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

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

[Full Court]

Haeckel's drawings are not used today.

ROTFL!!! They are used and often!! I checked out a book when I was pregnant to show my son the progression of the growth of the baby and what did we get??? Haeckel drawings, and the book was copyrighted 1996.

They are also used in a booklet by the National Science Foundation.

See, evolution is a lie, is based on a lie and it has nothing but lies as it's foundation. That's why those fake drawings are still being used. The Evo fairy tale people have nothing else.

[shuckmaster]

Kent Hovind's $250,000 Offer

[peyton randolph]

Hey babe, when they guy will come and preach for free, and takes the copyright off all his materials so that anyone can reproduce them, there isn't any fleecing going on.

When the IRS finds that he is taking in more than a $ 1 million a year (see prior posts), doesn't have business licenses, tax-exempt status, or pay taxes, then yes, there is some fleecing occurring. Being a good Christian, isn't Dr. Dino supposed to be rendering under Caesar? Guess not.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"ROTFL!!! They are used and often!! I checked out a book when I was pregnant to show my son the progression of the growth of the baby and what did we get??? Haeckel drawings, and the book was copyrighted 1996."

That's not true. They DO use photographs of embryo's though. That's different than the drawings that Haeckel used.

"See, evolution is a lie, is based on a lie and it has nothing but lies as it's foundation. That's why those fake drawings are still being used. The Evo fairy tale people have nothing else."

The lie is the insistence that Haeckel's drawings are still used. They aren't.

[metmom]

BTW, the IRS has tried the same tactic with Kent before and they ended up apologizing and returning his cars.

Now THAT would qualify as a miracle. Sounds like evidence of God to me.

[longshadow]

Why is it that whenever there is a thread about Hovind, a bunch belligerent bozos with bad grammar show up to defend him? It's like some sort of law of nature....

I must thank you and the GrandMaster of DarwinCentral™ himself, PH; this thread is one of the delighfully entertaining amusements I've seen in a long time -- a perfect diversion for a pre-Christmas Weekend.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

YOU TOO WILL BURN AT THE STAKE, ANTI-CHRIST!!!


/demented creo rant mode

[Coyoteman]

Similar to a line I used a couple of threads ago:

if you want proof, try mathematics, photography, or a fine Scotch

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/1541028/posts?page=220#220

[PatrickHenry]

Evolutionists at the stake
(creationist fantasy)

[nmh]

"Kent Hovind, a former high school science teacher turned creation science evangelist, said that evolution is the "dumbest and most dangerous theory on planet Earth" at a program in the Union on Dec. 6."

I couldn't agree more. He states it politely.

I'm still waiting for my gold fish to "evolve" into a cat. How silly people are ... to believe in "evolution" and all the nonsense that goes with it.

[Right Wing Professor]

(With thanks to Jesus's General)

[CarolinaGuitarman]

I've been using my line for a while, but I think I may have *borrowed* the main idea from a different quote I heard or read somewhere else. I forgot to add photography though; this is odd since my father was professional photographer for a long time. lol

[VadeRetro]

They DO use photographs of embryo's though.

Jonathan Wells assigns textbooks a grade of "D" for using photographs of embryos to make any points about evolution.

To improve their grade to a D, a book uses "misleading photographs" of real embryos instead of the Haeckelian drawings. Again, however, what is the objection here? These aren't fudged or inaccurate drawings. They are photographs of vertebrate embryos that accurately illustrate what they look like, that anyone with a microscope and access to embryos can see (Figure 3). Is it next on his agenda to condemn classes that allow students to examine live or preserved embryos in the laboratory?

Figure 3. A chick embryo at the second day of development. The peculiar way that the vertebrate face is initially structured from arches of tissue (the jaw arch, j, and the 2nd, or hyoid arch, h, are labeled) that subsequently rearrange themselves is clearly seen.

Wells and Haeckel's Embryos.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"I'm still waiting for my gold fish to "evolve" into a cat."

Ah, the number of strawmen that creationists can create knows no limits.

[PatrickHenry]

I must thank you and the GrandMaster of DarwinCentral™ himself, PH; this thread is one of the delightfully entertaining amusements I've seen in a long time -- a perfect diversion for a pre-Christmas Weekend.

The Grand Master accepts your thanks. Tracking Hovind's career is one of the few amusements he allows himself.

On behalf of the Grand Master, I am,
PatrickHenry

[spinestein]

[“In a nutshell, debates like this do not settle issues of scientific understanding,”...]


A debate between the supporters of evolution and creationism is like a debate between the supporters of bicycles and bananas.

[Full Court]

The Heackle drawings WERE and ARE used. You can lie until you are blue in the face, but they are still used. In fact, a friend of mine has a copy of the pages of that book. I made the copy at the time and sent them to him.

The evolution fairy take rests on nothing but lies and the Heackle drawings are just more proof of that.

[VadeRetro]

I'm still waiting for my gold fish to "evolve" into a cat. How silly people are ... to believe in "evolution" and all the nonsense that goes with it.

I'm waiting for creationists to evolve normal levels of intelligence and integrity, but my money's on your goldfish.

[Baraonda]

"Your scientific arguments are particularly convincing."

Thank you and Merry Christmas to you and your loved ones.

May the good Lord shower you with health, prosperity, happiness and wisdom.

[Baraonda]

"Its just so laughably Luddite that I want to make sure I understand what you saying."

What's so "laughably Luddite?"