Lying for Jesus: Humans lived with dinosaurs

If people ever say we’re exaggerating the ravages of creationism in the United States, have a look at this video. Check out the title in the subject line. The answer, of course, is a resounding, “YES! Praise Jesus!”

Non-American readers: be prepared to be gobsmacked by the stupidity here.

Eric Hovind and Paul Taylor are your hosts at this 30-minute episode on the Creation Today show. For most of the show Hovind is lecturing to kids.  I can’t think of anything more vile than promulgating such lies to children.

Hovind comes off, I must say, as a bit unhinged: as an amalgam of Jimmy Swaggart and Soupy Sales.

Among the highlights:

  • 4:02: Hovind claims to prove that dinosaurs are mentioned in the Bible (as “dragons”) and concludes without doubt that those dragons were really dinosaurs. (He later says that dragons are mentioned 35 times in the Bible, and Hovind determined that at least 23 of those refer to real dragons.)
  • 5:00: Hovind claims that the dinosaurs faced a “very hostile environment” after the Flood. But how did they survive it? He doesn’t mention that they were on the Ark.  And the dinos went extinct because of the debilitating post-flood climate.  How do we know? Because the human lifespan dropped from over 900 years before the flood (Methuselah) to 400, then 200, then 100.
  • 7:42: People also helped bring about the extinction of dinosaurs: they were killed for meat, to protect the kids, and even for medicinal purposes (ancient remedies called for “dragon blood”).
  • 10:45.  The Bible refers to dragons and serpents breathing fire.  Since the Bible is literally true, Hovind has to show that dinos could do that.  But of course they couldn’t. What does he do: had adduces “animals alive to day with those kinds of capabilities.” He’s apparently referring to bombadier beetle.  How that proves that reptiles breathed fire is beyond me.
  • More proof: the walls of Babylon had dragons engraved on them.  And of course there are the stories of Beowulf and Grendel, and St. George and the dragon. More evidence!
  • The Grand Canyon has Native American carvings of dragons!
  • 17:13: Hovind asserts that “behemoth” mention in the Book of Job was “obviously” a dinosaur
  • 20:25: Satan twisted God’s creation by making scientists say that dinosaurs really lived million years ago
  • 22:25:  Hovind offers the kids a choice between evolution (obviously disproven) and a creator.
  • 23:20:  Hovind tells the kids that evolutionists are deceiving people about the evidence we have to support our theory. (I’m checking myself for horns).

Of all the horrible aspects of religion, the worst is the imperative to brainwash kids with lies that support your own faith.

h/t: chriskg

70 Comments

  1. Posted January 1, 2012 at 12:44 pm | Permalink

    The real tragedy is that Eric is following in the footsteps of his father, Kent (serving time in a federal prison for tax evasion) and was unable to escape the toxic environment he now spreads to more children.

    • Reginald Selkirk
      Posted January 1, 2012 at 12:53 pm | Permalink

      The real tragedy is that Eric is following in the footsteps of his father…

      And failing at it. Mind-boggling.

  2. Persto
    Posted January 1, 2012 at 12:50 pm | Permalink

    I love the Asimov quote about Creationists. “Creationists make it sound as though a ‘theory’ is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night.”

  3. jaxkayaker
    Posted January 1, 2012 at 12:57 pm | Permalink

    “20:25: Satan twisted God’s creation by making scientists say that dinosaurs really lived million years ago”

    But that, too, is God’s will.

    • Posted January 2, 2012 at 1:37 pm | Permalink

      God’s will? You think (that Christians believe) God controls people to make them do His will?

      Interesting.

      • microraptor
        Posted January 2, 2012 at 6:14 pm | Permalink

        Isn’t that the effect of saying that gawd has a plan or that everything turns out the way dog wants it to?

  4. Stonyground
    Posted January 1, 2012 at 1:01 pm | Permalink

    Why are these people so eager to present their worldview to children? In the UK, religious organisations, including the, oh so moderate, government sponsored, Church of England, are doing everything possible to take over taxpayer funded schools so that they can present their infantile fairy tales to young minds that they hope are too immature to be able to tell fantasy from reality. Bad news for them is that our youngsters are exposed to brilliantly produced movies about Harry Potter, Jedi Knights, Tolkein and yes, even C.S.Lewis and as a result, understand the difference between fantasy and reality. Our youngsters understand very well which side Christianity is on.

    These people will be forgotten by history for the simple fact that they are wrong.

  5. chriskg
    Posted January 1, 2012 at 1:01 pm | Permalink

    Jerry,

    You probably shouldn’t have said, “Hovind proves that dinosaurs are mentioned in the Bible (as “dragons”) and concludes without doubt that those dragons were really dinosaurs.” Because now Hovind will claim you said he “proved” it and you agreed. I smell a quote mine.

    Chris

    • whyevolutionistrue
      Posted January 1, 2012 at 1:16 pm | Permalink

      I fixed that. I didn’t mean “prove,” of course: I meant “claimed to prove,” so I’ve changed the text to reflect that. No quote mining is possible now without extreme duplicity.

      Thanks.

      • Ken Kukec
        Posted January 1, 2012 at 3:35 pm | Permalink

        Religious arguments are often plagued by an equivocation fallacy regarding the term “proof” or “prove.”

        “Proof” is sometimes used synonymously with “evidence” — as in “the prosecution offered proof of motive.” Alternatively, it can mean that the proffered evidence has satisfied a particular burden — as in “proved beyond a reasonable doubt.” (The term also has a specialized meaning in mathematics — as in “Wiles’ ‘proofs’ of Fermat’s Last Theorem.” Or it can mean “to test” — as in “proving grounds” or in the frequently misunderstood phrase “the exception that proves the rule.”)

        Many religious arguments are fouled by an undisclosed shift among the term’s meanings.

  6. Paula Kirby
    Posted January 1, 2012 at 1:08 pm | Permalink

    As if more proof were needed that religion is corrosive to both mind and morals …

  7. Posted January 1, 2012 at 1:10 pm | Permalink

    Dream on. There is no way to get the human brain to accept reality nor turn away from dependence on childish fantasies.

    The money really just is using these all powerful ideologies — not creating them. Following not leading or creating.

    Also, since religion is a hyper-competitive form of power getting in the US, there will always be new and improved marketing tactics.

    Plus, we know from the lack of free will research that rational and word based strategies are pointless.

    Fact based knowledge will never have a mass audience nor be accepted by anyone other than a very tiny group of professionals and experts. Thus, it has always been.

    • Notagod
      Posted January 2, 2012 at 12:10 pm | Permalink

      You probably hate having old-timers disease, thinking you’ve got an original thought going, only to realized that you just typed the whole worthless mess just four minutes ago.

  8. Posted January 1, 2012 at 1:12 pm | Permalink

    Infuckingsanity requires a full-time staff for routine maintenance, detail work, and monthly checkups.

  9. Posted January 1, 2012 at 1:18 pm | Permalink

    The title, here, reminds me of Chris Rodda’s book, “Liars for Jesus.” I’ve been meaning to read it, especially since Chris does a good job of researching before writing.

    Jerry, as for horns, in 1975, a freshman classmate asked me if I had them! We were in school in the capitol of Virginia, and she’d grown up in the country — never met a Jew before me. She was so sincere, I respected the question and educated her. We were great friends, after that. Now, if only we could educate a few more unfortunates who actually want to use their brains.

    • randyextry
      Posted January 1, 2012 at 1:53 pm | Permalink

      My mom was also asked by a classmate (in the late 60’s) if she had horns. I wonder if that still goes on.

  10. Posted January 1, 2012 at 1:30 pm | Permalink

    Hell, I don’t even know what to say to that.

    It’s both sickening and terrifying that not only is this being served up to kids, but many of them are going to grow up believing it… Depressing.

  11. Mary
    Posted January 1, 2012 at 1:43 pm | Permalink

    Flabbergasted and concerned

  12. Sastra
    Posted January 1, 2012 at 1:47 pm | Permalink

    Maybe the “fiery breath” of the dragons was a metaphor for really, really smelly breath. That way, even the Creationists get to claim sophistication.

    Maybe not.

    Eric Hovind used to come into Pharyngula and avoid all the scientific arguments against his evidentialist creationist tripe by using a clunky version of a presuppositional argument (“can you justify reason if you’re only a meat robot???” or some such nonsense.) Worst of both worlds.

  13. Brandon
    Posted January 1, 2012 at 2:05 pm | Permalink

    I can’t wait to get back to my high school biology classes this week to do Satan’s bidding by teaching students facts.

  14. Dr. I. Needtob Athe
    Posted January 1, 2012 at 2:06 pm | Permalink

    “Of all the horrible aspects of religion, the worst is the imperative to brainwash kids with lies that support your own faith.”

    Yes, it’s horrible, but it’s also a case of the mechanism of evolution exhibiting itself outside of the realm of biology. A religion that incorporates brainwashing kids will spread farther and faster, like a plague.

    On the other hand, a religion that preaches exposing kids to all points of view and letting them decide for themselves would be the most virtuous, yet the most short-lived, religion in history. In other words, it would quickly become extinct.

    • Rory Larson
      Posted August 23, 2012 at 2:46 pm | Permalink

      Exactly. The only thing I would quibble about here is that this is not “outside the realm of biology”. Richard Dawkins’ meme theory to the contrary, it’s *all* biology.

  15. Posted January 1, 2012 at 2:08 pm | Permalink

    $

  16. Centricci
    Posted January 1, 2012 at 2:10 pm | Permalink

    i dont see any email or any title in any subject line anywhere in this post.

    what am I missing?

    • chriskg
      Posted January 1, 2012 at 2:58 pm | Permalink

      This was received as an email with a subject line of “Did dinosaurs really live with mankind?‏” That should clear that up.

      Chris

  17. Lina
    Posted January 1, 2012 at 2:22 pm | Permalink

    This is unbearable!!!!… I’m speechless.

  18. Posted January 1, 2012 at 2:42 pm | Permalink

    I was browsing Wikileaks last week and came across a link to Kent Hovind’s doctoral dissertation from Patriot University. Apparently Patriot University doesn’t make its dissertations available to the public (i don’t blame them, Hovind’s was written at about a 7th grade level).

    Here’s the link (This was working last week, although I’m getting a timeout error today): http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Young-earth_creationist_Kent_Hovind%27s_doctoral_dissertation

    If the link doesn’t work, someone has written a review of Hovind’s dissertation here: http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/bartelt_dissertation_on_hovind_thesis.htm

    cheers

    • Notagod
      Posted January 2, 2012 at 12:58 pm | Permalink

      Sadly, Wikileaks has this statement at the main page:

      WikiLeaks: 394 days of banking blockade – no process
      Assange: 391 days detainment – no charge
      Manning: 588 days in jail – no trial
      DONATE ›
      Legal Costs: $1,200,000
      We are forced to put all our efforts into raising funds to ensure our economic survival. For almost a year we have been fighting an unlawful financial blockade. We cannot allow giant US finance companies to decide how the whole world votes with its pocket. Our battles are costly. We need your support to fight back. Please donate now.

    • Mark
      Posted January 3, 2012 at 2:16 pm | Permalink

      Patriot University is an unaccredited college. This is another way some Christians lie for Jesus. Many fundie preachers and leaders get their “doctoral” from unaccredited Baptist colleges. In most cases, the fundie preacher doesn’t even work for it; he receives an honorary degree from what are often referred as BBC (Basement Bible College).
      Some fundie leaders like “Doctor” Cyrus I. Schofield of the “Schofield Reference Bible” just flat out lied. Schofield never even attended college!
      Next time you see a right-wing; anti-science Baptist leader claiming to have a doctoral degree, most likely it is either an honorary degree from an unaccredited college, an “earned” degree from an unaccredited college or the man is just lying. Fundie leaders with real doctoral degrees from accredited colleges are a small minority. This fraud is quite rampant among independent fundamentalist Baptist.
      I still own the “Schofield Reference Bible” my grandfather gave me. When I get grief from my fundie family members or people from my former church, I like to point out that Schofield lied on his resume and put it in front of the bible. This tends to make them want to change the subject.

  19. TnkAgn
    Posted January 1, 2012 at 2:43 pm | Permalink

    Sir, you insult the memory of a great American, Soupy Sales.

  20. Steersman
    Posted January 1, 2012 at 4:22 pm | Permalink

    For most of the show Hovind is lecturing to kids. I can’t think of anything more vile than promulgating such lies to children.

    Just as odious, if not more so, as a remembered scene in Slumdog Millionaire where a young boy is blinded to make him a more effective beggar. Not quite sure how true-to-life that particular scene was, although I remember reading some fiction of similar circumstances in “modern” Egypt. The consequences – in all cases – of a witch’s brew of poverty, ignorance, a dearth of empathy, and pathological selfishness.

  21. retrieverman
    Posted January 1, 2012 at 4:49 pm | Permalink

    Most of this is nothing more than a rehash of the classic “Dinosaurs and the Bible” lecture.

    You can watch it online. It’s over two hours long, and it’s two hours of zany. Creationism meets cryptozoology. Kent compiles all these sightings of dinosaurs, often using his trademark bad logic and misrepresentations.

    Eric is so lazy that he just took his dad’s lecture and parrots it. He even tries to tell the same lame jokes, but he doesn’t have the delivery skills of his daddy.

    I particularly like that he thinks an Animal Planet documentary vindicates his father’s theories about dragons and dinosaurs.

    This is the same network that has given us Finding Bigfoot, which I’m sure confirms some of Kent Hovind’s theories about giants.

    • microraptor
      Posted January 2, 2012 at 8:08 pm | Permalink

      I’ve long wondered why cryptozoology and creationism are often so intertwined. Too many creationists have the strange notion that if they can prove that there’s a Sauropod running around the Congo or a Pterasaur in South America it will somehow disprove evolution.

      I got blocked from one YouTube channel for “rudeness” when I pointed out that the supposed Mosasaur video was pretty obviously just a low resolution video of an alligator.

  22. David Leech
    Posted January 1, 2012 at 5:01 pm | Permalink

    I could only watch a couple of minutes of that video, I’ll wait until ThunderfOOt tears it a new one:-)

  23. Kevin
    Posted January 1, 2012 at 5:05 pm | Permalink

    “10:45.  The Bible refers to dragons and serpents breathing fire.  Since the Bible is literally true, Hovind has to show that dinos could do that.  But of course they couldn’t. What does he do: had adduces ‘animals alive to day with those kinds of capabilities.’ He’s apparently referring to bombadier beetle.  How that proves that reptiles breathed fire is beyond me.”

    There is a similar gap in the following passage:

    “Thus our eyes did not suddenly appear as full-fledged camera eyes, but evolved from simpler eyes…in ancestral species…. A possible sequence of such changes begins with pigmented eye spots (as seen in flatworms), followed by an invagination of the skin to form a cup protecting the eyespot and allowing it to better localize the image (as in limpets), followed by a further narrowing of the cup’s opening to produce an improved image (the nautilus), followed by the evolution of a protective transparent cover to protect the opening (ragworms), followed by coagulation of part of the fluid in the eyeball into a lens to help focus the light (abalones), followed by the co-opting of nearby muscles to move the lens and vary the focus (mammals). The evolution of a retina, an optic nerve, and so on would follow by natural selection…. And each step of this process is exemplified by the eye of a different living species.”

    Just as referring to the bombardier beetle does not prove that reptiles breathed fire, neither does referring to flatworms, limpets, the nautilus ragworms and abalones prove that our eyes did in fact evolve from simpler eyes.

    • cyan
      Posted January 1, 2012 at 5:35 pm | Permalink

      Apples and oranges.
      Bombardier beetles’ ejections are hot, but there are no organisms known which produce fire, either internally or expelled through any orifice. And there is no physical evidence that an such organism ever existed.
      Whereas all of the organisms in the second paragraph do exist and do have those structures which sense light, and all those mechanisms are basically similar.

    • jaxkayaker
      Posted January 1, 2012 at 5:46 pm | Permalink

      Does anyone claim that that set of observations does “prove” that eyes evolved? What those facts do is disprove the creationist assertion that half an eye is of no use and functionless. Those facts show a possible evolutionary sequence for the modern tetrapod eye. That’s what the passage you quote claims (“A possible sequence of such changes begins with pigmented eye spots…”) and no more. Not “proof”.

      See also the discussion of the different senses of the word “proof” in an earlier comment by Kukec, and at pretty much every evolution site ever, which creationists roundly ignore and instead continue to reiterate their inane ramblings and asinine arguments and misuses and deceptive uses of semantics.

      • Kevin
        Posted January 2, 2012 at 1:56 pm | Permalink

        In the first passage I quote above, Mr. Coyne says Mr. Hovind has to prove the truth of the assertion (“show”) that dinosaurs breathed fire. The second quote, which appears to be from Mr. Coyne writing in the New Republic, begins with a different statement of fact: that our eyes evolved from simpler eyes. Surely Mr. Coyne is equally obliged to prove this literal fact?

        That the remainder of the paragraph does not do this suggests to the reader that no such proof exists. Were there any, it would obviously have been more efficient to refer to it, both to prove the statement of fact and to (emphatically) refute the ID concept of irreducible complexity, at least as applied to the eye.

        Failure to provide this proof actually makes Michael Behe’s task easier, as “What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence”.

        • jaxkayaker
          Posted January 2, 2012 at 3:03 pm | Permalink

          Congratulations on continuing to abuse and misuse the word proof.

          Also, because the evidence supporting the contention that eyes evolved from simpler precursors wasn’t presented in one particular forum, that means the evidence doesn’t exist anywhere? That’s obviously fallacious and illogical. The question that then suggests itself: are you just ignorant or are you dishonest? Both, I suspect.

          I’ve read Darwin’s Black Box and nowhere in it does Behe provide any positive evidence for an intelligent designer. Instead, his is the usual false dichotomy of not evolution = intelligent design. However, he can’t even manage to disprove evolution.

    • RFW
      Posted January 1, 2012 at 6:58 pm | Permalink

      Sounds rather like Hovind doesn’t understand that living taxa are not the same as the ancestral taxa. Yes in some, perhaps many, cases, there are living organisms closely resembling very ancient ancestors, but (as readers of WEIT already know) they are not the same.

      The coelacanths of today are not the same as fossil coelacanths, for example.

      He also seems to be ranking various living organisms in a straight line fashion as though limpets are ancestors of humans.

      It would be funny if the guy weren’t serious about it.

      Does he realize he’s spewing falsehoods?

      • chriskg
        Posted January 1, 2012 at 7:11 pm | Permalink

        So, Hovind doesn’t understand taxa or taxes. Ha! Too funny.

  24. KP
    Posted January 1, 2012 at 5:55 pm | Permalink

    Bottom of the barrel disgusting

  25. KP
    Posted January 1, 2012 at 6:07 pm | Permalink

    “an amalgam of Jimmy Swaggart and Soupy Sales.”

    I missed that the first time. HA!

  26. RFW
    Posted January 1, 2012 at 7:00 pm | Permalink

    Dragon’s blood:

    Well known to be a resin, still used as medicine.

    Wikipedia has a short but decent article on the subject.

  27. Posted January 1, 2012 at 9:44 pm | Permalink

    I couldn’t watch more than a couple of minutes of this rubbish. Let’s face it he’s not as good a comedian as his dear old dad!

  28. Posted January 1, 2012 at 11:41 pm | Permalink

    Well the video certainly gives the lie to any claim that ID is not religious.

    And it looks as though they’re determined to make some use of the Bombardier Beetle. They failed utterly to show that it could not have evolved; now they’re harnessing it as a (very bad) analogy to prove fire-breathing dragons were real. It’s as though they’ll hope that this mention of the BB will help viewers forget their earlier débâcle.

  29. Chris Booth
    Posted January 2, 2012 at 12:25 am | Permalink

    They are vile. Soul maggots. Creationism is a phenotype of evil memes; evil memes that spread through society as a kind of memic larva migrans.

    I’m not particularly squeamish, but I couldn’t watch this video.

    The horror. The horror.

  30. theinstinctofnottobecomeextinct
    Posted January 2, 2012 at 4:17 am | Permalink

    “20:25: Satan twisted God’s creation by making scientists say that dinosaurs really lived million years ago”

    well, given this as an axiom, i need to be a bliever of satan. anyway, satan is not as bad as YHWH.

  31. Phil Robinson
    Posted January 2, 2012 at 7:55 am | Permalink

    Hey! It’s great the way that you have outlined the main points and the evidence so well! Congratulations!

  32. David Evans
    Posted January 2, 2012 at 9:14 am | Permalink

    Most of the references to dragons in the King James bible are visionary (Revelation) or mythological. In the few verses where it seems to be a real animal, some recent translations have “jackal” instead of “dragon”.

    That makes Isaiah 13:22 a typical piece of Hebrew parallel structure:

    “Hyenas will howl in her strongholds, jackals in her luxurious palaces”

    Replace “jackals” with “dragons” or “dinosaurs” and it’s not so parallel.

  33. Posted January 2, 2012 at 9:31 am | Permalink

    Brainwashing?

    I’m assuming you mean ”indoctrination.” But he is, in fact, at least showing what evolutionists believe. Education is showing all aspects and views of any given subject; indoctrination is about only showing what you want them to believe.

    So, if anything, public schools are the ones that indoctrinate. Creationists show all sides.

    • RFW
      Posted January 2, 2012 at 5:34 pm | Permalink

      Creationism is NOT “a side” that is in any way comparable to evolution. The very essence of science is the attempt to understand the natural world’s phenomena and structure, and any explanation given has to accord with the facts.

      Creationism is nothing more than that narrative device of second-rate authors, the deus ex machina that is parachuted in to resolve (in fiction) plot tangles the author can’t unravel herself. Biologists, paleontologists, and scientists from many other fields have looked at the evidence, and devised a very simple explanation that explains an enormous amount: evolution.

      Incidentally, there’s no such thing as an “evolutionist”. There are people who accept that evolution explains the wide variety of life forms on Earth, the many fossils found (fewer, btw, than amateurs realize), and much else. But it’s not a belief IN evolution.

      The thing that amuses me is that the creationists never, ever seem to have bothered to open the pages of Darwin or Coyne. I suppose they can’t risk exposing themselves to doubt. Those of us who do accept evolution have, many of us, read such books, and read them critically. We think for ourselves: Charles Darwin, Jerry Coyne, and all the rest are not prophets who dictate what people believe. And indeed, there are many details about evolution that remain in dispute, but no one (except brain dead creationists) thinks that such disputes invalidate the fundamental theory of evolution.

      Darwin himself was an extremely honest man and freely admitted, even drew attention to, facts that seemed outside his theory’s explanatory power. (That’s more than can be said of the lying “religious” frauds that promulgate creationism because it improves their cash flow.) Most of those points have since been shown to be in harmony with the broad theory of evolution, thanks to advances in scientific technique. DNA analysis being a particularly powerful tool in this regard.

  34. Posted January 2, 2012 at 5:28 pm | Permalink

    Is anyone else having trouble running this video? I wanted to show it to my child and see what she thinks but it won’t work for me. Tried from the awful website too, no go.

    • Steersman
      Posted January 2, 2012 at 5:38 pm | Permalink

      I took a look at some of the links from a search and the most that I could find was the trailer – though I noticed that the documentary didn’t get more than two stars. Seems it was broadcast on one or more British stations but may not be available outside of there. But this is the link (below) to the trailer itself which seems interesting; particularly scary is a comment at about 38 seconds in where “Rev. Bess” says that “[Palin] believes she is God’s anointed one”; crazier than shit-house rats:

      • Posted January 2, 2012 at 8:01 pm | Permalink

        I was referring to the Hovind video Jerry embedded.

        • Steersman
          Posted January 2, 2012 at 8:04 pm | Permalink

          Ah, sorry; wrong thread. :-)

  35. Robert
    Posted January 8, 2012 at 9:06 pm | Permalink

    You should be ashamed of yourself for preaching something that you know is not true.

    • cyan
      Posted January 9, 2012 at 2:46 pm | Permalink

      What do you mean by this?

  36. d ver steeg
    Posted August 7, 2013 at 8:37 pm | Permalink

    Of all the horrible aspects of religion, the worst is the imperative to brainwash kids with lies that support your own faith.

    The truth would be the opposite…..
    Of all the horrible aspects of evolution, the worst is the imperative to brainwash kids with lies that support your own deceived faith.

    Check out the stegasaurus carved on the recently discovered jungle ruins site.

    • Posted August 8, 2013 at 3:24 am | Permalink

      Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha … 

      /@

      • microraptor
        Posted August 8, 2013 at 12:47 pm | Permalink

        Doesn’t even AiG say that it’s obviously not a dinosaur, don’t use it to try to argue against evolution? Or am I thinking of something else they said not to bother with?


One Trackback/Pingback

  1. [...] first saw this video on Why Evolution Is True. Advertisement GA_googleAddAttr("AdOpt", "1"); GA_googleAddAttr("Origin", "other"); [...]

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 29,405 other followers

%d bloggers like this: