It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by mentalempire
Personally I'm not convinced of Dr. Hovind's theories, but I do have to admit that it seems his critics have done a poor job of trying to refute him. Attack the theories, not the person, people.
Originally posted by white_raven
I am fully convinced that as he started to talk out more against the government and more people started to follow his teachings, he became a threat...
I mean come on...this charge sounds so bogus..."tax evasion" who the hell goes after a church for tax evasion.
I do not know the entire details of the case, but i really think this is a lot more then just more then his "tax evasion" and about creation theories again evolution, he became a threat starting to show the government for what it really is and he had a big following....
They had to shut him down!
Oh yea and seriously if all you can find on him is this "diploma mill" crap then wow... every heard of private education?
this maybe off the subject a little bit but... don't you think that the government would want to shut these places down, and "expose" them as frauds causing these people that graduated from them to be discredited?
and i really love what he says, if you dont like that he has a doctor...then forget about it and more on...
[edit on 6-1-2009 by white_raven]
Originally posted by Absolom_Absolom
1). That Science did not 'disprove' the Biblical Genesis account of Creation or Noah's Flood; geological sciences did not disproiove it nor did biological or astronomical sciences either.
thats becasue it cant god anyway, but here comes the evil immoral logic bit, absence of evidence isnt evidence of absence correct, but lack of evidence does show a lack of justification for said belief via occams razor, so creators can be ignored until evidence for one is presented
2). In viewing the whole seminar (several hours) I did not once ever hear Dr. Hovind claim that God and the Bible could be "proven" by science.
well deffine proven?
On the contrary he stated (quite accurately) that true science (an examination of the empirical evidences and demonstrable models) that neither Creationism nor Darwinist Evolution could be "proven" one way or another (perhaps those who unwisely took him on in debates should have given this fact more consideration).
and thats why he doesnt know what he is talking about
3). Dr. Hovind revealed the many holes in Darwinist "thought" and pointed out the many inaccuracies and outright lies (ie. the gill slits --admitted by other biologists as bogus) and demonstrated that in FACT Darwinist Evolution was as much a RELIGION when the same standards of definition were applied to it as often are to Creationism.
unfortunatley that will only display how different sized grains of the same strat will be sorted and not how different layers of rock will form unless you purposly use different sized material to start with
What Dr. Hovind proceeded to do was to demonstrate by examination of empirical evidences (a variety running the complete spectrum) and by reasonable demonstrable models (ie. hydrologic sorting of soils and other sediments)
the Hovind theory is the ice shield right? or is it the meteor? both get called the same, nothing unsound?
He also advanced what he called "The Hovind THEORY" (emphasis added), his OWN thoughts as to what MIGHT have happened during the castrophe known as Noah's Flood or the Great Deluge. NOTHING Dr. Hovind advanced in his theory is unsound scientifically.
its NOT a theory its a hypothesis becasue its entirely unproven
e simply left it for what it was HIS THEORY (and a good one at that).
the absurdity factor, AIG do bad pretend science and hovind didnt even managed that standard
Now I've seen this site thatdedicates itself to smearing the character credibility of Dr. Hovind (www.kent-hovind.com) and whereas I am well aware of the people at Answers In Genesis warning against some of the things Hovind was advancing (WHY I do not know, but be that as it may)
he is the greatest parody of him self, so its hard to do a better parody think of it more as a homagee
and some of the other stuff I wonder about. I do know that this site has taken one of Dr. Hovind's parodies completely out of context.
I am referring to the Chromosome Parody. Dr. Hovind put out this parody to demonstrate the utter fallicy (scientifically speaking) of suggesting that because "humans and some great apes are different by only two or three chromosomes this is proof of their close kinship".
well he got somthing right,
Dr. Hovind points out that chromosomes are so complex that their numbering in no way tells us anything about the complexity of the plant or animal or its relations to any other
it would much rather you learnt about it for your self and examined the evidence(yes theres lots of it) blind faith leads away from science, scinence is about understanding not believing
The simple fact is that Darwinist Evolution REQUIRES some (great) degree of blind belief (ie. FAITH) in its 'accuracies', as most of it is not provable.