don't you have to know a just a little about what you talking about for the Dunning-Kruger to be in effect?
@@patrickcromwell7554 personally I think he believes every word of it, at least in the moment. Holding patently inconsistent and illogical positions is very much in the wheelhouse of this variety of religious belief.
@@chimpana I suppose, that could be true. All I mean is that I've heard Kent Hovind compared to a "sleazy used car salesman" and it gave me a new kind of point of view. Unlike many typical Flat Earthers/young Earth creationists, Kent choses his words and his "evidence" very carefully. Which tells me he knows very well that he's being dishonest. Especially when he makes claims like "Globe earthers believe that..." Which is essentially intentionally lying.
Dolphins and whales literally have a language
Their different pods even sing(?) differently. Birds also have their own language and can even speak human languages
@@ArtyKibbles2190What bird speaks human language. Parrots can imitate it, not speak it.
@@aahhhhhhhhhhhhhsome corvids raised in captivity can learn some human words and use them correctly to communicate to thier handlers. There is a youtube channel out there showing it off
You know their evidence is whack when they start quoting bible verses.
Exactly, you can even use their own book against them.
Exactly. Anyone who claims they're going to prove something scientifically and then starts quoting the old testament can be safely ignored.
The earth is 6000 years old? Turkey is absolutely peppered with megalithic human-made construction that is almost double that age. In my country, the oldest human settlement found, dates back to about 11'000 years.
indoctrinated creationists are embarrassment to society, they are ignorant to such historic marvels.
You see, the religious people will just say that that is a lie that scientists are payed to say in order to hide god. There is no wining with cultists.
From a CBC news item:"The dominant story in archaeology has long been that humans came to North America around 12,000 years ago. But Indigenous archaeologist Paulette Steeves points to mounting evidence suggesting human migration may have occurred closer to 130,000 ago."
@@chankarchandra the first humans came north America 30,000 years ago for the area now known as France
oldest cave paintings in indonisa are 30k years old I think
When anyone says "Bible says..." and uses it as evidence, you can instantly disregard their point.
And them
And 'The Hobbit' claims elves are real, so they _must_ be ...
I prefer to learn my history and science from the volumes of stories about Harry Potter.
@@phillwainewright4221 in middle earth they exist; the orcs of that fantasy realm are former elves on top.
@@phillwainewright4221 "BASED ON A TRUE STORY" I ALWAYS SEE THAT AND KNOW THEY MADE UP EVERYTHING...
People only use the word "believe " when they can't justify the word "think"",,but they are exactly opposite,,,
I think he may have forgotten that the Australian Aboriginal language is 13000 years old.
That's incorrect, Australian Aboriginals invented CGI 4,000 years ago and faked the previous 9,000 years. (Taken from the "Kent's Big Book of Facts" )
I guarantee you that Kent only considers white people as "people".
Doesn’t count because it immediately disproves his theory and book. 😂
Hearing an adult person spew so much nonsense even kids wouldn't believe in ... amazing
"Do you think your little scientists are smarter than me?"
"Yes, Sir, some of them actually went to collage.."
college...
I was going to say that Kent actually went to college, but I was mixing him up with Ken Ham. Kent actually went to an unaccredited college instead.
EDIT: changed "fake" to unaccredited, it's a more accurate description.
I would not say Midwestern Baptist College is a fake college, just potentially unaccredited. But those additional degrees from Patriot Bible University have little known value, given it is a diploma mill (allegedly).
@@ianstopher9111 Fair enough, I recant the "Fake", part, I should have gone with "unaccredited" from the start.
So, are you suggesting "Dr. Hovind" didn't actually earn his doctorate? When he claims he taught high school science, he didn't actually work in a classroom. He sold home-school science courses to Christians. This guy is a fraud...and a felon! LOL!
So god has vocal chords and speaks while there's nobody listening.
Makes perfect sense.
That comic book is cruel. It has created monsters.
… but the serpent could talk? HOW!!!??
God am clever!
Just like high-speed projectile weapons fired in a vacuum from a ramshackle military craft making a sharp downward turn to slide down a hole less than two meters across...
Because it is necessary to make the story work.
@@MonkeyJedi99 Yup, I can feel the force too.
Magic. However tell any theist that they believe in magic and they will quickly try to come up with some exception to the definition of magic and the supernatural to try and differentiate their belief in magic from belief in magic.
@@nickryan3417atheists believe in magic??? Like little kids birthday party magic?
How do you stay so calm.. I can feel my rage rising with each verbal diarrhoea spout from Kent..
“I can prove this scientifically”
Uses a 2000 year old fairytale book as “evidence”
Most fairytale books are at least interesting and fun. I have tried reading the bible out of curiousity (they keep the damn book in every hotel room for some reason) and I've got to tell you, it is one of the worst written books ever. So boring and monotonous. Whether you are telling a made up story or the truth, that is no way to write it.
Sorry to say so, parts of the Bible are older, the compilation of stories called "the old Testament" are older than 2000 years, "the New Testament" tells about events some 2000 years ago, but this was all put together during 4th till 8th century after the events, added and removed parts and re-edited texts up till about the 16th century, last "revisions" at about 18th and 19th centuries.. 😮😊
It's so sad that he thinks he has a point... 😐
I think he either knows he doesn’t or he’s genuinely delusional. I’ve seen Kent in debates, he is wildly dishonest and straw mans everything his opponents say.
@@Trollsagan69420 The first time I saw a video of him a couple years ago, I thought he was a misinformed new retiree, with some flare of cognitive decline, who turned to YT as a hobby to cope with his newfound freetime. Then I learnt who he was and that he's been at it (not on YT at the start, but same joke) for 30 years... 😅
My goodness... How far I've come. I used to believe that garbage. Now it makes me sick to my stomach.
😭 lol
@@jaymac7203 How the f*ck is your reply to this comment older than the comment itself?
Congrats on coming back to live in reality with the rest of us. Might not be fun or easy but that's what makes it special.
What these evangelical types fail to see, if there were a god, it'd probably 'create' something like DNA and have the process automated while having foresight of the outcome, instead of literally making everything. His disregard of animals though is disturbing. He strikes me as a wicked maniacal person behind closed doors.
Glitches caused by having to sync thousand of servers in real time.
"Animals don't have language" whale's have even dialects.
So do birds and, quite possibly, many other animals.
Goats have been noted as having "accents" that sometimes confuse other goats brought up in a different area. Sounds like a dialect to me. LOL Kunt Blowhard is a twit.
Have you asked the whales?
Where do Neanderthals fall into this joker's time line.?
Oh wait - I bet if Kent had a blood test ...
He blocked me when I asked him that question
I was raised in a heavily religious family. Thankfully my grandfather ignored all the dogma and taught me to just be observant. The evidence of how our world works is all around us and it's a little sad some people let religion rule how they view their existence...
No where in the Bible does God proclaim advancement, human enguniity, the study of the world to be evil. In fact, God gave us free will and dominion over the Earth - would that not mean we should explore it, learn what it can do, and use what we learn for the advancement of all? Seems to be in line Biblically. It only violates the desires of the gatekeepers of the faith who wish to use our faith as a system of control.
My faith became real when I stopped going to Chruch and started reading what was written front to back (no cherry picking versus) and applying proper context to each section. It is not a restrictive faith - yes it requires us to be ethical, moral, and selfless, but it is free from the chains applied to it by supposed Men of God.
Yup. Well said.
Agreed
It's possible to believe and also not be a complete fucking moron. It should be obvious to anyone that the bible shouldn't be taken 100% literally. It was written by humans, at the very least.
Provided you're prepared to completely suspend your critical faculties and accept everything in the Bible as absolutely true, then Kent's arguments make perfect sense. For the rest of us, though, there's nothing like a good debunk! Thanks, Dan.
Kent's whole philosophy can be summed up by this quote from Futurama.
"The only lies worth believing are the ones in the bible! "
When I was a young teenager, my young earth creationist mother took me on a homeschool fieldtrip to a "Dr. Dino" speaking event, and I got the opportunity to speak to him in person. This was my mother's attempt to try to sway me as from a very young age I had an obsession with dinosaurs and ancient history and wanted to be either an archaeologist or paleontologist which obviously was a thorn in the side for her and the nonsense she was teaching. Hovind tried saying carbon dating wasn't accurate that far back and couldn't be trusted. When I pressed him on other radiometric dating he laughed and started talking to my mother, completely ignoring me.
Geologiskt have painstakingmy counted layers of clay sediment with a spring (pollen) season in every layer to see how much rain there was and they go way further than 6000 years. Such a lack of respect for science.
Glad to know that however unwittingly, Hovind has managed to encourage some people to pursue science and truth.
I hope you continue to stay curious about the unknown.
what did you end up as and how do you get on with your mum ?
@@Rubensgardens.Skogsmuseum Ice cores in Antarctica date back continuously for about 800,000 years. Those in Greenland date back as far as 130,000 years.
Before that man started with the Bible, my thoughts were "probably a creationist".
After about 2 or 3 sentences spoken by Dr (fake) Hovind. I could tell, he is creationist and hardcore Christianity.
Ahhhh the USA. Where you can call yourself a doctor without having study anything whatsoever
I find it hilarious that you can be a doctor in fairy tales...😂
Just look up the school "Dr. Dino" earned 😅 his PhD. from. Some of this "S..." You CAN'T make up.
@@WingDiamondWing (King????) Diamond..... your kidding... that guy actually went to school (University???).... amazing
@@Donathon-qx8kqno, he got his PhD from a diploma mill.
You can also call yourself a minister without ever having studied any religious texts.
I can't take someone seriously the moment they use any religious text as a science textbook.
Let me ask you a question.
What if what happened is extra terrestrial? (Stay with me a second).
What if "god" came from somewhere else in the universe, and Let's say he came down to earth where animals already existed with a mission to genetically engineer a new species "in his image" from a species that was already here? (picture cross-breeding with early Neanderthals that were similar in DNA).. and from this he "created" what we view as the first man/humanity. What if god was on a mission to preserve or spread his species to other planets?
If you interpret the Bible in different ways, it technically can fit.
And it could explain how and why we have such a leg up on the next closest species here. What we've done in the last few thousand years is just not natural seeming.
If nothing else, it is interesting to think about.
@@MidwestFarmToysthat’s probably stupider than just believing in the Bible
@@Mycorruptedmind but not stupider than liking your own comment because you're scared of not being validated when you put other people down?
@@MidwestFarmToys I didn’t like my own comment, but I will now since you brought it up. Watch my likes go to 2😂 it looks like someone agrees with me that you’re not the brightest fella
@@MidwestFarmToys "If you interpret the Bible in different ways, it technically can fit."
Fit how, exactly?
You mean, "fit" like the Book of Mormon? "Fit" like the Vedic scriptures? "Fit" like the Qur'an? "Fit" like The Urantia Book? "Fit" like Greek mythology? "Fit" like Stargate and Egyptian mythology?
Well, sure, if you can just make everything up, then you can "fit" just about any made-up book.
I suppose you've heard of Immanuel Velikovsky?
But the Bible? Seriously? It doesn't make any sense, because reality doesn't fit the book. Tower of Babel, not real. Worldwide flood of Noah, not real. Garden of Eden, not real. Adam and Eve, not real. A god that selects a primitive goat-herding desert tribe and calls them his "chosen people" and commands them to engage in genocidal conquest of territory against the people who live in surrounding villages?
Like, seriously, man, what the hell are you talking about? The BiBULL is bull pucky, built on bull picky, based on bull pucky, filled with bull pucky, and motivates millions of people today to believe in bull pucky ideas.
If languages began 6000 yrs ago as claimed, did indigenous Australians who populated Australia approximately 30,000 years ago simply grunt a lot? I’m sure they had languages then, just as they do now.
Whether or not they exclusively used seemingly random (to us) sounds for communication, who are we (especially Kent) to say those sounds couldn’t comprise a language that made sense to them?
Correct except that it is more like between 60,000 years ago and 100,000 years ago. Apparently the methods used to find out the age of artifacts can't deal with the time frame that Australian Aborigines have been walking around this island. And of course they had language, laws and morals. They would not have survived otherwise. They also survived without the benefit of this idiots imaginary friend! And for 94,000 years before the imaginary friend even created the place the Aborigines were living.
@@josephmother2659 Agree. After all many languages sound like gibberish to me, but are fine to ones that speak it. Any number of sounds could create language. The human brain is very good at differentiating and then applying meaning
We now know neanderthals actually spoke too
It's a lie by humans not fact about Australians.
It amazes me that these people still exist in 2024.
No animals have language.
Whales have entered the chat
Humans have entered the chat.
Dogs have entered the chat.
Bats have entered the chat.
I think all animals have communication in one form or another.
The snake that spake has entered the chat 🐍 😭 lol
@@reubenmanzo2054all animals have communication. Not all animals have language. It's possible than none do besides humans.
It's likely that many do, but mostly only larger mammals.
The question hinges entirely on how one defines language. That definition has not been achieved with consensus by the scientific community and so the question as to whether animals have language remains unresolved at this point in time.
It largely depends on arbitrary and subjective qualifications unless there is a consensus across disciplines as to what actually counts.
@@SineN0mine3 Language is a means of communicating ideas with one another. If you can communicate an idea to another individual, you have language. Animal trainers understand this better than anyone. Babies, for example, will have a different cry based on their needs (allegedly, according to the mother), dogs have a different bark that other dogs will respond to accordingly.
@@SineN0mine3 Language, however defined, requires a shared vocabulary. Meerkats have been observed making a particular call warning to alert the rest of avian raptors, birds can either declare their territory or call for a mate, whales and dolphins have been recorded making certain repeated complex phrases, wolves use particular barks and howls in hunting, and (imo) the sub-sonic communications of elephants are not simple location markers but could well be communicating distress or water/grazing opportunities.
The similarity of certain key words throughout so many human languages (eg. moon, fire, water, mother, sun) should also be noted.
What set Humanity apart is that at some point, and in whatever language was being used, we came up. with the phrase "what if ..."
What if - we observe, study, and always enquire.
What if - we grift a dogma.
the moment he starts quoting his story book, he failed.
His target audience eats that up though. He knows he is lying and does it anyways to take advantage of believers. He is so easy to debunk because he doesnt care what those outside his marks think.
He hasn't even written his own version of it, but just used the old one. What a fraud.
He is not adamant, he is AdamandEveamant!
Kunt is definitely not AdamAnt,
AdamAnt was a UK 80s singer, musician & actor whos real name was Stuart Leslie Goddard 😂
@@shaneeslick
Can you bleedin Adam and Eve that ... blimey
@@shaneeslickLove the song Stand and Deliver
Shoulda known someone would do this Eventually.
@@LexusLFA554 Something Flerfs & Young Earth Creationists NEVER do in relation to evidence of their claims
Trees that live to be 2,000 years old have no need for writing or language to outlive humans. So which is superior? And if Adam and Eve were given the ability to speak and understand language @ 6,000 years ago, why did it take humans another 1,000 years to learn to write? Couldn't God have given them the ability 1,000 years earlier when he "spake". What nonsense. Using the Bible as a scientific text book is just nuts.
Trees also don't have legs to move around and get in trouble....
"I will scientifically prove... " and proceed by reading fairy tales book 🤣 ... What a bulletproof science 😂
If you think animals can't speak... What are the barking of dogs or the singing of birds? 🤦🏾♂️
Animals definitely can speak. Sure, they may not be able to convey complex ideas like we can, but just because we don't understand what they are saying doesn't mean they aren't communicating.
Animals can communicate. But that’s not the same as “speaking” a language like humans do.
@@hobojoe9717 Whales & dolphins might want a word... Dolphins, for example, give each other names. That requires language.
@@DrachenGothik666 There is absolutely no evidence of a language found outside the human taxa. Signature whistles in some dolphins vocalisations are not names, nor are the countless times debunked use of signs by Koko or Nim Chimpsky evidence that they understood a form of sign language.
To be a proper language a system of communication needs a grammar, a structure that only humans have been able to use so far.
@@Malekith227 that's a really human centric view of things no? Social animals must have some way of communication amongst themselves. That communication must have rules the other animals can follow. Who's to say that is not a "grammar" or "structure" of sorts?
Animals definitely communicate with each other. Many likely do so in more complex and interesting ways than we do. So I think drawing the distinction between "language" and "non language" is more vanity on our part than actually relevant or helpful.
"Animals don't have language."
"The serpent told Adam and Eve..."
Also “god spoke every things into existence, didn’t have to lift a finger…” “god made man with his hands”
It's funny how people worship mf who claim to be all seeing all knowing but let his arch nemesis sneak into his back yard and convince his kids to sin against him if this isn't the biggest clown i don't know what is
@@idontreallyknow1649 In ex-con Kent Hovind's defense, the bible was written by at least four different people (probably a lot more), so it contradicts itself like every other page.
The same I thought. The serpent can speak. Therefore it must be a human.
@@michaellang9154 Kent Hovind is the serpent, confirmed.
Anytime anyone says they are going to prove anything then begins with “The Bible says..” they instantly lose all credibility.
How so?
the bible is the word of god, so yes, it is the truth.
@@trials-2009 No the bible is what the church decided to ACCEPT as the word of God , they redacted alto of it.
Also most of the bible isn't even word of God it's stories of man talking about God, It's the Word of God as interpreted by many corrupt man throughout history.
Any true baliver in God will know that Bible is an iterpretation at best and heresy at worst. After all if Bible was the objective truth than how come it wasn't writen earlier? why do other cultures have texts teling of the Creation and the Flood long before the first Bible? All of them are mere interpretations writen by man with an agenda of their own and translated and edited uncoutable nuber of times.
@@trials-2009And what proof is there that any claims stated in the Bible are true, including that it is the word of a claimed god? Not even being sarcastic, there is nothing to say the ones who wrote the Bible are telling the truth in their claims, at least no greater then any other religion. No demonstration of capability or evidence.
It can’t even keep its own story straight, there’s dozen of times the Bible counteracts itself.
@@trials-2009 No, it ain't, unless god is a fan of gaslighting and lying to his people.
Language is even older than 5000 years. We know thru the discovery of Gobekli Tepi that written language is at least 13, 500 years old.
"The Goblecky Tepe" -someone on a podcast
I was under the impression that nothing there had been determined likely to be writing.
Of course, as old as it is, would any system of writing they might have had even be recognisable as such to us?
They would be as ancient to the Ancients as the Ancients are to us.
ooh... nice one :-)
@@cooltaylor1015 If the writing system has enough material, we can mathematically determine that there is a writing system even if we don't know the language or the methods in detail.
The main kinds are: 1. Alphabetic, 2. Syllabaries, 3 Pictogram systems. In all three cases, repeated symbols will give the game away.
There are certainly pictograms there. That implies at least artwork if not some basic form of writing.
I like how he tries to prove that the Earth is young by using our species’ age. Dude really took the Book of Genesis too literally lol
Even our species age disproves 6K years.
No seriously he simply can not and will not explain no IN BETWEEN fossils.
"Replenish the Earth"? Doesn't that infer that there were people here before? You cannot replenish something that wasn't previously there.
No. Languages change over time. Back when the King James Version (the version Hovind quotes) was written, replenish just meant “to fill.” Not, “to re-fill.”
@@7Patriot yes it became that in the 17th century.
(From Etymonline site:)
"mid-14c., replenishen, "provide" with food or drink, also riches, beauty, etc., from Old French repleniss-, extended present-participle stem of replenir "to fill up," from re-, here perhaps an intensive prefix based on the notion of "fill repeatedly," thus "fill completely" (see re-), + -plenir, from Latin plenus "full" (from PIE root *pele- (1) "to fill").
Specifically as "to fill up again, restore to a former amount or condition" by 1610s. Related: Replenished; replenishing; replenishment."
You were right, but it happens to coincide when the KJV was written in 1611.
@@spamsquirrel Even if thats true and the KJV writes replenished to say, "to fill up again, restore to a former amount or condition" I still wouldn't concede that the original Hebrew texts meant for it to be that way. As far as I've seen every reliable Bible translation, including NKJV, says "fill the earth." (and just for any uninformed people who are confused and wondering; this is about the verse Genesis 1:28)
I give most people who can't pronounce _Descartes_ a pass. But a man who calls himself a doctor...
Anyone who takes that man seriously is hopeless.
Adam and eve couldn't get married, wouldn't they need a priest or witnesses? 😂😂
Why would the only two people in existence have the need to get married anyway? What's the point. I wonder if they took a vow to remain faithful to each other?
@andystokes8702
Because according to Christianity, it is a sin to have sex out of wedlock; and they had plenty of that.
@kiwibob8967 but they would predate Christianity and everything. They could do whatever they wanted. People later on would then have to twist the narrative to suit their own beliefs, not those of "God"
@@pricey0986ify"People later on would then have to twist the narrative to suit their own beliefs . . ."? Oh yeah, I see what you mean!
Bible translations:
Snake = being horney
Forbidden fruit = sex
And God observed Adam and Eve get it on and said porn is good.
I struggle to understand how "the amount of time that humans have been on Earth" or "how old civilization is", even _remotely_ tells us the actual _age_ of the Earth.
This makes as much sense as saying "This shop can't be 50 years old, because Diet Cola wasn't invented until the 1980s".
Exactly, and to be frank, Dan messed up by not calling that out more.
Don't laugh - a standard young earth creationist argument that was used in the 1970s (I remember it myself, being a former young earth creationist, and I'm 62 years old now) was that the earth couldn't be more than 10,000 years old because Niagra Falls couldn't have existed that long. I'm not kidding.
@@steveg1961 Ironically, however, Niagara Falls isn't _that_ much older. It's only about 12,000 years old. On a geological scale, it's practically a newborn. Of course the rocks found there are much older. About 425-440 _million_ years old. But the actual falls itself is only about 12,000 years old.
@@scmtuk3662 That's why their argument was always so silly to begin with. It's like cutting a tree down counting the rings, and saying that the rock sitting next to the tree stump can't be more than 27 years old because that's how old the tree was.
Young earth creationists using that argument are literally proving that they have zero comprehension of geology - and also are inordinately incompetent with basic logic.
If humans didn't observe it and didn't talk about it, it obviously didn't exist.
Wasn't there a Greek mind experiment about this? Would a tree falling in the forest make a noise if nobody is there to observe it? I don't remember if the Greeks reached the correct answer but this "doctor" or rather quack didn't.
The oldest written language has been traced to a few thousands years ago. And we all know that without written language, planets can't exist, right? Let alone without language at all... what language would the sun and moon speak if there wasn't language back then? Solid reasoning, dude...
The first flying insects be like "we are superior, above all other animals, for no other animal has the ability of powered flight."
Yeah, nobody has ever built a dam or an air-conditioned city or made a tool until we came along.
Insects don't have politics. Birds are smart enough to HAVE politics but only use it for self-preservation. Object lesson: don't piss a corvid off, their kids will also know you are not nice to deal with.
{edit} I directly quote a personal acquaintance (yes I am that fucking old)
A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
-Robert A. Heinlein
Clearly the Earth was made for the flying bugs.
we're just sacks of snacks for mosquitos. they are predator, we are prey. Worldwide it is the most feared animal.
THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A SENTIENT INSECT. THE ARACHNIDS ARE NOT CONSIDERED INSECTS. THEY WERE THE FIRST TO FAIL THE SENTIENCE TEST, THE REPTILES WERE THE PREVIUS, AND HUMANS WILL BE THE LAST...
If Matt Powell has a giant inflatable banana in his backyard which he calls Dr. Peel, what does Kent have? And where?
He has a whole dinosaur park
... and a reserved jail cell.
I was just looking up the origin of the slang fruit loop and uh oh! I think I know where that banana is ;)
Kent lives in an abandoned gravel pit. He has no liability insurance.
He has mannequins of Adam and Eve in his ark, both sporting bellybuttons.
Dan, please tell Ken Hovind that "God" was "created" in human brains (=imagination).
I will prove the earth is young. “Do plants write down things ?”
Is this guy really a qualified doctor or is he like Dr Dre ?
No, he isn't, he bought a diploma from one of the diploma mills (AKA scammers)
Guy : "I can scientifically prove something"
Also Guy : "Let's use the Bible".
Imagine talking to him and saying "I can prove it to you religiously" and then proceeding to use math and physics.
He would be like
👁👄👁
That Crow was waaaay more intelligent than kint! 😂 All Corvidae families are fascinating to learn about.
So parrots are also human, since some of them are able to speak and understand human languages and even express their needs in it?
Indeed. My parrot thinks he's human, and he does use words to ask for things. He also communicated very clearly using body language. Just because we don't know an animal's natural way of communicating doesn't mean it doesn't have one.
I've been listening to Kent Hovind claiming that the Earth is only 6,000 years old for at least 7,000 years. Humanity is certainly NOT billions of years old.
Im gonna start a new conspiracy that claims the earth is 5 years old and speaks French
Excellente idée, très bien.
Unless you invent a religion to go with it, I don't see how this endeavour would lead you to any personal gain.
@@SineN0mine3 He(?) didn't say he wanted personal gain, only to start a conspiracy. I assume they meant conspiracy theory.
See: Last Thursdayism.
Ah, yes. We MUST take an ABSOLUTELY literal reading of the Bible, especially Genesis.
And then that all goes out the window when it comes to the talking snake. Saying it's the devil is anything but a literal plane reading of the text. It is never said nor implied at any point that it's anything but a literal talking snake.
YECs: "We must take an absolutely literal reading of Genesis!"
Genesis: **shows God creating everything twice over, because it literally starts with two different, contradictory creation myths**
Grown people believing in a fairytale and magic in 2024.
So ridiculous.
Im pretty sure Kent doesnt believe in them either. However, the ignorant and the indoctrinated that do, make him LOTS of money.
Easier to believe their God buried the dinosaur bones to test their faith.
hey, i'm still waiting for my letter from hogwarts. and of course the hobbit threw the ring in the fire so the age of man can rule.
I have a question for all the non-religious people: Why do you obey all the religious laws if you don't believe in God? Marriage is a religious commitment to save your soul from hell when you have sex, nothing more. And many more that I won't list here.
@@Loan--Wolfbecause it’s ingrained into society, marriage is nothing more than a business partnership these days. I’d say 90% of people who get married don’t do it because they wanna have sex and not go to hell, it’s because they love that person and want to start a family, and share assets. You’d know that if women paid any attention to you
Doesn’t He have a Criminal History? 🤢🤮
He does, he's served time for at least 2 counts of fraud and and a count of criminal violence committed on his wife.
Tax evasion.. using the phrase; "you are not allowed to steel from God." Addressed to tax collectors, while pocketing the same money for himself.
I bet those 37 countries are glad you found your way back to the good ol'US of A.
They probably all deported him.
I read a book recently by Seth Andrews entitled 'Christianity made me talk like an idiot'. He may be onto something.
Ant language is in their chemical trails, bee’s language is in their “dance”
Using the bible for scientific evidence is beyond absurd.
Never engage with a fundamentalist. There’s no talking to these people.
He's not even that. He's a convicted felon conning people out of money while using his "ministry" to avoid paying taxes.
I disagree. If there is an audience, it is paramount to 1: be the dissenting voice to show the variety of viewpoints and 2: demonstrate that these guys are wrong and full of fallacy
@@IcyBreath OK, but they’ll never admit (to you or themselves) that their argument/worldview is flawed. It takes an enormous climbdown of ego and refutation of their conditioning/hundreds (if not thousands) of instances of confirmation bias for them to see the truth. In 99.9% of cases, that’s just not going to happen by discussing it with someone they’ve never met on social media.
Doesn't work. Believers do not admit when they are wrong. @IcyBreath
Be careful with that attitude. Arrogance is innate with all humans and it's usually the people that complain the most or claim they are immune from such flawed thinking that are the worst offenders.
He also states there is no evidence of animals speaking other than humans, then refers to the bible and highlights a serpent spoke 🤦
So if language was invented in the middle east 6,000 years ago, I wonder how Australian Aboriginals were conversing 60,000 years ago in isolation in Australia?
"I can easily prove scientificlly...", "Bible says..."
So his imaginary friend (he calls it 'God') can scientificly prove anything. Awesome. Let him summon his imaginary friend to have a talk.
Language isn‘t available in the animal kingdom.
Speaking snake: totally ok 😂
It's like they don't comprehend the authors of the Bible stole from older mythological deities and morphed them into actually existing
The whole snake analogy is from the King Mino tragedy