Finally! Kent Hovind accepts evolution!

Originally posted by RBHILL
How about this if you think that the Bible is written by flawed man how can you trust any other books ever written? Or even any other idea?

Why are there millions of diet books? Why haven't they figured it out? One book is all you needed why have the other 999,999 health books?

Well, if a man says 2 fishes fed 10,000 people in one book and another book says if you drop a rock on your head you will get a headache, I think I know which one to believe.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Well, if a man says 2 fishes fed 10,000 people in one book and another book says if you drop a rock on your head you will get a headache, I think I know which one to believe.

I have heard may news reports of unusual things happening just in my life time. But just because I did not believe some could be true at the time did not mean I was always right. It is easy to believe reports of commonly occurring incidents, but that does not prevent the unsusal from also occurring from time to time.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I have heard may news reports of unusual things happening just in my life time. But just because I did not believe some could be true at the time did not mean I was always right. It is easy to believe reports of commonly occurring incidents, but that does not prevent the unsusal from also occurring from time to time.

A bit like self replicating molecules developing from a primordial chemical soup?🙂

Originally posted by OdBod
A bit like self replicating molecules developing from a primordial chemical soup?🙂

I have never known of that happening from time to time or even ever. 😏

Originally posted by RJHinds
I have never known of that happening from time to time or even ever. 😏

Well, you weren't even around 500 years ago much less 6000 or 6 billion so you are just taking the word of people doing idiot math to force the world to be 6000 years old. So you in fact have no knowledge of chemistry to have ever even looked into the possibility of molecules self assembling.

That would throw doubt into your mythology and you can't have that.

So you just refuse to look at any data that refutes your ridiculous 6000 year old Earth claim.

Just EXACTLY like the people asked by Galileo to look into his telescope to see for themselves there are moons around Jupiter or the fact that he saw binary stars, two stars where only one is visible to the naked eye.

They would rather NEVER look into his telescope and therefore never have their world view shaken to the core, so sure they were of their position.

That is what I mean when I say scientists have the ability to be wrong.

You can NEVER have the ability to be wrong, that would shatter your mind so instead you lock yourself into an untenable position being in a smaller and smaller (luckily for the rest of the world) minority of people so stuck in the 10th century they have lost, just like you, the ability to reason for themselves, convincing themselves they actually are using reason to come up with their untenable positions.

Like the moon being cooled by water where no gullies or shorelines have ever been found on the moon, but in spite of that you go on believing your bullshyte mythology.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Well, you weren't even around 500 years ago much less 6000 or 6 billion so you are just taking the word of people doing idiot math to force the world to be 6000 years old. So you in fact have no knowledge of chemistry to have ever even looked into the possibility of molecules self assembling.

That would throw doubt into your mythology and you can't have ...[text shortened]... ever been found on the moon, but in spite of that you go on believing your bullshyte mythology.

I have the ability to be wrong just like you and your scientists. But God is never wrong! 😏

Forbes.com Pete Reilly: Interview with Kent Hovind

YouTube

Originally posted by RJHinds
Forbes.com Pete Reilly: Interview with Kent Hovind

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RPvufEipt0

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind%27s_doctoral_dissertations

Originally posted by sonhouse
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind%27s_doctoral_dissertations

Another case of attacking the messenger for bad news.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I have the ability to be wrong just like you and your scientists. But God is never wrong! 😏

i think most would agree that the creation of lucifer was a bit of a mistake. asking abraham to kill his son as a test (when he already knew the answer) was wrong.

theres two mistakes for you.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
i think most would agree that the creation of lucifer was a bit of a mistake. asking abraham to kill his son as a test (when he already knew the answer) was wrong.

theres two mistakes for you.

What most humans think does not determine right or wrong for God. 😏

HalleluYah !!! Praise the LORD! Holy! Holy! Holy!

Originally posted by RJHinds
What most humans think does not determine right or wrong for God. 😏

HalleluYah !!! Praise the LORD! Holy! Holy! Holy!

And you know that how?

Originally posted by sonhouse
And you know that how?

I know it from study of the Holy Bible and the use of common sense. 😏

Originally posted by RJHinds
I know it from study of the Holy Bible and the use of common sense. 😏

There is a time when common sense works and a time when it produces silly results. You need to consider the relevant criteria.

You might be that rare breed of (near) genius that also has common sense.

do all high IQ people lack common sense? No, but the person with high IQ and high common sense, or Practical Intelligence, is definitely a rarer breed of genius.

http://www.science20.com/rogue_neuron/does_superhigh_iq_superlow_common_sense

I go along with this account, explaining that the right place for common sense is to deal with social and psychological problems, when our best strategy is often to respond "instinctively" or to refer to our feelings. Very intelligent people who may lack common sense can produce silly behaviours by trying to come up with a novel, clever solution.

"Preferential use of abstract analysis is often useful when dealing with the many evolutionary novelties to be found in modernizing societies; but is not usually useful for dealing with social and psychological problems for which humans have evolved ‘domain-specific’ adaptive behaviours. And since evolved common sense usually produces the right answers in the social domain; this implies that, when it comes to solving social problems, the most intelligent people are more likely than those of average intelligence to have novel but silly ideas, and therefore to believe and behave maladaptively."

By the same token, I suggest that the inappropriate use of common sense in dealing with matters calling for high levels of intelligence is also likely to produce silly results, as they do in your case. Indeed, it is difficult to see how common sense is likely to be the most effective tool (or even a useful tool at all) for biblical exegesis:

Biblical exegesis is a systematic process by which a person arrives at a reasonable and coherent sense of the meaning and message of a biblical passage. Ideally, an understanding of the original texts (Greek and Hebrew) is required. In the process of exegesis, a passage must be viewed in its historical and grammatical context with its time/purpose of writing taken into account.

http://www.theopedia.com/Exegesis

I recognise that you said "and" in your post - study of the bible AND commons sense. However, the clear meaning of your post is that you regard your common sense as a helpful guide, even if it may not be your only guide. Since you do in fact arrive at unusual and confused conclusions from your "study," and bear in mind that you "study" with the help of some very unreliable sources, then I suggest that part of your problem may indeed be your inappropriate reliance on what you call "common sense" but what probably in fact amounts to a serious lack of self discipline or intellectual rigour in the way you approach your "study."

Originally posted by finnegan
There is a time when common sense works and a time when it produces silly results. You need to consider the relevant criteria.

You might be that rare breed of (near) genius that also has common sense.
[quote]do all high IQ people lack common sense? No, but the person with high IQ and high common sense, or Practical Intelligence, is definitely a rarer ...[text shortened]... o a serious lack of self discipline or intellectual rigour in the way you approach your "study."

My statement was not all-encompassing. For example, I did not even include my Near Genius or being inspired by the Holy Spirit. 😏

HalleluYah !!! Praise the LORD! Holy! Holy! Holy!