Hi Russ

Interesting that you would stoop to character assassination.

Sorry was I assassinating his character? Did I say anything that was not the absolute truth about the man?

Can you show me the law that requires one to pay income tax?

Did I ever say that there was a law requiring anyone to pay income tax? I said only that he was a convicted tax cheat which is the truth. The validity of the law under which he was convicted on, what was it 56 counts, is a separate question and one that I can’t really comment on. I’m not an American and know little about the details of your laws. The fact is he was convicted just as I said and that is all that I said on the question.

It was also true that he claims high credentials including a doctorate but they were obtained from an unaccredited college which charges around $20 per credit and awards diplomas based on your statement that you have learned the appropriate material. For laughs I too have a doctorate from a similar organization yet I would never claim it gave me any credibility in a discussion, its good for laughs and that’s all. Hovind claims that his purchased credentials give him authority to speak on subjects he clearly knows little about.

You see Russell2, most heroes are initially condemned as tyrants, rebels, or frauds until the truth can no longer be withheld.

Of course for every true hero of scientific knowledge there are at least a thousand quacks who think they are the hero but actually know very little about the subjects they profess to be experts in. They make grandiose but unsupported claims against the current paradigms, claims that are unsupported by evidence, claims which are invariably false and in so doing they cause much harm to those who accept their unfounded rubbish. It’s a dangerous game.

I know you don't like Kent Hovind. I would assume it is because the things he says oppose your faith in evolution. Nevertheless, his statements about the fossil-record hoax are true, and more and more people are realizing how ridiculous evolution really is.

Then you would assume wrongly again. My real problem with Dr Dino is that he goes on spruking debunked rubbish years and years after it was pointed out to him that he had no idea what he was talking about. Even the YEC community has recognised this and has published a list of his claims that they believe should never be used by YEC’s because they give the movement a bad name because they are clearly false. People who deliberately lie to people are, IMHO, unworthy of our respect and so no I don’t respect Kent.

Again I ask you, if you find any of the claims Kent makes in that video compelling raise them here and we can discuss them. Take just the very best of his arguments and let’s air them here and see how they stand up to scrutiny.



You cited this passage before. I pointed out last time that it was false, that it was not Charles Darwin who said these words but N.C.Gillespie. The false quote was created by taking a passage from Gillespie’s book which did contain a quote from Darwin and dropping Darwin’s words from the middle of it while retaining Gillespie’s words and the citation giving the false impression that Darwin said or thought any such thing. Once your errors have been pointed out to you it is very dishonest to continue to make the same claims. It is for doing exactly that that I do not respect Mr Kent Hovind. It if for this exact transgression among others that I believe we should all reject in its entirety the arguments of Mr Kent Hovind. Once someone has been proven to be a deliberate and repeated liar it’s hard to take anything else they say seriously and Kent has been clearly proven so on a number of occasions.

In reason.

Russell

P.S. I've seen Hovind's video before, I've watched quite a few of them over the years, I don't discount it out of hand but out of the knowledge that it contains rubbish and not substance. Still as I said, if you find some part of it compelling raise it here and lets examine it in detail.