scigirl

I like this one.

Point out that "scientists" encompass a wide variety of belief systems, cultures, and countries. The "scientist" worldview is very diverse. Young Earth Creationists, on the other hand, are almost always Christian.

scigirl

tgamble

Not sure what you mean by that.

He'd do that anyway wouldn't he? One can't defend and explain isochron dateing in less than an hour (at least, I doubt they can.) and Hovind can always invent some BS about the mammoth being dated at 2 different ages
<a href="http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/hovind_fractured_fairy_tales.htm" target="_blank">http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/hovind_fractured_fairy_tales.htm</a>

or the 200 year old lava dated at millions of years.
<a href="http://www.best.com/~dlindsay/creation/hawaii.html" target="_blank">http://www.best.com/~dlindsay/creation/hawaii.html</a>

Which brings us to a good place to attack his credibility. Bring the papers with you and ask Hovind to point to where it says what he claims. Explain that anyone who's interested can have a look. Use other examples of his incompetance that can be exposed quickly without technical jargon. Even a Hovind supporter can understand that a paper nowhere claims that the mammoth was dated at 2 different ages...

The best stratagy (IMO) isn't to defend the science that he attacks, but the refute the attacks directly showing it to be garbage.

It could take a while to explain biochemistry and comparison but it wouldn't take long to point out that the comparisons between chimp and humans are identical or highly similar, contrary to Hovind's ravings that a sunflower is closer.

You could also nail him on the Geologic Column claims. HOw hard is it to understand that it was formulated by Christians long before evolution was accepted? Ditto the old age of the earth and rejection of Noah's flood.

<a href="http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/hovind_fractured_fairy_tales.htm" target="_blank">http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/hovind_fractured_fairy_tales.htm</a>
"Well, today, they probably couldn't survive in our environment, but I think before the flood came, in the days of Noah, the earth had double the atmospheric pressure, and there are several reasons for all of this, and 30% oxygen."

hmm, so why does he claim that dinosaurs are still alive? Could they survive or not?

False Christians, corrupted by Satan. blah blah blah. It depends on how open the audience is.

Good question that.

Ya know, I can understand that some people can be persauded by people like Gish or Sarfati. Their arguments sound vaguely scientific and they do have legit credentials. But Hovind?

"The whole idea that man can become a god started with the devil in the Garden of Eden. And that's really what evolution teaches, that we started off like a rock, and we're slowly evolving, and, you know, eventually gonna become in charge of our own destiny."

How can anyone take such utter stupidity seriously?

[ August 09, 2002: Message edited by: tgamble ]</p>

Jimmy Higgins

The utterly stupid. Sadly these people are more common than we would hope.

Camaban

He said something along those lines?

tgamble

It's an exact quote. See <a href="http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/hovind_fractured_fairy_tales.htm" target="_blank">http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/hovind_fractured_fairy_tales.htm</a>

[ August 10, 2002: Message edited by: tgamble ]</p>