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.”
Boy, they just get wierder and wierder. This guy basicly says he doesn't give a damn what facts and reason say.
The one that has always dropped my jaw has been the one about the Grand Canyon and the Great Flood. This guy's statements about the Great Flood prove the old adage that you can't win an argument with a fool. Of course, the fool never realizes he is a fool so he just wouldn't understand why 3,000 scientists won't debate him.
Where do you get the idea that Hovind is fleecing people to the tune of millions of dollars???
That is totally ludicrious!!!
He produces materials that people are free to buy or not buy. He never goes to speak at any church without being invited and he does not charge churches to come.
Before you go around lying about the guy and making yourself look like an idiot, you ought to get a few facts.
No way is Kent Hovind a fool. He is a rich man, who got that way by exploiting the gullibility of fundamentalist Christians, and telling them what they want to hear. A very clever charlatan who makes use of the "one born every minute".
Now aren't you really showing your ignorance. The "theme park" is a hands on kids activity place in the back yard of his home. Any admission feee (which I think is 5 dollars) goes to support the missionaries that work there.
The facts as they pertain to the lying charlatan Kent Hovind are freely available on the internet. The best primary source that demonstrates his dishonesty is his own website. You only have to look at the ludicrous YEC arguments on his website (arguments so stupid and dishonest that even other creationist lie-sites like AiG say that they are stupid and dishonest) to see what kind of man we are dealing with here.
He makes very little money off the materials he produces because he does not copyright them. He allows people to copy them and do with them what they will.
He has some excellent materials at a great price. But he never tries to charge people more than what they are worth and if you called him today and told him you needed something and could not afford it, he would give it away to you for free.
I have personally seen him do that.
So stop trying to malign the guy and get your facts straight before you post lies about the man on a public forum.
I wouldn't have to buy any, he allows people to copy them and give them away.
But one of my favorites is where is exposes the frauds in evolution like Piltdoan Man, Glued Moths, human fetuses drawn to look like pig fetuses, the way Hawking pretends like the Law of recapitulation just doesn't exist. Oh, the list is long.
See, people who believe in the religion of evolution have to make us fairy tales to prove their "theory."
Sad.
Interesting. What exactly is your relationship with Hovind? Under what circumstances did you see him give his material away to the needy?
Oh yeah, now we have another ignoramous on the thread. Hovind is not rich by any means.
Why do you evo's have to create fiction to try and support your weak theories?
You can't prove the guy wrong so you try and pretend he is some Jim Bakker wanna be who is fleecing millions of people of millions of dollars.
What a crock. His amusment park is in the back yard of his three bed room home in Pensacola.
The lien against him is a matter of public record - one of the IRS agents on the case has publicly stated that they have records of bank deposits exceeding $1 million/year for Hovind. Estimating his income from the amount the IRS claims he owes is a simple matter - do the math yourself, if you like.
Also, Hovind's 1996 Chapter 13 petition to recover his cars was tossed out of court as a sham - the IRS never apologized and did not, to the best of my kowledge, return the cars. If they did, it's almost certainly because he paid the back taxes owed.
As for me lying about him, let him subpoena my identity from FR and sue me for libel. I'm more that willing to stand by what I said.
All the real frauds were all exposed by the normal process of science. Not one was exposed by a creationist. In fact Piltdown man was increasingly seen as an irrelevant anomaly precisely because it didn't fit in with the pattern of hominid finds. Because creationists don't have any theory that explains the pattern of fossil finds they had no basis for rejecting Piltdown.
Most churches would die for the freedom from fraud and error associated with ToE over the last 150 years, and its demonstrable ability to police itself and to discover its own frauds and errors.
AIG would like to think that they own the creationsim movement,but they don't. Their biggest problem with Hovind is that he tells them that they are not going to dictate to him. They hate that.
He also chastizes them for copyrighting their materials and trying to make a buck off the people who need the information.
They hate Kent for being generous and giving stuff away. It just makes them look selfish.
I have visited with Dr. Hovind on many occasions in Pensacola, including the "theme park."
I have had ample opportunity to observe his operation, every there is open doors. I am not a personal friend of his and there are areas which I would disagree with him, but I know that he is not some kind of rip off artist like you people would like to paint him.
I have seen him give materials away on more than one occasion and his materials are not copyright, so anything he sells can be copied and passed around. However, many people copy his stuff and then sell it. So more people make a profit off his stuff than he does.
Well bro, looks like you don't know squat then, because he has the cars back.
Better check your facts better next time.
THat would be interesting to see, but I doubt you can furnish it.
However, he does have a ministry where he goes and speaks to churches and he does sell products that he produces. Are you implying that he is not intitled to the fruit of his labor?
The point is that you don't know what you are talking about. YOu have stated things about Dr. H that are not true.
Why would you do something like that?
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.