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.”
Sorry about the double post.
You're a looney.
There you go again.....yet another Libertarian claiming the mantle of the Founding Fathers of this country. When everybody knows those who forged this country were Christians.
I've been to your 'classic-liberal' Libertarian website. Open borders, pro-homosexual, pro-abortion; the only consistent thing you fight for is the legalization of any drug you can get your hands on.
....ever putting forth the myth that the men who fought in the American Revolution were super-patriot Libertarians.
I'm sure George Washington and others like him would agree 100% with the platform of your 'party'. All three members of it.
You and your Libertarian friends are nothing but liars and thieves, claiming the blood and sacrifice of others as your own.
It goes hand in hand with every other false and demonic doctrine you try endlessly to force upon us. It is an effort on your part to eliminate the very people who built this society. Raving lunatic? I've talked to plenty of Christians, and I don't mean the David Koresh types either, although I'm sure that's what you would like to believe. They invariably think civil war is inevitable with you and your friends. Of course no timetable is set for such a conflict, as that is entirely dependent on you. When you push too hard for the last time, you'll know when it's starting.....and you'll only have yourselves to blame.
The Bible is replete with examples of God commanding the Israelites to purge their nation when wicked influences became too much to bear.....and so it shall be with you.
Faced with obliteration, Christians will fight back.
We will fight back, and we will not be obliterated. The Christian heritage will survive; it has for the last 2000 years despite the efforts of people like Stultis, Dimensio, Oztrich Boy and the rest. They will be vanquished, and perhaps God will find favor with us again after they are driven out.
Osama? Some people think you are dead.
I'll reiterate some points about them again just in case they haven't gotten it yet.
1) These people would have you believe that they carry the mantle of those that framed the Constitution. The promulgate the belief that these people were Libertarians and secular humanists. Lies, all of it.
2) It is pointless to debate evolution vs. creationism with them, as they are liars to begin with
3) They are hardheaded, and think that the growing segment of Christians who realize that were headed for armed conflict with them are Tim McVeigh or David Koresh types. Let them believe that; I always liked the element of surprise.
4) Their beliefs are more identifiable with the virulent leftists who emerged from the 60s, not with the Christian patriots who emerged in the late 1700's.
5) Whether they believe in God is irrelevant; their doctrines and beliefs have been a curse upon our nation; the time is coming when we will have to drive them out. It will be our duty.
6) Again, they know the debate regarding creationism vs evolution is part of a much larger agenda, despite their constant lying. Eighty-five percent of this country believes in God, and these 15% think they will impose their secular tyranny upon us; it is they who are dreaming.
7) Much like their totalitarian brethren, they seek to force their secular beliefs upon us by twisting the Constitution to suit their agaenda (the 1st amendment in particular).
8)These people are those who think they have a right to take your 14 year old daughter for an abortion, without notifying parents. They have no concept of parental rights; despite their protestations, they believe that the State supercedes the rights and beliefs of individuals. They use every flunky available to wage war upon us, whether it be the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, Nambla, GLSEN, left wing teachers, academia, and last but certainly not least, liberal activist judges who usurp the legislative branch and issue decrees, regardless of what the people want. It is a tyranny of a minority
9)Stultis and his friends thinks I'm locked up in some 'compound' somewhere, as he sneeringly puts it; yet he belongs to a party that can't even muster more than a few hundred thousand voters (being generous here)......yet as I've stated 85% of people state they believe in God.....and just who inhabits a compound. Too funny for words.
10) They hate us, just as Oztrich Boy admits; he says I would rather be a pig than a creationist, Patrick Henry thinks creationism is a cancer on society......and these types would accuse us of agitating for war. There is no doubt in my mind that we are locked in a life or death struggle with these vermin, their goal is our destruction, and they know it. Unfortunately for them, more and more of us know it also.
11) War is a last resort, but we will come to the last resort at some time; because they never give up.....as stated in 10, it is they who have embarked on the path of destroying us. It is their endgame, nothing short wil satisfy them.
12) While war is undesirable, it is sometimes necessary; Jesus Himself ate with a soldier. The soldier's lot is not an evil one, so long as the cause is righteous. Ecclesiastes itself proposes that their is a time and place for everything under the sun, and that includes war and peace.
13) Let these arrogant tyrants think that it is only a few 'loonies' opposing them; they are so dismissive of others that anybody who disagrees with them must be 'crazy'. Their hardheadedness will be their undoing; they claim to be people of vision, yet it is obvious to me that they are blind men stumbling around in the dark.
It is because of people like yourself that Osama and others exist; he himself has stated that America is weak and decadent. The reason he believes this is because of the policies and agendas inflicted on this nation by you and your friends. Indeed, the enemies of the United States often speak of how weak we have become, and by virtue of this attack us.
It is you and others like you who have given heart to our enemies; it is you and others like you who have led our nation on a path to decay.
Osama belongs to you, not us.
I'm not a (capital "L") Libertarian. I'm a partisan Republican more or less of the "neoconservative" variety. I have no use whatsoever for the Libertarian Party. I merely said that I'm (small "l") libertarian when it comes to matters of culture. I like that different groups and individuals(including conservative Christians) assert and express their own outlooks, and sometimes robustly criticize each other.
Hey, but don't let the facts intefere with your rants. They haven't yet.
Do you even know what the word means? It refers to ideological "totalism": The notion that a society and CULTURE must be based on one, and only one, particular set of ideas. HINT: Real totalitarians often fantasize about going to war with their society, as you do, and suppressing or driving out those who disagree with their cultural, political or religious ideology, as you do.
This is why we live in the greatest country on earth. Theocrasy is not allowed. The darker side of social darwinism is checked.
The Constitution keeps things comfortable for us heretics and non-conformists.
I worked on radios, jammers and nav.
Facts that dissolve into theory? You do know how a theory is developed don't you?
Excellent.
Couldn't have said it better myself, and didn't.
Your post has reinforced my convictions and, hopefully, it has done the same for the lurkers.
God bless us all and Merry Christmas.
You really are a hoot. I haven't been this entertained for quite a while.
"I was replying to someone else.
You were indeed. I responded because your generalization addressed all atheists, which of course includes me. I'm happy to see you qualify that statement.
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.