Can Evolutionists be a Laughing Stock?

Series:

1) Creation vs. Evolution : Can Evolutionists be a Laughing Stock?
2) Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : ... on Age of Earth video's by Kent Hovind
3) Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : ... on Chaplains vs Councellors and on Creation vs Evolution (feat. Kent Hovind)
4) Φιλολoγικά/Philologica : Hovind's Dissertation Not as Bad as its Critics on Rational Wiki Think
5) Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : ... on Hovind - Ross Debate, for Four Videos
6) Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : ... on History being Kent Hovind's Weaker Subject
7) Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : ... on Kent Hovind's supposed failure in Carbon Dating Subject

I just saw a video which complained that creationists were too funny and killing poor atheists by provoking laughter.

Same video professed it was impossible to make evolution look funny.

Now, here I am watching Kent Hovind. He had moments of making evolutionist atheism look funny. Looking at such a video, I think an atheist would either snicker - or be angry.

Now Kent Hovind is serving prison. Maybe he was kind of funny. Check him out.

He can of course have been set up because he attacked the public school system. As do I. As do I.

We have both served in such.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
BpI Georges Pompidou
St Alphonsus Maria Liguori
2-VIII-2013

Turtle's and X-rays:

That poor turtle!” the netizen wrote. “It had to absorb all those X-rays!”

source

Now, absorbing X-rays is not very healthy, but turtles are thickskinned and absorb less than others.

Mussels - other long lived species - also have a shell and are furthermore protected by water. Trees are longlived and have bark.

As I said elsewhere, I do not believe the Hovind theory, since I believe the "water above the firmament" is a permanent part of creation and refers to all water molecules, maybe even all hydrogen molecules you can find all over space. Came down during flood, then back up, part of it.

But he is right that there were less X-rays or other cosmic radiation reaching earth before the Flood, that much I consider a safe guess.

My turn on that is that God asked the stars "time to turn on some more radiation, men have been living too long and getting too bad, as you could see. If times are shortened some of them even might be saved" and stars answered "OK, you are our creator and theirs, you know what you are doing". (Confer Canonic Book of aruch, chapter 3:34-35)

Now, I found his defense of the water canopy theory, and I will quote from it what I find relevant to mine, with my answers. And maybe later restudy it:

2 Peter 3 : Open letter to Brother Tom Ish- Editor of Creation Illustrated

"Genesis 1:1 in the Jewish Torah (OT) says, 'In the beginning God created the heaven...' Hmmm? Heaven is in the singular and has been for 3,400 years in Jewish literature as well as the thousands of copies scattered around the world."

Sorry, but ha-shamayim is in Hebrew plural. Whether you translate the word as heaven or as heavens in English - you did not cite the Hebrew - the Hebrew word is plural.

"The FIRST 'bible' I can find that uses 'heavens' plural in 1:1 is the 1553 Spanish 'Inquisition Approved Old Testament' -'En Principio crio el dio alos cielos y ala tierra.' Plural. Catholic Spanish Inquisition... Hmmm? Satan plans lo-o-o-o-ong term!"

Sorry again, but Spanish Inquisition at that time included lots of converted Jews who really knew Hebrew.

[Besides, if you accept the Sanhedrin approved Masoretic version, approved by the inheritors of the Sanhedrin that condemned Jesus or at least the Sanhedrin at Jamnia, that seems to have condemned Christians, it seems a bit fuinny to object to a "Sanhedrin" of a Christian type when it is on top of that clearly not withholding the Bible from the people. At least not from stable and pious ones.]

"KH- Ps. 148:4 says 'the waters THAT BE above the heavens.' Based on that verse I believe the entire universe we see is inside a water canopy right now. That would not negate the idea that there was also one over the first heaven as we will cover in part 3. The birds fly in the firmament (KJB). That means it is the air not the stretching. I do agree the heavens have been or are being stretched. The Bible says they are at least 11 times."

Ah, that was the psalm I was looking for!

That is why I believe the waters above the firmament are still or again at least in part there.

I wonder if the verses about having been stretched mean that God is making the Universe bigger - which could explain why year is now more than 364 days (confer Book of Henoch) - or that it is not hanging loose and limp as something "not stretched" would.

Now, if the waters are "above the heavens" they are therefore also above the firmament.

That is my main reason against the Hovind theory./HGL

Yeah, sth else I would not laugh at at all:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nP4dp-VxNvQ