I'm very disappointed with you Linda, as you are again twisting the truth to fit your purposes, and you are, as usual, doing this in a very sly way. This technique manipulates the emotions of those reading your posts into feeling a certain way about someone without providing any real information in an honest way that allows the reader to make their own decisions. It's emotionally-based spin-journalism.

First, let's be clear on this subject.

This subject is not about the academic weight of the diploma Hovind holds. That is another subject entirely (you often glump things together to confuse the subject at hand and to coerce the conclusion). What we are talking about is the fact that you worded the statement in such as way as to cause the normal reader to believe that Kent Hovind lied in stating what credentials he possesses.

You said:

"The point I was making about Hovind is that his credentials are fake."

Now, most people reading this statement that you made would know that any person who has "fake" diplomas would certainly know they had fake diplomas and therefore, this statement strongly asserts that Kent Hovind is a liar.

In order to be intellectually honest, you should have said that his credentials are inadequate. That would have been an honest expression of your position (as we know it), and honesty is very important here because you are making serious accusations about a real living person. They deserve to have the truth told about them rather than being fed through the Linda-spin machine.

Now, it seems that you have an opinion about how Kent should have worded his introduction. You said:



So you seem to think that this "qualification" in his statement would have made a difference.

I hold the strong opinion that you would have found another way to bash his character, even though you admit that his credentials are immaterial. In short, nothing is really good enough, and this, because this position has nothing to do with intellect. It's a position you hold and will not let go of regardless of evidence. You stated yourself that you won't rebut videos that I post links to, but let me ask you:

Have you even watched them?

How strange it is that you admit that credentials are immaterial to a discussion like this yet you continuously bring them up. Hmmm.

Throughout my contact with you, I have found you to be a woman that walks close-to-the-margin in terms of intellectual integrity. Your posts are littered with just this kind of insinuation and innuendo so as to play on people's emotions. This is not good.

Remember, if you're going to stand up to truth, then the truth about yourself will be revealed.

But let's dig further.



[color:"brown"]Strawman Alert[/color]

Like I said previously, I'm going to start calling you on this behavior as well as your posts are littered with strawman arguments.

Now, there are numerous certifications that you can get for herbal education. Some are better than others and it's up to the person evaluating the education of another to decide if they respect or disrespect the organization providing the certification, as it should be. This method of utilizing reputation to discern one's character and background is far superior than the current system of state-accreditation and licensing which only gives an extremely false sense of security.

I was part of a state-accredited college for 11 years and was indirectly involved in the accreditation process and let me tell you, most aspects of it have nothing to do with educational quality and most other aspects of it are a joke. Most things that are put into government hands eventually sink to the lowest levels of integrity and efficiency. Those who have not yet discovered this are socialists. Learn from history.

So the bottom line is that Kent probably holds all of the credentials he claims to. You just don't like them and believe that he did it to give an "aura" (your word) of credibility to his character. Did you know that this is the reason many (perhaps most) people do it, according to some polls?

In reference to Kent Hovind's character:

I believe Kent is a nice guy and a strong Christian who wanted a Christian education and got one. Since the accreditation laws pertaining to "religious" schools are lax in the U.S., these schools may offer degrees without the depth of requirement of non-religious schools.

Nevertheless, from what I know about him, he is a man of excellent character and is knowledgeable enough to submerge any evolutionist in their own magic. He is a great debater and, in my opinion, wins every debate he enters. This is, of course, why he is a favorite character-assassination target of evolutionists.

The information he teaches is solid and extremely revealing of the ulterior motives of the "establishment" in promoting socialism and centralization of power and he has worked tirelessly to free people from this type of enslavement. Ironically, he is working to help the very people who persecute him, but isn't that just the way the world has always been?

[color:"brown"]Remember what they did to Christ?[/color]

If anyone takes the time to explore the information Kent presents, they will begin to see the massive ocean of lies that have been perpetrated upon the world and the lies that exist in the so-called academic literature relating to the myth of evolution.

If anyone cares to listen, explore, and examine, they will eventually realize that—Hovind is right.

Even the fact that he is now serving a prison sentence for tax evasion is an indicator of his deep conviction. He may be considered a criminal, but so were the American forefathers who initiated the separation from a tyrannical, overbearing and completely corrupt monarchy who weighted people down with the same system that you indirectly promote when you promote evolution, namely socialism, i.e. secular humanism.

He is serving a sentence for a crime that, according to my research and my many others', is not a crime at all. It is only another fallacy (your word) in the legal system used to oppress people.

The ultimate irony is that a man came to you with liberating truth and you assassinated him.

Tell me; Who is the fool?