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

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

[VadeRetro]

What "argument" would you think I am making or there is to make at all on this topic?

As usual, you are unhappy that the sow's ear of creationism is looking ridiculous and you can't do anything about it except screech at those who point it out.

[b_sharp]

Good post. Thanks for the ping.

[darbymcgill]

Amazing how you can know the thought process of every written word by others. Even when a statement might be read more than one way, you always know the intent of the author. And the way you change the meaning of words and terms on a dime is quite a talent as well.

I guess you can't ever lose an argument when you can redefine the thoughts and words of others so that you make yourself believe they agree with you.

Do you linger when you pass mirrors or do you have one of those little video windows in the corner of your monitor?

[VadeRetro]

[Watching creationists go ballistic because they can't admit their errors is *so* much fun.]

This is a consistent feature of creationist argument. Thread after thread turns into a bizarre dance in which a creationist is caught out on some absurd and clearly unsupportable statement but cannot and will not simply admit the "misstatement."

I know myself the sinking feeling when reality betrays me and makes some statement I make in heated argument flat wrong. I really want a reality-modifier to change the world to match my statement rather than eat crow just there and then.

Still, what can you do? To stand on solid ground--to stay right--you have to allow yourself--force yourself, even--to admit being wrong. It's either that or marry your mistakes forever.

It's one of the big differences between the sides, IMHO. Most of their posters admit no error above the typo level, ever.

[PatrickHenry]

know myself the sinking feeling when reality betrays me and makes some statement I make in heated argument flat wrong.

Happens to all of us. But our side makes corrections and goes on from there. Without integrity, you're just a worthless screen-name, raving in cyberspace.

[tallhappy]

you are unhappy that the sow's ear of creationism is looking ridiculous

Your idea is based on what?

What I find amazing is the delusions on your part. Complete delusion.

[Right Wing Professor]

To stand on solid ground--to stay right--you have to allow yourself--force yourself, even--to admit being wrong. It's either that or marry your mistakes forever. It's one of the big differences between the sides, IMHO.

It's an essential difference between science and religion. Science progresses by successively less erroneous approximations to the truth. So if you're never wrong, it can only be because you never say anything. Religion cannot admit fallibility, because if it did the entire edifice would come tumbling down.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

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.

To prove it, he's been raising dinosaurs and ewoks at his theme park.

[Dimensio]

Is Ichneumon's argument one used to destroy the faith of young science students in the veracity of the Word of God?

No, it is used to expose the absurdity of creationist claims regarding a global flood. It is not Ichneumon's fault or anyone else's if observed reality contradicts what you want to believe.

[Stultis]

and stop the on-going PC course of attempting to discredit the written Revelation

Thanks. Although it is not in ALL cases our direct goal, we are trying hard to prevent the creationists discrediting the Bible by treating it as a science text and thereby opening it ridicule.

[Quark2005]

Excellent information. You've caused me to revise my opinion of Hovind. I used to think he's a total idiot. Now, I think there are some limited areas in which he's an evil genius.

I've always had an unprovable speculation that Hovind isn't really even an ardent creationist, but just someone taking advantage of scientific illiteracy to line his pockets. His apparent stupidity seems way too over the top to be genuine.

[Thatcherite]

"Do you believe that there were "raindrop imprints" placed in sand in a laminar lay in the Grand Canyon before there was rain?"

I am curious. Where in the bible does it say that there had never been any rain prior to the flood?

[thomaswest]

"...lay in the Grand Canyon before there was rain..."

Careful. Although evolution does involve sex, personal experiences do not a theory make!

Besides, the major sandstone unit in the GC (the Coconino)is of aeolian origin--that is, sand dunes, which arose in a dry environment. This layer disproves quite effectively the flood myth.

[Thatcherite]

His apparent stupidity seems way too over the top to be genuine.

As does that of his shills who post in online discussion boards.

[VadeRetro]

Your idea is based on what?

Your absolutely inevitable behavior on every thread. Was no one supposed to notice?

[VadeRetro]

Happens to all of us.

Wonderfully big of you. Now, stop teasing me about Romania!

[Thatcherite]

Tell me Metmom, how did you feel about the way that AAMM was treated in this thread yesterday afternoon? Did you notice that several creationists posted in support of her assailant, and that none could be found to condemn her assailant? (apologies if any did, I missed it if so)

[Ichneumon]

There's a lot of anti-Bush websites out there too - making all sort of claims. Hmm...

Wow, what a lame non-rebuttal, in response to a large amount of documentation of Hovind's flubs, lies, and misrepresentations...

If you want to let the facts stand without challenge, go right ahead.

[js1138]

It's one of the big differences between the sides, IMHO. Most of their posters admit no error above the typo level, ever.

Like the dude on this thread who asserted that a suntan was the same process as the acquisition of resistance to antibiotics. After six or so posts he has still not admitted making a mistake. I think he doesn't understand that it is a mistake.

[VadeRetro]

Was that the one where he insisted on spitting into the wind and tugging on Superman's cape, even though we warned him you don't mess around with Jim?

Yes, but of course he was already off on LP by then anyway.