Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In Forums

Quote# 53310

In my world religions class at scottsdale community college in AZ, even the textbooks admit that although some scientists believe that man was here hundreds of thousands of years to millions of years ago, the earliest evidence for man goes back only about 6 thousand years ago. Even this is just guessing or averaging the time frame. Also if man were here 3 million years ago like some scientists at Rutger's university say, then there would be trillions times trillions times trillions of people in the world not to mention an affinity amount of human fossil skeletons. We'd be walking on human bones every inch of the world, except that there would'nt be any where to walk because there'd be living people on every inch of the world too. As for the oldest civilizations, The Mexicans government knows that the Mayans oldest ancestors are The Toltec Indians. The Toltecs reported in thier writings that the world was only around 1700 years old before a world wide flood about 4,000 years ago. The exact dates they added up are only a seventeen year difference to the Hebrew calendar. For the exact dates see Hovind's seminars. As for the whale having feet or legs, you are referring to vestigial body parts. Dr. Hovind debunks this theory in one of his seminars. The whale actually needs those certain hip bones to produce baby whales. Scientists that teach this evolutionary theory about the whale are either ignorant about whale anatomy or lying. Watch Dr. Hovind's seminars and debate DVDs. People are finding out the truth. Now that science is "evolving" they are proving evolution wrong as well as the old age of the earth theory.

James Lopez, Free Hovind 55 Comments [12/1/2008 6:43:30 AM]
Fundie Index: 7
Submitted By: DevilsChaplain
WTF?! || meh
Username:
Comment:



1 2 3
#791337
Jay-Sus

Watch Dr. Hovind's seminars and debate DVDs.

What about Kent getting destroyed in a debate with a university student? I can't help but notice how that is always ignored.

12/1/2008 6:51:13 AM

#791349
DarkfireTaimatsu

the earliest evidence for man goes back only about 6 thousand years ago

I could swear I just heard about a news article about the discovery of a temple dating back 11,000 years or some such thing... In fact, I think I heard about it on this website.

12/1/2008 6:58:01 AM

#791352
Philbert McAdamia

an affinity amount of bullshit.

12/1/2008 6:59:34 AM

#791355
szaleniec

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neolithic

You fail archaeology forever. As does prisoner #06452-017, along with every other academic discipline he tries his hand at.

12/1/2008 7:00:43 AM

#791360
a mind far far away

This is your brain on christian fundyism.

12/1/2008 7:09:17 AM

#791365
gremlinn

If you've got no proof, make shit up.

12/1/2008 7:12:42 AM

#791367
Nightjaguar

Sigh. As a Hispanic I am always disappointed when I read something real dumb and then find out the writer has a last name like Lopez or García or Rodríguez,etc. Guys like James give us a bad reputation. I hope everyone is smart enough to know we're not all like this.

12/1/2008 7:15:13 AM

#791373
Ambrielle

Ah, Hovind. Would-be guardian of the next dark age.

12/1/2008 7:23:08 AM

#791378
Antichrist

What a good parrot, wanna cracker?

12/1/2008 7:30:10 AM

#791379
Grigori Yefimovich

You have accidentally wandered into the college creche. Real textbooks are printed on paper, not floppy chewable fabric.

12/1/2008 7:32:23 AM

#791393
Grimesy

Those text books are wrong. Here in australia, we have bones dating back 10s of thousands of years ago. This entire quote is wrong. I have not seen a single fact here. It's all bloody opposite to the truth!

12/1/2008 7:52:16 AM

#791397
Thinking Allowed

Free Hovind says it all.

12/1/2008 7:57:29 AM

#791406
Dinomancer

If the first evidence is only six thousand years old, then where does that leave the 11,000 year old temple they unearthed, or the 350,000 year old French cave paintings?

As to there being bones everywhere, I can't fault that, it's not like bones rot or anything.

12/1/2008 8:14:12 AM

#791438
Dan Onymous

What? You do realise that people die don't you? Why would there be trillions of people wandering about?

12/1/2008 9:43:52 AM

#791453
lumax

"In my world religions class at scottsdale community college in AZ, even the textbooks admit that although some scientists believe that man was here hundreds of thousands of years to millions of years ago, the earliest evidence for man goes back only about 6 thousand years ago. Even this is just guessing or averaging the time frame. Also if man were here 3 million years ago like some scientists at Rutger's university say..."

<begin sarcasm>Because Scottsdale Community College is way more prestigious than Rutgers and the world scientific community counts on World Religion classes for all their "evolution theory"<end sarcasm>


12/1/2008 10:11:18 AM

#791454
Rat of Steel

Kent Hovind apologist = automatic 5

12/1/2008 10:13:50 AM

#791455
Giveitaday

You have already show a near complete ignorance of the aforementioned subjects and you decide to top if off with "Watch Dr. Hovind's seminars "? Comgratulations, you are willfully ignorant of established facts, and completely accepting of blatant, on it's face psuedoscience from a known hack, who's "scientific theory's" can't even stand up to grade school level science. How sad your life must be.

12/1/2008 10:14:04 AM

#791459
Ladnil

-- What? You do realise that people die don't you? Why would there be trillions of people wandering about? --

Pretty sure that number was based on current population growth rates extrapolated millions of years.

Its like they think modern medicine has been around forever. Oh wait, they think modern medicine is useless and its all the praying they do that cures people and lets women actually manage to live through childbirth.

12/1/2008 10:16:21 AM

#791463
Comicartist

Your textbooks are most deffinitely deceiving you. And Kent Hovind is about as far removed from the truth as you can possibly get.

12/1/2008 10:24:08 AM

#791509
FMG

In my world religions class at scottsdale community college in AZ, even the textbooks admit that although some scientists believe that man was here hundreds of thousands of years to millions of years ago, the earliest evidence for man goes back only about 6 thousand years ago.

Except for civilisations such as Egypt, Indus, Mesoamerica, China who all outdate 6000 years...

12/1/2008 11:40:07 AM

#791516
Mortok

I have only the loosest grasp of evolutionary theory, and basic biology, but I'm confident I could kick Hovind's worn-out arse in a debate.

12/1/2008 11:45:37 AM

#791521
aaa

Buy my crap!

12/1/2008 11:50:05 AM

#791560
Mister Spak

" even the textbooks admit that although some scientists believe that man was here hundreds of thousands of years to millions of years ago, the earliest evidence for man goes back only about 6 thousand years ago. "

Try remedial reading classes before you tell us what is in a science texbook. And your creationist books are not science textbooks.

12/1/2008 12:21:36 PM

#791595
BufferickVonHellbags

no one said that man has been around for millions of years. that's just stupid.

12/1/2008 12:52:47 PM

#791616
Hasher

The Mayans and Toltecs thought there'd been a whole series of "suns" each ended by a different disaster before the flood. How come you leave out the bits that don't fit your own mythology?

12/1/2008 1:33:58 PM
1 2 3