Creation evangelist derides evolution as ‘dumbest’ theory [Kent Hovind Alert!]

University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Post ^ | 17 December 2005 | Kayla Bunge

[RunningWolf]

You quiz says nothing about the Bible nor Havoc, but does make a statement on where peyton randolph stems from.

Your sanity quiz says that your cognitive ability, world-view, and sanity are are ill and seriously impaired.

Wolf

[RunningWolf]

Its the arrogance of blind ignorance and tiny little minds.

Wolf

[forsnax5]

Caught up to the end of this crazy thread placemarker.

But not for long placemarker.

[DennisR]

What is your definition of a liberal?

[DennisR]

...and they call themselves "scientists," no less!

[razorbak]

Read posts 484 & 489 for the contxt of what I said in the post to which you refer.

[Thatcherite]

Read posts 484 & 489 for the contxt of what I said in the post to which you refer.

I already did. Zero relevance.

[eleni121]

I stand by my statement.
........................................

Of course. You can be wrong forever.

[Thatcherite]

Could someone tell me where in the Bible it says the flood waters came from some source other than rain.

There is some mention of a concept called "The fountains of the deep" in one of the two expositions of the flood story. Physical evidence that this concept ever existed (and you'd expect there to be some physical evidence of the source of a billion cubic miles of water, unless perhaps God erased the evidence in some kind of guilt-trip); zero, zilch, nada, zip.

[eleni121]

Clearly it's s the EVOS who are lying and sputtering downhill...and everyone knows it.

[eleni121]

Ich (mongoose or tracker?) went to a lot of trouble for nothing. He/She posts stuff from Evo sites whose business it is to undermine Creationist sites. Laughable if not downright absurd.

Well guess what...he went to a lot trouble for nothing. Lots of words and sites do not make for proof of anything...but rather just a lot of hot stinky evo air.

[Junior]

I'm a would-be SF writer whose one published book is a western.

You could always pull an L. Ron Hubbard and start your own religion.

[b_sharp]

This post may be a little late but I feel a need to impart some information. (Perhaps a lurker or two will benefit)

5 weeks ago, I spent more than 6 hours listening to Hovind's lectures with the intention of listing his errors and debunking them on FR. I sat there with a pad of paper and a pen in hand. After 15 minutes of listening to the actual seminar (much of the start of the seminar was taken up by poor jokes and stealth adds) I had two pages of my 81/2 x 11 pad filled with errors and found myself falling behind in my transcription. I then began to pause the seminar every few seconds simply to enable my writing hand to keep up (remember - I was documenting errors only). Eventually I gave up, there were far too many errors to debunk within a reasonable time. Although I gave up documenting his errors within the first 30 minutes, I did force myself to listen to the rest of the seminars I had downloaded. It was quite an education into the mind and methods of a snake-oil salesman.

The arguments Hovind uses are deceptive, disingenuous and brilliantly designed to elicit and prey on the emotions of his audience rather than to encourage thinking. I found that what Hovind left out was in many cases was as misleading as what he included.

[Quark2005]

Clearly it's s the EVOS who are lying and sputtering downhill...and everyone knows it.

Only according to the delusional accounts of creationist blogs and websites. A quick perusal of actual scientific research journals shows quite the opposite to be true.

[Thatcherite]

Ich (mongoose or tracker?) went to a lot of trouble for nothing. He/She posts stuff from Evo sites whose business it is to undermine Creationist sites. Laughable if not downright absurd. Well guess what...he went to a lot trouble for nothing. Lots of words and sites do not make for proof of anything...but rather just a lot of hot stinky evo air.

It would be real easy to vindicate yourself and make Ichneumon look stupid. All you need to do is back up your claim of 500 doctoral theses about Piltdown with some actual evidence (eg a list of them, or a link to a list of them). Airy handwaving doesn't count unfortunately for you, because that is all the creationist sites have got.

[Dimensio]

It has nothing to do with liking it or not, it has to do with LYING about what the facts point too.

Yes, you do a fair bit of lying about what the facts say also. I apologize for not acknowleding that contribution of yours.

[Dimensio]

So where are those 500 thesis on Piltdown Man? You weren't lying when you claimed that they exist, do you? If not, then surely you can provide references to support your claim.

[Dimensio]

The absolute absudity of a fish evolving into a man is not only ludicrous, it defies logic

Argument from incredulity. You not finding an idea credible is not evidence against the idea.

[Dimensio]

Congratulations! You will soon be starring in Creationist Quote Salads everywhere!

Wouldn't be the first time.

[PatrickHenry]

Amazing, isn't it, that the biotech industry, which employees tens of thousands of scientists in the field of biology, never recruits creationists. Why are they avoiding such a rich source of talent? If there were any creationists in such industries, or any fruits to be derived from the "science" of creationism, the usual websites would be delighted to point it out. They routinely proclaim that evolution is dead, and they're the future, yet they are strangely silent about their failure to penetrate the biotech industry.

If creationism produced results -- which it doesn't -- the biotech companies would be actively seeking recruits from among the students of Hovind. Or they'd hire Hovind himself as a valued consultant. As profit-seeking enterprises, they're driven only by results, not ideology. Could it be that creationism is scientifically worthless?