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.
Posted on 12/17/2005 3:58:48 AM PST by PatrickHenry
A former high school science teacher turned creation science evangelist told an audience at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee last Tuesday that evolution is the “dumbest and most dangerous theory on planet Earth.”
Kent Hovind, founder of Creation Science Evangelism, presented “Creation or Evolution … Which Has More Merit?” to a standing-room only audience in the Union Ballroom on Dec. 6. The event was sponsored by the Apologetics Association, the organization that brought Baptist minister Tim Wilkins to UWM to speak about homosexuality in October.
Members of the Apologetics Association (AA) contacted biology, chemistry and geology professors at UWM and throughout the UW System, inviting them to debate Hovind for an honorarium of $200 to be provided to the individual or group of individuals who agreed.
Before the event began, the “No-Debater List,” which was comprised of slides listing the names of UWM science professors who declined the invitation, was projected behind the stage.
Dustin Wales, AA president, said it was his “biggest disappointment” that no professor agreed to debate Hovind.
“No professor wanted to defend his side,” he said. “I mean, we had seats reserved for their people … ’cause I know one objection could have been ‘Oh, it’s just a bunch of Christians.’ So we had seats reserved for them to bring people to make sure that it’s somewhat more equal, not just all against one. And still nobody would do it.”
Biology professor Andrew Petto said: “It is a pernicious lie that the Apologetics (Association) is spreading that no one responded to the challenge. Many of us (professors) did respond to the challenge; what we responded was, ‘No, thank you.’ ”
Petto, who has attended three of Hovind’s “performances,” said that because Hovind presents “misinterpretations, half truths and outright lies,” professors at UWM decided not to accept his invitation to a debate.
“In a nutshell, debates like this do not settle issues of scientific understanding,” he said. “Hovind and his arguments are not even in the same galaxy as legitimate scientific discourse. This is why the faculty here has universally decided not to engage Hovind. The result would be to give the appearance of a controversy where none exists.”
He added, “The faculty on campus is under no obligation to waste its time supporting Hovind’s little charade.”
Hovind, however, is used to being turned down. Near the end of his speech, he said, “Over 3,000 professors have refused to debate me. Why? Because I’m not afraid of them.”
Hovind began his multimedia presentation by asserting that evolution is the “dumbest and most dangerous” theory used in the scientific community, but that he is not opposed to science.
“Our ministry is not against science, but against using lies to prove things,” he said. He followed this statement by citing biblical references to lies, which were projected onto screens behind him.
Hovind said: “I am not trying to get evolution out of schools or to get creation in. We are trying to get lies out of textbooks.” He added that if removing “lies” from textbooks leaves no evidence for evolutionists’ theory, then they should “get a new theory.”
He cited numerous state statutes that require that textbooks be accurate and up-to-date, but said these laws are clearly not enforced because the textbooks are filled with lies and are being taught to students.
Petto said it is inevitable that textbooks will contain some errors.
“Sometimes, this is an oversight. Sometimes it is the result of the editorial and revision process. Sometimes it is the result of trying to portray a rich and complex idea in a very few words,” he said.
The first “lie” Hovind presented concerned the formation of the Grand Canyon. He said that two people can look at the canyon. The person who believes in evolution would say, “Wow, look what the Colorado River did for millions and millions of years.” The “Bible-believing Christian” would say, “Wow, look what the flood did in about 30 minutes.”
To elaborate, Hovind discussed the geologic column — the chronologic arrangement of rock from oldest to youngest in which boundaries between different eras are marked by a change in the fossil record. He explained that it does not take millions of years to form layers of sedimentary rock.
“You can get a jar of mud out of your yard, put some water in it, shake it up, set it down, and it will settle out into layers for you,” he said. Hovind used this concept of hydrologic sorting to argue that the biblical flood is what was responsible for the formation of the Grand Canyon’s layers of sedimentary rock.
Hovind also criticized the concept of “micro-evolution,” or evolution on a small, species-level scale. He said that micro-evolution is, in fact, scientific, observable and testable. But, he said, it is also scriptural, as the Bible says, “They bring forth after his kind.”
Therefore, according to the Bible and micro-evolution, dogs produce a variety of dogs and they all have a common ancestor — a dog.
Hovind said, however, Charles Darwin made a “giant leap of faith and logic” from observing micro-evolution into believing in macro-evolution, or evolution above the species level. Hovind said that according to macro-evolution, birds and bananas are related if one goes back far enough in time, and “the ancestor ultimately was a rock.”
He concluded his speech by encouraging students to personally remove the lies from their textbooks and parents to lobby their school board for accurate textbooks.
“Tear that page out of your book,” he said. “Would you leave that in there just to lie to the kids?”
Petto said Hovind believes the information in textbooks to be “lies” because his determination is grounded in faith, not science.
“Make no mistake, this is not a determination made on the scientific evidence, but one in which he has decided on the basis of faith alone that the Bible is correct, and if the Bible is correct, then science must be wrong,” he said.
Petto said Hovind misinterprets scientific information and then argues against his misinterpretation.
“That is, of course, known as the ‘straw man’ argument — great debating strategy, but nothing to do with what scientists actually say or do,” he said. “The bottom line here is that the science is irrelevant to his conclusions.”
Another criticism of Hovind’s presentation is his citation of pre-college textbooks. Following the event, an audience member said, “I don’t think using examples of grade school and high school biology can stand up to evolution.”
Petto called this an “interesting and effective rhetorical strategy” and explained that Hovind is not arguing against science, but the “textbook version” of science.
“The texts are not presenting the research results of the scientific community per se, but digesting and paraphrasing it in a way to make it more effective in learning science,” he said. “So, what (Hovind) is complaining about is not what science says, but what the textbooks say that science says.”
Petto said this abbreviated version of scientific research is due, in part, to the editorial and production processes, which impose specific limits on what is included.
He added that grade school and high school textbooks tend to contain very general information about evolution and pressure from anti-evolutionists has weakened evolutionary discussion in textbooks.
“Lower-level texts … tend to be more general in their discussions of evolution and speak more vaguely of ‘change over time’ and adaptation and so on,” he said. “Due to pressure by anti-evolutionists, textbook publishers tend to shy away from being ‘too evolutionary’ in their texts … The more pressure there is on schools and publishers, the weaker the evolution gets, and the weaker it gets, the more likely that it will not do a good job of representing the current consensus among biologists.”
Hovind has a “standing offer” of $250,000 for “anyone who can give any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.” According to Hovind’s Web site, the offer “demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more than a religious belief.”
The Web site, www.drdino.com, says, “Persons wishing to collect the $250,000 may submit their evidence in writing or schedule time for a public presentation. A committee of trained scientists will provide peer review of the evidence offered and, to the best of their ability, will be fair and honest in their evaluation and judgment as to the validity of the evidence presented.”
Wales said the AA’s goal in bringing Hovind to UWM was “to crack the issue on campus” and bring attention to the fallibility of evolution.
“The ultimate goal was to say that, ‘Gosh, evolution isn’t as concrete as you say it is, and why do you get to teach everyone this non-concrete thing and then not defend it when someone comes and says your wrong?’ ” he said. “It’s just absurd.”
No, but that's my point! I have NOT seen it! I see what looks like evidence of it and make a conclusion based on that evidence. Just like evolutionist, the difference is I don't call what I believe FACT, and tell people this is absolutely what happen. I leave room for other theories to be explored, eventhough I concluded a global flood did happen, but I'm honest enough to also say it's only ONE conslusion since I can't take people back in time to actually witness the event.
Evolutionist do not allow other views to be introduced. Why, because there is an agenda? An agenda to fool people into thinking this is ALL chance and there is no meaning to any of it, because logically that's what evolution leads too...now evo maybe true, but until I see some monkey turn into a man, or a half an eye, true transitional changes, (Not someone guess of a transitional change) it's all speculation and conjecture.
No,I take my belief on faith, evolution can't do this because science can't do this and still be called science, but evo's really try hard to turn their faith into facts as evidenced by this thread.
Until you answer the quiz, I have no further response. Your sanity is seriously at issue. I'd like to know if I'm dealing with a crazy person before continuing.
wasted placemarker-of-life
Caught up to the end of this crazy thread placemarker.
You qoute the Bible -- that is not Scientific Proof.
It is an opinion. It is belief. It is not subject to scientific scrutiny.
No scientist ever equates theory with fact. The best a scientist can come up with is an Axion, subject to disproval.
Religion can't do that. It posits its beliefs as "Facts." Look at the earlier post to me. One of you gives me Scripture where I am asking for Proof. Scripture is belief.
If you can't debate honestly you really should stay on the sidelines.
First you're ignoring the evidence I presented, second the the Hebrew and Greek word used in the OLD & NEW testeament refer to GLOBAL flood, fissures all over the globe as well as over 270 accounts of this event worldwide...So I have my reasons and evidence to believe, but "angular conformities" as far as I understand, make no sense in this case when the flood lasted less than a year and much of the flood came up from beneath the surface anyway, not neccessarily rain.
Nice opinions!
Is this one of the 270 accounts? And which parts do you believe?
Long before the world was created there was an island, floating in the sky, upon which the Sky People lived. They lived quietly and happily. No one ever died or was born or experienced sadness. However one day one of the Sky Women realized she was going to give birth to twins. She told her husband, who flew into a rage. In the center of the island there was a tree which gave light to the entire island since the sun hadn't been created yet. He tore up this tree, creating a huge hole in the middle of the island. Curiously, the woman peered into the hole. Far below she could see the waters that covered the earth. At that moment her husband pushed her. She fell through the hole, tumbling towards the waters below.
Water animals already existed on the earth, so far below the floating island two birds saw the Sky Woman fall. Just before she reached the waters they caught her on their backs and brought her to the other animals. Determined to help the woman they dove into the water to get mud from the bottom of the seas. One after another the animals tried and failed. Finally, Little Toad tried and when he reappeared his mouth was full of mud. The animals took it and spread it on the back of Big Turtle. The mud began to grow and grow and grow until it became the size of North America.
Then the woman stepped onto the land. She sprinkled dust into the air and created stars. Then she created the moon and sun.
The Sky Woman gave birth to twin sons. She named one Sapling. He grew to be kind and gentle. She named the other Flint and his heart was as cold as his name. They grew quickly and began filling the earth with their creations.
Sapling created what is good. He made animals that are useful to humans. He made rivers that went two ways and into these he put fish without bones. He made plants that people could eat easily. If he was able to do all the work himself there would be no suffering.
Flint destroyed much of Sapling's work and created all that is bad. He made the rivers flow only in one direction. He put bones in fish and thorns on berry bushes. He created winter, but Sapling gave it life so that it could move to give way to Spring. He created monsters which his brother drove beneath the Earth.
Eventually Sapling and Flint decided to fight till one conquered the other. Neither was able to win at first, but finally Flint was beaten. Because he was a god Flint could not die, so he was forced to live on Big Turtle's back. Occasionally his anger is felt in the form of a volcano.
The Iroquois people hold a great respect for all animals. This is mirrored in their creation myth by the role the animals play. Without the animals' help the Sky Woman may have sunk to the bottom of the sea and earth may not have been created.
XS>Let's see does he (the Pope) believe in and follow the Holy Word of G-d?
Genesis 9:6 G-D> "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man".
XS>No. I think he has a problem with G-d.
T>Maybe one day you'll start reading the New Testament. In the meantime, I hope you eat your steaks well done.
950 posted on 12/18/2005 12:30:25 AM MST by Thalos
G-d, creator of the universe, demanded the death penalty as murder is an affront to G-d himself.
I do read the so-called New Testament daily.
The same G-d who wrote the Old Testament also wrote the New Testament.
Mark 12:29 "The most important one," answered Y'shua, "is this: `Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.
Mk. 12:30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ [Deut. 6:4,5]
Deuteronomy 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one.
Deuteronomy 6:5 Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength
Has the Pope told you to ignore the Old Testament?
Has the Pope told you that the Old Testament it is silly old fables?
The same G-d, HaShem, creator of the universe, wrote both the Old Testament and the so-called New Testament.
as there is only one Holy Word of G-d!
and His name is Y'shua!
b'shem Y'shua
So, how long ago do you think the entire world ecology was saved on a wooden boat?
A population of 8 can do a lot of damage in a short period of time. Any actual problems, or just handwringing?
Huh? What has that got to do with anything I said?
What evidence was that then. I saw you name some features, but I missed the evidence. Sorry.
second the the Hebrew and Greek word used in the OLD & NEW testeament refer to GLOBAL flood, fissures all over the globe as well as over 270 accounts of this event worldwide...So I have my reasons and evidence to believe,
I already addressed this in post #1003. You'd expect ancient civilisations to have flood myths. In the light of the effects of events such as Hurricane Katrina on an ancient civilisation which would have no defence and no system of advance warning it would be surprising if ancient cultures *didn't* have myths of floods that killed nearly everyone "in the world". We are talking about people who had no idea of the scale of the world. The OT is pre-occupied entirely with talking about a small area of the Middle East.
but "angular conformities" as far as I understand, make no sense in this case when the flood lasted less than a year and much of the flood came up from beneath the surface anyway, not neccessarily rain.
At least we appear to be in agreement that angular unconformities make no sense in the light of a claim that the geological column was laid down by a global flood a few thousand years ago. However in the light of normal mainstream geology they make perfect sense.
Great handwaving. Just ignore what happens to YEC who get jobs that require them to confront the actual data on a daily basis. I'm sure you'll feel much more comfortable with that.
"Visions of Timothy Leary" placemark
Could someone tell me where in the Bible it says the flood waters came from some source other than rain.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.