These Seminars are NOT copyrighted. If you are interested in helping support Kent Hovind his video series is available on DVD at: shopping.drdino.com The Garden of Eden, part two of the seminar series, describes the earth as it was before the worldwide flood. Dr. Hovind explains in detail how it was possible for man to live over 900 years, for plants and animals to grow much larger than today, and for dinosaurs to thrive along with man. This Creation Seminar is only one of the seven listed below: Creation Seminar 1 – The Age of the Earth Creation Seminar 2 – The Garden of Eden Creation Seminar 3 – Dinosaurs and the Bible Creation Seminar 4 – Lies in the Textbooks Creation Seminar 5 – The Dangers of Evolution Creation Seminar 6 – The Hovind Theory Creation Seminar 7 – Questions and Answers Below are direct links to each part of Seminar 2, which is 13 parts long. Part 1 www.youtube.com Part 2 www.youtube.com Part 3 www.youtube.com Part 4 www.youtube.com Part 5 www.youtube.com Part 6 www.youtube.com Part 7 www.youtube.com Part 8 www.youtube.com Part 9 www.youtube.com Part 10 www.youtube.com Part 11 www.youtube.com Part 12 www.youtube.com Part 13 www.youtube.com If you want to watch this seminar uncut go to: www.veoh.com If you just go to the link above this paragraph and watch it directly off of the website, the quality is not very good. But if you install VeoTV (which you can download from the last link at the bottom of this page) you can download the fullscreen uncut …
(Kent Hovind) Creation Seminar 2 The Garden of Eden Part 10
Written by admin on September 1st, 2010 in Textbooks.
Tags: Creation, Eden, garden, Hovind, Kent, part, Seminar
@DelMinor i agree. there is no evidence yet like kent says they are as religious about their beliefs as creationists are, the difference is that the creationist argument i think is a lot more logical when followed all the way through.
About 1,000 years ago, scientists “knew” that the Earth was at the center of the universe. About 600 years ago, scientists “knew” that the Earth was flat. About 500 years ago, scientists “knew” that bigger rocks fell faster than smaller rocks. About 5 years ago, scientists “knew” Pluto was a planet. Today, scientists “know” we came from apes. Ha, scientists don’t know shit.
@DelMinor life would be so much easier of people read the life manual (Bible), all evidence is so much more concrete than theories.
@gregrutz Alright, Greg. You’ve proved the definition of science. That’s great :]. science isn’t meant for rationalizing anything, but it is used for that purpose. Its no secrete that mankind has been ansty to try and disprove the existence of a God by digging for the facts that can reserve the possibility. That’s why there’s a widely accepted fact (whatever the fuck that means) that we were brought here by natural selection.
@sablechicken Thank God Kent is in Prison.
@KakashiTheFirst
Science is not trying to rationalize anything, they are looking for the facts.
They have no intention to end religion, they don’t care about religion.
Yes, Kent, they can discredit all your bull shit.
@DelMinor No, scientists have proven evolution with DNA. Hovind is full of crap.
@gregrutz Greg, you obviously don’t know about the fossil line-up.? Ardi and Lucy were a smaller type of australopithecine. Now some scientists agree that its skull was “overwhelmingly simian [ape] – not human”. Who says humans were the only [animals] to walk up-right? Did you know that the Homo erectus fossil was observed to be “limb and bones, later discovered to have been indistinguishable from those of H[omo] sapians” ?
@KakashiTheFirst Like I said before, a Scientific Theory is different from the everyman’s use of the word theory. it’s true-look it up. And sometimes I do clarify that the Theory of Evolution is not synonymous with the idea of an old earth. Other times I merely focus on refuting the scant evidence the creationist gives in order to show them they haven’t a single basis in fact.
@KakashiTheFirst I don’t have to ”believe’ in Ardi or Lucy. They are real.
They are called fossils. I know they are invisible to you, but they are real.
And They walked upright. If you hadn’t noticed, humans are the only animal to walk upright.
@KakashiTheFirst Science does not care about religion. There is no plot.
Science just doesn’t use the supernatural, it changes no experiment.
IF science found out God made the first cell, THEN would you ”believe” in evolution?
@KakashiTheFirst You can prove God, or a superior divine being created everything that is by just looking through the cracks. The errors. Take for example: Reverse all the stars/universe in an expanding universe to one point in time. Where does the star come from? Where does the force come from? Was it always there? No. Infinity can’t leak into a finite universe. We don’t know space’s measurement or if it even has one. But the universe, galaxy, stars “began” at one point and became limitless.
@gregrutz Would science really come up with such a guess that’s so flawed? For many years, science have tried to support the evolution theory with the intentions bringing religion to an end. We can play pong all day, and talk about what science tries to unfold, or what religion renders within the bible. The real answer lies within the “beginning” of everything. science will never come to rationalize the origin of existance. They will not, never, and can not.
@gregrutz The shrewlike rodent was dismissed as well as Ramapithecus, Australopithecus, Chimpanzee skull, the Neanderthal man. Its sad that the first apes you’d bring up were Ardi and Lucy. Consider radioactive dating methods have come under sharp criticism. Believing in Arid and Lucy is just as making up a God.
@DelMinor No, Science is based on facts. Religion takes faith.
@KakashiTheFirst what is you excuse for Ardi?
@KakashiTheFirst Just wondering, what bull shit did creationist make up for Ardi. And Lucy, who also walked upright, you can tell from the neck.
@KakashiTheFirst Just wondering, what bull shit did creationist make up for Ardi. And Lucy, who also walked upright, you can tell from the neck.
@KakashiTheFirst Just wondering, what bull shit did creationist make up for Ardi. And Lucy, who also walked upright, you can tell from the neck.
@KakashiTheFirst What part of God is hard to understand, All Everything. All powerful, that is why it took 6 days to make the universe and then he had to rest.
I read the first page of the bible and it was clearly written by men who thought the world was flat and the moon only came out at night.
@Soupthemighty Is accepted by the majority, as apposed to any congregation who accept God? Can he not fit the guessing criteria within science? I can tell you the names of all the evolutionary-line ups from fossil evidence leaking down to dark fragments of human skull, orangutan jaw and teeth, and areas fabricated from plaster all in ONE model. I’m not bluffing, I’ll tell you.
@gregrutz I bet you know nothing about God or the Bible. Do what Newton or Galileo did, study the bible first before coming up with a solution.
@gregrutz No no, infact if you’ve read deeply into Galileo’s background. You would know that he, with the intentions of rendering biblical texts, was evoked to modify the truth about the bible. Where on earth did you read that he “proved the bible wrong”? He proved the Catholic’s rendition of the bible wrong, yes. Not the bible itself.
Did you know that Newton also read the bible, back to back? Daily, throughout his life? There’s a good cause, who’s looking for answers.
@Soupthemighty How is it that Evolution, we’ll call it modern synthesis, being the product of an every-day basis a theory. . . when its clearly a fact? And yeah, creationists do confuse that. But I often come across a thread, now and then, seeing Evolutionists taking advantage of that flawed knowledge. Why not help them understand what it is, instead of furthering their confusion?
@KakashiTheFirst It is true that the Scientific Theory of Evolution pertains only to the adaptations that animals go in order to better suit their environment, however creationists tend to confuse the fact of evolution with the fact of an old earth, stemming from the controversy the resulted from Darwin publishing “On the Origin of Species” and the Catholic church denouncing it.