[Dimensio]

The problem with Hovind's "debates" is that he fires off rapid-fire lies one after the other. Each one would take quite some time to fully debunk, but there's no time, so Hovind "appears" to be the winner even though his entire argument is supported by falsehoods.

How do you explain that the two wooly mammoth samples dated at vastly different ages actually came from two completely different specimens when Hovind's already gone off onto a tangent about stellar formation (which the theory of evolution does not address at all -- but Hovind, liar that he is, includes it as part of the theory)?

[RightWhale]

he fires off rapid-fire lies one after the other

It is a valid rhetorical style. There is a way of parsing sentences so that the pauses for breath come in the middle of sentences while the next sentence begins without pause. This technique allows one to keep the floor indefinitely.