Dinosaurs co-existed with man.

[highwaystar101]

Wiintendo said:

 

@highwaystar101

Yes, you understand right, I'm a Young Earth Bible Believing Authorized King James Using Self Professed Christian.

 

Geological column - stratigraphic layers, radiometric dating, carbon dating, and all the like have been address and explained numerous times by creation scientists many times before.

 

Of their ilk Kent Hovind is the creationist with whom I agree most with, I've also studied his work more so than other creationists.  If you'd like to understand these points better, and at the same time gaining both sides of the argument I'd recommend watching some debates (may'be search for some with your favorite scientists.)

 

First things first. I am well aware of who Kent Hovind is. I want to tell you right now that the man is not trustworthy, he genuinely thinks that an ice shield could exist around Earth without collapsing within a day and destroy the Earth. I've listened to most of his arguments and all of them show a complete lack of understanding of science. I could offer rebuttals to his arguments until I'm blue in the face. And I know most of the creationist arguments and I've seen the debates. I know both sides very well.

Anyway, back to Mr Hovind. You may note that I called him Mr Hovind, and not Dr Hovind. This is for the very good reason that his PhD is from a well known diploma mill, he barely had to do anything to achieve it. I've sat and read his PhD thesis, and as someone who is currently doing a PhD I can tell you that it would never even remotely come to pass in a real University. It's not even high school level. Just to list a few gaping problems with his thesis that would cause it to fail at any real University...

• It is all the first person,
• He outright admits extreme bias, and holds the bias all the way through,
• He makes no references, or at least references that are of any value,
• He doesn't structure it correctly, to the point that the pages aren't even numbered,
• He makes major sweeping assumptions without anything to back him up,
• There is nothing of publishable quality for the academic arena,
• It was reviewed by one person... This should involve at least four people.
• He purposefully misrepresents data many times.
• And the big one... He makes absolutely no original contribution to knowledge, which is pretty much the foundation of all PhD theses.

There's Mr Hovind in a nutshell. He is an intellectually dishonest fraudster, who knows nothing of the scientific processes he talks about. He doesn't even know the difference between a genome and a chromosome, yet he wants to refute evolution despite not even knowing the basic terminology. It's just nonsense form the start.

...

As for the creationist arguments, I find that creationists are all too ready to massively misrepresent the dating processes that scientists go through.

.

Creationists always claim that it is prone to errors, well guess what scientists that date artefacts understand the risk of errors intimately. They don't avoid acknowledging these potential errors, they take them on.

.

Scientists understand how to overcome these errors to date an artefact within a reasonable limit (less than 10% off for example), and they have many methods of calibration to understand that their methos of dating are correct.

.

I went through this in an earlier post with carbon dating. There are potential errors with Carbon dating, but scientists understand these and they understand how to avoid the errors, so that near enough all samples are dated reliably. I wont repeat myself, so I would like you to offer a rebuttal to that post.

.

In short to say that we can accurately calibrate Carbon dating methods used on trees to tree rings to see that it is reasonably accurate, which means we accept that it works for other lifeforms. Also a scientist wouldn't date a sample that would give an error, it would make no sense.

.

I can guarantee that Kent Hovind, Ted Haggard, Ray Comfort, Andrew Sclafly, Kirk Cameron or whoever else misinterprets the risk of errors greatly. I know this because I've watched their videos and read their work, and I've heard them do it time and time again.

...

-Edit-

VGchartz wont let me put multiple spaces in the second part for some reason. Sorry about that.