Prove Evolution: Win $250,000!

Creation Science Evangelism ^ | N/A | Dr. Ken Hovind

[handk]

OK, you evolution monkeys, claim your price here.

Also, highly recommended (and highly effective) video series here (or click on image below).

[widowithfoursons]

Even Darwin refuted his theory (on his deathbed).

[Paradox]

This guy had better be more specific. Evolution has been "proven".

Now, if he means the grand scope of Darwinian evolution accounting for all the species we see today, thats a different matter. Actually, I dont know if anyone could "prove" the following either:

That stomach ulcers are "caused" by a bacterial infection. That smoking causes cancer. That intelligence is largely inherited. That the current model of the atom is correct. And finally, that little blue smurfs have NOT taken residence in my Colon.

[PatrioticAmerican]

Prove creationism.

[The Shootist]

Might as well ask, "Prove reality exists and win a million dollars."

[handk]

Might as well ask, "Prove reality exists and win a million dollars."

If that sentiment keeps you in your comfort zone, so be it.

[handk]

This guy had better be more specific. Evolution has been "proven".

No, it hasn't.

[Hunble]

Might as well ask, "Prove reality exists and win a million dollars."

My thoughts exactly and it is not worth bothering with any other replies.

[steve-b]

****BBBBBZZZZTTTTT**** I'm sorry; the first four elements on your list of five are not relevant to the question being posed.

[jayef]

You're joking, right. This dude has been called out and debunked. See for yourself:
Hovind is Bovine not Divine

[FrdmLvr]

Now, if he means the grand scope of Darwinian evolution accounting for all the species we see today, thats a different matter.

Sounds like equivocation and/or rationalization to me.

[boris]

There is nothing inherently incompatible between creation and evolution.

One viewpoint (my own) is that there is a Creator who was instrumental in causing the Universe, together with the physical laws that we observe. Some of those laws allow (or perhaps compel) evolution.

In other words, evolution--"correctly interpreted" does not argue against the possibility of a creator. Again, IMHO, creation and evolution are compatible and consistent.

--Boris

[general_re]

Bah. I've got a better one - prove that the Moon exists and win $100,000...

[arete]

My thoughts exactly and it is not worth bothering with any other replies.

Ditto that. Headline only makes sense to the creationist crazies.

Richard W.

[jayef]

Love it, love it, love it! This is hilarious.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

LOL! That's great! (Is that medved's site?)

[Hunble]

That Moon website is fantastic! Thanks for sharing it with us. I am laughing so hard, it is difficult to type.

[big bad easter bunny]

1)"Brought time, space, and matter into existence from nothing." That is the definition of Creation not Evolution! Evolution takes in account the laws of physics; one of those laws say matter can be neither destroyed nor created it has always existed. Besides does this guy have the $250,000?

[warped]

Actually, he has a good point. Evolution is still a THEORY, but taught as fact. It's really stupid to do so at the expense of other theories. When I took western civilization in a public high school, our Christian teacher (good man) presented no less than seven theories on the origins of life on earth, including creationism, evolution, the spore theory, etc. Our Biology teacher presented four of them. Since they are all theories, this is the best (and correct) way to do it. You can't prove any of them based on existing evidence (he did mention macro, not microevolution), and evolution has NOT been proved. (not that it matters to the discussion, but I lean strongly towards the creation viewpoint, but still read up on other theories, because I beleive God has used the structure of the natural universe to accomplish his goals).

[biblewonk]

Prove yesterday existed.