Atheist Defends Professor From An Atheist Whack
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 січ 2023
- Does Kent Hovind's audio get worse? I think so... but here he is ready to whack @ProfessorDaveExplains - and so I do that thing you do when you react to someone reacting to someone reacting to someone...
and yes... 'why do we give KH so much air time'?
whilst he thinks that there's no such thing as bad publicity, if you can point out just how silly his arguments are, and someone who may have originally thought he made good points realises it, you've done something good!
The Original Video is here - • Video
More Hovind 'whacks' - • Atheist Defends Biolog...
Much Hovind Hilarity - • Hovind Hilarity
** T-Shirts Are Here - my-store-cf9db1.creator-sprin... **
Patreon - / theskeptick
Facebook - / theskeptick
Instagram - / theskeptick
Twitter - / the_skeptick
TikTok - tiktok.com/theskeptick
Everything in this video is just an opinion, and should be treated as such - though it is important to ask questions. Any humour or sarcasm is aimed towards the words and actions of the individuals, and not intended to be a personal attack on any individual themselves, under the act of free speech
Title - Atheist Defends Professor From An Atheist Whack
Tags - atheism,atheists,atheist vs theist,creationist vs atheist,kent hovind,professor dave,professor dave explains,is there a god,is creationism true,how did the earth form,does science prove god,whack an atheist,religion,how to prove god,theist vs atheist,is atheism true,how to disprove atheism,how to prove atheists wrong,is atheism wrong,are atheists wrong,is atheism stupid,are atheists stupid,arguments against atheism
Arguing with Kent really is like playing chess with a pigeon.
The only difference is the pigeon would win against Kent
That's an insult to all pigeons out there. Kent is as dumb as a poorly computer generated parrot that is programmed to say random words that have been inputted, as even real parrots are smarter than kent.
Even pigeons refuse to play him. He's that demented.
Yeah his words are like the pigeons pieces he throws them randomly about and walks away thinking he won
A pigeon that's taken too many hits against too many windows...
"I spoke to Dr. Tour today and asked him to be on, he didn't want to"
that should _really_ tell you something Kent.
I wonder how that conversation went. I mean, Hovind says Dr. Tour said he "didn't want to." I tend to think there were two possible ways it actually went down. "[Expletive] no" or "[Expletive] off."
I just can't imagine anyone with an accredited degree giving a polite negative response for some reason...
@@richardhanck972 🤣💀
I noticed that too. Even Dr Tour knows better
I just love that argument of "explain pens and paper without a designer! You can't, therefore people had a designer." Because the argument can only go one of two ways from there, 1) people are inanimate tools that are made to be used then thrown away once the usefulness is gone. Or 2) pens and paper are alive.
and anyone can explain how a pen works without mention someone created it, there is a plastic tube with ink, and thanks to gravity and air pressure the ink falls down the tube when the lower end makes contact with a surface
@@devforfun5618 Original pen , stick , with most likely burned tip , when charcoal is still used to make drawings and black ink .
Every time I use my pen on my paper they both scream in agony
You forgot my other way,
Your question is ludicrous and has nothing to do with justifying a god through lies and child abuse.
Professor Dave is a legend. He's exposing pseudoscience, and he's savage af while doing it.
So why doesn't he publish? Oh wait, Dr. Tour has, hasn't he?
@@paulthompson9668 bwahaha. Dave doesn’t need to write his own papers on the subject to cite experts who wrote papers who completely destroy Tour’s nonsense. And he talks to those scientists, who directly say that Tour is wrong.
Where are Tour’s papers on abiogenesis and early life topics?
Haha.
@@SpaceLordof75 You're going to hell!
@@paulthompson9668 the real expert in genetics is Francis Collins and he states the evidence for Evolution is overwhelming
@@paulthompson9668 Try PZ Meyers then, if you only respect published scientists.
And Tours still got heaps wrong and in his creation orientied content is absurdly NON scientific, so GFY with your appeal to authority. FACTS beat titles.
Kent doesn't know what an ad hominem is, while commiting ad hominem himself.
I’ve heard people misuse the word enough times that I don’t even remember what it actually is..
@@StarlightEdith An ad hominem is any form of insult "directed at the person". An Ad hominem FALLACY is when you use an insult IN STEAD OF an argument to "win" a debate.
Ad Homs are not automatically fallacious, if they do not try to replace an argument.
Isn't it great how Kent gets exposed and humiliated by the very recording of Dave he's playing several times without noticing it happening even once? It's like putting a taser to your own balls to show how dumb the warning sign on the electric fence is.
He knows sweet F A .
@@EdwardHowton You mean like what Steven Anderson did?
"Where did the energy come from?" (looks up at giant hot gas ball in the sky) God only knows.
The problem is as god relies on its earthly "ground personnel" to even show the pretense of existence, it is limited to the knowledge these mushy brained reality deniers are themselves able to scrape together, which going by the likes of Kent Hovind is basically zero facts he can rely on. Thus god knows nothing, cause the staunchest defenders FEAR knowledge as knowledge makes their god go away and hide in some tiny gap...
goD DoNe DId it.
And where did the Sun come from?
@@eduardopena5893 same place the earth came from. That's a stupid question.
to be fair, the ancient aegyptian thought the sun was a god, they probably got it closer when you think about it
4:18 Kent, are you a doctor in anything? Getting a degree in a diploma mill online doesn't make you a doctor. Professor Dave actually has degrees in a properly credited university.
yes he's got a BS in Lunacy .
@@gordonlynn8300 more like BS in BS.
@@gordonlynn8300 pretty sure it's an honorary doctorate 😛
@shawncook160 Well if I got schooled as much as Kent does, I would probably also want to deminish the importance of it
Kent's got a phd in BS.
It’s rich that Kent disputes Dave professor title but he goes around calling himself a doctor.
to be fair, Dave isn't a professor and Kent isn't a doctor
@@nimbuto yeah, just is hypocritical from Kent.
@@nimbuto Kent has several doctorates. He is a doctor.
@@eduardopena5893 No, he isn't a doctor.
Wikipedia "In 1988 and 1991 respectively, Hovind received a master's degree and doctorate in Christian Education through correspondence from (also unaccredited) Patriot University in Colorado Springs, Colorado. Patriot University is a diploma mill."
Kent is a tax evader, a conman, a fraud, a wife beater, a hate preacher, a mad man, a science denier. Even if you add all those "qualities", he is still not a doctor.
@@nimbuto So you admitted he earned a doctorate. He has others as well. Thank you for proving my point. And I wouldn't hang your hat on a Wikipedia page, that isn't even accepted as a credible source on a high school paper.
For clarity (idk if you say this because Kent is so infuriating that I can't continue without getting this out there), There is a difference between insults and AD hominim. Ad homs are like "you're wrong because you're dumb" whereas insults are "you're dumb and you're wrong." So long as the insult isn't given as the reason they're wrong, it isn't Ad hom
Also, criticizing the audience isn't ad hom either.
Yeah, Kent has never understood what ad hominem means. It's _almost_ as if he's an uneducated, ignorant twat... almost.
Like I always explain:
observation: You're an idiot because you're wrong.
ad hominem: You're wrong because you're an idiot.
In short, it's not an ad hominem if it's true.
Yo seem to have taken a rich 'bitch
Funny how Kent didn’t react to the actual debunking video but only reacted to the response to James tours response video 😂
More power to you both. I can’t listen to Kent for more than 20 minutes before I lose my mind
More than 20seconds*
He’s almost as bad as that jesse guy who thinks women don’t feel love
Im pretty dumb I like watching bigger idiots than me Saying stupider things that I could ever hope to dream up Not only do I get to say " At least i'm not that damn stupid" But i'm stupid enough to find their stupidity funny 😅
I usually watch your videos all the way through, but I can't today because Hovind is maddening to the point I want to smash my phone and I can't afford to replace it.
So, I'm just going to stop and wait for your next video. Enjoy your week! Cheers.
Thankfully Kent isn’t very often!
@@TheSkepTick At least Kent is going to heaven
Fair
@@denverarnold6210 Are you born again?
@@paulthompson9668 no, and I meant fair not being willing to watch Kent again. He can be VERY aggrevating.
OmG just saw the thumbnail, haven't even watched it...but everyone's favorite inmate being ignorant enough to whack Prof Dave? The cringe levels have to be off the charts in this one. I gotta get something strong to drink before watching.
Kent pointing out that Dave doesn't have a Ph. D. Lol!
It's worse than that; he's saying Dave can't call himself "professor" because he doesn't have a PhD.
Professor is a title you'd use with a bachelor's degree (or master's, but mostly because calling yourself 'master' is out of fashion). Or if you were hired to teach at a school, since that's the job title. You only call yourself a doctor if you have a PhD. You'd think Kent would be aware of this, since he bought a fake diploma just so he could pretend like he's a doctor himself, but I guess he's too illiterate to have read the fine print on the pamphlet that came with it to know that much.
He should really avoid the whole "Doctor" thing considering an 8th grader can write a better paper than his "thesis".
@@jenna2431 he won't. the dude got to appear smart and legit to the crowd or they won't pay attention to him.
jup. while kent acts like he has one while its not even valid. because the place he got it from isnt allowed to give them. so its invalid
@@EdwardHowton _"Professor is a title you'd use with a bachelor's degree... Or if you were hired to teach at a school"_ - Not in the UK education system, where professorships are rare and only awarded to those who have made a significant contribution to their field. A person can only legitimately be a "professor" in the UK if the title has been conferred on them by a university or college of higher education, but never a school. Every other university lecturer or schoolteacher, no matter how long-serving or respected, is a "lecturer", a "teacher" or various grades along the same lines (e.g. "senior lecturer", "head teacher").
I tried to make it through this one, but I can't. Kent won't respond to the content where Dave tears Tour's arguments apart, but a video denouncing Tour as an unscientific knob.
It's not about the science, it's about Kent getting to rip apart the pithy statements that make Professor Dave a creator I simply cannot watch. I am glad to see more people on the side of science refusing debates because that's not what changes science. Debates are a win win for the creationist, but someone debating for the side of science loses if even one of their points is something they're anything less than a certified expert in, and they can communicate flawlessly.
Love your stuff SkepTick, always a pleasure to hear from you!
You changed your username! Good to see you!
Glad to see I'm not the only one that responds that way to Professor Dave.
He generally knows what he's talking about, and approaches it in a well researched manner, but I can't stand his delivery, and the cute little digs he makes all the time.
@Martin McKee yeah, i have tried numerous times to watch him, and I just can't. Smart person though that's for sure and even though I have a disdain for debates on scientific principles, where one or more debater is uneducated in the extreme, his debate with Hovind was still pretty damn funny!
lol Even James Tour doesn't want anything to do with Kent! 😂
My partners mom has learned of Lisa and works with kids who are from abusive homes- many of which are radically religious. She's started using Lisa in her consoling sessions with them, telling them of this clearly fictional being who will always accept them and care of them (in her own way). Sort of like helping them deal with the conflicting mess of emotions that religion and abuse cause (like kids thinking that god is punishing them). She's using Lisa as a therapy aid and to help kids feel valid and worthy of love.
I hope she approves. More Hen.
Is that a comment super chat? I didn’t know you could do that
@@aaronbarreguin.4211 click on the “…” and click $ Thanks
@@Xanomenon no thank you
"A bunch of chemicals in a warm little pond or something" ... If ever there was a statement that completely summed up 'Dr' Kents scientific knowledge, it's this... Aron Ra once said of him "He is so dishonest, he can tell more lies in one sentence than there are words in that sentence."
"Little pond...or something". Strawiest strawman ever made of straw...to quote Prof Dave himself.
Lmao he’s trying to whack Dave after dodging all of his questions in their debate
He didn't want Dave to bring up anything in the buybull because he knows he can't defend it's claims with his "knowledge of science" he always claims to use. He's a clown and a liar that just insults people who actually make a difference or use logic and evidence.
@@_Omega_Weapon honestly, if I was given the chance I'd pin him to the wall on it.
"Look, either the Bible is evidence for your claim, which means it's on the table to pick apart, or it's not, and you can't reference it either. Pick one."
@@denverarnold6210 I would to. I wouldn't bother discussing evolution with him at all. I'd first insist he thourougly define and prove his god in a coherent and unambiguous way.
I liked the bit where Kent constantly tells people to "debate me bro" and then plays the clip of Dave saying "dishonest creationists always repeatedly ask for debates like idiots but science is done in the primary literature" and Kent says NOTHING hoping his idiot audience doesn't notice.
People say Kent has charisma a lot. I don't understand why.
@@_Omega_Weapon just like every other religious bullshit, it all starts with the Bible. Or better yet, what they THINK is in the Bible. Proving the claims in that is the START of the debate, yet Christians treat it as a foregone conclusion.
Loving when people don't understand the difference between insult and ad hominem...
Insult: "X claim is wrong. You're a fucking idiot."
Ad homonym: "X claim is wrong BECAUSE you're a fucking idiot."
Exactly. Kent is an idiot. That's not an ad hominem, because that's not a reason to not listen to him. It's an insult. However, being an idiot, he constantly presents poor arguments, debunked "facts", and lies transparently. We, therefore, have substantial evidence that what he says cannot be trusted and, as such, should not listen to him. That's not an ad hominem either. It's a logical deduction.
If I said he shouldn't be listened to because he has morally repugnant taste in fashion, that would be an ad hominem. But I wouldn't say that, not because his fashion sense is top notch, but because it would be a fallacious argument that does not benefit anyone.
Insults ARE Ad Hominems ("directed towards the person"), the difference is between any Ad Hom and an Ad Hom FALLACY, where you use the insult as distraction from an argument or in place of a rebuttal of the argument, to silence your interlocutor.
The only thing Kent understands is
...actually I'm coming up blank. I was going to make a joke but honestly there's no punchline possible, just a line of people wanting to punch Kent despite Kent's army of violent, armed druggie buddies. The piece of trash makes any human being's skin crawl.
@@Ugly_German_Truths technically what you said it's correct, but the reason they came up with a term for it is they don't have the same purpose, Ad Hominems are attempts to dismantle a subject by deflecting the scope on the guy who said it instead of pointing out a mistake; insults don't have the goal to take an argument down, their goal is to insult
BTW, does a teacher have to have a Ph D. to be a professor? I didn't think so. Maybe I'm wrong.
Certainly not but they tend to be classified as a Sessional Instructors by the post-secondary institution and colloquially referred to as professors. Depending upon the post-secondary institution the instructor will have a relevant Bachelor degree plus years of practical experience or a Masters degree. I had a Professor for digital design courses who had a Masters degree and had written a number of books in the subject field and created a new way to design digital systems that revolutionized the field
In my area (American south west), any college instructor is generally called a professor, unless they are specifically a teaching assistant (TA). Often graduate TAs are called professors as well.
There are different official classifications that a school may use - instructor, associate professor, full professor, etc. - but some schools will have no issue hiring someone with a masters as a full professor if they are exceptional.
So no. Generally one does not need a Ph.D. to be called a professor, at least in the USA where Kent and Dave both are.
If I'm remembering correctly (and this is subject to change based on local politics and policies), to teach grade/elementary school a bachelor's degree is enough, and a master's degree is good for up to college. Or if you open up a pretend-school in your cult building's basement and brainwash kids and call it homeschooling, you can call yourself Dr. Dino, but that's exactly the opposite of legitimate.
@@EdwardHowton The majority of the public school teachers that I know have at least two degrees, a BA or BSc and then a BEd - I'm actually hard pressed to recall a teacher who only has a BEd. I guess that happens when you have a well funded public education system province wide.
@@vestafreyja Eh, I'm hardly authoritative; I'm going off of something I vaguely remember one of my high school teachers explain once about... 25 years ago.
It's not something that's ever really been relevant at any point otherwise, and that includes when I went into university to become a teacher.
Might be remembering wrong, might be incorrect information, might be a Quebec thing, or any combination. It's a really dumb thing for dumb Kent to dumbshow no matter how one looks at it. I mean, seriously, who _cares?_ Dave's a teacher, Kent's a fraud, one of them deserves to be called a professor and it isn't the barely-literate child abuser with delusions of delusional grandeur and a fondness for hitting children's toys with a wooden mallet. It's such a stupid and petty thing for Kent to bring up, but he's _beyond_ insane. "I've got angels protecting me", sheesh. Makes you wish he could have a brief meeting with a fast car.
There's no way James Tour would appear on any show with Kent Hovind
Professor Dave is beyond awesome. He has tons of great informative videos.
I love his education videos, I've started the chemistry ones. They're very clear, and build a foundation. Very well made
True. I wish he did computer science, though.
The day Hovind actually builds an argument beyond _"No, that's dumb."_ is the day I'll eat my hat.
Kinda funny how he's always just ridiculing atheism and evolution and the likes, but never once have I seen him actually putting in honest effort for making a case for his G-dog 😂
I wouldn’t say he ridicules atheism or evolution. I mean, he tries, but instead he shows how belief (and money) can make you dishonest and reluctant to learning. Thus, he ridicules himself more than anything
Even if all the science in the world were false, it still wouldn’t prove his imaginary friend was real.
@@kellydalstok8900 True, but it would make for a much more interesting conversation if he actually made a proper effort to build an argument.
His only arguments I’ve heard from him are “dogs can’t birth rabbits” and random quotes from the bible
I think you might have worn out a lot of hats before it happens.
Where is evidence for supernatural magic?
it's hiding in a crystal ball.
muh bible
Cuz I said so
Three words. Bible.
Threaten him with heaven, Nah. Prison is where you get to go Kent
Professor Dave only goes after those who are stupid to the point of being silly.. The ones who have it coming, but he completely degrades them.
The fact that Kent tried(and failed) to rescue an opponent of Dave's shows you that his ignorance is unprecedented and in a league of its own
His arrogance is ten times his ignorance.
@@ericvulgate that’s the Dunning-Kruger effect
James Tour is embarrassed to be associated with Kent 😂😂😂 That's so sad...
Leaves be upon you all
More hen.
I'd want to see Professor Dave debate Kent again, but make the stipulation that he needs to use sources from this century to do it
That effectively guarantees no debate (or, more likely, one where he simply breaks the rule...).
@@martinmckee5333 you’re right (though I think I remember Dave even said he wouldn’t debate Kent again anyways) but I’m just tired of creationists coming up with a source that says evolution is fake! And it’s from 1920. They act like no other science has been done for 100 years
@@phoenixkingtheo Hey, that's quite modern. Jordan Peterson has no issues using "psychological studies" from 300 years ago to support his claims.
Not to mention that 300 years ago modern science was still more or less at its starting point and that many psychological studies up to today still have issues producing good and repeatable/replicabale results, although it seems to have gotten much better in the last ~20 years.
@@johnscaramis2515 good thing evolution doesn’t have anything to do with phycology then
@@phoenixkingtheo it’s like flat earthers using maps from the 1600s to prove their point
I love how no one except matt ever goes on Kents show
People should stop debating Kent as he's a dishonest when debating(actually dishonest most of the time as his stint in jail bares out).It always devolves into you think you come from a rock and/or you think your related to a strawberry or a pine tree,etc,and that's not science! Why does a man with several fake PHD'S and no real ones get to decide what is and isn't science.F**K Kent! lol
Matt and Kent probably have a “special” relationship.
@@KarnakActual no, we know Kent is only into beating women
@@fart63 Kent is into a lot of things. Beating women is only one of his pastimes.
Watching Kent "whack an atheist" feels very reminiscent of those old cartoons where one animal would try to catch another animal, and hilariously hurt himself in the attempt.
I keep expecting him to run off a cliff, look down and realize he's about to fall, hold up a sign that says "yikes" and then plummet to the ground.
Kent is the christian coyote trying to destroy the atheist roadrunner.
@@kellydalstok8900 Don't demean Wile E. Coyote by comparing Kent to him 😁
Insults are not, by themselves, ad hominems.
I wonder if kent has any idea how long it took for the knowledge to build a pen took to evolve. No one person just woke up one day and made the first pen in history.
He thinks god made everything one day in his cooking pot because he was bored
Wait, does Kent think the professor title is a degree qualification? 😂
I think you don't know what you're talking about. Remember, that's a negative claim which doesn't incur a burden of proof
@@FrankWinchester
Why are you so angry and insecure? Have you suffered trauma? Did you unexpectedly fail your degree rather than pass it? Have you recently deconverted?
@@nealjroberts4050 Repeat after me slowly: "You can prove a negative". Just do it, kid
@@FrankWinchester
Why are you so angry and insecure? Have you suffered trauma? Did you unexpectedly fail your degree rather than pass it? Have you recently deconverted?
@@nealjroberts4050 Just repeat after me: "Hi, I'm Neal J Roberts. I was corrected about something online, and I swear I will die before I admit I was wrong"
Love your videos! Thanks for taking on this con! You’re absolutely my favorite floating circle!
It's funny that Dave created challenges for kent and he's all but forgotten them!
You know, it's funny that Kent's admitting that they were able to create that stuff in the lab cuz just a couple years ago creationists were saying it was impossible and would never happen. Oops!
Their whole worldview is revisionist to cover the evolution of their beliefs .
As a conartist you constantly have to adapt the nonsense you're telling the people. A flearth claim based on the bible will not build you a big followership, just like e.g. claiming that lightning bolts are made by god.
Some people would buy that for sure, but if the words are too far off the truth you will run into problems.
So I have to disagree with everyone who claims Kent is an idiot. He is quite clever. Misguided by the prospects of power and money, but not an idiot.
Sir Sic sent me. Your fill-in video was fantastic, and I wanted to see more. Subscribed.
Appreciate it! Thank you! Welcome…
I watched Dave's entire series on James Tour, and I thought it was entertaining, watching a guy respond to a response. Your video adds two more layers to that, and it's just amazing lol. It's like the whole "In Defense of Dark Souls 2" mess, with one guy responding to a criticism of the game, then someone else making a 9-part series responding to that response video, and finally ANOTHER guy responding to just one detail of that entire 9-part series that he is passionate about lol
Dave is so unapologetic about calling these people morons 🤣
Rightfully.
A bit unfair to morons but they are dumber than the rocks.
Is that why he turned off his comments on the video he posted on the debate between he and Kent? He was getting wrecked and couldn't handle it.
@@eduardopena5893
moron
@@eduardopena5893
"He was getting wrecked and couldn't handle it."
Translation to normal:
He got too frustrated with the overwhelming power of *stupidity in numbers.*
Old Man Kent is feeling particularly spicy today...probably had his yacht appraised and it wasn't good news
He should have spent 5 minutes on Skillshare on how to use a lapel mic instead of this annoying waving around his mic...
Got his tax bill??
This was sooooo meta....your reaction to Kents reaction to Daves reaction to what's his name reaction to something Dave did.....
Simplified, creationists believe that a supernatural being from outside the universe with no arms or lungs somehow piled up dust, breathed on it, and it became the first ever human being. Even the most ridiculous strawman nonsense version of abiogenesis is still a more rational hypothesis than creationism.
At 15:24, I just love how Kent, just after repeating that professor Dave assume things about James audience, stays completely silent after Dave shows comments from said audience, proving his point.
Kent trains his simps to bark on command. When he stays silent, they're taught to not pay any attention until Master Hovind(tm)(r)(c) does his sleazy chuckle signal and they know it's time to laugh and clap.
I wish I was joking. Preachers and their useful idiots are bad theater.
Kent: Life cannot create itself.
Kent: God created itself.
Kent: life can't come from non life
Kent: water, carbon.
The ignorance of that statement is mid blowing .
So apparently I have to squish your substicles(???)
Anyhoodles, excellent video as always
Yum yum
Sloths Rock ✨
I've studied the subject of abiogenesis. I see no problem with one of the trillions of pre-life complex organic molecules stumbling onto replication. After that it was all evolution.
Even if abiogenesis turns out to be untrue that doesn’t automatically make creation true. It still needs to be proven.
If God created everything, then we’d be related to strawberries as we’d have the same creator.
You are dead on accurate about Hovind. Just says your wrong and never backs up anything. No one wants to debate him. He does and says the same old stuff every time. It’s not worth even talking to him. Even his new content is old.
Thanks for the laughs as usual.😂
Subbed - came here from Sir Sic, so you now owe him a bottle of Whisky xD oh Kent Hovind is a knowlessman of the highest order.
Angels are protecting him? 17:35 Really? Will angels be keeping him out of jail?
I wonder if these are the same angels who Paula white invoked to help trump win the last election election. Just bizarre 🤪
The angels had better protect themselves against Kent’s fists.
I find it ironic that "Dr." Kent Hovind is questioning Professor Daves credentials . Anyone else?
Nope. Kent has several doctorates whereas Dave is not an actual professor.
@@eduardopena5893 he bought them from a diploma mill.
@@eduardopena5893 If Kent is an actual PhD, then I'm a pilot, wanna fly in my plane?
@@philstephes I don't fly in any plane. Congratulations on being a pilot.
@@kellydalstok8900 Citation needed: Note, Wikipedia is not a credible source, a high school teacher wouldn't accept it as citation in a term paper.
Hey Skeptick, love your content, but I’m not sure that subscriber count and other youtube stats are really relevant to whether someone is right or wrong. Hovind is a tool regardless of whether he has 10,000 subs or 10,000,000, and Prof Dave is awesome likewise.
No. I agree. I just think it’s interesting…
Lol here from The Sir Sic channel. You got my sub from the video you did for him. Thank you!
You have a fan here in small town Montana. Love the humor and the content
I've always wanted to be confronted with the watchmaker argument I believe I have an amazing answer for it which is
Explain to me the reproduction of watches. Exactly how does one watch have to touch another watch to get the first watch pregnant and then how long is the gestation period of a watch before it gives birth to a smaller watch that grows into a full grown watch over time.
The obvious answer is " No, that's not how that works"
And that's probably because watches don't reproduce like living things do because watches are not alive meaning your argument has no place in a conversation about the origin of living things
Once again, Kent owned... hiself.
I've already been subbed for a long time but Sir Sic says we should come over and fondle your Substicles. 🤣
Kent just seems so angry to have someone disagree with his points almost to the point of a narcissistic rage .... Actually that explains a lot when I think about
Kent is a real con- man 😢😢
He gives me "used car salesman" vibes with his style of talking.
@@markozagar and his tourist button ups
Kent thinks, 'I'm funny', and he's even wrong about that.
Did Kent Hovind who routinely lies about having a degree and being a teacher and calls himself "Dr Dino" really just insult Dave about not having a degree?
Personally, I'm more inclined to listen to the person that is NOT a convicted felon.
Keep up the good work Skeptick...hopefully your channel gets huge as it deserves a wider audience. Hovind apparently doesn't understand the difference between a doctorate and professorship. The former requires a PhD, but you can be a professor without it at least in North America.
I appreciate that JW!
@@TheSkepTick My pleasure! :)
Frankly, I don't think there's a problem with Kent using Ad Hominem. Thing is, it's _all he has._ Every time he uses it, he's just reminding everyone that it's his one and only card to play, because he _doesn't have the required education to do anything else._
So just let him jeer. He's only playing himself.
Q- What's the difference between Kent Hovind and a computer?
A- With a computer you only need to punch the information in once...
I know which kind of idiot I'd rather deal with, and it's not Kent!
Please accept my most sincere apology, SkepTick, for not being able to watch this whole video. It has become impossible for me to hear Ken Ham's voice without having my anxiety triggered. As well, Dave does get a little hostility in his voice when he respondes to creationists, which is understandable from him when someone denies science, but that wears on my anxiety as well.
But I do look forward to most of your videos - this one was just too many cuts of Ham to swallow in one sitting.
I'm going to go take a Clonazepam now.
See you next time! 😉
You’re awesome Derreck
@@TheSkepTick
I know. Everybody tells me that.
...
...
...
😁/s
It's Kent Hovind in this video, not Ken Hamm'n'eggs, but I get what you're saying.
@@ziploc2000 Thanks. 😮😬🤭
I'm horribly bad with names and faces, but I'm told it's a common problem for people with moderate autism like mine. I've gotten KH and KH confused more than once. Plus, when they both parrot the exact same idiotic "arguments" it's hard to tell one utter moron from another.
I know Matt Powell, though. He's the one with the banana.... or is that Ray Comfort?
@@derreckwalls7508 To be fair they are so similar it's a waste of space having two of them in the world. They both own/run "creationist" theme parks that indoctrinate innocent kids with their biblical bullshittery.
My wife has face-blindness. I used to dance with a Morris team, and to help her sort out who was who we had to use a combination of hair color, beard (or no beard) and glasses. Problem was most of them fell into the grey hair & beard with glasses category. Only two of us didn't have grey hair and a beard... but we both wore glasses.
In the Hovind/Hamm case they both have grey hair and glasses, but Hamm has the beard.
Damn. I have to listen to Professor Dave. Love the blatant honesty coming from him.
Watch his flat Earth debunking videos. He's savage in them. Great to watch.
Creaky Blinder is my fav. He is also quite vicious. I think it's the Welsh accent... 😂
@@gusmonster59 Creaky has no accent 😁
I have to admit, I find it difficult to endure responses to Prisoner Hovind because his hick voice, smug ignorance and blatant lies just enrage me. But I persevere, because it’s important work. I may or may not yell at my screen more than usual, though. Well done, Dave & Skep Tick.
Dude gets on professor dave for calling himself professor with a bachelors and I believe a masters, then literally calls himself doctor and doesnt even have a damn bachelors degree.
You can blame Sir Sic for the influx of terrible people! I wish Professor Dave would destroy Kent like he did DIRTH!
James Tour may be absolutely terrible at apologetics, but I guess he's at least part of some groundbreaking research and development in his actual field.
It'd be nice if he stuck to that, instead.
He is (or at least was) quite the accomplished synthetic chemist. I'm not sure why that's not enough for him.
I wish it were.
He was briefly mentioned on an episode of Last Week Tonight, iirc, so I paused it to verify.
The cast iron pot is calling the stainless steel kettle black again. Love it SO HARD!!! 😄😄😄
Edit: Kent is the pot...crackpot
AronRa's version is "pot calling the silverware black", but I still prefer mine, even if it's a bit unwieldy: "sooty charred pot calling the crystal decanter black". Mine's typically far more accurate.
@@EdwardHowton I remember an astronomical version, courtesy of Q in one of the Star Trek books: "the singularity calling the neutron star black". Can't remember which book and it might not be one I own, anyway.
I will offer two other points. 1.Ken Ham and Bill Nye had a debate recently. In the Q&A period which followed, a student asked both men the same question -"What could cause you to change your opinion to your opponent's?" Ham replied "Nothing". Nye replied "Evidence". 2. George H. Smith said that, if you ask someone if they would examine evidence which would invalidate their position, would they seriously consider said evidence, and they say no, then the asker is thereby immediately defeated. I did this with a Mormon who knows I am an atheist. He refused to consider my sources. He and I rarely speak of religious/antireligious matters yet further.
'recently'?
@@ericvulgate I do not recall when the debate took place. Can you enlighten me?
I love how Kent thinks that Ad hominem is just another word for insult, bless his heart
Kent: "We are talking about Oblivion Dave!"
Ah yea. The Elder Scrolls IV, good old Game. Ou wait, Kent meant something different didnt he?
Anyway, its kinda pathetic how Kent is yet again only telling what everybody has to think and believe befor knocking those strawmans down. Has he actually done anything else than that? besides from misrespresenting the Topics he claims to talk about.
Kent likes listening to himself talk
Amazing! You are debunking Kent debunking Dave debunking James ! I find this hilarious
Well done for making 32,000 more people aware of Kent! No such thing as bad publicity!
Hey SkepTick. Sorry you had a hard week and a real tough day yesterday. I love your videos and what you do. I genuinely hope my nonsense and shenanigans in your other comment thread (encouraging people to go read Ezekiel 23:20, but not making it clear it was for the lols) didn't upset you or anyone. If it did, I truly am sorry. I just hoped to get a bit of engagement in your channel comments and to also give a few people a laugh when they realised I wasn't a bible thumper but just taking the p1ss. Sorry if it didn't land as intended - that's on me and nobody else.
Right, off to enjoy your latest video - thanks Skep, and may Lisa the rainbow giraffe enjoy a bounty of lovely leaves and crunchy goodness. Moor hen.
You’re awesome! Thank you. I found it funny once I realised what was going on 🤣
@@TheSkepTick ♥️
Questions I mean.
You had me going, sry for not getting the joke 😥
@@thejudgmentalcat eh no worries my friend - I am well skilled at being a d1ck (shockingly so in fact, given I'm female). I love to bate creationists, but most of them have me blocked and also, I don't want to give them the attention in the Al Gore Rhythmz.
So now, I pretend to be a bonkers Jebus freak in the atheist channels and see how soon people work it out, as I slowly get more ridiculous. Of course, Poe's law kicks in, so oftentimes no matter how crazy I get, I still seem like a 'true believer'.
My only saving grace (if it even counts), is i will confess as soon as someone calls me out directly in the thread as being a Poe...
Why? Well, it is fun for me, it gets activity in the comments of channels I like, maybe it helps athiests to hone their abilities to argue (if I can be bothered to pretend to be a 'sophisticated theist' or something) and most importantly, I hope it makes people laugh when the tension of the 'argument' breaks and they realise that the verse Ezekiel 23:20 is all about 'big willy and much splodge' action. Which isn't a verse that often gets discussed in Sunday School or in church.
Someone should open a bible for Kent
Abiogenesis is how life got started from non-living material, Yes the Bible backs it up in Genesis 2:7
Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
Dust from the ground, Dust a non-living material, Abiogenesis!!!!
It's even worse when kunt says but you believe you came from a rock when he believes he came from ground up rock
Thats the edited version, the original has Lilith, Adams first wife made the same way.. but that lady got the delete.
I love Professor Dave!! He knows a lot about the science stuff
I just glanced at your sub count and the views after 24 hours and said that you have around 80% engagement already.
My Dutch reform church friend staying with me said “that is the problem, when you break it down and analyse it you cloud gods vision and his faith for giving you faith, I’m going for a walk”.
Works every time, I love her but her religiosity increases in direct relation with her stress levels, and her husband just realised that my partner was the one she was excommunicated over 23 years ago.
😁 I however be loving her 8 hour explanation followed by my partners shrug and “I like blue eyed brunettes” 8 hours explanation time loop/bottle episode this day has become.
It’s a bit quiet, I’m going to point out, to my partner, how much this is like those reality show teasers he irrationally hates muh ha ha haaaaaa.
"that is the problem, when you break it down and analyse it you cloud gods vision" I'm translating: I want to stay willfully ignorant, otherwise I would have to rework my view on my faith and my view of the world.
Okay, kenty boi realizing that dave isnt a professor while he himself isnt a doctor is just rich
Kent is a doctor. Just like I am. I have a doctorate in pharmacology. Now I don't go around calling myself a doctor, but I could.
@@eduardopena5893 Hovind is not a real doctor.
@@69eddieD He has a doctorate degree, more than one, therefore he is technically a doctor just like I am with my doctorate of pharmacology.
@@eduardopena5893 I seen his thesis he got his PhD with. He does deserve his PhD but since it was from a diploma mill, it might as well blank.
@@dragonspartan9031 It isn't up to you to decide whether you think he deserves it or not. He got it. Are you jealous because Kent has one and is a doctor and you aren't?
11:33 tons of evidence... but not a single for god
"Dr." Dino asking if someone's a real professor. For me, this is the best part of the video.
And that's from a fellow who has less flavors then before Dr. Oetker started making deserts.
I would say that Sheldon''s brother George is more a doctor when he called himself Dr.Tire than Hovind, at least Georgie knew what he was talking about.
Hovind asks Dave to prove he is a professor. That is hilarious! Considering Hovind got his doctorate by mail.
Not back to jail yet Ken.? Has the latest "wife" learnt her place.?
Am I the only one that laughed out loud when Kent criticised Professor Dave for calling himself “Professor Dave” despite not being a real professor?
I like how Kent has a dinosaur hat on, ironic isn't it...
Would also be interesting to see him try worm his way out of why people need their wisdom teeth extracted.
When a fake doctor calls a real one fake...
*gringe*
I've been listening to Bart Ehrman's podcasts and there's someone doing voiceovers during the segment breaks that sounds remarkably like you (except calmer 😆). Izzat you SkepTick?
Big fan of you work on this channel.
It may be… it depends if the commercials are localised or if they’re specific to the podcast. 😅
Every time Mr. Hovind says "today I'm going to whack *insert atheist here* I always hear Archer in my ear going "phrasing!!"
And all Kent has to do is show us his creator. His creator seems to be everywhere at the same time, so it shouldn't be hard to show him to us.
22:00 omg I‘m going ham. Dave predicted this line of argument way in advance when he debated Hovind 😂😂
LOL! The pen and paper where created by people, who evolved from chemicals. Kent is completely out of his element here. Even the apologist as bad as he is, is many levels above Kent. Kent is like a toddler trying to make conversation at the adult's table.
Kent didn't come from a strawberry, but a door knob.
He's related to dog turds
Brilliant! Prof Dave’s evisceration of Tour is a delight. Seeing Kunt Hovind jump on board and play the fool makes it even better! 😂
Of all the flerfs and creationists out there, Kent is my favorite. He is genuinely entertaining IMO. He is a wonderful example of a snake oil seller/confidence trickster.
The debates with Prof Dave were hilarious. Aaron Ra always brings out "the best" in him as well. 😁