I'm all for people questioning what they are taught. The problem is that, as many will have noticed here, creationism has no answers as to why things like radiometric dating and the sorting of the fossil record are wrong, they just . . . are. CTD is the only one here who has attempted to explain how radiometric dating is wrong, but unfortunately for him all he has demonstrated is that he doesn't understand the mathematics behind it.

What this again seems to boil down to is that creationism claims the vast majority of scientists and the body of scientific knowledge are wrong but can't explain how, and doesn't have any answers for why it is contradicted by physical evidence. A person truly questioning what they are being told might wonder, for instance, why they are being told that the earth is 6000 years old when the half-lives of isotopes that are used to date the earth are measured in millions of years . . . but it's likely that such a person will know nothing about radiometric dating apart from "it's all lies," which is what they would "learn" at a camp like this presumably.

Kent Hovind's claims are peppered with scientific misunderstandings and fallacies. It's disturbing that he wants these to be passed on to others. I've told you that he thinks the sun burns by combustion.

I also suspect that the theory of evolution will be presented as "dogs giving birth to cats" and "hateful atheist scientists who want everyone to reject the Bible." I can have a little chuckle there at least, imagining all the absurd things these guys will probably come up with. I suppose anyone who is willing to pay for it deserves what they get, even if it's kids who don't know what an igneous rock is but who will tell you that God created it.