Friday, September 22, 2023
Mitochondrial Health

Best Evidence for Universal Common Ancestry with SFT, Rawmatt, and Kent Hovind Reading His Script



On September 1st, 2023, I, against my better judgement, appeared on an open mic stream on Standing For Truth to talk about what I think is the single best piece of evidence for universal common ancestry and against separate creation. It turned out to be a reasonably good conversation! That is, except for Kent Hovind being completely unable to understand literally anything I was saying. But once he left it was a good conversation.

There’s a related conversation to be had here about the utility of going on channels like SFT, how and where to reach creationist audiences, also the value of doing so, and the trade-offs involved. I’ll have that conversation at some point.

For now, enjoy this chat, and stick around to the end to see how SFT and Rawmatt respond to my pointing out that Kent makes them look stupid.

This is just a hobby for me, but if you appreciate what I’m doing and want to say thank you, you can contribute here:

https://www.patreon.com/creationmyths

https://paypal.me/creationmyths?locale.x=en_US

If you disagree with anything in this video and want an opportunity to make your case, email me: [email protected]. I’ll give you as much time as you want, and then I’ll take the time I want to respond, and we can have a conversation.

source

Similar Posts

38 thoughts on “Best Evidence for Universal Common Ancestry with SFT, Rawmatt, and Kent Hovind Reading His Script
  1. This was such a great watch. I can't understand how Kent isn't embarrassed by his showing and what he does in general. As a math student, give me all the math Dr. Dan 😂

  2. To simply dismiss results of genomic analysis as 'lines on paper' or 'artwork' serves only to demonstrate Hovind's total and utter lack of understanding of the subject matter. He was way out of his depth here.

  3. I see Donny as a victim. He looks up to Kent so much, but one day he's going to disagree with him about something, and he's going to see how quickly a narcissist can turn. But right now he's just an enabler.

  4. When Kent started his big "your a hog" line – my response was… yes, this is technical. And none of you seem to understand it. Yet you presume to claim that those who are experts in the field are wrong or liars.
    I would describe all of the creationists in this mess as disinterested in the real science Dan was trying desperately to explain. But Kent was so far from being honest about his real relationship with the subject as to be both obvious and offensive to anyone who wanted a truthful interaction.

    BTW Dan, as this subject is far from my area of study, I was learning a LOT from your attempt, however frequently they opted to interrupt you.

  5. You’re literally explaining some of the evidence for universal common ancestry and Kent doesn’t even address your argument and just repeats a script of “that’s not science, that’s just artwork.” Wether or not drawings were used as a visual tool in explaining is completely irrelevant.

  6. Holy moly, the first few minutes alone must have tried your patience.
    Imagine trying to discuss geometry with them…

    Dan: Let's make sure we're all on the same page here. A square has four sides, right?
    Creationists: * visible confusion and chaos *

  7. Dan you're an absolute champ at pointing out the smoke screen Danny keeps tossing up! And the convo was better when Kent was quite. Edit the convo was better without bubbles too…..hes spent too much time near darth.

  8. Kent keeps saying, “that’s just lines on paper,” but you can find a video of him explaining how the wild mustard plant is the common ancestor of kale, cabbage, brussel sprouts, broccoli etc—with LINES ON PAPER. Someone needs to pin him on this, and ask him if he ever saw kale produce a brussel sprout or a cabbage produce a broccoli. He is such a dishonest POS.

  9. Saying that molecular phylogenetics is 'just lines on paper' is so blatanly ignorantly idiotic it's ridiculous. Kent's narcissism is a fantastic shield against understanding and I really have to commend your patience dealing with him.

  10. Wow, I think in this video I learned some very interesting things I had not yet been educated on. But, I am very illiterate in the field of genetics so I don’t feel like I have a full grasp on all that was discussed in this video. So, basically what you were saying right is that in unconstrained regions of the genome, mutations can freely occur without being affected by natural selection and these mutations are chance occurrences rather than deterministic and we find that all species share mutation history in their genomes and so for all species to not share a single common ancestor they would have to all have had the same mutation history just by pure chance which would be so improbable as to be virtually impossible? That’s what you’re saying right? Please, can anyone educated on this topic tell me if their is any part of this that I am missing?

  11. I love how SFT would hand it over to Kent to regurgitate script for a minute then just resume the discussion with you like he wasn't even there, because it was clear he had no interest in answering. Half of what he kept saying was even some variation of "I'm not going to answer that". And the other half was "dogs don't mate with trees".

  12. He Kent, do you KNOW what we also DO NOT SEE???

    A god creating ANYTHING right here, right now. Therefore all you have to show is black symbols on white pages in a book that cannot be demonstrated to be true.

    His hypocrisy is stunning!

  13. Putting a nested hierarchy as part of the support for a “creation model” is already being too generous. That’s already getting into unfalsifiable there’s an invisible pink elephant in my garage that you can’t disprove the existence of kind of arguments.

  14. What? It will increase its fitness, it will not increase its survival? Fitness is a measurement of surviving to procreate… Damn, these creationist misunderstandings get worse the longer they spend in the echochambers. oh F**cking grief, he is making homophobic slurs as his evidence???

    Gay people can procreate. Gay people can support heterosexual people that procreate. Sexual attraction is not a negative trait for overall fitness. Bloody disgraceful hatespreading believebots.

  15. I have a parent who loves Hovind. Tragically, they have squandered thousands on his materials. Once when I gently suggested that "Dr Dino" might not be the most qualified educator on these topics, and that in fact some of the things he says may be "out of date", I was told directly by my parent that it didn't matter if Hovind was qualified or even if he was wrong about everything he said. The only thing that mattered, according to my parent, was that Hovind was "effective". He is effective at "communicating", and therefore effective at convincing "ordinary people" that God is the creator, and keeping them in the Church, and so keeping them from burning forever in Hell.

    So I asked directly: are you advocating not being truthful to win souls? If it keeps them from hell, they replied, it is worth it. I commented that that seemed like it might be a little short sighted, and could do damage in the long run. But in my parent's view, we don't know if we have a long run.

    It was a nice play, trying to make the case that Hovind's numbers are down. Hence he is not as "effective" as he supposedly once was. And I'm sure the case is made with the background awareness that there are many alternate motives working behind the scenes. Besides the inarguable fact that saving a human soul from eternal torment far outweighs any other consideration, another is simply that Hovind is a kind of parent figure to many of these people who grew up with him. It's hard to ditch or sideline your dad. Even when you realise he's been lying to you his whole life, and squandered so many resources that might have been put to such more "effective" long term use, in order to save your soul. And maybe that (but we dare not think it) was a lie too….

  16. . Evolution is good for nothing outside of being a hobby or atheist propaganda. Serious scientist don't use it.. It doesn't matter whether it is right because it is a hobby. It is easy to accept things when believing them costs you nothing.

  17. This is the best evidence for evolution from a common ancestor? Really? The 2018 Mitochondria barcode study showed 100,000 animals, including humans are all about the same age….you could say created at the same time.
    My God, you have millions of organisms that supposedly have evolved from a first simple cell in a very short period of time …..there should be a mechanism so evident that it’s easily described in detail in high school textbooks. But there is no mechanism that makes new body parts so we are arguing over obscure genetic variations and claiming it’s the evidence. We are told the mechanisms of micro evolution somehow build when we all know they don’t. Sad.

  18. 38:42 Cows and Pine Trees cannot make a baby. CHECK MATE atheists!

    Well, I can't stomach any more of this, came to the channel and subscribed after the mention on Prof Dave – yikes, I think the only productive way to interact with these guys is to clip their videos or quote them, and then explain why they're wrong, as opposed to this kind of debate.

    I'd never heard Kent before, now I can see I haven't missed anything.

    Question: does it seem like the majority of the hard-core anti-science guys are all boomers and the new crop of ID pushers are more wishy-washy since they know they're fact checked?

    Maybe direction is being made.

    Well, even though the subscribe count was at 666, still subscribed.

  19. You have so much more patience that I do. From what I have noticed with SFT and Matt, they will make the same arguments and need to have the same things explained to them next time. Kent always goes with his cows produce cows thing – it gets old for me and I don't ever talk to him. Hopefully their audience learns from these sessions.

  20. 22:50 – Kent should really turn his camera off as he is obviously not listening to a word you are saying, in my opinion he is a dishonest interlocutor & wouldn't know what science was even if it came up & bit him on his gluteus maximus

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *