Loading...
Debates

Kent Hovind debates Bill Ludlow: Is there evidence for human evolution. (BEST DEBATE TO DATE)

Streamed live July 14th, 2017
Kent Hovind debates Bill Ludlow on human evolution. This was one of the best debates we have had so far. Please subscribe, like, comment and share this on various social media. This is how a debate should be done. 🙂

11 comments
  1. Dr.EricTenComfort
    Dr.EricTenComfort

    Thank you to Bill again for that opening presentation. That table of skulls was something I will never forget, truly amazing.

    As I said elsewhere, the table of skulls was far more awe-inspiring, more fascinating, more ‘spiritual’ and more beautiful than anything you will find in the Bible or any other religious text.

    1. Avatar
      BranB84

      Lmk what u think about my other proposed ideas I think they r pretty solid and never heard anyone use them on Hovind or other creationists yet (maybe someone has idk def too many videos debates to have seen all of them. But plz check out lmk what u guys think.

      Also yah Hovind relies on science from the 16-19 century and ignores the 20-21 century science to try and prove his case, same problem thr Biblical scholars had to rely on God explanation for things they didnt understand which is how Hovind tries to argue against science saying they dont know (yet) so it must still be God. Its really absolutely incredible the level of sheer stupidity and lies he will tell to try and argue his case. HE NEVER USES SCIENCE he just tries to use science against itself. Its really scary that so many ppl believe same thing he does and its really sad actually as well.

    1. Avatar
      BranB84

      Hey Bill I just wanted to say that I think you did a great job presenting the Evidence/Facts for Evolution. Unfortunately, trying to explain or help someone understand them w a presupposition that starts w a book that makes extraodrinary claims without any evidence is an impossible task as evident in Kent’s relentless circular argument and responses, and absolute fundamental misunderstanding of simple ideas. One thing I wanted to add that I dont know why anyone hasn’t brought up to Kent to completely shut him up by using his own argument is this: “when he continuously argues that the fossil discovery for the intermediate species cannot be proven to have children/reproduce, and has no way of observing that there were any other “kinds”. This is what needs to be said and I GUARANTEE he will NOT be able to answer it!! (KENT YOU CLAIM THAT THE BIBLE IS LITERALLY TRUE, therefore when God told Noah to take ALL of the animals in pairs after its “kind” and ORDERED them to populate the Earth after their “kinds” THEN WOULDNT THIS BE PROOF BY YOUR OWN ADMISSION AND BELIEF that God made 1 Male and 1 Female of every “kind” and ordered the to populate and inhabit the Earth? SO OBVIOUSLY THERE HAD TO HAVE BEEN A Male and Female (by your own words and beliefs) and that they had to have reproduced/had children BECAUSE THAT IS GODS WORD!!!) and TRUST ME I HAVE ALOT ALOT ALOT of other great arguments that I have NEVER heard anyone else use against any Creatard like Kent or his son or Ken Ham etc.. I got probably 50-100 more that no one has ever used or I have heard used to refute their own logic and I have them all written down and saved in my notes and pages of arguments from both sides, and I would love to embarrass this guy online and prove his “irrational, illogical and simpleton belief of a literal Bible, Age of Universe and Evolution are all wrong!!” Please feel free and I can let everyone know more of what I got using his own arguments against him and some are very good and I can guarantee he will be speechless because Ive spent thousands of hours trying to refute my own ideas unlike him who will never do so or attempt to do so. I think this is a GREAT EXAMPLE of just 1 of many more that I have. Thanks

      1. Avatar
        BranB84

        I also do not remember if in your debate you got into carbon dating of fossils or if it was a different debate BUT I also wanted to know WHY when Kent goes on to argue about his seminar on radio carbon dating he mentions that carbon dating of some specimens such as I think it was a seal, a snail and a elephant body or something such as that, that the carbon 14 dating showed variations of thousands of years between the same specimens that were recently taken from live and recently dead specimens (and this proves carbon dating is fallable/erroneous). Well IDK why or if you or the other debater never pointed out that these are completely wrong and absolute BS argument for carbon 12/14 dating and he is lying!!! The reason is because he argues that same specimen getting dating wrong from live/recently dead specimens proves carbon dating is junk BECAUSE THIS IS NOT HOW CARBON DATING WORKS!!! You CANNOT use radio carbon dating on ANY specimen that has NOT been dead/decaying less than 100 years to 50,000 years!! Because you need to determine the half life of the carbon 14 and carbon 12 in conjuction with the rate of decay and other criteria BUT trying to do this on living or recently dead organisms/specimens IS IMPOSSIBLE because the c14/c12 hasnt begun to decay to the half life point. So he uses stuff like this against uneducated ppl and his own herd of uneducated followers who take everything he says as scientific facts when he cherry picks and banks on ppl not catching his BS. I think at one point in a debate someone may have mentioned this and to show you the level of stupidity by Kent Hovind (may have been Ken Ham) he responded with, “well if you and me are living at the same time and you carbon date me and you then you can get different answers, so carbon dating is wrong.” The response was that you cannot carbon date living/recently dead specimens to get accurate results thats not how it works, there need to be 100 years min. Of decay to get the true and accurate c12/c14 reading/measurements. And Hovind/Ham responded with “that doesnt make any sense it shouldnt matter, we are all taking in the same atmosphere, absorbing carbon, eating similar foods from same planet at the same period in time so thats proof it isnt reliable.” (I mean this is proof/evidence of the basic/primitive/low IQ and unintelligent level of stupid he has, so trying to explain to him these basic chemistry, physics arguments and for him to understand them is impossible. He claims to be a teacher of science but cannot understand the half life of elements and how robidium/strontium work or the fact that doing radioactive dating methods can be done if they are in accordance to the factors of the elements they are testing and there are buffers/and other factors that effect the markers on the accuracy of the tests/results. And the fact that fossils can be dated NOT ONLY BY carbon dating but by taking the samples and finding the atmosphere inside the fossils and being able to pinpoint the volcanic ash amounts and relate that to known periods of time when these things occurred, and other elements in the fossil to prove when they happened. He doesnt and will NEVER accept reality and that anything is possible outside of a book written by uneducated, illiterate, middle-eastern peasants. Its amazing that level of stupidity he possesses but its real and its unfortunate.

        1. Avatar
          Justin L. Franks

          Carbon-dating was covered a bit in the debate, pretty much exactly how you described. Mr. Hovind made the “carbon-dating living things give wild results, so the process is junk”. Mr. Ludlow tried to explain that it doesn’t work that way, to no avail.

  2. Avatar
    BranB84

    So basically my argument against his own words is that God made male and female of every kind. Since he made 2 of each and they had to be on Earth before or after the Ark and ordered them to populate the land they had to have children by his own admission, this was according to him God’s command, AND there is no evidence anywhere that said God made only 1 off “species/kinds” anywhere in the Bible. So his own logic is wrong on its face that these fossils didnt reproduce or have children is Kents argument so obviously this is a major problem that he cannot answer. And a reasonable person would have to then admit oh yeah well hmm I need a different excuse. Which there wont be one.

  3. Avatar
    BranB84

    I think another great question to ask Kent or any creatard is: “If today on the news a man shows up with a slab of stone and it has carving/etching in it with proclamations of morality/rules to live by and the man has also brought the bodies of his 3 kids he killed with him in a duffle bag. And he states that God spoke to him and commanded him to sacrifice his kids for his sin he committed 10 years ago when he was younger (just example) and a lightning bolt hit his driveway and blew up the piece of pavement and to his amazement had these commands etched/carved in them and told him to tell the world. So he went on the news to tell everyone what happened and what he had just done.”

    What do you think would happen to this man?
    A. He is arrested/committed to me tal health facility and jail.
    B. He is taken to a psychiatric hospital and giving medication and tested to find out what mental disorder he has.
    C. He is taken to the White House and put on a pedestal and the President proclaims this man just spoke to God and wants to spread his word to all after just killing his kids we should all make a sacrifice in which he is then given a plane ticket to go to the Vatican and become the new Pope.

    So what do you think happens Kent? One would assume this man be arrested and committed to an insane asylum. Correct? But according to you as long as enough people believe you then you will be honored and written about and the world indoctrinate you to become the new Pope or a Bishop/Cardinal I assume?

    Well thats what you think Moses did pretty much correct? Instead of killing his kids part everything else seems pretty close correct? Or lets take the killing and he raped them, well that would be okay to because thats what Lot did with his daughters when the Angels came to town right? See thats simply crazy, and if you think that its rational to believe such ridiculous things because a book told you this well I feel sorry for you because thats not intelligent.

  4. Avatar
    BranB84

    My one last one on here just to show you the ridiculous of Kent Hovind is that he always says “evolutionist believe we all came from a rock.” This is NOT TRUE/it is FALSE! Evolution does not say we came from a rock it shows how Life can Evolve over time through mutations, genetic variations etc.. THE CREATARDS are the ones who believe we came from a rock!!! “God made Adam from the ground/dirt of the Earth.” (The same exact argument as The beginning of Universe something from nothing) is the same 2 fundamental ideologies they believe God did. They believe he birthed/created World in 6 days from nothing! And God created the first man Adam from the dirt/ground of the Earth. These r what they claim and believe but if scientists say it and dont give credit to God it an impossible and ridiculous ideas!! If thats not the pot calling kettle black and a double standard then idk what is lol!

  5. Avatar
    darrylsteele

    I’m almost a couple of years late on this debate, but it was worth the watch and now a comment. As I’m writing this, I’m not sure what I’m going to say about this debate, so maybe I’ll start from where I stand as far as religion and evolution goes.
    I won’t be saying who won this debate because I don’t believe winning a debate helps with WHY there was a debate in the first place.

    But I think this might be a good place to start. “WHY”

    Let’s look Why there are debates between religion and evolution.

    A few probable evolution motivations.
    1. To prove that the Earth is billions of years old
    2. To prove our beginnings came from a ape like creature.
    3. To prove Science is a vital part of human evolution today and a key to continued learning in many areas of life. [space, medicine etc]
    4. My personal favourite. Dinosaurs existed millions of years ago before man.

    Religions probable motivations
    To prove the Earth is a lot younger than what science says it is.
    To prove we did not originate from monkeys/apes.
    To prove we have a purpose on this Earth.
    4. My other personal favourite. To live for ever with out death.

    So based on these few reasons what was achieved with this particular debate?

    I think on the surface Bill’s skulls and the evolution of man from the stone age man is very convincing evidence. This is what most of us grew listening to [and me anyway] happily believing in. It seems fair to say kent didn’t have much to say back against this evidence.`This evidence is very hard to ignore and to be able to come up with any sought’ve debatable evidence to counteract this seemed to difficult for him.

    On the other hand Bill failed to show enough of the missing parts of evolution from one ape like being to another. He did say it takes a long time for this [evolution thing] to happen [probably 100,000s of years or millions]. Question is, how long? and how many specimens do we need to find to have absolute conclusive proof of the 1st primitive man evolving into modern man?

    Based on this lack of evidence provided though impressive, the evolution theory to me has some fatal flaws in it.

    The main question to me about these debates is “what does this all mean”
    What is the point in these two religions proving the other one wrong and what do they get out’ve it?

    What does it mean to a evolutionist proving to a creationist that the Earth is billions of years old and that we came from apes etc etc.

    1. I think it makes you feel you are supporting the right team and you are not going to lose because of all the scientific data that flows through to us from various media channels. It sounds and looks convincing and amazing. Far enough too.

    What else is there?
    It’s just fun seeing a creationist squirm back into his hole when beaten to a pulp with evidence for evolution.

    Ok now what about the other side

    I think it far to say it is interesting seeing if there is a god in the universe and if the bible is true and what that all means.

    So if there is a god and Kent is 100% correct with what he was trying to get across in this debate, than that means there is a heaven and there is a place there for us to live for ever with out the fear of death.

    I guess the big question here is without wondering if you believe in this particular question I’m going to ask. Do you want to live forever with out the fear of death?

    My answer is yes I do
    So for me, regardless of the evidence for evolution that comes up, does any of it help me to reach my goal of living forever. Well for one I’m not going to dispute any of the evidence that shows up because it’s there for all to see. But despite how convincing and amazing it is, the answer is [NO, it doesn’t save my sole for ever]. Actually all the scientist and the past human expected life expectancy gives me, is about 100 years of living, so that means at best I’m half way through my time here and that is all there is for me. I’m not to happy about that as there is a big world to explore and a even bigger universe and my body is starting to hurt as I get older.

    Religion on the other despite it crack pot leaders and so called dumb ass followers and some pretty weird shit in the bible, gives a pathway to ever lasting life [debatable I know] through believing in this particular dude and something he did for us all. At this stage of my withering and pathetic life I’m happy to take a chance and see if he will give me this everlast life thing, Shaw as hell I don’t deserve it and I struggle like hell against it, but this is what this debate is actually all about from the religious point of view.

    Just a side note on my search for ever lasting life, the latest thing I’ve been looking into is the nephilim and the possibility of the them building the giant megaliths structures e.g pyramids around the world. One thing for certain is all of Bills evidence meaning his ape come modern man DID NOT build any of the giant megalith structures around the world, they could only use stone tools to break open nuts and club there women on the head etc etc. A possibility to this question being answered is the giants from the bible being involved in the building of these structures.

    Just something to think about, because your eternal life depends on it and evolution unfortunately offers nothing to the ones seeking something more than what we have been told will 100% happen to us all.

    Have a great day and don’t be afraid of the things you don’t yet understand.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Editor's choice