I just puked in my mouth a little bit...

buuuuuuuuuuulllllll shit.

something really fishy is going on.

I did more digging on the biologist. His name is Dr. Ben Waggoner and is a tenured professor at the University of Central Arkansas. UCA happens to be a publicly funded school.

Here is his CV: http://faculty.uca.edu/benw/benwcv.htm

What is odd is that his CV is full of scientific and evolutionary papers. Given this, I cannot understand why he makes the shocking claim at the outset of this video, and why he continually plugs creationist materials throughout the debate.

Look what I found: *lies

Adding video to channels (Lies) - requested by gwiz665.

reminds me of this sift in a way:

http://www.videosift.com/video/SS-Officers-Come-to-a-Startling-Realisation-sketch-250

surely when you have to resort to an orchestration like this you must know you're on the wrong side.

I really couldn't watch all of this. It seems he's claiming is own incompetence as a scientist and critical thinker as the reason he's converted to creationist belief? I wonder how much they payed him.

My teacher is a fruitcake.

I would make a comment such as "This video makes baby Jesus cry." but that would be wrong in a couple of ways...

Maybe I should say "This video makes baby Logos cry."

ok....
this is pure tripe.
first,there is no sign of a debate.
for a debate to happen there has to be two opposing views.
second,while this teacher may have had a "born-again" experience,which is fine,he seems to be more prosyletizing than debating,which is not fine in the realms of a "debate".
i have seen kent hovind debate,his skills are less than extraordinary,and is usually left shackled by his own inept and circular logic by an experienced person of science.think it was dr bennet,but i could be mistaken.
the man built a museum in order to perpetuate his premise that dinosaurs and man lived at the same time.that alone disqualifies him in any rational discussions about creation.
mr hovind claims to be an evangelical,but in actuality he is a fundamentalist.
the written word IS the word of god...period.
to entertain any other theory,premise or reality is to deny his whole belief system.this is the main reason he promotes creationism so fervently.
the fact of the matter is:the bible is the written word of man and anybody who looks deeper into the matter will see that plainly.

so let me throw my two cents here:
first:there are 66 books in the bible (73 if you are catholic),yet there are in actuality 267 books of the bible,all by biblical authors.
why so many books not included in the bible?
nicea council of 325 a.d emperor constantine played a large role in its canonization.understand that before this time christianity looked far different than the christianity you see today,the current christian churches roots started in 325 a.d.
the bible contains the gospels (the good news) of mathew,mark,luke and john.
but there are actually 24 gospels.
*for all you heretics out there i suggest reading the gospels of mary,judas and thomas.you might enjoy the revelations of paul also.all are apocryphal books.
second:understanding that in the time of the biblical writings of the old testament (from the hebrew torah),sacred geomancy,astrology,numerology and a huge dose of superstition,influenced almost all religious texts.they were almost entirely metaphorical.
for example..the book of genesis,which has been written and re-written over and over,is actually a metaphorical representation of the tetragrammaton,which in itself is a graphic representation of creation itself,yet having little,or nothing,to do with religion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetragrammaton
to use the book of genesis,and all its obvious flaws,to explain and argue the validity of biblical creationism,is not only a poor platform,but lacks imagination.
the only reason i can surmise that seemingly intelligent people keep re-visiting this dead horse,is that they believe whole-heartedly in the "word",
and to allow any other belief is tantamount to having to rebuke god.
this is the fundamental flaw in..well...fundamentalism.
when your belief system is so rigid,based in bad science and even worse theology,you are doomed to either break or dismiss all evidence as heresy.
this is dark ages material,and should be rejected,but sadly its not.

one final note...
if the definition of science is:the study and observation of the natural,physical universe through testing and experimentation,to reach a consensus based on theory and fact.
and if you believe there is a creator.
a creator who created the known physical universe.
would it not then make sense that science is actually the study of god?
is that NOT a more poetic,and beautifully harmonious way of looking at the universe?
because to me science reveals creation to be a much more complex,profound and poetic place than the book of genesis.
who wants to be dust and a rib?
booooooring.
now the story of a single-cell organism fighting,scratching and ultimately co-operating with other single-cell organisms to form more complex,and ultimately what we see today.creatures of all unique and incredible forms.
now THATS impressive!
so ends todays sermon..
please dont forget to tip your bartenders and waitresses.
next week!
sink or swim wednesdays!

BTW - that Kent Hovind is now in Prison for TAX evasion... HAHA

Magic is REAL. Enough said.

Whenever i think of Kent Hovind, I think of this..
http://www.videosift.com/video/Kent-Hovind-is-a-fucktard

I had to find more about this nutter, found this interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4q737-0QSfc

Clearly, he's a moron. Anyone who would be convinced by his arguments, unfortunately, doesn't have the aptitude to understand what everyone is talking about. Sad, but true...