(Disclaimer: This transcript is auto-generated and may contain mistakes.)

All right, guys, well, this should be a really interesting live stream today we are talking with Dr. Kent Hovind. And so this is answers in creation. Episode six, I can't believe we're already at Episode six, Matt. That's pretty cool. Huh? Yeah, we're flying through these things. Yeah. And so today's episode is going to be the basics of creation. And so this should be pretty good, especially if you're new to the conversation or the topic. You can just get the basics down. And so we're going to be going through all the basics. Can you give some examples of kind of some of the direction we're going tonight? Sure thing, Paul. So basically, the basics of creation are just simple facts that even little kids can understand about the universe and about science and reason. And so we just want to do the very basic teachings of creation in this episode and just simple arguments that you can use to debunk an evolutionist just on the fly and without using any real deep methods of science. And so these tricks that we're going to be showing you tonight are or that Dr. Kent Hovind will be showing you are going to be just really easy to understand. And they'll even be for the layman. So pay close attention and I hope you guys enjoy. Awesome. Well, I know I always enjoy the conversation with Dr. Kent Hovind. Today's episode is sponsored by the Romans Road app. So if you haven't yet downloaded that app, make sure to go check that app out on the App Store. And also, I wanted to thank our Patreon supporters for their support, Clive Hagen, Sarah Wallace, Chad Demian, Josh Lutzford, Robert Kearney, Andrew Harms, and Samuel Elliott. So I appreciate them supporting us on the website through the donations. And I also wanted to let you guys know about a giveaway we're going to be doing at the end of this month. So the last day of this month, we're going to be giving away a whole big stack of stuff here. And we're going to be giving away a really neat prize, a Confederate bill from 1861. And this is a 20-cent bill. So I guess they didn't use coins in the Confederacy, but this authentic 1861 Raleigh, North Carolina Confederate States bill. So if you subscribe to our Patreon, just $1, or you support us through our SubscribeStar, you'll be entered in for a chance to win these items right here. And so I really encourage you to do that. I also encourage you guys, and I know I plug this every show, but I really need you to head over to our Bitchute channels and our Brighteon channel and subscribe to those channels. And also check out our new shirts. Man, we got, this was Matt's idea right here, this shirt, the Surfing Monkey shirt. I love it. It could turn out good, huh? Yeah, pretty clear. The Surfing Monkey, what evolution actually teaches. That was a great idea, man. Thanks. Yeah. I think if you're an evolutionist, that's something that you have to believe as part of the theory, because if the monkeys didn't make that voyage from Africa to South America, then we wouldn't have been able to evolve in the Americas into humans. So it had to be done. Yeah. When you first told me that, I was like, there's no way that's true, but it's true, guys. And so we also have another one, Evolution is Dumb. So just check out those shirts on our website. We'll put the link in the description below. I think we're going to just get right to Dr. Kent Hovind today and start this episode. Are you ready, Matt? All right. Dr. Hovind, thank you so much for joining us. How are you today? Well, today's the oldest I've ever been. So it's kind of a steady race to the grave, but yep, doing great, getting a lot done down here at Dinosaur Adventureland. We're having a blast. But I poured concrete a couple of days ago, and I'll be 68 in January, and I found muscles I forgot I had, because they hurt now. So I'll be fine. Go ahead. Right on, right on. Well, it's good to hear that things are going somewhat well for you, and we're really excited to have you on. Thank you so much for being here. Well, thanks for having me. Yeah. So the episode is just, the name of the episode we're doing is just the basics of creation. And we're looking at just basic arguments for creation in favor of creation over evolution. And so Dr. Hovind, let's talk a little bit about genetics. What would be a good way to prove creation from genetics, a simple way? Well, the word genetics comes from the word gene code. You know, the code that is in every cell of your body is more complex than the space shuttle. And that code, the code in one person, the genetic code, the DNA code from one person would probably hold the entire internet. All the computer pictures, all the computer codes ever written by man combined would probably not equal what's in one person's body. How anybody can believe that genetics is evidence for evolution absolutely blows my mind. They got to have, it's a special kind of stupid that you have to be helped. You have to be helped to get that stupid. There's a designer. Now who was it and why and all that, that becomes a different argument. But I think it's just kindergarten level simplicity to say, when you look at the genetics of any animal or any plant, any living thing, an honest person would have to say, this had to have a designer. There is no possibility of this happening without a designer. That is awesome. And so Dr. Hovind, what about space? When we look at cosmology, what are some basic truths about cosmology that demonstrate a young earth or demonstrate, well, a 6,000 year old earth, because we know that the heavens were of old and that 6,000 is indeed a long time. What are some good evidences for a 6,000 year old earth or cosmos in the cosmos? Well, yeah, you can look at the age of this universe, let's say three different ways. One is from the scripture and that clearly teaches 6,000 roughly. And you can look at it from the earth or you can look at it from space, you know, evidence of from space. There are dozens of evidences from any one of those, which way you want to look at it. If you look at, let's just take the earth itself is spinning and it is slowing down a thousandth of a second every day. That's why we have a leap second every so often, you have to add it to the clock, usually about a year and a half, because the earth slows down from tidal friction and internal friction with the liquid magma inside and the Coriolis effect of the wind and the gravitational drag of the moon. We know the earth is slowing down. Okay, well, that means it used to be going faster and you can't, that puts a time limit of how old it can be because if you go back in time, of course, we can't do that, but if you could imagine going back in time, adding or, you know, this spin to the earth, the, because now it is slowing down, it would, you'd reach a limit where you can't be billions of years old. You can also look at the moon, which is leaving us partially because of the same lunar drag it's called, and it's called the lunar recession problem. The moon is getting away from us about an inch and a half a year. It's slowly spiraling away from the earth. Okay, well, that means it used to be closer. And if you run the numbers on that and go back with the mathematics, you'll say, wow, you go back about 1.2 billion years, the moon orbit, moon earth orbit would collapse. They're like two magnets. You get them close enough together and pretty soon they snap together. You cannot have the moon going fast enough to stay away from the earth if it was closer because of the gravitational pull. And so they get a number of about 1.2 to 1.4 billion. I say, now hold it. Why are we teaching the kids the earth is 4.6 billion when the moon says 1.2 max? When you look at the stars that are out there burning or take the sun, for instance, the sun that we can see and study clearly, the sun is burning a lot of fuel. I mean, it's quite a gas bill. It's burning about 5 million tons a second and it's losing about five feet an hour in its diameter. Now, it's true the sun goes through oscillations. It swells and shrinks and swells and shrinks, but the overall trend is toward shrinking because duh, it's burning up its fuel and sending it off into space. So the sun is shrinking on average about five feet an hour and it's losing 5 million tons a second. That's how much fuel it burns up. Okay, well, if you could run the numbers backwards in time, you'd say, hold it. This puts a time limit. We cannot tell the kids the sun is billions of years old because if you go back in time and add this 5 million tons a second to the sun, the sun is going to be heavier, which increases the gravitational pull and at some point it's going to start sucking all the planets in. So it's just not common sense to say it's 4.6 billion years old. It's absolute insanity to believe such a thing. And when you look at the stars and the galaxies and the amazing complexity of this universe, see, David said, when I consider the heavens, which we should do, take time to look at the stars. I'm out here now in Lenox, Alabama, where we get an incredible view of the stars at night. It's beautiful out there tonight. Well, he said, when I consider the heavens, I say, what is man that thou art mindful of him? You know, a person who spends time considering the cosmos just is not very impressed with what man can do. All the great inventions man has, space shuttles and stuff, is so nothing compared to what God has done with the stars. But they just don't seem to want to give him the glory for his creation. We see stars blow up once in a while. It's called a nova, or if it's a big one, they call it a supernova. But still, that's the opposite of a star forming. Nobody's ever seen a star form. Don't even have a theory of how it could happen. One atheist I debated one time said, well, we calculated that if 20 stars explode near each other, they could produce enough energy to compress the dust and make a new star. I said, well, that's just brilliant. You got to lose 20 to gain one. You want to run for Congress and help those guys borrow their way out of debt. It's insanity. There's a creator. I'm sorry. Get over it. There's a creator. It's so funny. They'll always go pointing to vestigial structures, which, again, is an example of losing. And then, you know, genetics, we're losing genetic information. So it seems like they point to situations where we're losing something and then try to say, well, that's how we're evolving. Yeah, it makes no sense whatsoever. But see, that's all they have are examples of us losing information. And that's just not going to explain the origin of anything, nor the increasing complexity. We see a lot of variations happening within every kind of animal and plant. I don't know how many varieties of corn there are now, you know, hundreds and hundreds. I know there's 195 recognized breeds of chickens. They might have had a common ancestor called a chicken. That's what the Bible said would happen. All that's ever been observed in all of human history combined and every farmer on the planet will tell you this is true. Cows produce cows. Dogs produce dogs. Cats produce cats. There are no exceptions. So they have to imagine, like SpongeBob, you know, just imagine, long ago and far away, it was different. Okay, well, you can imagine anything you want, but that's not science. Evolution is absolutely anti-science, not a shred of evidence that any animal or plant has ever produced anything other than its kind. And God said that would happen 10 times in the first chapter and 20 times total in the first seven chapters. God said they're going to bring forth after their kind, and I think that's all that's ever happened. If somebody wishes to believe otherwise, that's fine. I don't care what they believe, but they shouldn't call that science. They shouldn't even call it common sense, and they certainly should not require that to be taught to the kids at taxpayer expense in the public schools. I mean, that's criminal. If they want to believe something that's stupid, that's fine, but they should go teach their own kids at home or start a private school where people got to pay to come to pay tuition to come learn how stupid they are, you know? We all came from a rock. It's absolutely criminal to have all this in a public school system. That's my humble, totally unbiased opinion. Well, I'm in agreement with you on that for sure. And one of the other questions that I had for you, Dr. Hovind, is when we look at the Grand Canyon or we look at fossilization that has occurred in time past in large mass amounts and like the Cambrian explosion, when you look at the Grand Canyon, what is a simple way to demonstrate that it was caused by a flood? Well, Walt Brown on his website, creationscience.com, has a fabulous demonstration showing what would happen if we plugged up Grand Canyon. If you filled it back in with dirt, that would take a lot of dirt, but what would happen if you could plug up the canyon? Well, the Colorado River would stop flowing and the Grand Canyon area would become a dam, and pretty soon it would back up a giant lake that would go clear back to Colorado. The lake would be 5,000 feet deep, and it would contain probably millions of cubic feet of water. If you plugged up the canyon, it would make this huge lake behind it, and he's got it all mapped out in his book, what it would look like, the shoreline of Grand Lake, he calls it. Well, I think 50 years after Noah's flood, just to pick a number, that lake got too deep and went over the top and started eroding Grand Canyon from the far side and ate its way backwards like all dams do when they fail over the top and they eat on the backside on the outside first and eat their way back. We've got a bunch of illustrations of that here at our dinosaur adventure land in Lenox, a bunch of pictures showing where dams have failed, and it ends up, if a dam fails, it doesn't wash away the whole dam, it cuts a slot in it and lets all the water out through the slot. That happens all the time. So Grand Canyon is the slot where a lake failed and went over the top, Grand Lake, and Grand Canyon probably formed in a week or less. If you Google the Tomsock Reservoir, T-A-U-M, some Indian name, T-A-U-M-S-A-U-K, Tomsock Reservoir in St. Louis failed in 2005. It was a giant reservoir to hold water for the city of St. Louis. 2005, it got too full, went over the top and carved out a slot on one side. It lost one and a half billion, with a B, billion gallons of water in 10 minutes. That was incredibly rapid erosion. Look at the lakes up in Michigan where you are just, what, a couple months ago in May, they lost 21, Wixom Lake lost 21 billion gallons of water in one hour. Once the dam fails, it's over, but the shouting. So Grand Canyon is a failed dam, a big one, actually the biggest one in the world. But that's all it is, is a failed dam where the water went over the top, carved that thing out probably in a week or less, maybe a couple of days. Incredible, definitely a scientific proof for a global flood, no doubt. And that actually leads me to my next question. Evolutionists will admit that if we find dinosaurs and man in the same layer of strata, that it would falsify the geologic column and that it would demonstrate that there was a global flood and that dinosaurs and man lived together. What is some of the greatest evidence, or even just some of the simplest evidence, because we want to keep this episode simple for sure, of dinosaurs and man living together? Well, I point out, first of all, there is no such thing as a geologic column. It doesn't exist anywhere in the world except in the imagination of the evolutionist. They keep telling the kids the top layer is younger than the bottom layer. I say, come on, you've got to be kidding. Where's this top layer coming from, outer space? All the layers are the same age. They all formed by the shaking up of the crust of the Earth. You know, the water, turbulent waters stirred them up. Get a jar of dirt out of your yard, add some water to it and shake it up. It'll separate into layers. Now, it's true, there is a little bit of sorting of the types of fossils that are found in different, some are found in certain layers, some are not. Well, that would be hydrologic sorting. Reptiles have a different body density than birds and then other animals. They say clams are found at the bottom because clams evolve first. I say, no, guys, clams are found at the bottom because clams already live at the bottom when the flood started. Of course, they're the first ones buried. Hello, that's where they live. They're at the bottom. Birds are found at the top because birds are the last ones to drown in a flood. Hello, they can fly around till they run out of gas. If you took all the animals in the world and drowned in them all and buried them in a giant jar and shook it up, they would sort into layers because of their body density. The body density of reptiles is similar to other reptiles as opposed to mammals. So, if there's any sorting at all, and there's really not a lot of sorting, but if there is any sorting, it's because of their body density or because of their habitat. You know, the clams are buried first because they're already at the bottom and birds are buried last because they live in the air. So, the habitat would be a great influence there. Their body density probably is the biggest one. Also, their mobility, you know, if they see flood coming, how fast can they run? Well, as far as I know, clams can't run very fast and so they would clam up and get buried. See, right now the moon pulls the water up on the earth causing the tide and I don't know, worldwide it's different amounts, but in Pensacola it goes up and down about four or five feet. Up at the Bay of Fundy, Canada goes up and down about 50 or 60 feet. Okay, well the tide goes up and down based on the pull of the moon and the pull of the sun, etc. Right now the tide goes up and down about every six hours, 12 and a half minutes. It changes from high tide to low tide. So, during the flood in the days of Noah, the tide would not be interrupted by banging into the continents. As it happens now, the tide comes up and it bangs into North America or South America or Africa. The tide gets interrupted and so because it gets interrupted it can never become harmonic. You can google what's called a harmonic tide. If the earth were smoothed out a little bit, pushed the continents down, raised the ocean beds up, there's enough water in the oceans right now to cover the earth about a mile and a half deep. So, if you smoothed it out, made it a mile and a half deep and now you got the moon up there pulling it, the tide going up and down would not be interrupted so it become harmonic and would be about a 200-foot tidal change. Every six hours, 12 and a half minutes. So, if the water came up 200 feet here in Lenox, Alabama, where's all the water coming from to fill that big bump? Sideways. The water is constantly moving sideways because of the pull of the moon's gravity, but it's got to be moving at the same speed the earth is turning to stay under the moon. Well, here in Lenox we're 31 degrees above the equator. We're turning almost 900 miles an hour toward the east. So, if the tide was rushing in at 900 miles an hour for a couple hours, that would do all kinds of scouring and sorting of sediment layers, but your question was about dinosaurs and man. I think there has been plenty of evidence that dinosaurs and man live together and maybe even some still alive, but that's kind of a different story. I've got a whole videotape on that called Dinosaurs in the Bible on drdino.com d-o-r-d-i-n-o or come to our dinosaur adventure land in Lenox. So, the dinosaur and human footprints have been found together. Dinosaur bones and human bones have been found together, but if dinosaurs are still alive in some parts of the world, it doesn't matter. I say, guys, nobody's ever found human and chicken bones in the same strata. Would that prove humans and chickens did not live at the same time? No, I had chicken for supper tonight. Chickens lived with man. They've always lived with man. They still live with man, so you don't need to find the bones together. I love your art. Make sense? Yeah, absolutely, and, you know, recently I was watching Bill Nye in his debate with Ken Ham, and interestingly enough, you debunked Bill Nye's argument about, because he will say his number one argument, and they have a video out there called Bill Nye destroys Noah's flood, and in this video Bill Nye says his number one evidence against the flood of Noah is that, if you look at the layers of the Grand Canyon, you don't see, or the layers of strata, that you don't see one animal kind mixed in with another animal kind. Well, he's negating that there's hydrologic sorting and buoyancy of these creatures, reptiles, birds, clams, clams that would be at the bottom, birds that would be at the top naturally, and so he's negating all of that and just assuming that it's all different time zones that these creatures were buried in, and so that was a great response to Bill Nye, and I would love personally to see a debate between you and Bill Nye. Has there ever been anything that has been talked about or arranged between you two, Dr. Hovind? Many people have tried. He won't do it. I would be honored to do it. I'll take him on any day of the week with half my brain tied behind my back. When they say we never find these fossils together, there's no gradation, I say hold it, if you found a dinosaur bone, what age would you assign to that layer? They would say that would be Jurassic, 70 million years ago. Okay, well how do you know that layer is 70 million years old? Well, it contained a dinosaur bone. Now hold it. You told me the age of the layer based on the bone, and now you're telling me the age of the bone based on the layer. It's complete circular reasoning. It's insanity. Not only that. Yes, I'll debate him any day. You arrange it. Any day, and I would love to arrange that, and not only that, there's soft tissue in the dinosaur bones that we're finding that there's still C14 in the bones, so whenever they say the geologic column is proof of evolution, like you said, there's no such thing as a geologic column, and just for the record, I want to let everybody know once I'm done with my new documentary on the atheist religion, I'm actually going to take Bill Nye's debate, and I'm going to edit in Dr. Kent Hovind's responses to all of the false science that Bill Nye makes, and it might be an hour and a half long video, but by the time that that video is done, make sure to share it with your evolutionist family members folks, because there's a battle on out there, and people want you to think, audience, that science falsely so-called and evolution is a fact when really they have nothing, and if the number one argument that Bill Nye has against Noah's flood is that the Grand Canyon layers form slowly because certain animals were found in certain of the layers, well as a creationist it's easy to answer that. Buoyancy determines where the hydrologic sorting is going to put them. So once again, evolution falsified, creation verified. Dr. Kent Hovind, the last question for you. When we look at nature, you know, we see a lot of evolutionists that will say, if you give it enough time, the variations, the micro variations, will become macro variations between the species, and in your debate with Mark Drysdale, Mark Drysdale said, we need more time, Kent, we need more time. What do you think of that statement, we need more time? How do you rebut that argument? Well, first of all, time is not going to help. Trillions, quadrillions of years would not help. All we've ever seen is dogs produce dogs. So they can imagine that it would be different if they had more time. I'd say, first of all, you can't have more time. There's too many ways to prove it cannot be that old. Scientific indicators, it's not billions of years old. But even with time, it's not going to help. There's a genetic limit. Dogs produce dogs. They've been trying for centuries to get smaller dogs, you know, lap dogs. They got the little toy chihuahuas now. Well, why don't they get a dog as small as a flea? There's a genetic limit. That's correct. They might have reached the limit now. I don't know. Probably pretty close. What about bigger dogs? Can they get, they got the macmastiff now and they got dogs that are pretty big, but do you think they'll ever get a dog as big as an elephant? Do you know there are animals as big as an elephant, like an elephant? So is there some kind of limit with the dog genetic code? Well, obviously there is. Farmers have been trying for years to get bigger cows, bigger pigs. There are limits. They run into a stone wall. And the further you get away from the average normal animal, the more problems you get. Almost all of these special breeds of cows or dogs or pigs have to get a babysitter. They couldn't survive out in the wild on their own. You got to feed them every day. You know, they show up when they're hungry. The idea of evolution happening, it just, it's insane. It doesn't happen. Variations happen, but they're limited. And they're always the same kind as they were before. What they have to do is they have to rely on imagination, like SpongeBob. Just imagine if we had billions of years, what could happen, like Clark Drysdale. Give us more time, Kent. We need more time. Time's not going to help, son. It's not going to help. It's actually going to make it worse because the gene code is degrading in many creatures. Look at the human gene code. You know, it's not getting, I mean, how many times can you copy this gene code before you start to get, you know, problems? You are a copy of your parents' genetics and they're a copy of their parents and they're a copy of their parents. And so if you figure it out, we are a copy off a copy off a copy off a copy of Adam. Goes back, who knows, 200 some genes, 300 some generations. If you keep, most doctors will tell you we're suffering from a genetic load that we're building up in the human race that's causing lots of medical problems. The genetic load. But if you look at an animal, see that the generation time for humans, you've got to be 15 or 18 years old before you can have babies. So let's just pick a number and say the average is 18. OK, worldwide. We only get four or five generations, five generations per century. Pick something with a shorter genetic code like bacteria, where they get married, get born, grow up, get married in 20 minutes. Now you can get tens of millions of generations in one observable lifespan. And so they've studied bacteria. They've done everything you can imagine to those bacteria. They nuke them and microwave them and x-ray them and all that gets bacteria without exception. So evolution is completely a religious belief. There's nothing scientific about it at all. They believe in it very strongly and I admire their faith. I do not admire their intelligence, but I certainly admire their faith. Takes a lot of faith to believe we all came from Iraq. That takes a lot of faith. Yeah, well, second law of thermodynamics as things tend towards disorder, Mark's statement in his debate with you of begging you for more time, like you said, it doesn't do him any favors. It does the exact opposite because we know that the cosmos is deteriorating over time. The sun is deteriorating over time. The moon's getting further away. So the more time that we give to Mark, the more evolution fails, it seems. Exactly right. But even then, you cannot give them more time. We can only do one day at a time. We're kind of stuck on the clock here. Secondly, we don't see any of these changes happening. So he has to believe, capital B, believe that they happen. That's not science. Science deals with things we know based on observation, study, testing, demonstrate. There have been a lot of experiments done where they crossbreed cows. Millions and millions of farmers have done this. Guess what they always end up with? A cow. Every time. So that's science. What do we observe? What do we study? What do we test? OK, we observe cows make cows and dogs make dogs. No other. There's no exceptions. That's why it's a religion and it's a dangerous religion and I think a dumb religion. Now, I don't mind them believing it. I don't care what the people believe, but I do care that they want me to pay to have that taught to all the kids. Now that I care about. Amen and amen. Dr. Hovind, thank you so much for coming on to the show tonight. We really appreciate it. And is there any closing remarks that you'd like to share with any of the viewers? Well, all of this is really a secondary argument. The big question is, what are you going to do when you die and you face God? You're all going to die. Everybody's going to die. I'm going to try to make it the last thing I do, but it's going to happen. Now, when it happens, then what? If God created the world, He must have done it for a purpose. And I believe God made everything perfect. Man chose to rebel against his creator and he sinned and disobeyed God. And now there has to be a punishment. A just judge has to punish sin. And God, the perfect judge, is going to the death penalty for any sin. And so God himself came down as a man. Jesus Christ died on the cross, and He's offered to take our sin penalty for us. So if your person does not know the Lord Jesus Christ as their Savior, that's the most important. More important than all these arguments on the flood and creation and evolution is, are you going to heaven? People are welcome to call me. I lead people to the Lord, probably almost every day, over the phone. 855-BIG-DINO extension 3. I'll answer if I can, and I'll explain to them how to go to heaven. They can pray and ask Jesus to forgive them. It's kind of like planting a seed. You know, the seed knows how to make a tree, not the dirt. The dirt is 100% stupid. But if the dirt will let the seed come in, the seed can grow a whole tree in there. And so we're like the dirt, and we just invite Jesus to come in, and then He starts making a whole new person out of us from the inside. So February 9, 1969, I prayed and asked Him to save me. He's been growing in there ever since. It's awesome. I'd encourage everybody, if you're not sure you're saved, give your heart to the Lord and get saved. I'll help you if you need help. 855-BIG-DINO extension 3. All right, thanks for having me, brother. Hey, thank you so much for coming on, and I know several people that have gotten saved through your ministry. And so thank you so much for the work that you do, Dr. Hovind. We really appreciate it. All right, call anytime. Thanks, brother. Sounds good. God bless. Bye-bye. All right, that was Dr. Hovind, guys. Great simple truths about creation, and why evolution is so easily falsified. It's not that it's just falsified, it's that it's easily falsified. It is easy to defeat evolution theory. It is easy to prove the flood. We have scientific proof, and I mentioned a few episodes ago that in the Grand Canyon layers, in case you think that the geologic column is somehow true, we don't find any animal holes between the layers. Now, if you go outside right now, you're going to see animal holes where they're burrowed down into the earth. Well, between the Grand Canyon layers, we don't see any animal holes between them, which means that no animals were living at those supposed time frames that they would have been living at while the layers slowly formed over millions of years. We don't see any root remains. We would expect to find tree remains, tree roots in the Grand Canyon layers, but we don't find them. On the contrary, we see that all the layers were deposited at the same time. This is a scientific proof. It's a scientific fact. So for somebody to argue against it, they have to be dishonest. And evolution is a religion of dishonest, delusional, wanna-believers and a theory that will send them into fantasy land and away from reality and away from the God of the Bible. You know, Matt, when you were talking about that, it made me think of something. You know, when you find animal remains, and I'm not an expert on this, but if you find animal remains in the ground preserved, you would have to think that somehow they were buried quickly because if they just died and fell over, they would decay and decompose and we wouldn't even know they exist. You're exactly right about that. The fact that we find fossils at all is proof of rapid burial because remember, folks, the only way for something to fossilize is if it's buried rapidly. So all of the layers of the Grand Canyon, if they were individually laid down by little floods, they would have had to have had floods that would have covered all these animals rapidly each time through the geologic years of whatever over millions of years. It's just simply not possible. It's not science. It's not scientific. And Paul, that's a great point. The fact that we find fossils at all is a proof of creation and a proof of the global flood. Yeah, I remember when Ken Hovind said that in one of his seminars, you know, it really clicked with me. It's like, you know what? That's true. Because if something dies, it just decays and goes back to the earth. Well, you look at the fossilized seashells that were found on Everest. You know, seashells, when they died in the flood, they were sent to the bottom. But through plate tectonics, they were pushed up. That's how the mountains were even formed. And I believe that's how Mount Everest was formed through the flood. And so, interestingly enough, they're fossilized seashells that we find up on the top of Mount Everest. And they're closed. Now, when a clam or an oyster dies, what happens is, naturally, they open up. Because the muscle on the inside will relax and they will get eaten by a scavenger. So, if they die in a rough environment where they're afraid or where they're being buried rapidly, they're going to die closed. Well, interestingly enough, the seashells on Mount Everest are closed. And which means that they were buried rapidly. They were crushed in a catastrophic event, a flood. And the only way, scientifically, to determine that these fossilized seashells, the only way to justify that they're number one on the top of Mount Everest, the world's tallest mountain, and two, closed, is if they were pushed up the mountain by a catastrophic event, a flood, where the waters of the deep broke open. And then two, they were buried rapidly, which means that they didn't have time to open up or relax when they died. Scientific proof. There is no doubt that the flood is. And it's so funny because I was watching, just the other day, the debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham. And Bill Nye had brought that point up about the buoyancy, about certain animals being found in different layers of strata. Well, of course, that's what we expect in a global flood. That's what can be expected. So that's no problem for the creationist. He shouldn't even be using that as an argument, because that's an argument that goes along with the flood story, not millions of years. Yeah, I'm shocked you'd even bring that up. It is appalling. If Kent Hovind debates Bill Nye at some point, I'm buying a front seat ticket and I'm going to grab my camera because I believe that Kent Hovind would take care of the lies and expose them and expose Bill Nye himself for the liar that he is. And I mean that, folks. Bill Nye is willfully lying to you. Anybody who studies this subject, if they do not go with what the evidence says, which is blatantly in front of them, they're lying to you. There's no doubt about it. The Bible says, for this they willingly are ignorant of. So they're willingly ignorant that by the word of God the heavens were of old and the earth standing out of the water and in the water. So they're willingly ignorant of the flood. Yeah. Well, I have this video here. I don't know if you want to play it, Matt, of a video that you put out in March of this year, the Thug Life video. Did you want to play that? Let's do it. All right, let's do it. Give it more time. Proteins were more primitive in the past. You know they're going to form. Okay. It reminds me of Kent Hovind's debate recently where he went up against Mark Drysdale and Mark Drysdale goes, we need more time, Kent. We need more time. We need more time. That's the problem. You won't allow us the time. You always tell us that the time is the religion. It's not enough time, Kent. We need more time. Yeah, you need lots of time. I know. How much time do they need to produce all left-handed amino acids? Trillions of years? It's just absurd. It doesn't work. How about that? They'll never say that though. Right. And then I love Hovind's reaction too. He kind of leaned up in his chair and he's like, yeah, I know Mark, you need lots of time. It was hilarious. You think your brain was designed by anybody with any intelligence? Absolutely not. You may be right on that one. Oh man. Good times, good times. So that was Dr. Hovind versus Mark Drysdale. And you know, when these guys cry out for more time, what's so silly is they're not thinking about the second law of thermodynamics. It literally states that everything in order tends towards disorder. And a lot of people will say, well, that just applies to closed systems. Look, you can't just negate the second law of thermodynamics in nature. We see it everywhere. You can't just say, well, it just applies to the closed system. The second law of thermodynamics applies to every living organism. Because if we look at the genome, if we look at erosion, if we look at paint on your house that's going to come off in a few years, that has to be reapplied. If you look at your car, it's going to rust. If you look at the sun, it's going to burn down. If you look at the moon, it's going to get further away. Everything, the galaxy will eventually go out of orbit. Time will only cause evolutionists to have more problems. So the only way to fix their dilemma is if they have less time. Well, if they have less time, evolution can't work. Because evolution requires time for it to work. So it simply makes evolution impossible. And like I said, evolution, and I've always said this, evolution is the only theory. Well, it's not necessarily the only theory, but it's a theory that is impossible to defend honestly. You must lie. You must make believe. You must choose to believe things that are irrational and illogical, rather than going with what the scientific data shows. And when you go to these college students in these campuses, and I've been doing this a lot for my film, they claim to believe in science. You talk to them, they'll say, I believe in science, but I don't believe in religion. And you ask them, well, do you believe in evolution? And they'll say, absolutely. You know, everybody believes in evolution. Who doesn't believe in evolution? But when you share the facts with them and you ask them, do you think that monkeys surfed the ocean blue to find a land anew your ancestors? They don't even know what you're talking about. Dr. Grady McMurtry said in our interview, he said, and while I was at lunch with him one time, he said, if people knew what evolution actually taught, no one, no one would believe in it. If people actually knew the theories that were out there, the, and that's the most well-established theory. And that would have had to have taken place for us to be able to evolve from those monkeys that came over on a raft 34 million years ago. You cannot tell me that that is scientific. You cannot tell me that that's logical. It would take, I think over 90 days, excuse me, for somebody to row a boat, row, R-O-W-E, to row a boat from going three miles an hour from Africa to South America. What are they going to eat? What, how are they going to survive? And by the way, for any evolutionist that wants to try and justify the monkeys surfing the ocean blue, which sounds pathetic and ridiculous, anybody that wants to justify that, you have to take into consideration the tides, because remember the tides, if you're in Africa, are going to take you up to the North or down to the South. They're not going to take you across the ocean. So I don't know if these monkeys were paddling their way across. Yeah, and they're not intelligent creatures that are just going to figure this out. I mean, look at them today. I mean, so let's pretend evolution's true. Suppose that monkeys that you see in your local zoo where they can't really do much at, but they're given a lot of space to do things. If you look at a monkey at your local zoo, it will just swing around on branches. It can't really think critically. It's an animal. It's an animal for crying out loud. And you think that a group of less evolved monkeys were going to be smart enough to get on these rafts, these, you know, supposed vegetation rafts and raft across the ocean, the Atlantic, professing themselves to be wise. They became fools. That's all I... That's the only thing that comes to my mind is what the Bible says about these people. The Bible prophesied that these people would do what they do, act the way that they act. It says they're scoffers. They're willingly ignorant. They laugh at us. They say, you know, it's so funny to think that these guys believe in creation. I mean, I literally just had a guy comment on my YouTube channel. This is the comment that he left. He says, well, where did your God come from? That is such a ridiculous question. He's like, well, the flood might be true based on the evidence you're showing. And it's not that it might be true. It is true. It's a fact. So the flood is true, number one. He's like, the flood might be true based on the evidence that you're showing here. But where did your God come from? Look, if something creates time, by definition, the cause of creating time must have been outside of time. It wouldn't have been limited by time. Otherwise, time wouldn't have been able to be brought into existence by the thing or the entity that created time. If it created space, whatever it was must have been outside of space and been able to operate outside of the laws of nature. If it created matter, that means it must be outside of matter. So you have a God that's outside of time, space, and matter of being. And they'll say, well, how do you know it was conscious? Because it made a decision to create and with precision. Stephen Hawking said that if the expansion rate after the Big Bang would have changed by one part out of 100,000 million million, nothing would exist. That's one chance out of 100,000 million million chances that the universe would come into being by chance, just based on the Big Bang model alone. So they have nothing. When you ask who created God or where did God come from, that is literally asking who created the thing that created everything and that by definition cannot be created since it's eternal and doesn't have a beginning or end, which therefore means it cannot be created. It doesn't make any sense. So that's pretty much all I've got as far as those arguments are concerned. I know we could talk all night about this subject. Well, one thing is, you know, people are probably tuning in and if they, especially if they haven't watched previous shows, they're probably thinking to themselves, what are you talking about, Matt, with these rafting monkeys? Because that's why I said when you brought it up. But I want to show you guys just another article here on this rafting monkeys. Prehistoric monkeys rafted from Africa to South America on floating islands of vegetation, study claims. What in the world? It occurred 34 million years ago. I mean, there's article after article here. You know, it's interesting, the evolutionist will say, we have fossil evidence that monkeys did this. We have fossil evidence that they were hopping on rafts and that they were trying to survive. Do you know what that fossil evidence actually means? Because I do believe they did find evidence of monkeys trying to survive. They were trying to survive a catastrophic event, a flood. They're demonstrating the flood to be true when they say, these monkeys were hopping on vegetation mats. They were trying to survive. Absolutely, the waters of the deep were broken up and these creatures, the only thing they knew to do was to either A, run to higher ground or B, hop on to something that would float for a while. And so when these monkeys died and were fossilized and were found with vegetation and these mats, it proves that they were trying to survive a catastrophic event, a global flood. It wasn't that they were wanting to just up in one day, let's surf the ocean blue, kids. They were trying to survive a catastrophic event. So when evolutionists point to that fossil evidence, remember it only supports creation, not their theory. Yeah, yeah. What you're saying right now totally makes sense. These monkeys are drowning. They're trying to do whatever they can to get on some floating log or whatever. They're not trying to like sail across on some journey. And the funniest thing about that is they say, monkeys had to have surfed the ocean blue. Like there's no other way. Well, look, let's pretend that's true. And you're pointing to fossil evidence of monkeys that died near mats and that died in the ocean. Well, how did they make it? They died. You're proving that they didn't make it. When you point to fossil evidence of monkeys that actually died and failed their mission and that's your supposed evidence that they made it across the ocean. I mean, how wild is that? And it's just as wild as saying, well, we might be losing genetic information from generation to generation, but somehow through all these mutations, somehow we've gained it all and we've become a perfect human species. That doesn't make any sense. Vestigial structures. They say vestigial structures, we're losing organs. Evolution is the study of gaining, not losing. So by losing all these organs, somehow we've gained it all. You know, it doesn't make it. I feel like you almost lose brain cells when you even talk about this stuff. But since society teaches it, you have to be able to contradict what society tells you and what the famous opinion tells you with the facts. Like I said earlier, and in previous episodes, Darwin was afraid he was living in fantasy land. He said, and I quote, often a cold shutter has run through me. I've asked myself whether I've devoted myself to a fantasy. Do you really want to trust a man who thought that he was possibly living in a fantasy? A man who is living in fear that he was living in fantasy? Look, science is not based off of fantasies. I've never met a scientist that makes an observation and say, oh, it could be a fantasy. When you establish something as fact, a fact is exactly that. It's something that you know to be true. Despite all other contradictory theories or hypotheses, you know that your fact is true. And so therefore, if evolution was founded by Darwin and Darwin was basing it on fact, he would have never made such a statement. So once again, another episode that demonstrates that evolution is a lie. And folks, share this information. Share this episode. Get this information out there. Sit down with your atheist family members and let them learn to think critically about that. Let's have some free thought here. You know, it's so funny when these people hold up free thought signs. They don't even know what free thought is. Free thought is comparing two sides, not being told what to think. You know, they're not taught how to think. They're told what to think. And then at the end of the day, they think they know how to think when they got their PhD. When they've been just taught what to think instead of how to think. This show, we want you to be able to think on your own two feet. We want to teach you how to think. And you know, years ago when I first got into this subject, I know I wasn't very well versed in science when I first got started. Just like anybody wouldn't be very well versed in it. But over these past few years, as I've studied, I've seen more and more that evolution is completely falsifiable. Creation is completely verifiable. And these are just the basics, folks. This is the basics of creation. Awesome, guys. That was episode six of Answers in Creation. I really appreciate everyone tuning in to this stream. Make sure you go check out Matt's YouTube page, Matt Powell Official. That's all you have to do. Type that into YouTube and it'll come up. But he has a lot of great videos on here about evolution and creation. Yeah, that's it, right, Matt? Yeah, actually the last video on my channel might be a good one just to play in closing. It's a short video, but it debunks Michio Kaku, Neil deGrasse Tyson, and Stephen Hawking in less than two minutes. Awesome. Well, we'll play that video in a second. I wanted to encourage everyone to subscribe to our Patreon account. If you subscribe to the Patreon account, you'll be entered into a giveaway where we're giving away three books, two DVDs, and we're giving away this 1861 Confederate States bill. So that will be at the end of the month for everyone that either subscribes to our Patreon this month or increases their Patreon support by a dollar. But we'll play this video for the closing. Do you want to say anything before we do that? Nope, I think we're all set, man. Let's go ahead and play the video. Awesome. All right, let's pull this up here. And Stephen Hawking literally said, he said, because there are laws such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Yeah. That's an oxymoron because how can nothing exist while gravity, which is something, exists at the same time? Because there are laws such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. So he says because gravity exists, nothing will create everything. Well, how can gravity and then nothing exist at the same time when gravity is something? Yeah. And so Stephen Hawking makes no sense. I mean, even Michio Kaku said, and I quote, he said it could be that the universe was nothingness that became unstable and created a soap bubble. Well, how could nothing become unstable? The universe could essentially be nothingness, which was unstable and created a soap bubble. How could nothing become unstable? I mean, it really doesn't make any sense. And, you know, even Neil deGrasse Tyson said, and I quote, he said it's hard to argue against the possibility that all of us are not just a creation of some kid in a parent's basement, programming up a world for their own entertainment. These scientists know that intelligent design is there, but they want to run to aliens and they want to run to all sorts of different things. And so they'll believe anything but the facts when it comes to creation, cosmology, the Big Bang, evolution, they'll believe anything but the facts. Because the Bible says, if you believe anything but the facts, then you will not believe anything but the facts. And so, you know, the Bible says, if you believe anything but the facts, evolution, they'll believe anything but the facts, because the Bible says they'd be willingly ignorant. The sopherers would be. Yeah, it does seem like they'll believe anything but what it says in the Bible. Awesome. Well, that's our show, guys. Episode six of Answers in Creation. Thank you so much to everyone that tuned in. Make sure you share this video on your social media accounts and God bless. Amen and amen.