Latest / Brett Keane and Eve Show / 3 Evolutionists vs Kent Hovind

Transcript

3 Evolutionists vs Kent Hovind · Brett Keane and Eve Show

0:00
3 - 10 Nine Eight 76543210 Ignition.
0:11
All right, well, it's an honor to be here tonight.
0:13
My name is Kent Hovind. I live in Pensacola, FL.
0:16
I taught high school science for 15 years and now I travel and do
0:19
seminars on creation, evolution and dinosaurs.
0:21
And my ministry is not government funded.
0:25
This is not my wife, just a picture of her.
0:27
We have three kids, one of each. I have all the kids married off
0:30
and the dog died, so I made it. I'm home free.
0:32
It's wonderful. And my lovely daughter and her
0:35
husband are over here. So raise your hand there, Paula.
0:37
Marlissa, good to have them here tonight.
0:40
And I got two grandkids, one more due in a few days and
0:43
another one due in about seven months.
0:44
So I'll have 4 grandkids all under three when it's over with.
0:49
I'm the founder of Dinosaur Adventure Land in Pensacola, FL.
0:51
If you ever get up to Pensacola, you need to stop and see that
0:53
place. We have a Science Center, a
0:55
museum, and a theme park all based on creation and give glory
0:59
to God for his creation. Instead of teaching evolution.
1:02
We offer a lot of home school classes.
1:03
We have a lot of video materials available.
1:05
We have a creation boot camp coming up this September, and
1:08
you're all invited to come up to that.
1:09
We believe that the creation ought to glorify the God of the
1:12
Creator and he ought to get credit for what he did.
1:15
So our position is the Bible is true, evolution theory is
1:19
seriously wrong and one of the dumbest and most dangerous
1:22
religions in the history of the world.
1:23
That's our totally unbiased opinion on the subject.
1:25
Thank you so much. Professors.
1:39
I'll start. My name is Jim Strayer.
1:44
I'm from Michigan. I started my educational career
1:47
in a small Methodist school. I went there for two years and
1:51
then transferred to Eastern Michigan University to get the
1:55
major in biology and a minor in chemistry.
1:58
I taught school for a few years and went into the Army and
2:02
served as a corpsman in the US Army Hospital.
2:05
Came home and and after a few more years of teaching, I was
2:08
awarded the National Science Foundation Scholarship to get a
2:11
master's degree in biology and got that from the University of
2:14
Michigan. OK, OK.
2:22
I have, I have you finished. Sorry, no, I have around 100
2:27
hours of semester hours of, of science and and most of that's
2:31
in biology and I retired a few years ago.
2:36
And since then I've been keeping active by giving lectures on
2:39
Charles Darwin and evolution and related biological subjects.
2:43
I'm very happy to be here and I feel very comfortable in front
2:47
of a college crowd and we should have a good time.
2:55
I'm rhino sleeper, I teach here and that means I live around
3:00
this area too, and there's no way I'm going to be able to top
3:03
that introduction that we just heard.
3:06
So I'll just be staying on the side of modesty and stop right
3:11
here. My name is Luther Reisbig.
3:21
I'm professor of aerospace engineering.
3:25
I graduated from Michigan State University where I got my PhD in
3:30
engineering there. I'm probably the least qualified
3:33
person to be here talking about any of these matters, but but
3:37
I'll apologize and we'll do what we can.
3:40
Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Doctor
3:48
Hovan. You'll now have 12 minutes to
3:50
make an opening case. All right, well let's define a
3:55
few positions. I believe very strongly that the
3:57
earth is about 6000 years old. It was created in six literal 24
4:01
hour days. This position would make a few
4:04
predictions. The Bible says clearly in six
4:06
days the Lord made heaven and earth and all that in them is
4:09
everything created in six days. Now based on that prediction,
4:11
based on that premise, we can make a few predictions, which is
4:15
what science is supposed to do. A scientific theory is supposed
4:17
to allow you to make predictions.
4:18
I predict, based on the Bible teaching, that the universe will
4:22
show evidence of order and design all over the place.
4:25
OK. I predict that we'll find
4:26
thousands of symbiotic relationships in nature, animals
4:29
that require certain plants and plants that require certain
4:31
animals, and it works just fine because they were all created
4:34
within a few days of each other. Not a problem at all.
4:36
For the creationist viewpoint. I predict that there will be
4:39
limits to the variations that life forms are able to produce.
4:42
The Bible says they will bring forth after their kind, and
4:45
that's what we've observed our 6000 years of human history
4:48
shows us. Dogs produce dogs every time.
4:54
Might be a big dog or a little dog, it might have curly hair or
4:56
straight hair, but it's going to be a dog, guaranteed.
4:59
OK Farmers actually count on that.
5:01
I mean, when they plant corn, they expect to get corn.
5:05
And so far it has happened. So certainly there are
5:07
variations, but there are definite limits to the
5:10
variations. And this is where the major
5:11
difference comes between the creationist and the
5:14
evolutionist. I predict that there are not
5:16
only limits to the variation. I predict that there will be
5:18
actually a purpose to life because we were designed by a
5:21
creator for a purpose. That's a prediction based on the
5:23
Bible view. I predict there will be non
5:25
material things like love, sense of justice, mercy, innate
5:29
knowledge of right and wrong, a conscience and absolute truth.
5:34
Those things are not possible with the evolution theory.
5:36
They are predicted based on the creation theory.
5:38
Somebody designed this for a reason.
5:40
I predict that there will be a way to find the will of the
5:43
Creator, such as messenger speaking for him or maybe even a
5:46
book telling us why he did it and how he did it.
5:49
I predict there will be an afterlife where we'll face the
5:51
Creator to give an accounting. OK, the Bible dates, if you add
5:55
them up in Scripture, comes to about 6000 years ago for the
5:58
creation, not millions. There's a large difference
6:01
between 6020 billion. Congress doesn't seem to
6:04
understand that, but there is a big difference.
6:06
OK, now based on the Bible teaching that the earth was
6:12
originally created where people live to be 900 years old, I
6:15
predict we will find lots of legends about a golden age and a
6:19
creation event. This seems to be kind of
6:21
universal. Throughout history, most people
6:23
believe there was a creation and most people believe there was a
6:25
time when man used to live to near to be nearly 1000.
6:28
The Greeks talked about it, the Babylonians talked about it, the
6:30
Sumerians, everybody talked about this golden age.
6:33
Why? Well, that's predicted based on
6:36
the creation viewpoint. OK, I predict there will be
6:38
skeletons found of people showing signs of great age
6:42
because they were living to be much older.
6:44
You know, before things happen. Then as you grow, especially the
6:47
brow Ridge of your head never stops growing.
6:49
The constant pull on the back of your head, the occipital bun,
6:52
based on just the muscles from holding your head forward, is
6:53
going to elongate the head. Over two or three or 400 years
6:56
people would look exactly like the Neanderthals look.
6:59
Brain 13% bigger than ours, few strange things about their head,
7:02
but 100% human in every respect. I predict that there will be
7:06
biological problems with modern man, such as wisdom teeth.
7:09
Because we're not as big as we used to be and we're developing
7:12
probably faster. People are maturing faster.
7:15
They're only living to be in 80 or 90 instead of living to be
7:17
900. And wisdom teeth are a problem
7:19
today not because of evolution, but because we're actually
7:21
genetically inferior to the original model.
7:24
Adam and Eve. OK, I predict that there'll be a
7:26
universal longing for things to be restored to the Garden of
7:29
Eden conditions. That's what everybody seems to
7:31
want. OK, now what difference does it
7:34
make if you believe in evolution or creation?
7:35
Well, if evolution is true, how do we tell right from wrong?
7:39
Anytime. Tonight I would like any one of
7:41
these gentlemen to answer the simple question, If evolution is
7:44
true, how does anybody tell right from wrong?
7:49
If I wanted you to make a list of 10 things that are wrong,
7:52
before you put anything on the list, I want to know how are you
7:55
deciding? Are you deciding right from
7:57
wrong based on what Osama bin Laden thinks?
8:00
Do we decide right from wrong based on what Congress thinks?
8:02
Do we decide right from wrong based on the majority?
8:05
How do we decide right from wrong?
8:07
Simple question, I've never had it answered.
8:10
If evolution is true, death brought man into the world and
8:13
death is actually the hero of the plot.
8:15
Because if evolution is true, one animal evolves a little
8:18
better than the rest for some reason, maybe a mutation or
8:20
something. What?
8:21
What must happen to the rest of them?
8:24
They have to die. Otherwise the good genes are
8:27
diluted back into the population and lost.
8:30
Evolution is a religion of death.
8:31
Death is actually the hero of the plot.
8:34
If the Bible is true, then man brought death into the world.
8:37
If evolution is true, death brought man into the world.
8:39
These two views cannot possibly be more opposite.
8:43
Somebody is wrong and I enjoy showing them who they are and
8:47
that's why I'm here. OK, now the Bible says clearly
8:51
that by one man sin came into the world and death by sin.
8:55
The reason we have death and suffering today is because of
8:57
man's disobedience to the Creator.
8:59
The Bible says by man came death in Adam all die.
9:03
We have suffering and death because of man's disobedience.
9:06
If evolution is true, you could read Charles Darwin's book page
9:09
170 or page 217. He said, hey, death and struggle
9:13
for life is the is a wonderful thing.
9:15
That's how we get ahead. OK, now the creation view says
9:18
there was a flood about 4400 years ago.
9:22
Now this would make a few predictions based on the idea
9:24
that there was a universal flood.
9:26
I think I could predict that the earth will have hundreds of
9:28
layers of strata. Floods automatically do that.
9:31
Moving water sorts particles and all sorts of layers.
9:34
You can get a jar of dirt, add some water to it and shake it up
9:36
and set it down, and in 20 seconds you'll have layers
9:38
forming in your jar. Moving water automatically sorts
9:42
particles. It's called hydrologic sorting.
9:43
Engineers ought to know about that.
9:45
I predict based on the Bible teaching of the Flood, that
9:47
there will be billions of fossils, including coal and oil,
9:51
found in those layers of sedimentary rock that we find
9:54
all over the earth. I predict there'll be huge
9:56
canyons and deltas showing evidence of rapid in massive
9:59
erosion. I predict there will be legends
10:01
of this worldwide flood found in cultures all over the world.
10:05
That's a prediction based on the biblical view.
10:08
Bible. Biblical view of creation is
10:11
certainly scientific. It makes predictions.
10:14
OK. I predict there'll be petrified
10:16
trees in the vertical position extending through all of these
10:20
layers. Thousands and thousands of these
10:22
trees have been found around the world, petrified, standing up,
10:25
connecting layers that some people want you to believe are
10:27
different ages. Now, I don't know how long a
10:30
dead tree stands up around here before it falls down, but up in
10:32
Pensacola, you get maybe 5 or 10 years maximum before the tree
10:35
falls over. And yet they're telling us these
10:37
layers are different ages. We have dozens of pictures of
10:39
these Poly straight fossils on our website, doctordino.com.
10:44
Now, if somebody wants you to believe the layers are different
10:46
ages by millions of years, well, they're welcome to teach you
10:49
whatever they want, but this is simply not in in accordance with
10:52
the evidence. I believe the Bible would
10:55
predict we would find things like this Poly straight fossils.
10:57
A worldwide flood would do that. Now science means knowledge.
11:01
OK, a more expanded definition of science means knowledge
11:05
gained by observation and study and testing.
11:08
My contention is there is absolutely nothing scientific
11:12
about the evolution theory if we define what we mean by evolution
11:15
carefully, which I want to do in my last few minutes here.
11:17
I like science. I taught high school science for
11:19
15 years. I love the study of science.
11:22
I am not against science, but I'm against using lies to
11:25
support a theory, and I'm certainly against telling people
11:29
that science can go farther than it really can.
11:31
OK, now Texas has a law that requires textbooks to be
11:34
accurate. So does Florida.
11:36
Florida Statute 1, Double O 6, says there must be accuracy of
11:38
instructional materials. Textbooks ought to be accurate.
11:41
Wisconsin says textbooks ought to be accurate.
11:43
Alabama says textbooks shall be adequate and current California
11:46
says textbooks shall be factually accurate.
11:49
Minnesota says a teacher shall not deliberately suppress or
11:51
distort subject matter. These are all wonderful laws,
11:55
but not one of those states enforces them.
11:57
The textbook says we have evidence of evolution.
11:59
OK, what kind of evidence do they give?
12:01
This guy says evolution is fact, not theory.
12:04
Birds arose from non birds and humans from non humans.
12:06
No person who pretends to any understanding of the natural
12:08
world can deny these facts. Well, it's OK to make a
12:11
statement like that, but that's just a mantra.
12:13
That doesn't make it true because he states that.
12:15
Even if he states it loudly and forcefully, that doesn't make it
12:17
true. OK, the word evolution has six
12:19
different meanings. First of all, there would have
12:21
to be cosmic evolution. That would be the origin of
12:24
time, space, matter. They try to answer that with The
12:26
Big Bang theory, with which there are numerous problems.
12:29
We cover that on our videotape #1 The second meaning or level
12:31
or stage of the evolution theory would have to be chemical
12:34
evolution. If The Big Bang produced
12:37
hydrogen, well, then how did we get all these other elements?
12:39
They want me to believe that uranium evolved from hydrogen.
12:42
That's Oh yeah, you get fusion in stars.
12:44
Well, first place, you can't fuse past iron #1 and secondly,
12:48
if you want the stars to produce the elements, you have a chicken
12:50
and an egg problem here. Which came first, the elements
12:53
to make the stars, or the stars to make the elements?
12:56
You have a real problem here, but they never talk about
12:57
chemical evolution. I'd like to hear that answer
12:59
tonight. Thirdly, we'd have to have
13:01
stellar evolution. The stars would have to evolve.
13:03
Nobody's ever proven the formation of anyone star.
13:07
We see a few a few spots getting brighter and they're assuming a
13:09
star is forming. No, it could be the dust is
13:11
clearing, it could be a supernova taking place.
13:13
There's there's all kinds of explanations.
13:14
Nobody's ever proven a star can form.
13:17
And yet it's known now that there are about 11 trillion
13:19
stars per person on this planet. Each of you can own 11 trillion
13:23
of them. How did the stars evolve?
13:26
Fourthly, we have to have organic evolution, the origin of
13:28
life. How did life get started?
13:30
Fifthly is macro evolution, where an animal changes to a
13:32
different kind of animal. Nobody's ever seen any of these
13:35
first five. Lastly is what's called
13:37
microevolution. I object to the term, but they
13:39
use it, so I'll use it. Microevolution tells us there
13:42
are varieties within the same kind.
13:46
Big dogs, little dogs. OK, this one happens.
13:48
The first five are purely religious, and if you want to
13:50
believe in those first five, you enjoy yourself.
13:52
But don't call it science and don't make me pay to teach that
13:55
to the next generation of kids as part of science, because it's
13:58
not. It's nothing but a religion.
14:00
They teach 20 billion years ago Big Bang and you know, that's
14:03
what that's what the evolution theory is based on.
14:04
You have to have an origin .18 or 20 billion years ago there
14:07
was a Big Bang. I think the evolution theory, as
14:09
is currently taught in our textbooks is totally
14:12
unscientific. There is no not a shred of
14:14
evidence to back it up and I simply resent paying for it.
14:17
So my position is that the evolution theory which teaches
14:19
clearly 20 billion years ago Big Bang.
14:21
Then it says millions of years of torrential rains created the
14:24
oceans as the earth cooled down, you know, cooled down into a
14:26
rocky crust and then oceans formed over millions of years.
14:29
This textbook says swirling in the waters of the oceans is a
14:31
bubbling broth of complex chemicals.
14:33
Progress from a complex chemical soup to a living Organism is
14:36
very slow. Sure is.
14:38
It don't even happen. That's how slow it is.
14:41
This guy said the first self replicating systems must have
14:43
emerged in this organic soup. So according to the evolution
14:47
theory, 20 billion years ago, Big Bang, 4.6 billion years ago,
14:50
the earth cooled down. It rained on the rocks for
14:52
millions of years and turned them into soup.
14:53
And the soup came alive 3 billion years ago.
14:57
So great great great great great great grandpa was soup.
14:59
OK, now it's true there's a lot of dogs in the world, but they
15:03
didn't come from a rock for three points 4 billion years
15:05
ago. Whatever you want to say.
15:06
So the evolution is a dying religion surviving only on tax
15:10
dollars. Evolution theory is positively
15:12
anti science. There's not a shred of real
15:14
evidence to support any of the theories except OFT repeat and
15:17
lies. Let's define one more term in my
15:19
last 30 seconds. Stupid, lacking normal
15:22
intelligence. Foolish, silly, a stupid idea.
15:26
Dull and boring. Evolution is not even a good
15:28
theory. I think it is stupid.
15:29
Thank you. Professors, you'll now have 12
15:43
minutes to present your opening arguments and additional 5
15:46
minutes to rebuttal Dr. Hogan's position and state a question
15:52
back to him. Thank you.
15:56
Well, I suppose you'd like to know what I teach when I teach
15:58
evolution. I think you should take a look
16:01
at the black sheet up here to see what the definition of
16:04
evolution is. Biological evolution is a change
16:07
in the gene pool of population over time.
16:09
It's really very simple. Do we have a gene pool?
16:12
Do we have DNA? Well, of course we do.
16:14
Every living thing has DNA. Does it change?
16:17
Well, of course it does. We can see it change.
16:20
We know what what DNA sequencing is.
16:23
We do it all the time. We can check the genes in any
16:26
plant or animal now that we want to.
16:29
Has there been a time enough, enough time for that to happen?
16:33
Well, of course there has all right.
16:35
If you'll take a look at the, the, the the green sheet over
16:41
here, you'll see that the age of the Earth has been found out by
16:45
astronomers studying the age of the Earth.
16:46
The geologists are the age of the Earth.
16:49
We used the radioactivity to find out the age.
16:51
We've used plate tectonics and movement of planets.
16:54
We use biology. And what's interesting about
16:57
these things is that they've all arrived at the same answer using
17:01
different science. If one of them have found a
17:04
different answer, there would have been something wrong.
17:07
But they didn't. The astronomers agreed with the
17:10
geologists, and the geologists agreed with radioactivity, and
17:12
the radioactivity agreed in plate tectonics.
17:15
They all agreed on a basic time that we've just heard, four and
17:20
a half billion years old. Now, how do I, how do I try to
17:27
get this across to my students? Well, I talked to them about
17:30
natural selection and what natural selection really means.
17:34
If you look at the red card down here is that everything that has
17:38
genes overproduces, everything that has DNA overproduces.
17:44
So there's always more population than can can be
17:48
there. Let me give you an example.
17:50
If you started out with two cockroaches, and cockroaches
17:54
lived in a perfect place, a cockroach perfect place, at the
17:59
end of seven months there'd be 164 billion of them.
18:04
Well, there's not 164 billion of them because there's no perfect
18:08
place for them. Instead, they're in competition
18:11
with each other. They're in competition for food,
18:13
they're in competition for space, and they're in
18:15
competition for mating. So what happens is that there
18:21
has to be a survival. Well, who survives?
18:23
Some people say the survival of the fittest.
18:25
Well, that means you don't understand evolution.
18:26
It's not survival of the fittest.
18:28
It's survival of the one that can live long enough to find a
18:31
mate and reproduce. Ants work together.
18:36
Only one of them is going to reproduce.
18:38
The rest of them are going to try to help somebody reproduce.
18:41
So it's survival of the fit, not survival of the fittest.
18:45
And then, of course, what happens is those individuals get
18:49
to reproduce and that species survives.
18:53
But look, we talked about billions and billions of
18:56
cockroaches not surviving. Why is that?
18:59
And the answer is they had some genetic changes that weren't
19:02
good. The idea is to have some tiny
19:06
little changes in your DNA. Maybe it takes five or 6720
19:11
generations for it to show up even.
19:13
But when it does show up, it's good.
19:15
Evolution is extremely inefficient.
19:19
So is little synthesis inefficient?
19:21
Biological processes are inefficient.
19:23
It's just a bad design. But what happens is some of them
19:27
make it and, you know, some of them don't.
19:30
So when I'm doing this, I, I, I have to use some kind of a
19:35
science. So if you look at the black
19:36
sheet down here with the blue markings around it, I talk about
19:40
fossils and I talk about genetics and I talk about
19:43
homology or the structures of plants and animals, and I talk
19:46
about distribution in the planet and I talk about Embryology.
19:50
But what's interesting about these things is they all agree.
19:54
They all approach evolution from a different point of view, and
19:58
yet they agree if we didn't have any fossils at all, not it
20:02
wouldn't matter. We still have enough information
20:04
to prove that evolution took place.
20:06
If we didn't have any homologic structures to look at, it
20:09
doesn't matter. We still have enough evolution
20:11
of facts to show that it took place.
20:14
Now I have I had a problem solved for me by the Supreme
20:20
Court. It happens that that there have
20:26
been nine cases brought by creationists to the federal
20:29
courts against evolution. They were competing against each
20:36
other in the Supreme Court. The first one of those cases
20:40
that really was important took place in 1968.
20:44
But in 1982, the Supreme Court case of McClellan versus the
20:51
Kansas Board of Education ruled in a decision that gave a
20:57
detailed definition of the term science.
21:00
The court declared that creation science is not, in fact, a
21:06
science. What that meant is that people
21:10
were teaching high school like me at that time.
21:12
That meant I couldn't teach creation.
21:15
It was a religion. You know, I I could teach, I
21:18
could teach evolution because it fit the definition of science.
21:23
Now that that court case was challenged by two teachers, One
21:27
of them challenged it on the basis that he had the right to
21:33
teach because of freedom of speech, he could do what he
21:35
wanted to do in his class. Well, he lost that case and he
21:38
lost it very simply because he was trying to teach creation in
21:42
a public school that doesn't allow religion to be taught in a
21:45
public school. He lost.
21:46
He should have known better to bring the case.
21:49
And then another guy challenged it.
21:50
He challenged it on the idea that, well, I'll make my own
21:54
curriculum. I'll show those guys.
21:56
Well, of course, what happened is the school board said, hey,
21:59
fella, you don't make the curriculum in this place.
22:01
We make it. And he lost the case too.
22:05
Now, I hope that makes you understand why the creationists
22:09
want to get to the 7th grade. They're going to get to the 7th
22:13
grade because that's the only place you can talk to school
22:17
boards who don't know anything about evolution.
22:19
Let me explain this to you. When I'm going to use a
22:22
textbook, what do I use? I use one like this one.
22:26
Now, this textbook is a pretty basic text.
22:30
It could be used in the University of Florida,
22:32
University of Michigan, and any, any large school in the United
22:36
States. It's small schools.
22:37
As a matter of fact, I looked at the six books that are used here
22:40
at Embry Riddle University. They're great.
22:43
One of the evolution and one of the ecology books here has one
22:47
of the best chapters on evolution I've ever seen.
22:49
It's a great book. Anyway, this is what I had to
22:53
use. And if you think about it a
22:55
second, all the facts in here have to be able to stand
22:58
scientific scrutiny. Somebody, it's looking at these
23:01
babies, you know? Well, here's what you find out.
23:06
There is not a school in the United States that does
23:10
scientific research that accepts creationism.
23:14
Not one major college or university in the United States
23:18
accepts creationism or intelligent design.
23:23
Matter of fact, we see it a different way.
23:25
I really checked. I mean, I really looked and I
23:28
couldn't find a major college or university in the world that
23:33
accepted creation or intelligent design.
23:37
Now I got to find out about this stuff.
23:41
So where did these guys get their ideas?
23:44
So I ordered some Bob Jones textbooks.
23:48
This is a Bob Jones life science book.
23:50
They use it in the eighth grade. It has 500 pages in it.
23:53
It has 250 references to biblical verses to explain
23:58
science. It has not one.
24:01
Not one reference to a scientific journal or book.
24:05
It uses the term God 380 times, Satan three times and Hell
24:11
twice. Here's the.
24:15
Biology book that Bob Jones puts out for high school students it.
24:20
Has 600 and. 92 pages. 350 references to biblical verses to
24:25
prove science. Not one reference to any
24:29
scientific journal or scientific book.
24:32
It mentions God 600 times in Satan, 40 times.
24:39
This book is put right here in Florida.
24:42
You know what's a creation book Because it says so.
24:43
Biology, God's living creation. It's a creation book.
24:47
This company claims that they are the largest textbook
24:51
publishers for creation of schools in the United States.
24:54
Now remember, we're talking creation of schools.
24:57
These things would never be allowed in a public school
24:59
because they're religious. This book has 650 pages in it,
25:04
150 references to the Bible, no science references at all to any
25:09
book, any article, anything. It mentions God 425 times.
25:17
Well, I'd like to ask a question.
25:22
You know, when I come before a group like this and I, and I,
25:25
and I want to show you that I've tried to keep up with things.
25:29
I mean, I read the Scientific American and, and I trust the
25:31
Scientific American. I get a, a book that's specially
25:34
put out for teachers called the National Center for Science
25:37
Education. You know, that's a lot about,
25:40
about evolution and creation. I trust that book.
25:43
I, I go to the bookstore and get and get discovery.
25:46
I trust that too. And I trust the National
25:48
Geographic. They've been at it 100 years.
25:51
They know how old the Earth is. So I'm looking out at this
25:54
audience. You look like a really great
25:55
group. Lots of college students and
25:57
lots, lots of creationists in here.
25:59
I'd like to know where I stand before I go any further.
26:03
How many of you folks would like to see every Riddle University
26:10
be the first university in the world to accept creation and
26:17
intelligent design in their science department?
26:20
Can I show your hands? Thank you very much.
26:27
That's that's exactly what I expected, you know.
26:31
OK, now I want to. I'm.
26:36
I'm often asked. Well.
26:39
How? How do you?
26:40
Handle the stuff with the with the students as far as now the
26:44
the the evidence is collected. Well, let me just give you a
26:49
list of things here that the pieces of equipment the
26:53
scientists use to study evolution.
26:57
Computers, ultrasound, core boring sonar, lasers, deep sea
27:02
vessels, chromatography, electron microscopes, DNA
27:05
sequencing, ultraviolet light, radioactive dating, television,
27:09
electrophoresis, X-rays, robotics, spectroscopes,
27:12
photography, and Geiger counters.
27:14
Those pieces of equipment are used in chemistry, physics,
27:19
geology, and evolution. We get the same results they do.
27:25
There are people in here that I imagine would not want a crime
27:30
to be solved because you wouldn't believe the evidence
27:35
that was collected by using these methods.
27:38
These are the methods that evolution uses.
27:51
Professors you'll have. An additional 5 minutes to
27:54
rebuttal Doctor Hoeven's opening statement and to pose question
27:59
or a question to him. I, I am curious about your
28:10
presentation, which was, you know, I'm, I, I am impressed.
28:13
The only one I've heard speak that quickly was a Texas
28:17
auctioneer. But I I I tried really hard to
28:20
concentrate and get it off the earth was created 6000 years ago
28:25
in six days by God. I am confused.
28:29
Being philosophically consistent and being very honest person.
28:32
I'm sure you can tell me where God came from.
28:36
And in. Addition, In addition, once
28:39
you've told me where God comes from, please try to clarify how
28:43
you can figure that a spiritual force can have an impact on a
28:49
material universe to create it. I think that some years ago we
28:54
already talked about that kind of thing in philosophical
28:57
circles. At any rate, by posing the
28:59
question, if angels are made of spiritual matter and a pen is
29:06
made of material matter, and spiritual matter displaces no
29:10
space, how many angels can dance on the tip of a pen?
29:17
I have a sense of sort of reversal experience here, but
29:24
but please do go ahead. You've got 5 minutes now.
29:27
I just wonder which question. That's all right.
29:29
You may take the. First few minutes we're supposed
29:30
to do one question at. A time.
29:31
Which one would you like? That was.
29:35
Part of the format for the debate, so which which I want
29:37
you to fill in the. Story of the rest of the
29:39
beginning of the universe. God.
29:41
Spiritual matter impact on material matter, So 2.
29:45
Questions. All right, go ahead.
29:48
All right, your question. Where did God come from?
29:50
Assumes that you're thinking of the wrong.
29:52
Obviously it displays that you're thinking of the wrong God
29:55
because the God of the Bible is not affected by time, space, or
29:58
matter. If he's if he's affected by
30:00
time, space, or matter, he's not God.
30:03
Time, space, and matter is what we call a continuum.
30:05
All of them have to come into existence at the same instant.
30:08
Because if there were a matter but no space, where would you
30:10
put it? If there were matter in space
30:13
but no time, when would you put it?
30:15
You cannot have time, space, or matter independently.
30:18
They have to come into existence simultaneously.
30:21
The Bible answers that in 10 words.
30:23
In the beginning, there's time. God created the heaven, there's
30:27
space and the earth. There's matter.
30:29
So you have time, space, matter, created a Trinity of Trinity's
30:32
there. Just as you know, time is past,
30:33
present, future. Space has length, width, height.
30:36
Matter has solid, liquid gas. You have a Trinity of Trinity.
30:38
It's created instantaneously and the God who created them has to
30:42
be outside of them. If he's limited by time, he's
30:45
not God. The guy who created this
30:47
computer is not in the computer. He's not running around and
30:49
they're changing the numbers on the screen.
30:51
OK. The God who created this
30:53
universe is outside of the universe.
30:55
He's above it, beyond it, in it, through it.
30:56
He's he's unaffected by it. So for and the concept that of a
31:01
spiritual force cannot have any effect on a material body.
31:06
Well, then I guess you'd have to explain to me things like
31:08
emotions and love and hatred and envy and jealousy and and
31:11
rationality. I mean, if your brain is just a
31:14
random collection of chemicals that form by chance over
31:16
billions of years, how on earth can you trust your own reasoning
31:19
processes and the thoughts that you you'd think, OK, so your
31:25
your your question, where did God come from?
31:29
Is assuming a limited God and that's your problem.
31:32
The God that I worship is not limited by time, space, or
31:35
matter. If I could fit the infinite God
31:37
in my 3 LB brain, he would not be worth worshipping, that's for
31:39
certain. So that's the God that I
31:41
worship. Thank you.
31:52
Would you please present a? Question to the other side I was
31:57
curious about. The previous presentation he
32:01
said he trusted National Geographic.
32:03
Just to give you one example. OK, the Bible teaches clearly
32:07
that the birds were made on the 5th day and the reptiles were
32:11
made on the 6th day. OK, Evolution teaches exactly
32:14
the opposite, Reptiles first and then birds.
32:17
The Bible says birds first, then reptiles.
32:18
Actually, everything about the evolution theory is backwards to
32:21
what the Bible teaches. Somebody's clearly wrong on
32:23
this. This guy says dinosaurs are
32:25
alive as birds. Scientists says, OK, well, this
32:28
is absurd. Obviously nobody's ever seen any
32:30
animal produce a different kind of animal.
32:32
They can believe that if they want.
32:34
Here's the USA TODAY missing link discovered October 1999,
32:38
National Geographic, one that he trusts.
32:40
Missing link. Breaking news, folks.
32:42
We have found National Geographic November 1999 the
32:45
missing link. Few months later, oops, it was a
32:47
mistake. Some Chinese.
32:49
Guy had taken a couple of fossils and glued them together
32:51
and fooled everybody. National Geographic paid, I
32:55
think, $80,000 for that fossil. It was incredible the amount of
33:00
money they paid for that. And there's all kinds of it I
33:02
can show you over and over where National Geographic is not
33:04
trustworthy. The entire argument that I heard
33:06
a few minutes ago was majority opinion supports evolution.
33:12
OK, first place, I don't think that's true.
33:14
OK, How many of you in here tonight at a secular university
33:17
do not believe the evolution theory that they present?
33:22
OK. How many do believe the
33:23
evolution theory that they present?
33:25
OK we could take account here. I suspect that was majority for
33:29
the creation side. We can count if you like.
33:30
But I know this about 9% of the population in Gallup polls and
33:34
surveys taken says they believe in atheistic evolution.
33:37
No God is involved. 90% say yes there was a God involved and 50%
33:42
of the entire population says God did it in the last 10,000
33:45
years. So if you're using majority
33:47
opinion as your argument, I think that's obviously
33:50
historically you can prove that's pretty easy to prove
33:52
wrong. Majority opinion proves nothing.
33:54
Majority's often been wrong. So all of the experts on birds
33:57
are saying the dinosaurs could not possibly have turned to
34:00
birds. There are just millions and
34:01
millions of differences. So I guess I'd be curious, with
34:03
all the evidence that we've gathered over the years, why you
34:06
would think a dinosaur turned into a bird when dinosaurs,
34:09
reptiles produce reptiles, birds produce birds.
34:12
I mean, there's no evidence of this.
34:13
So my question why do you think dinosaurs turn to birds if you
34:16
think that? Evolution is a process where all
34:24
kinds of DNA and all kinds of animals are making changes.
34:28
Some of that changes in DNA are going to turn out to be pretty
34:31
good. Some of them aren't.
34:33
If we take a look at an example from.
34:38
Your. Research saying that, how about
34:42
how about Noah's Ark have one kind of animal?
34:50
That evolved. Into dogs, foxes and wolves in
34:56
6000 years? Not possible at all.
35:00
Not couldn't even begin to happen in 6000 years.
35:04
Noah's Ark, one kind of horse developing into a zebra and a
35:09
donkey? Not possible.
35:11
No. There's no way DNA can change
35:13
that fast. What evolutionists are saying is
35:17
the the process of DNA changing takes a long time.
35:21
You see, the creationists want it both ways.
35:23
They want to make fun of evolution and saying, well, why
35:26
does that thing want to do that? Well, it doesn't want to do it.
35:29
DNA is changing randomly, but at the same time they want to say
35:34
that you can have all kinds of animals evolved in 6000 years,
35:38
just hopped off of a ship some place that Noah was running.
35:41
It's impossible. There's absolutely no way that
35:45
that amount of DNA could change in 6000 years.
35:49
The only way you can solve that is by saying the usual way.
35:52
It must have been a miracle. Well, in science we don't talk
35:55
about miracles. We talk about evidence.
35:59
And that's what's important to us.
36:01
And I kind of resent Dr. Hovine telling us this is what we
36:06
believe and this is what I predict.
36:09
My prediction, my prediction is there's a revolution that's been
36:12
going on for a long time and it'll continue to go on and
36:14
it'll go on the same way it's always developed.
36:18
DNA will change bit by bit, little by little, and plants and
36:23
animals will change. I have a a couple of creationist
36:28
magazines at home that tell that told me in the creationist
36:32
magazine that the reason that we have thorns on blackberries and
36:36
roses and the reason we have a toothache is because Adam and
36:41
Eve fell from grace when they sinned.
36:43
I have a hard time accepting that as scientific evidence.
36:46
I would rather use as my scientific evidence tracing the
36:50
origin of of thorns and and origins of teeth back to their
36:56
beginning rather than relying on the fact that Adam and Eve
37:01
sinned and that brought a disaster into the world.
37:03
I'm done. Professors, would you like to
37:08
formulate a question or another statement?
37:11
You do have two minutes. Do we have more time do.
37:14
We have more time, you will. And after 5 minutes, how many?
37:19
After. Mr. Hogan goes I I didn't.
37:22
Hear what you said I. I we can't understand you.
37:24
I'm sorry. You'll have.
37:25
Five more minutes after Mr. Hogan has his.
37:27
So what were the two minutes? That you said that we had time
37:30
right now. Is it around the board?
37:32
One minute and 47 seconds and we just talked about it.
37:36
And. Who has that?
37:36
Time right now you do any. Any three of us?
37:39
Yes, Sir. Oh, OK.
37:40
Just trying to. Get to I'm sorry, image
37:42
straight. Thank you.
37:43
I, I, I do wonder about my earlier question.
37:46
I don't feel comfortable about it's being answered.
37:48
That is, you keep insisting that the God of the Bible in some way
37:52
is responsible for all this. You may even if you were to
37:55
prove that there's some kind of spiritual force, it is not
37:57
necessarily the God of the Bible.
37:59
So you're taking a giant leap there.
38:01
So I think there's a lot of that has to do with lots of faith
38:04
that has to be developed in there.
38:05
And I see that from our group here.
38:07
And I think Mark Twain said about faith, that faith is
38:11
believing something you know ain't true.
38:14
That's, that's I, I don't think you can rely on faith.
38:17
I don't. I think you need to.
38:19
If you want to be honest, intellectually honest, you've
38:22
got to come up with something a little bit more solid than just
38:25
to buy in to the fact that 80% of US Americans are God
38:29
believers and only 14% are not. So I'm.
38:36
I don't know is is that, can he answer that or absolutely?
38:39
All right, that'd. Be nice, what was the question?
38:42
Phrase the question again, please.
38:44
You didn't really get. You made a statement.
38:45
I didn't hear a question. What do you want to hear?
38:48
OK, my original question was for you to show where the deity
38:54
comes from and you keep insisting that it is the God of
38:59
the Bible, but that is another leap of faith that seems to be
39:04
part of that. Can you sort of trot that out a
39:06
little bit more? And let let me say one thing
39:11
also about the, the story that you gave about the National
39:16
Geographic, the OR, or was it the Scientific American with
39:20
the, the bird and dinosaur thing, It shows that the
39:26
scientific community is working. These people are in dialogue.
39:30
Error may occur where reason is left free to correct it.
39:35
And in your system, it's nailed down by the Bible.
39:38
And no, I cannot challenge that with the invention of all kinds
39:43
of strange beings. I just looked, this is very much
39:46
news to me. I looked at one of the books
39:48
that Jim has here, where the assertion is that evolution is
39:52
inspired by Satan and what now we have.
39:55
Thank you, Sir. We're going to.
39:56
Cut you off and you can be back in 5 minutes.
39:58
Carry on. I guess I'm still a little
40:02
baffled what the question was. If your question if you're going
40:06
back to you didn't like my answer of how God did it.
40:09
God was just God is outside of time, space, matter.
40:13
I think you need to stop and look at the theory that you are
40:16
believing in. Apparently because there are so
40:18
many thousands of unanswered questions.
40:20
See, it's not much easier for me to believe in the beginning God
40:24
than to believe in the beginning dirt or matter.
40:28
The evolutionist does not answer the question.
40:30
There's six different types of evolution as I shared clearly
40:33
earlier. If The Big Bang theory is true,
40:37
then I would like to know what exploded and where did it come
40:40
from and where did the energy come from and where did the
40:42
space come from for the matter to expand into and where did the
40:46
organization come from and where did the information come from?
40:49
There's a whole host of questions that are a whole lot
40:50
harder for you to answer then in the beginning.
40:53
God, where is it? Where does information come
40:55
from? Man is this universe is not just
40:58
random molecules circulating around.
40:59
I mean it, it, it carries information just like a book is
41:02
so much more than ink on a paper.
41:05
It carries information and the DNA is more than just chemicals.
41:10
It's information. So the evolutionist never
41:13
answers the question, where did this information come from?
41:15
Where did the energy come from? Where did the matter itself come
41:18
from? And you gripe about my belief.
41:20
I, I believe by faith in the beginning, God, I know, I, I
41:24
admit I don't understand that. But you believe hundreds of
41:26
things by faith. You don't even understand that
41:28
you're believing by faith. You think matter is either
41:30
eternal or can create itself? What's the two choices?
41:34
How did matter get here? The world is here.
41:36
How? Where did the matter come from?
41:38
Did it just happen by itself or is it all just imaginary?
41:41
We're not really here at all. You're faced with the option of
41:44
we're not really here, this is all just our imagination, or it
41:47
had a beginning, Or matter is eternal, which is both.
41:51
Both of the second two options are in violation of the obvious
41:53
laws of thermodynamics. Matter doesn't create itself and
41:58
everything degrades over time. So either it had a beginning or
42:02
it didn't. If it had a beginning, then what
42:04
was before the beginning? I mean, there's so many
42:06
thousands of things you take by faith.
42:08
You say, I say in the beginning God and you say, well, this
42:10
matter somehow either was always here or created itself.
42:14
And then this matter somehow became alive and then this first
42:18
living thing learned how to reproduce and then it learned
42:22
how to make something other than its kind.
42:24
I mean, even though nobody's ever seen that, nobody's ever
42:26
seen a dog produce a non dog or you mentioned about, you know,
42:30
the dog fact that a wolf and a a fox and a dog coming from a
42:33
common ancestor of Noah's ark in only 4400 years, for heaven's
42:37
sake, you believe they came from a rock.
42:40
I mean, come on. I don't think my theory is that
42:43
silly at all. So if my answer to your question
42:47
is still the same, I believe in the beginning God, I do take
42:49
that by faith. Here's the major difference.
42:51
Major difference that I don't think you're going to
42:53
understand. I admit mine is a religion.
42:58
They do not admit theirs is a religion.
43:01
They want you to think what they believe is science.
43:05
And all of you should pay for their religion to be taught in
43:08
this university. And that's the situation we have
43:10
today. And that's unfortunate.
43:12
They've always been situations where the majority taught
43:13
something. I mean, in the Soviet Union 15
43:15
years ago, if you stood up and said, hey, kids, I don't believe
43:18
in communism. I think capitalism is a better
43:19
system, you would be in Siberia if you survived.
43:24
And here in Emory University, if you stood up in your classroom
43:26
and said, I don't believe this evolution theory is true, I
43:29
think it's pretty obvious there must have been a designer to
43:31
this system. You would be an intellectual
43:33
Siberia. You would lose your job.
43:35
It has happened to hundreds of teachers just simply for
43:38
standing up and say, look, I think the evidence is here,
43:40
folks, There must have been a designer.
43:42
If I asked you to explain how computers came to be, but you
43:46
cannot use man as your answer. I only want a purely
43:50
naturalistic explanation for the origin of computers.
43:54
Purely naturalistic. The answer has to lie within the
43:57
computer. How did these molecules get
43:59
together? How did this data get together?
44:01
How did these plastic molecules come together?
44:02
And the and the different silicone chips?
44:04
How did it happen? Your answer has to lie in the
44:06
computer. I've already eliminated the only
44:09
obvious answer to the problem at the beginning.
44:11
By my definition, they're trying to eliminate the only answer to
44:14
the only logical answer to the question by their definition of
44:17
science. They want to define science as
44:20
things that we can observe and test and demonstrate the natural
44:22
world. OK, well then that eliminates
44:24
both evolution and creation. Both are unobserved.
44:27
We don't see anything changed. We don't see anything created
44:29
from nothing. Here's the problem.
44:30
Both creation and evolution are religious.
44:33
I admit mine's a religion. They don't admit theirs is a
44:35
religion. And all of us are paying for
44:37
their religion to be taught in the school system.
44:38
And I for one resent that. So my answer is still the same.
44:42
God did it my question for them, now your.
44:53
Question for them. Quickly, please.
44:55
OK. My question for them, I have
44:58
several thousand questions I guess I'd like to ask.
45:02
Does your? Textbook you're holding in front
45:04
of you that you said you trust here at used at this university.
45:07
Does the your textbook teach that there are vestigial
45:10
structures? If you can maybe just look in
45:12
the index under the word vestigial.
45:13
I'm going to take back at 5 minutes or just ask a question.
45:16
Yeah. Just a question.
45:17
You already had your five. OK, does your?
45:19
Textbook teach that the appendix is vestigial and is no longer
45:22
needed. Even though all doctors know the
45:24
appendix is not vestigial, it has been proven to be part of
45:26
the immune system. If your appendix is taken out,
45:29
you can live just like you can live without both your arms and
45:31
both your eyes. It doesn't prove you don't need
45:32
it. So just simple question, does
45:34
your textbook teach the kids that there are vestigial
45:37
structures and that is therefore evidence for evolution?
45:39
I think you have that one of your posters here if I'm not
45:41
mistaken. Yes, it does teach.
45:42
Us. There's vestigial structures,
45:48
professors. It doesn't.
45:50
Teach there's a God though. You have 5 minutes.
45:55
I don't. I don't get the point.
45:58
That's the way, that's the way DNA works.
46:01
There are there are certain changes in the DNA molecules
46:05
that will make some organs more efficient and some less
46:08
efficient. That's just the way it is.
46:11
You can find the vestigial structures on plants also.
46:13
If we have you and I have no control over what goes on in the
46:19
DNA in our body, we just pass it on to our offspring.
46:23
But to to say that to make one example like that and say that's
46:27
going to get rid of the theory of evolution is ridiculous.
46:30
We've got all these other proofs that about evolution.
46:33
Vestigial structures are just one tiny part of that.
46:40
OK, let me let me ask, let me say another thing.
46:45
I know where God came from. Man made him.
46:55
I also know where your. Computer came from, you know,
46:58
from science. It was put together by people
47:01
that understood physics and chemistry.
47:03
It was put together by people that are molecules and atoms.
47:06
It was put together by people with intelligence, people that
47:09
knew how to love and hate and and carry on biological
47:14
relationships because they have intelligence.
47:17
We got intelligence because we have brains.
47:19
We've got brains because we've got DNA.
47:22
It doesn't make any sense at all to say that.
47:24
Or the people that don't have religion, don't have feelings,
47:29
don't follow the law. The Constitution of our country
47:33
does not mention God or religion.
47:36
It's a we are a nation of laws. We're a nation of laws because
47:39
we're a nation of people that have intelligence.
47:42
That's the way it is. That's the way animals operate.
47:46
Some animals evolved a different way.
47:48
They evolved so they could fly or they could crawl or they
47:51
could run. And what was successful for them
47:54
worked out for them. What's successful for us is that
47:58
we have a good brain and it's and it, and we'll have to wait
48:03
and see what happens. Not in our lifetimes, but all
48:07
animals are in the same boat. All plants are in the same boat.
48:10
Sometimes when people were were doing this kind of stuff, people
48:14
are always thinking about human beings.
48:16
You can find the evolutionary theory in any any part of life.
48:20
It doesn't matter if you're talking about Maple trees.
48:23
I I still want an answer to the question of how did all these
48:28
different things evolve in just 6000 years?
48:32
When it isn't possible. It's mathematically not
48:35
possible. If it were, by now farmers would
48:40
have bred a different species. When he says something like,
48:43
well, you feed dogs, you always get dogs, well of course you do,
48:46
because you can't change them in 6000 years.
48:49
If you could, farmers would have bred something different.
48:52
We've been breeding Ant plants and animals for 4000 years.
48:55
We can't do it simply because it takes too long.
48:59
The Earth is old enough for evolution to have taken place,
49:04
but we haven't had enough time. They get different kinds of
49:08
animals, starting from Noah's Ark.
49:12
Ryan Hall, you want to say something?
49:14
We have a minute again. Yeah, we got one.
49:16
And a half. Oh my God.
49:18
Yeah, I, I, I do. One thing that sort of crossed
49:21
my mind as you were speaking is the difference between science
49:24
and religion. And it seems to me there is a
49:27
very clear cut difference. Science is self correcting in
49:32
the sense that the battle of disagreement will edit out that
49:38
which is wrong, and by essentially falsifiability.
49:43
That is, in other words, if a scientist advanced a particular
49:49
idea, he also can tell what particular conditions must be
49:54
the case for him to retract that idea.
49:57
And this is something that is absent in religion.
49:59
That is, religion is seeking truth, absolute truth, and
50:03
charges science with not finding truth, which it isn't trying.
50:08
Science works with probability and with self correction
50:13
religion. Ultimately I know I am right and
50:18
I'm not allowing anything else. This is what is so devastating
50:21
to try to talk to anybody who is a person of faith.
50:25
You can't get anywhere because I'll weasel out just about
50:28
anything you try to to offer by inventing new and new and
50:32
different interpretations and new passages of the Bible and
50:36
whatnot. And everybody else, of course,
50:38
is wrong except the one person is looking at it.
50:40
That kind of system, I think, cannot be possibly science.
50:47
Well, he said, science. Is self correcting.
50:49
I agree. I happen to like science quite a
50:50
bit. But see, the creation view
50:52
doesn't have to be constantly corrected because it's right,
50:55
OK. And you?
50:59
I like the answer that one gentleman gave.
51:02
He said, obviously the computer is here because of man, because
51:05
of intelligence. I mean, obviously this took a
51:08
designer. Well, duh.
51:12
So did the universe. So did the single cell in your
51:14
body. So did every living creature.
51:16
I mean, you can't explain the computer inside the computer,
51:20
can you? And you can't explain the
51:22
creation inside the creation. There has to be something above
51:25
an intelligent designer and you talk about devastating to talk
51:30
to a person of faith. What you said a few sentences
51:34
earlier was or what the other gentleman said was, of course we
51:37
don't see changes. Farmers have been raising dogs
51:39
for, you know, 4000 years and we don't see changes because it
51:43
takes too long. If you don't see faith in there,
51:49
I can't help you. OK.
51:51
You are relying on the unseen. Oh yes, long ago and far away.
51:58
Evolution has got to be the biggest fairy tale for adults
52:01
ever created. Everything you said required
52:04
faith. Well, we see dogs produce dogs,
52:07
but if you give them billions of years, well, OK, you just left
52:10
science and went to religion and didn't even see it.
52:13
You didn't even see what happened in your mind.
52:16
And one of you teaches a course on logic.
52:18
I mean, if this was a student of yours doing this, you'd give
52:19
them an F. And yet your fellow professors
52:21
believe it and you think it's great.
52:23
They jump from faith to science back and forth all the time.
52:27
Well, we see dogs produce dogs. But if we had enough time, stop,
52:30
stop, stop. You're leaving science right
52:32
that moment. So I've got 3 minutes.
52:35
Let me just cover a couple things that I resent being in
52:37
the textbooks. And I would like to hear if this
52:39
is in your textbook. My question is, is this in your
52:42
textbook? And after I show you with you
52:43
the evidence, I want to know why.
52:45
OK. This textbook says many
52:46
organisms retain traces of their evolutionary history.
52:49
For example, the whale retains pelvic and leg bones as useless
52:52
vestiges. Earlier it was mentioned one of
52:55
the evidences for evolution is vestigial organs.
52:58
Andrew Carnegie left behind millions of dollars to start an
53:00
organization called the National Center for Science Education, of
53:03
which you are a part. OK, the National Center for
53:06
Science education. I was in Berkeley last week. 147
53:09
professors at Berkeley refused to debate me.
53:12
Jeannie Scott won't debate me for any amount of money on the
53:14
planet. Here's Jeannie Scott right here.
53:16
I'll fly out at my expense and take them all on.
53:18
This is welcome to the homepage of National Center for Science
53:21
Education. A tax exempt nonprofit
53:25
membership organization working to defend the teaching of
53:27
evolution against sectarian attack.
53:29
We are a nationally recognized clearing house for information
53:32
and advice to keep evolution in the classroom and scientific
53:35
creationism out. The National Center for Science
53:37
Education is a little bitty storefront building in
53:39
Berserkley, California. I was there four days ago and it
53:42
got five people working in this little building.
53:45
And they they teach that maybe the cow evolved into the whale.
53:48
That's what their literature teaches.
53:50
This textbook says the whale has a pelvis and a leg bone.
53:53
Whales have hind limb bones that have no function.
53:55
Just imagine whales walking around.
53:57
It's true. These are the bones they're
53:58
talking about right there. Just imagine the whale walking
54:02
around. I'm sorry, I tried and I can't.
54:05
OK. They say the whale's pelvis has
54:08
no apparent function. The whale's pelvis is evidence
54:10
of its evolution from 4 legged land dwelling mammals.
54:13
This is simply a lie, OK? Those little bones are anchor
54:16
points that special muscles attach to that allow the whales
54:19
to reproduce. This has nothing to do with
54:22
whales walking on land, it has to do with making baby whales.
54:26
So either the authors of this textbook are ignorant about
54:28
whale anatomy and certainly shouldn't be talking about it,
54:31
or they're deliberately lying to you and desperate for evidence
54:34
for their theory. So my question is very simple.
54:36
Does your textbook teach the whale has a vestigial pelvis?
54:39
If so, why would you use a biology book in your biology
54:42
class at A at a famous university like this based on an
54:45
author that doesn't even understand his basic anatomy of
54:47
whales and he's either lying to the students or he's ignorant?
54:50
Why would you use something like that?
54:51
And how could a vestigial structure be evidence for
54:53
evolution when that's an example of losing, not gaining?
54:57
It doesn't tell you how the whale got the legs.
54:59
Oh, it's slowly losing. Well, in the 1st place it's not
55:01
slowly losing. I'm OK, it's a lie.
55:03
Secondly, even if it was, that's the opposite of evolution.
55:07
How on earth can this be evidence for a theory?
55:09
Yes, boys and girls, we're slowly losing things.
55:11
That's how we got it all well. Duh.
55:15
So my question is simple, does your book teach there are
55:19
vestigial structures, specifically the whale having a
55:21
vestigial pelvis? If it does, why would you use a
55:24
book like that in a university like this?
55:29
Excuse me, Sir, it's. Just a quick reminder.
55:33
We. I'll turn your mic on just a
55:35
second. We're going to go to an.
55:39
Intermission in one more iteration.
55:42
So yes, absolutely your table, your table and we're going to go
55:47
on intermission after that the. Book does not teach that the
55:50
whale has a vestigial pelvis. That's one of the most ignorant
55:52
statements I've ever heard of. The pelvis is an absolute
55:56
necessary thing for the whale. He attaches all of his muscles
55:59
to it. It's one of the major things
56:00
that helps him swim. I happen to be keeping up with
56:04
what's going on with the evolution of the whale.
56:06
And we have a very good set of bones saved from fossil records
56:15
showing that the whales evolved through a long period of time
56:21
from animals that are on land to animals that are in the water.
56:24
We have that evidence. And for to say we don't have it
56:28
or to say that we're lying is disingenuous to this audience.
56:32
I, I ask you don't believe, don't believe me.
56:36
Let me get off the subject a second right up there.
56:40
Here's the things we try to do in science.
56:42
We say let's not believe revelations.
56:45
Just somebody just says, I know because I know, I know.
56:48
That's not good enough. Believe authority.
56:51
No, let's not believe authority. Let's not believe any of us up
56:54
here at the table. You folks can get the copy of
56:59
this book or this thing here and Get the facts.
57:04
You don't have to believe me. You don't have to believe him.
57:07
You can find out for yourself. You don't have to trust
57:10
authorities, even me. The second thing is tradition.
57:13
You don't have to trust tradition.
57:15
I mean, what the I mean, come on, there's different traditions
57:18
all over the world, but we can trust science because science
57:21
should be the same all over the world.
57:23
What I'm trying to say to you is when I teach my classes,
57:27
evidence is what's important. I have no evidence that God
57:31
exists. I have no evidence that there
57:34
was a Noah's ark. I have no evidence that there
57:36
was an Adam and Eve. I have evidence that whales
57:40
evolved from animals live on land, and I can prove it.
57:50
Well, we, we do have. I haven't had anything to say.
57:54
There's a lot of talking going on, and that's unusual for me,
57:59
but the the one thing that we can prove by the great
58:06
philosophical statement kajito ergo assume in Latin, which says
58:11
I think. Therefore I am.
58:14
Now what that says is that I exist and prove that I am there
58:20
because I can think, but it doesn't necessarily say that you
58:23
exist. I can't prove that you exist,
58:26
but I can prove that I exist. And I also know that I'm here
58:34
and I'm and, and I do believe in you.
58:36
There's high probability that I do believe in you and you are
58:39
here. And somehow you got here and
58:44
somehow this happened probably in the last time between 10 and
58:48
20 billion years ago, probably to the record of the Earth,
58:53
which was maybe 4 to 6 billion years ago.
58:57
And basic all of this biological stuff is very interesting.
59:03
And it does. Prove to how?
59:06
Science brings about to cause things to happen, but it's so
59:11
complicated. It is so so.
59:17
Complicated. That that it you, you can you
59:20
can confuse the process by misinterpreting the results.
59:26
We do have, as my colleagues say, the scientific method and
59:32
it based on the best information that we can put together to form
59:38
to what we know is true. It doesn't mean that we know the
59:43
truth. It means we have maybe some
59:45
probability of the truth and that may be the best that we
59:48
will always have but to. Just talk about.
59:54
Start talking about chickens and dinosaurs and I like eating
59:58
chickens because chickens are descendants of dinosaurs.
1:00:01
And every time I eat a chicken, it makes me happy because I
1:00:06
think a lot of them ate our ancestors a long time before
1:00:10
that, about 160 million years ago.
1:00:14
So I'm going to, I'm going to leave with my colleagues and.
1:00:23
With the fact that we, I exist, we do think and we are here and,
1:00:29
and how the record got as to how got to be here could be debated.
1:00:37
We do have information, we, we probably miss more information
1:00:42
than we than we know. But I will say this, that we've
1:00:46
got to be very careful as to how we interpret the record when
1:00:52
we're trying to, to talk about something because we are, we are
1:00:57
subject to ourselves to, to, to sink into confusion and to
1:01:07
basically involve yourself into what becomes voodoo science.
1:01:12
And, and that is very, very dangerous.
1:01:25
OK, let me cover 5 main points here.
1:01:29
He said we have evidence of whales evolving from land
1:01:32
animals in the 1st place. This is absolutely incorrect,
1:01:36
OK? If he's talking about
1:01:37
ambalocitas, you need to study here.
1:01:39
This was made mostly of imagination.
1:01:42
If that's your evidence, you need to study the ambalocitas a
1:01:44
little better. OK, there is overwhelming
1:01:47
evidence that ambalocitis is just an unusual animal, or just
1:01:50
an animal that may be still existing someplace.
1:01:52
There were just a few bones found and a whole lot of plaster
1:01:54
of Paris and imagination used to put it together.
1:01:58
Vasilosaurus is not an intermediate.
1:02:00
The Serpentine form of the body and peculiar serrated cheek
1:02:03
teeth made it plain that these animals could not possibly have
1:02:07
been ancestral to any modern whales.
1:02:10
This is from one of the experts on invertebrate history here the
1:02:13
evolutionary. His origin of whales remains
1:02:15
controversial among zoologist Compton's Encyclopedia a couple
1:02:18
years ago. Pachacetus, pictured here, is
1:02:21
made from one small piece of a skull, a few piece of jaw, a
1:02:25
small piece of jaw and a few teeth.
1:02:28
You. Find.
1:02:28
A piece of the skull, a few teeth on a piece of the jaw, and
1:02:31
that's proof it's intermediate between a whale and a cow.
1:02:34
You have got to be kidding. I'm sure this is one of the ones
1:02:37
in his fossil proof revolution. And you're missing such a major
1:02:41
point. I don't know if I can help if
1:02:43
you can't get this, but no fossil, no fossils count as
1:02:49
evidence for evolution in a court of law.
1:02:52
They would laugh at you because you bring some bones in and say,
1:02:56
your honor, this is the ancestor of Wales.
1:02:59
Well, first place, there's not enough to tell what it is.
1:03:03
Secondly, you don't know that that is the ancestor of anybody.
1:03:08
You don't know that that animal had any kids that lived.
1:03:11
It is absolutely impossible to use any fossils at all as
1:03:16
evidence for evolution. And anybody that's telling you
1:03:19
fossils are evidence for evolution, you talk about voodoo
1:03:22
science. That is it, folks.
1:03:23
OK, we know these bones produce something other than their kind.
1:03:27
Even though no animal today can do this, these bones were able
1:03:29
to do it. That's absolute voodoo science.
1:03:32
That's a good word for. I've got to use that one for
1:03:34
now, and I appreciate that. OK.
1:03:36
And if we could rewind the tape, we would hear you said many
1:03:39
times. Well, probably it happened.
1:03:42
We're here, so that proves we're here.
1:03:46
So that proves evolution. Man, you talk about voodoo
1:03:50
science and absolute insanity and logic.
1:03:53
We're here. I agree.
1:03:55
That doesn't have that doesn't offer any support for the
1:03:57
evolution theory. Yes, I agree.
1:04:00
We're here. I I happen to like being here.
1:04:02
OK, so and then you said something I think the average
1:04:05
audience may miss if you're not careful here.
1:04:08
He said, well, it's so complicated.
1:04:12
And the implication that I get, because I get this all the time.
1:04:15
I've had done many debates, universities and I I don't I
1:04:17
I've never had a class in debate.
1:04:19
I don't understand how the rules are and I don't know all about
1:04:21
all this time keeping stuff. All I know is I think the
1:04:23
evidence is is overwhelmingly obvious.
1:04:25
There must have been a designer. OK, And I'm here to defend the
1:04:29
biblical view of creation as the only logical scientific choice.
1:04:33
And I'm here to tell people I resent everybody's tax dollars
1:04:35
going to pay for this voodoo science of evolution to be
1:04:37
taught in this university and other universities around the
1:04:39
world. Beer is often sold at football
1:04:41
games, but beer has absolutely nothing to do with football, OK?
1:04:45
Beer does not become athletic by association.
1:04:48
And just because evolution is mixed into a science book, that
1:04:51
does not make evolution part of science.
1:04:53
It's just mixed in the book and I'm sorry about that.
1:04:55
OK, I'm trying to fix it. But he said it's so complicated.
1:04:57
We don't want to confuse, confuse the people or something
1:05:01
to that effect. I don't remember the exact quote
1:05:03
here. To me, what what that's trying
1:05:04
to imply is they're smart. You're too dumb to understand.
1:05:08
And anybody that doesn't believe in evolution is simply dumb.
1:05:10
And if you, if you just would study this for 100 hours like I
1:05:12
have, then you'd believe like I do.
1:05:14
And since you don't believe like I do.
1:05:17
You haven't studied. Enough and you're dumb.
1:05:20
That's the implication I'm getting.
1:05:22
Is anybody else getting that from this tonight?
1:05:24
OK, now we do exist. We are here.
1:05:28
I agree. And that is your evidence for
1:05:30
evolution. You got to be kidding.
1:05:32
All of the evidence of evolution from whales first place, no
1:05:35
fossils count. None.
1:05:36
Think about it, no fossils can possibly count for evidence.
1:05:40
And the fossils they find are little fragments here and there
1:05:42
and they are putting their imagination and interpretation
1:05:45
on those fossils. Look, when you find a bunch of
1:05:48
there is no such thing as a fossil record.
1:05:50
How they teach that blows my mind.
1:05:51
They say, well, in the fossil record, I said, well, what
1:05:53
fossil record? There is no fossil record.
1:05:56
There are a bunch of bones in the dirt.
1:05:59
There's a bunch of. Bones in the dirt.
1:06:01
I agree. I happen to have a huge fossil
1:06:03
collection myself. But those bones don't have dates
1:06:06
on them. They don't come with a little
1:06:07
tag saying this one evolved into this one.
1:06:10
All you do is put your preconceived evolutionary
1:06:12
imagination idea on top of these fossils that are found.
1:06:15
See, the creationists and the evolutionists are both looking
1:06:17
at the same evidence. We both see the.
1:06:20
Fossils, I see that as an example of death.
1:06:24
They see that as an example of, wow, that's how we got ahead.
1:06:26
All these animals died. Isn't that wonderful?
1:06:29
No, that's proof there was a big flood because fossils just don't
1:06:32
normally form except under special conditions.
1:06:33
And billions and billions of fossils are found.
1:06:36
That's to me, that's evidence of the Bible.
1:06:37
I see it that way. Thank you.
1:06:39
The first question will be. Posed to the evolutionist side.
1:06:44
The question is. Is The Big Bang theory a
1:06:47
reasonable scientific theory? Please explain.
1:06:50
You'll have 7 minutes. Mr. Hoeven left 3 minutes to
1:06:52
rebuttal and then we will go on to completely independent
1:06:55
question Is The Big Bang theory a reasonable scientific theory?
1:06:58
Please explain. Thank you, Judge.
1:07:00
Is that to? Us so that's what we're asking
1:07:05
I'll answer it wrong. Yes I will I will answer the the
1:07:10
issue for the team yes, the The Big Bang theory is viable, but
1:07:17
it's one of two theories about the existence of the of the
1:07:22
universe, one of which was a constant energy universe.
1:07:25
It said that basically simply exists and energy is somehow
1:07:30
generated with within itself inside.
1:07:33
There is no scientific evidence to show that that particular
1:07:39
theory of the universe has ever been proven or or shown any
1:07:45
evidence to to show. The Big Bang theory does have a
1:07:51
sea a piece of evidence that Wilson and Conzio from Bell Labs
1:07:57
got a Nobel Prize for discovering.
1:08:02
The fact that there was radiation throughout the entire
1:08:08
universe is in all particular directions believed to be the
1:08:12
the remnants of the explosion of the energy in the birth of the
1:08:16
universe. And their antennas would
1:08:19
basically they could point no matter how they pointed the
1:08:22
antennas in any any direction. They discovered that the
1:08:26
intensity of radiation in that particular direction was the
1:08:31
same, which was was essentially proof, a proof of the of a piece
1:08:37
of data that showed that there may have been something that
1:08:41
that made the The Big Bang theory.
1:08:43
So that we, we, we have that the scientific evidence right now is
1:08:50
that The Big Bang theory is the best knowledge that we have.
1:08:58
It is believed there are some very strange things about it.
1:09:03
It starts essentially with there was a void.
1:09:08
Now the void is it wasn't a hole or a box with nothing in it.
1:09:14
It basically didn't even have space.
1:09:17
It was nothing. And somehow a black hole the
1:09:23
size of an atom became unstable and exploded and it filled
1:09:30
essentially into an area of an atom 10 to the six more mass
1:09:36
than we currently have in the existing universe.
1:09:40
I find having something that packed together and how close we
1:09:46
are here and if we believe in the conservation of mass
1:09:51
principles and things of this nature, all things have to be
1:09:55
conserved and the conserved the, the conservation has to exist
1:10:01
either in the beginning, in the middle and at the end.
1:10:06
And as such we are here and know today the information and the
1:10:11
knowledge had to have existed at the at the beginning of the
1:10:15
creation of the universe. Now you can, you can, you can
1:10:20
place anything that you wish about how this happened or who
1:10:24
happened or how it happened or where it come from.
1:10:27
I don't know how a God could come outside of our universe
1:10:31
because there's nothing outside of our universe.
1:10:33
It's a void. There's nothing you can't go
1:10:35
outside of our universe. But we, we do know that the, the
1:10:45
10 to the billion years ago that, that, that from the the
1:10:49
beginning of 10 billion years ago, we have the universe
1:10:53
essentially to its time to date, the cooling of energy in the
1:10:58
formation of stars, in the formation of materials and
1:11:03
eventually forming planets. And six, four to 6 billion years
1:11:07
ago, we had a crust around this particular planet and eventually
1:11:12
some, some chemicals got together and, and we had life
1:11:18
and, and the rest is here and we're here.
1:11:21
And I can, I, I, I believe that and I believe that it's so.
1:11:26
And I all of the, all of the absolute details, and there are
1:11:33
many, many details are, are probably less important to me
1:11:40
than the fact that it did begin and it does exist and that we're
1:11:44
here today. I'm not, I'm not fighting about
1:11:48
with religion. I, I'm a Christian.
1:11:51
I have no, I have no conflict with, with Christian beliefs, my
1:11:56
Christian beliefs and and with the scientific methods that I
1:12:00
also believe in as well. So, you know, I don't see
1:12:04
anything that's contradictory to this.
1:12:08
Luther, you're more am I on OK. You're more of an expert at this
1:12:13
than I am. So I was just going to ask you
1:12:16
to elaborate a little bit of the possibility of getting some
1:12:20
corroborative evidence of something like The Big Bang
1:12:24
through the view of the Hubble back into time.
1:12:28
Is that something that might? Provide.
1:12:32
Corroborative evidence for them. Yes, the, the, the scientific
1:12:37
record is, is, is accumulating substantially about our, our
1:12:44
measurements and, and essentially what is going on in
1:12:49
the universe and essentially what, what we know about the
1:12:54
mechanism of this. We're dealing with astronomical
1:12:57
sizes and huge and huge and huge places.
1:13:02
And if it started with a little place the size of an atom, we do
1:13:09
know that it is done. I can tell you one thing that we
1:13:12
can all say that is true. Time has always gone forward,
1:13:18
and time goes forward with entropy into diversity, and
1:13:23
diversity generates through time.
1:13:27
It creates everything that's possible.
1:13:31
And what we? Have today possible?
1:13:33
Is what we have and what we are observing.
1:13:46
Doctor Hoeven you will. Now have 3 minutes to rebuttal
1:13:49
that statement and then I will ask you a completely independent
1:13:52
question. Thank you.
1:13:54
OK. Humanists regard the universe as
1:13:57
self existing and not created based on The Big Bang theory.
1:14:01
Textbooks say 18 or 20 billion years ago there was a all the
1:14:04
matter in the universe, which would be a lot of stuff.
1:14:06
And by the way, the word universe means a single spoken
1:14:08
sentence. Universe single spoken sentence
1:14:11
God said when he said there nothing can exist outside the
1:14:14
universe. This is about like two computers
1:14:16
talking to each other. Does man exist?
1:14:18
Nothing exists outside the computer where it duh.
1:14:23
OK, all the matter in the universe was in concentrated in
1:14:27
one very dense, very hot region that may have been much smaller
1:14:29
than a period on this page. I think that's what we just
1:14:31
heard a moment ago. OK, this textbook says after
1:14:34
many billions of years, all the matter and energy will once
1:14:37
again be packed into a small area.
1:14:39
This area will be no larger than the period at the end of this
1:14:41
sentence. Then another Big Bang will
1:14:43
occur. It happens every eighty to 100
1:14:44
billion years. Save the planet.
1:14:46
We're going to get squished, folks.
1:14:47
OK, this guy said nothing really means nothing.
1:14:53
That's. That's brilliant.
1:14:54
OK, not only matter and energy would disappear, but also space
1:14:57
and time. However, physicists theorize
1:14:59
that from the state of nothingness, the universe began
1:15:02
in a gigantic explosion. I believe that's what I just
1:15:04
heard in the last few minutes. OK, this whole Big Bang idea
1:15:07
started with a guy named George or Isaac, I mean Edward George
1:15:09
Latimer, who said the thing that exploded was a few light years
1:15:12
in diameter. Well, at the least that's about
1:15:15
12 trillion miles. OK, then by 1965 they said,
1:15:18
well, it was only 275,000,000 miles, 1972, I think it was.
1:15:22
Scientific American said, no, the thing that exploded, The Big
1:15:24
Bang came from something only 71 million miles in diameter.
1:15:28
Later they said, Oh no, it's only 54,000 miles. 1983, they
1:15:32
said the thing that exploded was a trillionth the diameter of a
1:15:35
proton. Now that's tiny.
1:15:37
OK, And now they're saying nothing exploded.
1:15:39
Here's Discover magazine. Two years ago.
1:15:41
Where did everything come from? The universe burst into
1:15:44
something from absolutely nothing, zero, nada.
1:15:47
As it got bigger, it became filled with even more stuff that
1:15:49
came from absolutely nowhere. How is that possible?
1:15:51
Ask Alan Guth. His theory will explain
1:15:53
everything. Well, what does Alan Guth say?
1:15:55
In Scientific American, Alan Guth says the observable
1:15:58
universe could have evolved from an infinitesimal region.
1:16:01
That's a dot, he said. It's then tempting to go one
1:16:03
step further and speculate that the entire universe evolved from
1:16:06
literally nothing. Folks, why would a sentence like
1:16:08
this be found in Scientific American?
1:16:11
There's nothing scientific about that stated exhibits incredible
1:16:14
faith. But the textbooks teach this.
1:16:16
This dot was spinning. It's spun faster and faster.
1:16:19
Finally, it exploded The Big Bang.
1:16:21
There are so many problems with The Big Bang, simple physical
1:16:24
science problems. What exploded?
1:16:26
Where did the matter come from? Where did the energy come from?
1:16:29
Where did the organization come from?
1:16:30
Where did the information come from?
1:16:33
The story he gave was so good. I got to replay the tape and
1:16:35
hear this. You know, 4.6 billion years ago,
1:16:37
the planet developed a rocky crust.
1:16:39
The chemicals got together, you know, blah, blah, blah.
1:16:41
Here we are. Exactly what I said earlier.
1:16:43
That's what that's what the theory teaches.
1:16:44
Now, if he wants to believe that, that's fine.
1:16:45
I don't care what you believe. But don't call that science and
1:16:49
don't make me pay to teach that to the rest of these kids in
1:16:51
this university. These kids came here to learn
1:16:52
some science, not a fairy tale like that.
1:16:54
Thank you, Doctor Hoeven the next.
1:17:02
Question will be posed to you. You'll have 7 minutes and then
1:17:04
the evolutionists will have 3 minutes.
1:17:07
The questions more of an open end one.
1:17:11
Please prove, disprove, or generally talk about carbon
1:17:14
dating and how it relates to evolution.
1:17:23
Get my projector. On here, See I have about 7000
1:17:28
slides in PowerPoint so it helps if you ask the questions in the
1:17:31
same order that I have the answers.
1:17:35
Carbon dating. OK, carbon dating.
1:17:39
Actually, fossils are dated by their position in the geologic
1:17:41
column. They are not dated by carbon
1:17:43
dating. Or potassium, argon, rubidium,
1:17:45
strontium, LED 2O8, LED 2O6. None of those matter.
1:17:47
A fossil is dated by the position in the geologic column.
1:17:50
They're called index fossils. This guy admits it.
1:17:52
Radiometric dating would not have been feasible if the
1:17:54
geologic column had not been erected first.
1:17:56
The geologic column was invented in 1918 thirties.
1:17:59
That was taught for 120 years and became accepted as science.
1:18:02
And the geologic column doesn't exist any place on the planet.
1:18:04
OK, there is no geologic column. There are layers of rocks and
1:18:08
they're assuming that it's different ages.
1:18:09
That's the problem right there. This guy says fossils have been
1:18:13
and still are the best and most accurate method of dating and
1:18:16
correlating the rocks in which they occur.
1:18:18
We go through all kinds of examples on this, but on video 7
1:18:21
Pierce atmosphere is about 100 miles thick.
1:18:23
It is mostly nitrogen, 78 percent, 21% oxygen, little bit
1:18:27
of CO2 for plants to breathe and very little radioactive carbon
1:18:30
14.0000765%. This radioactive carbon 14 mixes
1:18:36
with oxygen and it becomes carbon dioxide.
1:18:38
Most of it does and the plants are breathing carbon dioxide.
1:18:41
Now carbon 14 is formed when radiation strikes the
1:18:44
atmosphere. The nitrogen, which is the
1:18:46
majority of gas are up up there and here.
1:18:49
Nitrogen gets bombarded by cosmic rays and it bombards the
1:18:53
upper atmosphere producing fast moving neutrinos.
1:18:55
These neutrinos collide with atmospheric nitrogen, producing
1:18:58
carbon 14. That's how it's made.
1:19:01
If you look at a periodic table, carbon and nitrogen are right
1:19:03
next to each other. Nitrogen is normally an atomic
1:19:05
weight of 14 and carbon is an atomic weight of 12.
1:19:08
But if the nitrogen gets blasted with these neutrinos, it turns
1:19:11
into carbon 14, which is a rare, very rare and radioactive
1:19:16
element. It is radioactive just like
1:19:18
uranium or any other radioactive element and you can hear it as
1:19:21
it decays or breaks apart and throws off all the little
1:19:23
particles into the into space around it.
1:19:24
Now carbon 14 is being produced by the sun or by the neutrinos
1:19:28
by the high speed radiation. Long, doesn't matter.
1:19:31
It breaks back down to nitrogen. About half of it breaks down
1:19:33
every 57130 years. OK, this is the estimated to be
1:19:37
the half life. Obviously nobody watched it for
1:19:38
5700 years. But during photosynthesis,
1:19:41
plants are breathing in CO2, and so the animals eat the plants
1:19:45
and make it part of their body. So you and I probably have
1:19:47
carbon 14 in us because at some time in your life you have
1:19:50
either eaten plants or you've eaten animals that have eaten
1:19:52
plants. That's about all there is.
1:19:55
OK, so these plants are absorbing things out of the
1:19:57
atmosphere. They're absorbing the carbon 14.
1:20:00
It becomes part of their tissue. It is assumed the ratio of C-14
1:20:04
to normal C-12 in the atmosphere would be the same ratio found in
1:20:07
living plants and animals. If the atmosphere is .0000765%,
1:20:12
it is assumed plants and animals have the same percentage.
1:20:14
That has never been demonstrated, but that's that's
1:20:16
a reasonable assumption. OK.
1:20:18
When the planter animal dies, it stops taking in new C-14.
1:20:21
So in theory you can tell how long it's been dead by measuring
1:20:24
how much C-14 is left. This entire process was invented
1:20:27
by Willard Libby, Nobel Prize winner for inventing carbon
1:20:30
dating. University of Chicago in 1947 to
1:20:33
53. He worked on this, moved to
1:20:34
Stanford University. Carbon 14 continues to decay
1:20:38
after the animal dies. If half of it's gone, you would
1:20:41
assume it's been dead 5700 years.
1:20:43
It can't get anymore, obviously, so it's going to go out of
1:20:46
balance. Carbon dating is actually a
1:20:48
comparison of the carbon 14 in the object with the carbon 14 in
1:20:51
the atmosphere. It's a ratio, OK, if it's
1:20:54
.000765, it is still alive. If it's only 00003825, it's 5700
1:21:00
years old, etcetera, etcetera. The less it has, the older it
1:21:04
is. This is how the theory works.
1:21:05
It goes from 1/2 to 1/4 to an eighth to a 16th to not much.
1:21:09
OK, they compare the amount of C-14 in the object being dated
1:21:12
with the amount in the atmosphere to estimate how long
1:21:15
it's been dead if only half of it has been.
1:21:18
If it's only got half as much, it's assumed it died 57130 years
1:21:21
ago. Sounds good, but there are some
1:21:22
assumptions that mess up everything.
1:21:24
If I told you to fill a barrel with water, but there were holes
1:21:27
in the barrel, as you're putting water in, it's leaking out.
1:21:31
It's kind of like a check checkbook.
1:21:32
You know, you keep putting the money in, it keeps leaking out
1:21:34
in different places. But at some point you're going
1:21:37
to reach a stage called equilibrium.
1:21:38
You'll never feel the barrel past that point unless you speed
1:21:40
up the intake or cut down the outgo.
1:21:42
The Earth's atmosphere is going to have the same problem.
1:21:45
If you took a brand new planet Earth, created it, poof, and
1:21:48
stuck it out going around the sun 93,000,000 miles away, it
1:21:51
would start developing C14 from radiation and start losing it to
1:21:54
decay. So the question is they they
1:21:56
wandered this back in 1950, how long would it take Earth's
1:21:59
atmosphere to reach equilibrium? The consensus was it would
1:22:03
probably take about 30,000 years for the Earth to reach
1:22:06
equilibrium. And then Willard Libby and the
1:22:08
boys at University of Chicago made a tragic mistake.
1:22:10
They made two fundamentally fatally flawed assumptions.
1:22:14
They said well we know the Earth is millions of years old mistake
1:22:17
#1 so we can ignore the equilibrium problem.
1:22:21
They ignored it. Problem is radiocarbon is still
1:22:24
forming 28 to 37% faster than it's decaying with carbon 14 is
1:22:28
proof the earth is less than 30,000 years old or else it
1:22:31
would all be stabilized by now. It would be stable in the
1:22:34
atmosphere and it's not OK, we can talk all day about that, but
1:22:37
basically if an animal is still alive, it should give you about
1:22:39
16 clicks on your Geiger counter.
1:22:41
If it's only giving you eight, you're going to say it's 5700
1:22:44
years old. If it's only giving you four,
1:22:45
it's 11,000 years old, etcetera, etcetera.
1:22:47
This is how carbon dating is done.
1:22:49
I won't have time to cover all of the evidences I have, but I
1:22:52
just give you a few examples of how it simply doesn't work
1:22:55
because one good experiment is worth a pound of theory any day.
1:22:59
Back in 1949 when they developed it, the lower leg of a mammoth
1:23:02
dated 15,000 years old, but the skin dated 21,000 years old.
1:23:05
Same animal. It's not working.
1:23:07
In 19491963, living mollusk shells dated 2300 years old.
1:23:12
It's still not working, folks. 1970 At the proceedings of the
1:23:16
12th Nobel Symposium, they said if a carbon date supports our
1:23:19
theories, we put it in the main text.
1:23:21
If it is not entirely contradict them, we put it in a footnote.
1:23:24
If it's completely out of date, we just drop it.
1:23:27
Freshly killed seal carbon dated 1300 years old.
1:23:30
One part of a mammoth is 40,000 years old.
1:23:32
Another part is 26,000 from the same animal.
1:23:35
Now we can talk all day about carbon dating, but here's living
1:23:37
snails, carbon dated 27,000 years old. 1984 Science magazine
1:23:42
there's I don't have time to cover them all, but watch my
1:23:44
video #7 which is why it's out there. 1992 two Colorado Creek
1:23:48
mammoths and Alaska found side by side one day to 22,000 years
1:23:52
old. The other one was 16,000 years
1:23:53
old. They're side by side. 1996 at
1:23:56
Berkeley University, they used the most advanced dating
1:23:58
techniques they have. They discovered these things
1:24:01
that they thought were quarter million years old actually were
1:24:04
53,000 to 27,000. I'd like to point out, your
1:24:08
honor, that is still a 96% error.
1:24:11
If you think carbon dating proves the age of anything, you
1:24:14
need your head examined. Thank you.
1:24:23
I'd like a show of. Hands of how many understood
1:24:25
that I just We aren't the only liars here.
1:24:39
I. I have a pamphlet here written
1:24:43
by the Institute for Creation Research on radioactive
1:24:48
isotopes. I'm quoting a sentence of the
1:24:52
conclusion they're they're doing investigation on radioactive
1:24:56
isotopes. The thing is called a rape and
1:25:01
it says we would appreciate your involvement in this effort.
1:25:05
The most important contribution you can make is through prayer.
1:25:08
We recognize this is a monumental task and we need you
1:25:11
to pray that we have wisdom as we work.
1:25:15
Science would never pray for success I wanted to find out why
1:25:20
the evolutionists and the creationists disagreed on this
1:25:23
carbon dating thing so much so I went to one of the most famous
1:25:27
creationists that I know. Henry Morris is the past
1:25:31
president of the institution Creation Research.
1:25:35
In his pamphlet of the Creation Institute Creation Research
1:25:40
Society in March 1982, page 226, he explains why only dark carbon
1:25:49
dating that shows a short time is effective.
1:25:51
I quote when God squeezed energy into atoms, He squeezed and held
1:25:57
the atoms so tightly that there was no unstable elements and
1:26:01
therefore no radioactivity. At the fall of Adam and Eve, he
1:26:06
relaxed his grips slightly which affected every atom.
1:26:10
It allowed some to become unstable, that is radioactive.
1:26:15
It's all because of Adam and Eve's sin that we have unstable
1:26:21
radioactivity. Isn't that right?
1:26:25
Want to add anything to this? We don't need.
1:26:29
That any more time we're done, OK?
1:26:32
Let me go ahead and pose the next question to you.
1:26:34
I'd like to give you guys an open-ended 1/2.
1:26:36
For fairness sake, let me just read the question to you
1:26:40
verbatim and then please talk on this topic.
1:26:43
Question says in evolution there appears to be no real purpose to
1:26:47
life. What hope do you have to offer
1:26:50
me to even bother to continue to live?
1:26:53
So I guess. I you.
1:26:57
Know. What?
1:26:57
How do you say? For the sake of open endedness,
1:27:00
please, I I guess we're talking about morality, purpose,
1:27:05
anything along those lines. Well, let me, let me.
1:27:07
Let me point point out one thing that this is, you know, sort of
1:27:12
confusing terms. There may not be a purpose
1:27:16
ostensibly defined for the universe as a whole or for
1:27:21
society as a whole even, but that doesn't mean that an
1:27:24
individual could not set up a purpose for him or herself.
1:27:28
I I'm going to live first, then I decide what's worthwhile for
1:27:33
me to strive for in my life. If I simply subject myself to
1:27:37
the mass and say because they don't have a purpose, I'm going
1:27:41
to kill myself, there's something demented.
1:27:43
I think I need counselling at that point for all practical
1:27:46
purposes here. So here again, I think, I think
1:27:49
a purpose is something that we create individually for
1:27:54
ourselves. It's not something that we
1:27:55
deduce from the nature of the universe in any way.
1:28:01
I'm sure that everyone here has some kind of a purpose in their
1:28:05
existence defined by themselves to find where they're going to
1:28:10
go. So that that would be my take on
1:28:12
that. And did you want to sure look at
1:28:21
DNA? Changes and it changes so that
1:28:25
animals and plants survive. If the DNA changes in a brain of
1:28:30
an animal to make that animals breed successfully by taking
1:28:35
care of its young, taking care of his brothers and sisters, and
1:28:38
taking care of his family, that animal may survive.
1:28:41
If on the other hand, the DNA goes in a different direction,
1:28:44
then the animal learns to swim or or fly that can and that
1:28:49
animal can survive. Certain animals have more
1:28:54
emotions than others. We can measure the emotions in
1:28:57
dog and if anybody here want a dog that doesn't have any
1:28:59
emotions, you know, my two dogs have all kinds of emotions.
1:29:03
I can tell when they're guilty and I can tell, you know, when
1:29:06
they're happy and I can tell when they're sad.
1:29:08
It's and it's good for them. They have the DNA in their
1:29:12
brains that gave them the ability to be pack animals and
1:29:17
they survived because of it. Now, some animals like cats and
1:29:21
how how many cat owners in there know that cats aren't pack
1:29:23
animals. They don't care if you're home
1:29:24
or not. You know, dog owners know the
1:29:27
dogs can't wait for you to get home.
1:29:29
The cats survive because of the way they evolved.
1:29:33
Human beings survive because of the way we evolved too.
1:29:36
So it's important to us to take care of our children to.
1:29:41
It's important for us to make sure that our families survive.
1:29:44
It's important for us to get mad once in a while.
1:29:47
It's important for us to love. Those things have to be able to
1:29:51
come out of us because we've got the right chemicals in our body
1:29:54
to do that. If we didn't have those
1:29:56
chemicals, we couldn't do it. So it's it's anytime you talk
1:30:02
about any kind of emotions, we've got them, and so do lots
1:30:05
of other animals. If we want to talk, we can even
1:30:08
talk about plants, for heaven's sakes.
1:30:12
If insects attack a Maple tree, that Maple tree gives off a
1:30:18
chemical called a pheromone that goes off through the rest of the
1:30:22
forest and unites with the leaves and the trees and the
1:30:26
rest of the forest. Those trees pick up that
1:30:28
pheromone and then they produce a chemical to withstand the
1:30:32
insect infection. That's important for those trees
1:30:36
to be able to do that. It's important for them to be
1:30:39
able to communicate with each other by using chemicals.
1:30:42
It's important for us to do the same thing.
1:30:44
What we smell on each other is important.
1:30:46
What we see on each other is important.
1:30:49
Those things are controlled by DNA.
1:30:52
Can you? Can you, can you teach your
1:30:54
child to love? Can you teach your child to
1:30:58
hate? Sure you can.
1:31:01
But you can do it because those chemicals are there.
1:31:06
We are an animal that has the ability to make our environment
1:31:11
part of what the so we can survive.
1:31:15
We can control our environment. We can control it because we've
1:31:18
got intelligence. We can control it because we
1:31:20
have emotions. We get those things.
1:31:23
We get the basic cards we play with from DNA.
1:31:27
Some of us get a better deck than the rest.
1:31:30
What are you going to do about that?
1:31:32
And the answer is you can't do anything about it.
1:31:35
You can try to fit into your environment.
1:31:37
You can't make yourself something that you want to be
1:31:41
just by wishing it you got you were a, a sperm and an egg, you
1:31:47
know, and that's sperm and an egg developed from a lot of
1:31:51
cells. Let me, I, I want to ask you a
1:31:56
question because another question because I hear, I hear
1:32:01
this a lot and people are, are saying well.
1:32:05
How do you know about? That evolution, you weren't
1:32:07
there. How do you know that those
1:32:08
things are really happening? You weren't there.
1:32:10
Well, my question to you is, were you there when you were
1:32:14
conceived? Do you remember then can can you
1:32:20
prove that you were conceived if you weren't there?
1:32:23
Well, some of you are saying, well, that's a, a, a silly
1:32:27
question. Well, of course it's a silly
1:32:29
question. And it's a silly question
1:32:31
because we can look back in the past, we can trace back what
1:32:39
happens to animals to make them behave a certain way.
1:32:42
We can trace back to certain animals to make them, to show
1:32:45
what kind of characteristics they have.
1:32:48
If you were to take a little chunk of skin right there for me
1:32:51
and look at that hair follicle, then you were to take.
1:32:57
A. A.
1:32:57
A. A a bird and and take his wing
1:33:00
and take that little follicle out right there.
1:33:03
That's a, a feather follicle. Of course, if you took it from
1:33:05
his leg, it would be a skin. A a a scale follicle.
1:33:09
If you took a little chunk from a fish, you'd get another scale
1:33:12
follicle. So there's scale follicles, bird
1:33:15
feather follicles and hair follicles.
1:33:17
When we look at the DNA in those follicles, they're almost
1:33:22
exactly alike. And then when we look at the DNA
1:33:25
that produces the proteins that makes hair scales and feathers,
1:33:31
it's almost exactly like we can show relationships.
1:33:36
That's important. Evolution wouldn't mean anything
1:33:38
if we couldn't show relationships.
1:33:40
If, if we found that a a dog was more genetically related to a
1:33:45
frog than it is to a cat, we'd know something's wrong.
1:33:49
But we never find that we know we've got so much information
1:33:53
genetically that we'll probably, we may never figure it all out.
1:33:58
We've spent a lot of time here talking about fossils.
1:34:00
Fossils don't mean anything as far as evolution is concerned.
1:34:04
We don't need them. We got all evidence we need to
1:34:07
prove evolution without fossils. Forget fossils, they just aren't
1:34:10
important. What's important is DNA.
1:34:21
All right, the question was what's the purpose of life?
1:34:27
OK. Joseph Stalin executed 14,700
1:34:30
Polish officers, prisoners of war at the Katyn Forest.
1:34:34
Why did he do that? How do you execute?
1:34:36
Prisoners of war Adolf Hitler executed at least 6,000,000 Jews
1:34:40
plus millions of others. Why would a person kill Jews?
1:34:43
Well, Hitler thought they were an inferior species that hadn't
1:34:45
evolved as far. He was actually trying to speed
1:34:46
up the evolution process. 1975 to 79.
1:34:50
The Khmer Rouge under the leadership Paul Pot, executed
1:34:52
more than 1/3 of their entire population.
1:34:56
Check out the killing fields. Why did they do that?
1:34:59
Why were the Australian Aborigines treated like they
1:35:01
were animals? Why were Australian Aboriginal
1:35:03
skulls dug up out of graves? Or people were executed and
1:35:07
their skulls were boiled down and their soul to museums in
1:35:09
America to have displays for evolution?
1:35:11
Because they have a bigger jaw than other humans do.
1:35:15
Kip Kinkle said if there was a God, he wouldn't let me feel the
1:35:17
way I do. There is no God, only hate.
1:35:20
Huh. Well, in May 1st May 21st, 1998,
1:35:23
fifteen year old Kip Kinkle, a student at Thurston High School
1:35:26
in Oregon, entered the cafeteria, fired more than 50
1:35:29
rounds from a semi automatic rifle. 26 students were injured,
1:35:32
two were killed. Later, the bodies of his parents
1:35:34
were found in his home. He was taken.
1:35:36
He was arrested, taken to a police headquarters where he
1:35:38
attempted to murder a detective. He said if there was a God, he
1:35:41
wouldn't let me feel the way I do.
1:35:42
So there's no God, only hate. Why?
1:35:44
Violent crimes increased nearly 1000% since I was a boy.
1:35:47
And that's the time evolution became a popular theory in our
1:35:50
textbook. Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris
1:35:53
made a video prior to the Columbine shootings.
1:35:55
They're talking about a football player.
1:35:56
They said he doesn't deserve the jaw evolution gave him.
1:35:59
Look for his jaw. It won't be on his body.
1:36:01
Klebold's father was a geologist who believed in evolution.
1:36:04
Both Eric and Dial In were followers of Nazi teachings.
1:36:07
The shooting took place on Hitler's birthday on purpose.
1:36:09
It was planned to commemorate Hitler.
1:36:11
Eric's T-shirt said natural selection.
1:36:14
They killed Cassie and Rachel just because they were
1:36:16
Christians. They killed Isaiah just because
1:36:18
he was black. Hitler hated black people, after
1:36:20
all. They hadn't evolved as far.
1:36:22
That was Hitler's thinking. The clothes may give a clue to
1:36:24
the thinking of these teenagers said natural selection, Yes.
1:36:28
What about this natural selection?
1:36:31
Well, natural selection selects. It doesn't create a thing.
1:36:35
It's selects. It's all it can do.
1:36:36
It's not, it's not a creation process.
1:36:37
We go into that some other time. So my answer to the question is,
1:36:40
is there a purpose to life? Absolutely, there certainly is.
1:36:43
God created this universe with a plan.
1:36:46
He created man with a purpose. Now I have found in my doing
1:36:50
speaking on this topic about 800 * a year all over the world and
1:36:53
15 years worth. Now the reason people accept the
1:36:56
evolution theory is not because they have a scientific reason.
1:37:00
I asked a kid two weeks ago, I was debating 2 professors or I
1:37:03
forget where I was. I didn't matter. 3 weeks ago one
1:37:06
kid came afterwards and said evolution's a fact.
1:37:07
I said well Stan calm down. Let me ask you a question.
1:37:09
If evolution if, if creation was true, if the creation story's
1:37:12
true, would that affect your lifestyle any?
1:37:15
If there was a creator that said thou shalt not commit adultery,
1:37:18
don't know pornography, no lying, no cheating, no stealing,
1:37:20
would that affect your lifestyle any?
1:37:22
He said You're trying to embarrass me, aren't you?
1:37:24
I said I don't even know who you are, I'm just asking you a
1:37:26
question. The reason people accept
1:37:27
evolution is because of their sin, not their science.
1:37:39
Doctor hoeven this. Question is going to you first.
1:37:41
You've mentioned the second law of thermodynamics to prove that
1:37:46
God must have provided an initial energy or the initial
1:37:49
something in the universe. Have you considered that some of
1:37:52
the laws of nature only work in certain situations?
1:37:54
For example, Newtonian physics breaks down towards the speed of
1:37:57
light. So does it the second law of
1:38:00
thermodynamics really prove that God created the universe?
1:38:06
There are several ways to define the second law of
1:38:08
thermodynamics. There's all kinds.
1:38:10
Let me try to get, well, it'll take me a minute, but basically
1:38:14
it all, they all boil down to the same thing matter.
1:38:17
Everything tends toward disorder, OK?
1:38:19
Things don't order. That doesn't prove God created
1:38:22
the universe and it certainly doesn't prove the biblical view.
1:38:24
OK, And it doesn't prove everybody ought to become an
1:38:26
independent, temperamental, fundamental right wing radical
1:38:28
chicken eating Baptist like me. However, if you keep studying,
1:38:31
you will get there. OK?
1:38:34
I think the second law of thermodynamics demonstrates
1:38:36
there must have been a beginning.
1:38:38
Since everything is winding down, everything is falling
1:38:41
apart, there had to be a beginning.
1:38:44
There had to be something that wounded up.
1:38:47
So yes, I think the second law of thermodynamics is proof
1:38:49
positive that there was a beginning.
1:38:51
Even the evolutionists will admit that.
1:38:53
Oh yeah, 20 billion years ago. What was before that?
1:38:57
Was there any time or space before there was matter?
1:39:01
And where did this matter come from?
1:39:02
They have a totally illogical theory, yes.
1:39:05
I think that it's logical to say in the beginning God instead of
1:39:08
in the beginning you know nothing, or in the beginning
1:39:10
dirt or in the beginning matter. You know they worship matter
1:39:13
like the Christian worships God. There's no difference.
1:39:16
They're both religious. I think ours is more logical and
1:39:18
scientifically defensible, but they're both ultimately in the
1:39:21
in the final analysis or simply religious theories.
1:39:24
So the second law of thermodynamics, which is as far
1:39:27
as anybody knows, universally believe as far as Newton's laws
1:39:30
breaking down at as you approach the speed of light, there's a
1:39:32
lot of theories about that. There's also theories.
1:39:34
There's an article in Discover magazine last year, April of
1:39:38
2003, that says Einstein was simply wrong, folks.
1:39:41
OK, there's a large article in there.
1:39:42
The speed of light is not a constant.
1:39:44
So I don't think it's correct to say that we know for sure that
1:39:48
these laws breakdown as we approach the speed of light.
1:39:50
It may be true. I don't know.
1:39:51
I don't think anybody knows, would be my point.
1:39:53
I cover quite a bit about the speed of light and evidences of
1:39:55
it in the last 10 years. Proofs actually, scientific
1:39:59
experiments that say the speed of light is not a constant.
1:40:02
I'll get you some of those here if I can get.
1:40:05
Oh, no, sorry about that. See, I told you about asking the
1:40:08
questions in the right order, didn't I remember?
1:40:10
Now be a lot faster. The second law of thermodynamics
1:40:14
says everything's falling apart. There's lots of stars out there.
1:40:17
I mean like billions and billions of stars.
1:40:19
We don't have a clue how any one of them could form by chance.
1:40:22
And yet, obviously, they're here.
1:40:24
So the second law of thermodynamics, the Christian
1:40:26
would predict that God created a universe and we'll see things
1:40:30
falling apart. Universe is, is winding down.
1:40:33
OK. It's not getting better.
1:40:34
And stars are blowing up. It's called a Nova or a
1:40:37
supernova if it's a big one. So yeah, we're losing things.
1:40:40
And eventually the universe will experience what's called a heat
1:40:42
death. Everything will be uniformly
1:40:44
cold. And right now they look out in
1:40:46
space and see this three degree Kelvin, you know -270 centigrade
1:40:50
or -450 2.7, whatever it is, Fahrenheit, you know, it's a
1:40:54
universal temperature out there. Seems to be the same everywhere.
1:40:56
And it seems to be this background noise, this
1:40:58
radiation. OK, that appears to be true.
1:41:01
What does it prove? Oh, that proves The Big Bang or
1:41:03
it doesn't prove The Big Bang. Not to put it doesn't prove The
1:41:05
Big Bang at all. Nobody's for sure what's causing
1:41:07
that. We are seeing stars appear to be
1:41:09
drifting away like the red shift.
1:41:11
OK, there's not much question. There's a red shift.
1:41:13
The assumption is that maybe it's caused by the Doppler
1:41:15
effect. But actually nobody knows what's
1:41:17
causing the red shift. Even if it's true that it is
1:41:20
stars drifting away or moving away, that would still beg the
1:41:23
question of where did the energy come from to propel this thing?
1:41:26
Where did the star itself come from?
1:41:28
And I don't think we can prove positively that the the redshift
1:41:30
is proof of either great distances or that the universe
1:41:33
is that stars are moving away. They give the same thing with
1:41:35
parallel motion or perpendicular motion to your line of sight.
1:41:38
This guy said there was an early sign that redshifts indicate
1:41:40
distance of galaxies. For quasars, however, the
1:41:43
diagram shows a wide scatter and apparent brightness at every
1:41:45
redshift. In fact, there is little
1:41:48
correlation of brightness to redshift at all.
1:41:50
Either quasars come in an extremely wide range of
1:41:52
intrinsic luminosities, as most people believe, or their
1:41:55
redshifts do not indicate distance.
1:41:57
Sky and Telescope Magazine 10 years ago.
1:42:00
Thus, for us the only conclusion can be that can be drawn is at
1:42:02
least some quasars are relatively nearby and a large
1:42:05
fraction of their redshift is due to something other than
1:42:08
expansion of the universe. Some people think redshift is
1:42:11
for the Doppler effect from stars leaving.
1:42:12
Maybe so. If it is, that's still an
1:42:14
example of the second law. We see things get old, they die,
1:42:17
they fall apart. And if their if their philosophy
1:42:20
of life is you're only here to pass on your genes, that's the
1:42:23
only reason you exist. Eat, drink and be merry.
1:42:25
Tomorrow we die. That's a pretty pessimistic
1:42:27
worldview. I think there's a much better
1:42:29
view than that. You were created in God's image
1:42:33
with a purpose. It's true.
1:42:35
Everything's falling apart. The heaven's wax old I I'm
1:42:37
getting old. Everything's falling apart.
1:42:38
My car is falling apart. Everything falls apart.
1:42:41
How did it get wound up? Where did the initial
1:42:44
organization, energy and intelligence come from?
1:42:48
Information is consistently being lost.
1:42:50
Every time your DNA replicates, the little pieces break off and
1:42:53
you know it's like split ends on a hair and you eventually you
1:42:56
can only replicate it so many times and it it quits
1:42:58
replicating and you die. You know that if.
1:43:01
We are a. Copy off of a copy off of a copy
1:43:03
off of a copy off of a copy off of a copy off of a copy off of a
1:43:06
copy of Adam. It's amazing we can even stand
1:43:10
here and talk about it. OK?
1:43:12
The information must have been incredible in the original,
1:43:15
because it's been degrading ever since.
1:43:17
That's the second law of thermodynamics.
1:43:19
Everything is degrading. This building is degrading.
1:43:22
If you don't have people constantly maintain this
1:43:24
building, it will fall apart. The entire highway system in
1:43:28
America will fall completely apart if we don't keep
1:43:30
maintaining it. Every building on this planet
1:43:32
will fall down into a pile of rubble if somebody doesn't keep
1:43:35
fixing it. And even then, if they try
1:43:37
desperately to keep fixing it, at some point it's still going
1:43:40
to fall down. It's inevitable.
1:43:42
That's the second law. So if you think that evolution
1:43:45
can overcome that second law, I would like to understand how.
1:43:47
OK, the second law tells us everything's falling apart.
1:43:50
Therefore, obviously, there must have been a beginning.
1:43:53
I can answer that in 10 words. In the beginning, God created
1:43:56
the heaven and the earth. That's logical answer for me.
1:43:58
You can have the rest of my time.
1:43:59
All right. Are we supposed to resolve?
1:44:06
This can. We do that.
1:44:07
I'll try. That's a.
1:44:14
Mouthful to say the the least. First of all, the the laws of
1:44:20
thermodynamics are commonly called the laws of
1:44:24
thermodynamics. People like to talk about the
1:44:27
second law. Albert Einstein has said that
1:44:29
the laws of thermodynamics are the only laws that will stand
1:44:35
and never be overthrown forever. Stephen.
1:44:41
Hawking, a person who is believed to be one of the
1:44:45
brightest men on the planet, has used the second law of
1:44:52
thermodynamics to show the mechanism by which black holes
1:44:58
have have worked. Which, you know, I think that's
1:45:00
that's rather amazing. The opponent is saying truly
1:45:06
diversity is a measure of the second law of thermodynamics.
1:45:11
But I let's don't badmouth it too muchly because as the
1:45:18
universe, as it exists, as we know it, it's the only one that
1:45:24
can exist for us to exist to follow these particular
1:45:29
principles. So therefore, you know, I'm, I'm
1:45:31
very reluctant to say this is something that we want to have
1:45:35
to, to ask God to overthrow that it seems to be the very maybe
1:45:41
the the very thing that will make it possible for things to
1:45:46
exist energy and how it got together, I don't know.
1:45:52
But the fact that it is in a concentrated form that can go to
1:45:57
a less deform kind of less concentrated form and we can
1:46:03
utilize when things go from hot places to cold places.
1:46:08
And we did that when he drove our automobiles here today.
1:46:11
You did this, you're driving around with an automobile that's
1:46:14
8000°F inside of that engine with a burning of gasoline.
1:46:20
But you know, you don't have to have that inside of the car.
1:46:23
Of course, you're, you're surrounded by the 40° or 50°
1:46:27
temperatures that you're driving through the, through the,
1:46:31
through the atmosphere. The, the laws of thermodynamics
1:46:38
are much misunderstood. I can look out across the, the
1:46:46
class or the students here, and many of them are my, my
1:46:49
students. And I can probably, I can
1:46:52
probably confess to the confusion that exists in
1:46:56
thermodynamics. I probably contribute a great
1:47:00
contribution to to adding to that confusion.
1:47:04
But the what we have heard today are and I've I've got to I like
1:47:13
to use colorful language. So I'm very careful and I'm told
1:47:16
I can't do that here, but but I'm going to have to leave it
1:47:20
with this that I I'm certainly glad I don't have to step in
1:47:23
something. Thank you this question.
1:47:31
Will be posed to your table. Evolutionary theory predicts
1:47:36
that mankind will continue to evolve.
1:47:39
How long, in your estimation, will it take for a distinct new
1:47:41
species of humans to emerge? In other words, how long will it
1:47:44
take for there to be two or more incompatible species of humans?
1:47:48
And let me add something to that.
1:47:49
Where? Where do you foresee this going?
1:47:52
The evolution of of humans. I can tell you one thing.
1:47:59
We'll never have a war because there's been a disagreement on
1:48:02
science. What we will have is people
1:48:08
advancing because we've learned how to live with each other.
1:48:13
If we don't do that, we're not going to advance at all.
1:48:18
We have certain things that are going to take place with every
1:48:24
species. If we go back and look how
1:48:27
species have evolved over time, we can see that almost
1:48:32
everything that's ever lived on this planet is extinct.
1:48:37
Evolution is a really inefficient situation.
1:48:44
Well, as a matter of fact, the intelligent designer is about as
1:48:48
inefficient as you can get. Do you know how many kids die
1:48:52
every year because they choke to death because our throat and our
1:48:58
windpipe are so close together? I mean, whoever designed that
1:49:02
first engineering student could do better than that.
1:49:06
Just think how many people in this audience probably got all
1:49:08
kinds of hang ups because we've got a system that gets rid of
1:49:12
our waste material retinator system that we do, we reproduce
1:49:16
with. I mean, you know, there's all
1:49:18
kinds of animals that got better reproductive systems than that.
1:49:20
They don't. You know that the intelligent
1:49:22
designer designed a snail that has his anus right above his
1:49:25
mouth. Come on, who did that?
1:49:28
We can explain those things by looking at evolution.
1:49:31
You can't explain those things by looking at a designer.
1:49:35
The designer did a terrible job on the eye.
1:49:37
People have eye problems because the nerves in the cornea and the
1:49:42
nerves in the retina are in the wrong place.
1:49:44
And it happened that way because that was the only thing
1:49:48
evolution had to work with. There's all kinds of problems
1:49:52
with design in the world. There's all kinds of problems
1:49:54
with with evolution. And what happens is we try to
1:49:58
correct them now. What's going to happen to us in
1:50:00
the future? It'll depend on us.
1:50:04
I mean, I like the question because what it involves is
1:50:08
ecology involves environment, it involves saving the planet.
1:50:12
It involves, you know, under what it involves is
1:50:15
understanding evolution. You know.
1:50:21
One of these textbooks, I think this one, it says, it says in
1:50:24
here, do not worry about the future.
1:50:28
Because. God is going to kill all of us
1:50:33
soon. You know they say almost word
1:50:38
for word what I said in there is.
1:50:43
Do. Not give your life for
1:50:45
evolution, because I mean, do not give your life for
1:50:49
environment because the environment will be destroyed by
1:50:53
the Lord, you know. Well, if you believe that, then
1:50:56
I guess you don't need to worry about the ecology.
1:50:58
I guess you don't need to worry about the environment.
1:51:00
But I don't believe that. And I think that we should worry
1:51:03
about the environment. I think we should worry about
1:51:05
the future of our kids. I think we should worry about
1:51:08
what's going on and I think we should understand evolution so
1:51:11
that we can stay healthy when we're doing it.
1:51:13
We need to understand our immune systems.
1:51:15
We under need to understand that bacteria change in a moment's
1:51:18
notice. We under we need to understand
1:51:21
that highly formed animals can't change quickly.
1:51:24
And we're a highly formed animal.
1:51:26
We we evolve really slowly. Bacteria evolve very rapidly.
1:51:31
Insects can evolve certain things in just a matter of a few
1:51:36
months. We're we have all slowly, we
1:51:39
need to understand what's going on with our DNA.
1:51:42
We need to understand what's going on with the DNA of every
1:51:45
plant and animal that lives on this planet.
1:51:48
That's how we survive. And if we don't do that, we may
1:51:52
not survive. It's a, it's a, it's a, it's,
1:51:56
it's that simple. Actually, we need, we need to
1:52:00
use our brains. We cannot be in the situation
1:52:05
where we say. Here's.
1:52:08
A book that's got all the answers in it.
1:52:10
We don't need to know anything new.
1:52:13
When my father talked to me when I was a boy and he said when you
1:52:17
read a book, be sure to look in the back of it and see if
1:52:20
there's a good bibliography. If there's not a good
1:52:22
bibliography in there, it may be that the things in that book
1:52:26
aren't true. And then he handed me a Bible
1:52:30
and I look for the bibliography and there wasn't one.
1:52:35
That's all I got to say. Well, I, I just kind of wonder
1:52:43
whether there's any kind of a reason to assume that evolution
1:52:48
would necessarily lead to some kind of proliferation of one
1:52:51
particular species. That's that's sort of an
1:52:55
assumption in the question that I don't really quite comprehend
1:52:59
why it makes that. I think if you look back, we
1:53:01
know that the we're coming from proliferation.
1:53:04
That is, I understand that some comments have been that the
1:53:08
Neanderthal does not share our genes.
1:53:12
That is that. Are you up on that?
1:53:15
That that is, we had a proliferated species.
1:53:18
Neanderthal was also human related and there's every
1:53:22
indication that chimpanzees are of the same branch in some way
1:53:26
or other because they have an intelligence of a 5 year old and
1:53:29
are capable of manipulating language and communicating with
1:53:32
us. So we're sharing this world
1:53:34
already with quite a few different species that are
1:53:39
awfully close to us. Let me also mention the dolphin.
1:53:42
Their stories that go back all the way to Roman times of
1:53:45
cooperation being being inhuman and and dolphin.
1:53:48
So if we're talking about intelligent siblings, I suppose
1:53:56
on this planet there may be plenty already.
1:53:59
We don't have to wait for that to develop.
1:54:01
Beyond that, I don't know what the future will bring.
1:54:06
And I think that is what characterizes scientific
1:54:09
mentality, is that you are willing to live with uncertainty
1:54:15
yet don't know it all. That's why you're motivated to
1:54:18
learn more. And I quite agree with that,
1:54:22
with all the answers in one book.
1:54:24
That's very authoritarian, undemocratic kind of thinking.
1:54:29
One of the most frequent, our colleague here mentioned Adolf
1:54:34
Hitler, one of the most frequent words in Adolf Hitler's mound.
1:54:37
My mouth was God and divine Providence.
1:54:42
Therein lies danger. It's an authoritarian kind of
1:54:45
thinking that is not healthy. All right, that's interesting.
1:55:00
I don't want to step in much of that either myself.
1:55:04
How long will it take for us to evolve into a new species?
1:55:07
I don't. Nothing ever evolves into any
1:55:09
new. Well, I had to use the word
1:55:10
species. So nothing ever evolves into a
1:55:12
new kind. Nobody's ever observed anything
1:55:15
changed to a different kind. Bacteria are still bacteria.
1:55:18
If they become resistant to a drug, it's because they lost the
1:55:21
locking mechanism on the ribosome, so the antibiotic
1:55:24
can't lock on. It's no different than somebody
1:55:26
handcuffing everybody, hauling them off to jail to kill them.
1:55:29
But you don't have any arms, so they can't handcuff you, so you
1:55:32
survive. Wow, beneficial mutation.
1:55:35
Well, it might be for the moment, but it's not any new
1:55:37
information. Bacteria don't evolve into
1:55:40
something else, they lose information.
1:55:42
They're resistant to a particular drug for a short
1:55:43
time, but then you put them back in the population of regular
1:55:45
bacteria and they're inferior. Nothing ever.
1:55:48
The bacteria are still bacteria, for heaven's sake.
1:55:50
That's not an example of evolution.
1:55:51
OK, We're going to evolve how to get along.
1:55:54
People choke because of poor design.
1:55:56
How many of you happen to like the design of your esophagus and
1:55:59
your trachea? I use mine.
1:56:02
I've been using it for years. OK, It works fine.
1:56:03
OK. The, the, the, the purpose of
1:56:07
life is to save the planet and to understand evolution.
1:56:11
Let's get more government funding so we can teach more of
1:56:14
this stuff, so more kids can not only step in it but wallow in
1:56:16
it. Here he said the eye is a poor
1:56:19
design. Well, now let's see about that.
1:56:22
Charles Darwin said to suppose that the eye could have been
1:56:24
formed by natural selection seems, I freely confess, absurd.
1:56:28
OK. And yet he goes on for four
1:56:29
pages after that and tells how we think it happened.
1:56:32
The retina of your eye is about one square inch.
1:56:34
It has 137 million light sensitive cells wired to the
1:56:37
brain. I've done a huge amount of
1:56:39
electrical wiring in my lifetime.
1:56:40
I cannot imagine hooking up 137,000,000 connections in one
1:56:43
square inch. My heavenly Father did it and it
1:56:46
works pretty good. It worked till a couple years
1:56:47
ago. I had to get these dumb things.
1:56:48
OK, because that's an example of second law thermodynamics.
1:56:51
By the way, decay. Now I debated an atheist in
1:56:54
Buckler, Ed Buckler Buckner in New York.
1:56:56
He said the eye is poorly designed.
1:56:58
Like I believe I just heard a few moments ago, it's a poor
1:57:00
design. He said the retina is in front.
1:57:03
The blood vessels are in front of the retina so they block part
1:57:05
of the light coming in. He said the octopus has a much
1:57:08
better eye because their blood vessels are behind the retina.
1:57:11
That's proof of evolution because of poor design.
1:57:14
I said, Ed, we live in the air, OK?
1:57:18
Air is a poor insulator for UV light.
1:57:20
Your body needs the blood vessels in front of the retina
1:57:22
because that's your last defense against UV light.
1:57:25
Octopus live in the water, OK? Water blocks UV light.
1:57:31
They don't need their blood vessels in front.
1:57:33
Now, if you want to swap eyes with an octopus, you just go
1:57:35
ahead and enjoy yourself, but you're going to be blind in a
1:57:37
few days, OK? Their argument from poor design
1:57:40
is like saying, well, God wouldn't do it this way,
1:57:42
therefore it must have evolved. That's a lousy argument for
1:57:45
evolution. That's a proof evidence.
1:57:48
That's an evidence to me that we were originally perfectly
1:57:50
designed and we're the whole whole, all of humanity is just
1:57:52
plain falling apart, folks. And yes, God's going to have to
1:57:55
step in here pretty soon and we're going to all kill
1:57:57
ourselves. OK.
1:57:58
Thank you so much. Professors.
1:58:07
Rise, Big Sleeper and Strayer in the entrance of time.
1:58:10
Seeing that we have left time for a 10 minute closing
1:58:14
statement for each side, let's go ahead and present those now.
1:58:18
Would you please go ahead? Thank you.
1:58:24
OK, this is this is my closing right?
1:58:27
Yes. OK, good.
1:58:31
Well, this is, this has been an interesting discussion that
1:58:36
we've, we've had, I, I, I wonder how we have all changed in our,
1:58:44
our minds and thinking and knowledge of what we have talked
1:58:48
about. We've talked about some good
1:58:52
information. I've heard some bad information.
1:58:59
I happen to believe in the scientific method.
1:59:05
Without the scientific method, we have no defense of of.
1:59:13
Sinking. Into ignorance and despair and
1:59:19
to people who do not understand the the things that have been
1:59:25
accumulated for science. We, we are, we are cursed to do
1:59:33
ignorance and ignore and, and, and, and what I would what I
1:59:37
will repeat voodoo science that people will, will believe in,
1:59:42
in, in crazy kinds of things. And, and we see those kind of
1:59:47
things going on in people today. The one, the one thing that we
1:59:58
have is that we have knowledge and we have a way of, of testing
2:00:05
knowledge. And putting to the test of a
2:00:09
number of people essentially to evaluate and agree in what is as
2:00:16
correct as we possibly can. If we have nothing, then we, we
2:00:23
are in despair and, and we have, we have nothing that we can
2:00:27
possibly survive. I don't think that is true.
2:00:31
I think the scientific method is, is a wonderful thing and I
2:00:36
think it, I think we, the discussion we've had today has,
2:00:42
has proved that, that it is correct.
2:00:48
When you die, the world is not going to change.
2:00:56
The world will. Stop.
2:00:59
Because your. World is in your head all along.
2:01:03
You have no direct contact. With the world.
2:01:07
Out there, you have no immediate knowledge of the world.
2:01:10
The only knowledge you have is immediate knowledge through your
2:01:13
senses. For that reason, you work with
2:01:18
frameworks, trying to understand theoretical frameworks, trying
2:01:23
to understand what's going on out there.
2:01:26
You're trying to make tenuous predictions about what you think
2:01:30
the next event will be, and if the 10 years prediction doesn't
2:01:34
work out, that you're going to overturn.
2:01:38
The. Hypothesis to work on evolution
2:01:40
is no, it's a theoretical framework.
2:01:43
As long as new information framework, we're going to keep
2:01:48
working with it. When we have an overwhelming
2:01:50
evidence that doesn't fit, then the scientific community will be
2:01:54
just as comfortable overturning that and altering it to
2:01:57
something different. And it's a fairly simple system.
2:02:02
That's why it works. What we've been shown today is
2:02:06
that we should throw that out, replace it with a spiritual
2:02:11
being where we don't have any idea how it is interacting with
2:02:15
the material world and that material world which we can't
2:02:18
really understand either. And in that complicated system,
2:02:21
we're supposed to work scientifically.
2:02:24
I suppose the next time you go to the physician and you have
2:02:26
some kind of a pain will be pointed out to you.
2:02:29
It's probably some Little Rock that God forgot there.
2:02:33
Doesn't make any. Sense to me and and what I want
2:02:37
to say to conclude here. At the beginning, Doctor Hovind
2:02:43
offered a general ethical principle, and that is that we
2:02:47
have an inheritance of sin. I find it.
2:02:51
Abhorrent. I find that absolutely
2:02:54
incredible to even believe that anybody who has seen a baby and
2:02:59
is holding us in your arms, would you really believe that
2:03:02
that is hell bound, that that has inherited sin?
2:03:09
It's a, it's a, it's a most objectionable concept that is
2:03:13
being carried around here in the name of religion.
2:03:18
And for that reason, I also believe that we really do have a
2:03:20
very clear cut science ever because evolution is self
2:03:24
correcting. It is cuming data that it's
2:03:27
checking each other. It has the open scientific
2:03:30
community exchanging ideas with each other, checking on each
2:03:33
other, and not some kind of an authoritative system that is
2:03:37
loaded down on us where where we have no possibility of
2:03:40
questioning. The one is democracy, the
2:03:43
scientific community. The other is a form of
2:03:46
authoritarianism that I find very objectionable.
2:03:57
I'd like to quote. From this creationist book for
2:04:01
my closing, there's a section in here 342.
2:04:05
It says scientific truths revealed in the Bible, many
2:04:08
important scientific truths revealed in the Bible thousands
2:04:11
of years before they were discovered by modern scientists.
2:04:14
And then it lists several of them.
2:04:15
One of them has to do with the earth rotating on its axis and
2:04:20
that's, you know, the six day thing.
2:04:22
Another one has to do with the Earth running down the second
2:04:24
alternative dynamics, and there's some stuff about blood
2:04:26
and water and that kind of stuff.
2:04:28
But anyway, here is the proof from the Bible that the earth
2:04:33
rotates on its axis. It says it tells these students
2:04:36
to take check. Luke 1731 through 34.
2:04:42
In that. Day, he which shall be upon the
2:04:45
housetop and his stuff in the house, let him not come down and
2:04:49
take it away, And he that is in the field, let him likewise not
2:04:53
return back. Remember, Lot's wife, whosoever
2:04:58
shall seek to save his life shall lose it, and whosoever
2:05:02
shall lose his life shall preserve it.
2:05:05
I tell you, in the night there shall be two men in one bed, and
2:05:08
one shall be taken and the other shall be left.
2:05:12
I did not understand that I called a Becca.
2:05:16
I said, what does that mean? Well, you check for the
2:05:19
Teacher's Manual to find out what that means and they keep,
2:05:22
they went right and they came back.
2:05:24
They said, we're sorry, that's not mentioned in the teacher's
2:05:26
manual. I said, well, you know, is it a
2:05:29
possibility is a misprint. They took that as an insult and
2:05:33
said no, it's not a possibility. And click, they hung up the
2:05:38
second one, the universe is running down.
2:05:44
To find out the proof from the Bible that the universe is
2:05:47
running down, you go to Isaiah 51, six, and it says, lift up
2:05:53
your eyes to the heavens, and look upon the earth beneath.
2:05:56
For the heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth
2:05:59
shall wax old like a garment, and these that dwell within
2:06:02
shall die in like manner. But my salvation shall be
2:06:06
forever, and my righteousness shall not be abolished.
2:06:10
I didn't understand that either. I hope the.
2:06:16
Applause means that you understood that that has
2:06:18
something to do with the second law of thermodynamics, and not
2:06:22
anyway. Anyway, I decided to take a
2:06:30
quote from one of the best known.
2:06:33
Creationists. In the country explaining to me
2:06:38
or to all of us why all these colleges all over the world do
2:06:43
not accept creationism. Here's the quote.
2:06:48
It's from a fellow named Kent Hovine, and it came from the
2:06:53
sources. I got it from the Internet, the
2:06:55
unmasking, the false religion of evolution.
2:06:59
Here's his quote. There is definitely a
2:07:01
conspiracy, but I don't think it's in a human conspiracy.
2:07:05
I don't believe that there's smoke filled rooms where groups
2:07:08
of men get together and decide to teach evolution in all the
2:07:10
schools. I believe it is a much higher
2:07:13
level. I believe it is a satanic
2:07:16
conspiracy. The reason these different
2:07:19
people come to the same conclusions is not because they
2:07:22
all met together, it's because they all work for the devil.
2:07:38
I think that. Was one of the most arrogant
2:07:40
statements I've ever read in my life.
2:07:50
And. If we're going to use the Bible
2:07:54
for science, we've got some tough things to explain.
2:07:58
What about the cockatrice? It's mentioned four times in the
2:08:01
Bible. It's a chicken, a rooster that
2:08:05
lays poison eggs that can fly and spits fire.
2:08:09
The what are? We going to do about Dragons
2:08:11
being mentioned 17 times in the Bible.
2:08:15
What are you going? What are you going to do about
2:08:17
unicorns or mentioned eight times in the Bible?
2:08:21
I want to tell you what we have never found a fossil or Unicorn.
2:08:25
Wouldn't it be wonderful if we did?
2:08:27
Then you people have something to applaud for.
2:08:30
OK. Thank you.
2:08:35
All right, Well, first I need to say, fellas, I thank you so much
2:08:41
for doing this. These students get about nine
2:08:43
months out of the year teaching on evolution.
2:08:45
It's about time to get a couple hours at least to hear a
2:08:48
conflict between creation and evolution.
2:08:50
And I will be glad to come back at my expense.
2:08:52
Anytime now people say, oh, creationists win the debates
2:08:58
because they have, you know, better visuals.
2:09:01
OK, I don't use any tax dollars to buy my visuals.
2:09:04
You guys got unlimited funding to buy stuff here, get some
2:09:06
better visuals. Don't blame me.
2:09:07
People say, well, creationist win because they have a dumb
2:09:09
audience. The dumb people are dumb if they
2:09:11
believe in creation. That's that's the implication
2:09:13
over and over. People be believe because we
2:09:16
need more money to teach evolution.
2:09:17
That's why it's a lack of funding.
2:09:18
That's why we're losing these debates.
2:09:20
No. Maybe you're losing the debates
2:09:23
because you're wrong. And I'm right.
2:09:26
OK, several points were brought up and I'll use a few of my
2:09:32
minutes for this, and then I want to give a quick closing
2:09:34
here. I'm in favor of the scientific
2:09:36
method. You develop a theory, you gather
2:09:39
facts to support your theory. If you can't find any facts, you
2:09:41
throw the theory away. Evolution would have been thrown
2:09:43
away a long time ago, except they don't have a replacement
2:09:46
theory other than maybe somebody designed it.
2:09:49
Oh, they don't want that one. He mentioned.
2:09:53
He doesn't believe about inherent sin.
2:09:57
Well, I happened to have had three kids and two grandkids.
2:09:59
One more do any day. We didn't teach any of them to
2:10:03
lie or cheat or steal, but they all just kind of did it
2:10:08
automatically. How many of you noticed the same
2:10:09
thing with your kids when you're raising them?
2:10:11
OK, yes. I think it's quite obvious to
2:10:13
anybody that's raised any kids. There is an inherent sin nature.
2:10:16
If you think man is inherently good, you're living in La La
2:10:19
land, OK? Man is inherently bad, OK.
2:10:22
And he needs a savior. He said you don't want an
2:10:26
authoritative system that's very objectionable to you.
2:10:29
That is my entire point. The reason people reject the
2:10:33
creation stories because they don't want somebody telling them
2:10:35
what to do. The Bible says in the last days
2:10:38
scoffers would come that would be willingly ignorant of the
2:10:41
creation and the floods. Second Peter chapter 3.
2:10:44
Read it for yourself. They're willingly ignorant of
2:10:46
the creation because that creation event tells us God
2:10:50
created this place, which means he owns it, which means he makes
2:10:53
the rules. They don't want to admit there
2:10:55
was a flood because that flood indicates God has the authority
2:10:59
to judge his creation. They just don't want to admit
2:11:02
that. I cover this very thoroughly, by
2:11:03
the way, on Seminar Part 2. You might want to watch that
2:11:06
one. And they're right there out
2:11:07
there. And by the way, my stuff's not
2:11:08
copyrighted. You can get it, copy it, and
2:11:10
send back the originals and get your money back.
2:11:11
That's always been our policy. So yes, I can understand why the
2:11:14
idea of an authoritarian, you know, Bible, is objectionable to
2:11:18
some people because that Bible says thou shalt not.
2:11:21
Do you know quite a few things. OK, so yeah, I I understand the
2:11:25
Bible says the fool has said in his heart there is no God.
2:11:29
I think the evidence for a designer is so obvious all
2:11:33
around us. If you're walking through the
2:11:34
woods and you find a painting hanging on the tree and you see
2:11:37
no footprints, you see no people, you still conclude there
2:11:41
was a painter. If you're walking through the
2:11:44
woods and you find a building and you see no footprints, you
2:11:46
see no people, you still conclude there was a builder.
2:11:49
When you see a watch, that's proof of a watchmaker.
2:11:51
When you see a creation, that's proof of a creator, whether you
2:11:54
ever meet him or not. There just had to be one.
2:11:56
Now, who is it? Is it Allah or Buddha or
2:11:58
Jehovah? Well, that's a different set of
2:12:00
arguments. But the fact is there must have
2:12:01
been a designer. Whoever he was, there had to be
2:12:03
a designer. We can argue later about which
2:12:05
one's right. OK, But there had to be people
2:12:07
object to that. You said, what does Luke mean?
2:12:10
Luke was telling them that in that day, some will be in the
2:12:13
field and some will be in bed. That's proof.
2:12:17
The world is round. It's dark on one side.
2:12:20
That's evidence right there. So I can explain.
2:12:21
I don't know why Becca couldn't explain it, but that's pretty
2:12:23
obvious to me. Now hang on, what happened here?
2:12:27
OK. I visited Wayne Strickland's
2:12:33
tombstone. I don't know if the other dates
2:12:35
filled in yet or not. It's been a couple years since
2:12:36
I've been there. But the date was empty when I
2:12:38
was there. He said he's an atheist.
2:12:40
Bible says the fool has said in his heart there is no God.
2:12:42
God does not believe in atheists.
2:12:44
Actually, I don't either. OK, you're going to die one of
2:12:48
these days. I'm going to die now, fellas, I
2:12:50
didn't drive all the way over here and leave my gorgeous wife
2:12:52
because I like being gone, OK? I I didn't come to win an
2:12:55
argument. I came to win you over.
2:12:59
Honestly, I. Would like to see you saved
2:13:01
going to heaven. Maybe you think you are I don't
2:13:02
know but if you think God used evolution, you have the wrong
2:13:05
God. OK, I know you write all kinds
2:13:07
of articles for the Atheist Magazine according to your bio
2:13:10
here, Jim. And, and I think that people run
2:13:13
from God. People can't find God for the
2:13:14
same reason a thief can't find a policeman.
2:13:24
I sacrifice my time to travel and to do this because I'm
2:13:29
concerned that people are actually dying and going to
2:13:31
hell. I'm really concerned that that
2:13:33
really happens. I believe the Bible teaches
2:13:34
that. I believe that's literally true.
2:13:36
I believe we were designed for a purpose, and God loves each of
2:13:40
us. He hates our sin.
2:13:42
The Bible says he's angry with the wicked every day.
2:13:45
God hates our sin, but he loves us.
2:13:48
And we are inherently sinful. And we're going to die.
2:13:51
All of us are going to die. And you're going to be dead for
2:13:53
a really, really long time, OK? George Washington died 205 years
2:13:59
ago and he is still dead. I don't care how long you live,
2:14:05
you're going to be dead longer than that.
2:14:07
And you better think about that long and hard.
2:14:10
You better be really positive. You're right on this one.
2:14:13
God made this world. He owns it.
2:14:14
He makes the rules, and we are guilty of breaking his rules.
2:14:18
So rather than admit we've broken his rules, people say,
2:14:20
well, there is no God. We got it by evolution, which
2:14:21
means, of course, there are no rules.
2:14:23
If evolution is true, there are no rules.
2:14:25
I asked the question at the beginning.
2:14:27
I never got an answer. If evolution is true, how do we
2:14:30
tell right from wrong? How do we?
2:14:33
Tell right from wrong. God told us very clearly, thou
2:14:35
shalt not bear false witness. Don't lie, we've all lied.
2:14:40
Don't steal, We've stolen things.
2:14:43
We broke his commandments. Folks were guilty, period.
2:14:46
Which means we're going to be punished or you got to find a
2:14:48
substitute. And that's where Jesus comes in.
2:14:51
The God that made this world also came down and said, look,
2:14:54
you blew it. You're all sinners, you're all
2:14:55
going to hell. However, I still love you and I
2:14:57
still want to forgive you. I'll even die and take your
2:15:00
place. You can't beat a deal like that.
2:15:05
Now, Romans chapter one, Romans chapter one gives us a clear
2:15:11
progression. And I would recommend every
2:15:13
atheist or evolutionist or agnostic read Romans chapter one
2:15:17
very carefully because that which may be known of God, he,
2:15:22
he may be known, OK, you may know things about him.
2:15:24
You can learn about God. That which may be known is
2:15:27
manifest in them, for God hath showed it unto them.
2:15:30
You know there's a designer, OK? I don't care about all your
2:15:33
arguments. You know, somebody made this
2:15:35
place. The invisible things of him from
2:15:37
the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood
2:15:40
by the things that are made, even his eternal power in
2:15:42
Godhead. So they are without excuse.
2:15:45
Judgement Day. You're just flat.
2:15:46
Seriously in trouble. OK.
2:15:48
Because then when when they knew God, they glorified him not as
2:15:51
God, neither we're thankful. But became vain in their
2:15:53
imaginations. And their foolish heart was
2:15:55
darkened. Professing themselves to be
2:15:57
wise, they became fools and change the glory of the
2:16:01
uncorruptible God into an image made like a corruptible man and
2:16:04
birds and four footed beasts and creeping things.
2:16:06
They worship the creation. That's what evolution is all
2:16:09
about, save the planet. Wherefore God gave them up to
2:16:13
uncleanness through their own lusts, to dishonor their own
2:16:15
hearts and dishonor their own bodies.
2:16:16
Between them He changed the truth of God into a lie and
2:16:19
worship. Served and worshipped,
2:16:21
worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator.
2:16:25
I mean, to them, the animals are more important.
2:16:27
Look, I like animals. I take care of the animals we
2:16:30
have around our place. And I think Christians take care
2:16:32
of their things. But folks, this whole concept of
2:16:34
nature is all there is. We got to save the planet.
2:16:37
I don't pollute. I try hard not to.
2:16:39
I work very hard to keep our place clean and we do a very
2:16:41
good job. I think you can come visit
2:16:43
Pensacola, FL. But that's not the that's not
2:16:45
the ultimate goal of life. Bible says God gave them up.
2:16:50
You follow this trend. They don't want God telling them
2:16:52
what to do. So God gives up on them.
2:16:54
OK, you do what you want, and they get turned over to vile
2:16:57
affections. That's the way it always goes.
2:16:58
It descends. You can read the rest of the
2:17:00
chapter. It goes right into
2:17:00
homosexuality, by the way, If your job is to pass on your
2:17:03
genes and you're the fittest, well, they're not the fittest,
2:17:06
that's for sure. They're not passing on any
2:17:08
genes. Anybody.
2:17:10
I talked. I've been a long time on that
2:17:11
one. But God's going to judge this
2:17:13
planet. He tells us he's going to have
2:17:15
to because man has rejected him. Now, they professed them.
2:17:18
They thought they were wise. They became fools.
2:17:20
And if you believe your grandpa was a rock, you're fool.
2:17:23
Some of my ancestors probably swung by their necks.
2:17:25
OK, but none of them swung by their tails.
2:17:28
Now, if you think your grandpa was a monkey, I think you're
2:17:31
still a fool, but that's OK. You have the right to believe
2:17:33
that. You do not, however, have the
2:17:34
right to use tax dollars to teach that fairy tale in a
2:17:37
public university at taxpayer expense.
2:17:39
I think evolution should be taught in private schools at
2:17:41
private expense. Now, you guys are not the enemy.
2:17:44
I don't. I, I, I I love you and I want to
2:17:46
help you, OK? I think you're deceived.
2:17:48
And it's worse that you're deceiving others if you're
2:17:49
teaching this stuff. Now, there are people here
2:17:52
tonight with yellow shirts on. If you'd stand up, if you,
2:17:54
you're supposed to be standing up with the yellow shirt, you
2:17:56
know who you are. These people right here are
2:17:57
willing to talk to you and show you how you can become a
2:17:59
Christian and go to heaven, OK? That's why I do this.
2:18:02
I want to convert people, get them saved.
2:18:04
That's why I'm here, OK? I think the scientific evidence
2:18:06
is on our side. I think I'm right.
2:18:08
I think I won the debate tonight, actually.
2:18:09
But it's not because I'm smart. It's because I'm right.
2:18:12
And God loves you. He wants to save you and forgive
2:18:14
you. See, one of these folks
2:18:14
afterwards will be glad to help any way we can.
2:18:16
Thank you so much. We hope you've enjoyed this.
2:18:20
Video series on creation, evolution, and dinosaurs.
2:18:23
Much more important, though, than knowing all the truth and
2:18:25
facts about science is to know the truth about whether you're
2:18:28
going to heaven or not. If you've never trusted Christ
2:18:31
as your Savior, let me explain quickly what you need to do to
2:18:34
go to heaven. The Bible says we're all
2:18:36
sinners. We've all broken God's laws.
2:18:38
We've disobeyed the Creator. We've we've done wicked things.
2:18:42
We're sinners. Some are worse than others, at
2:18:44
least in man's eyes, But we've all broken God's laws.
2:18:47
And the Bible says you have to repent.
2:18:49
The word repent means to turn. It actually means two things, to
2:18:52
turn from your sin and to turn to God.
2:18:55
God's looking for a change in your attitude where you say,
2:18:57
Lord, I don't want to do wrong anymore.
2:18:58
I'm sorry I've offended you. I want to do right.
2:19:01
And you turn from sin and you turn to God and say God, would
2:19:04
you please forgive me? Would you save me?
2:19:07
The Bible says in Romans chapter 3, verse 23.
2:19:10
That all have. Sinned and come short of the
2:19:12
glory of God, you need to admit you're a Sinner #2 the Bible
2:19:16
says in Romans 623 the wages of sin is death we deserve to die
2:19:20
and go to hell because of our sin, but.
2:19:24
Jesus died for. You, He loves you, He wants you
2:19:26
to come to heaven and anybody that will ask Him for the free
2:19:29
salvation, God will give you the gift of eternal life.
2:19:32
It says in Romans 623 it's a free gift and it says in Romans
2:19:35
chapter 10 and verse 13, whosoever shall call upon the
2:19:38
name of the Lord shall be saved. If you would just call and say,
2:19:41
Lord I'm a Sinner, would you please forgive me and ask him?
2:19:45
He will give you that free gift of eternal life.
2:19:47
Why don't you? Just pray with.
2:19:49
Me right now and you could receive Christ as your savior.
2:19:51
There's no magic words, God's looking at your heart, but if
2:19:53
you could say this and mean it, God would forgive you.
2:19:56
Just say dear Lord Jesus, I know that I'm a Sinner, I've broken
2:20:00
your laws, I'm sorry, please forgive me.
2:20:03
Please apply your blood to my account.
2:20:05
Forgive my sins and take me to heaven in Jesus name.
2:20:09
Amen. Bible says if you call upon the
2:20:12
Lord, you shall be saved. So if you've asked the Lord to
2:20:14
save you, he promised he'd save you.
2:20:16
Now your job is to grow, read your Bible, pray, get involved
2:20:19
in a good Bible believing church, and begin to grow to be
2:20:22
a good Christian. Thank you so much, caller.
2:20:24
Right? If we can be any help at all,
2:20:25
we'd be glad to help.