Every evolutionist has a chance to win $250,000

quote:

---

Originally posted by minnemooseus:
Which reminds me, does anyone out there remember the Bill Cosby routine, of Noah talking to God?

---

God: "NOAH!"
Noah: "What?"
God: "I WANT YOU TO BUILD AN ARK."
Noah: "Riiiight. What's an ark.?"A classic. By the way, do you enjoy talking to yourself on BB's? Not a moose.

quote:

---

Originally posted by TrueCreation:
"First, Hovind is not a "Dr." He is a fake who got his degree from a degree mill (input the three search terms: hovind AND creationism AND creadentials, and you can track the info for yourself). As to debating him, it is done to demonstrate the man for the liar that he is."
--I believe he is having one of his seminars down close by where I am. If I get the chance to go, I'd sure have to ask him this one! Along with his questions on the Pangean continent and the evidence he ignores and sure puts that 'unique perspective' on.

​

---

Great TC! We'll make a scientist of you yet! Seriously, though: don't go into one of his lectures unprepared. In spite of his faults, he is a very good speaker. He has totally perfected the "Gishian Gallop" - he'll present a bewildering barrage of assertions and rapidly changing overhead projections. Most people unfamiliar with either the science or the tactic will be overwhelmed. His primary tool is to speak so quickly and present so much (erroneous) information that while you're processing one bit he's already three assertions further along. Also, according to one of my colleagues who attended one of his lectures, he has shills in the audience. It rapidly gets to a point where his presentation is more "tent revival" than scientific lecture. The shills keep the cheers and laughter/applause going (basic group dynamics in action), until at the end you feel breathless and can't even remember the specifics of what he said - just that he made a dazzling presentation. We're talking about a guy who can beat out an auction barker in a stand-up fight.Be prepared - and don't take him lightly. He is VERY good at what he does. He's also a total crank. You wonder why scientists don't take creationism very seriously? He's a prime example of why not. One of the "leading creationists" indeed.

Hi Dr. T: Just wanted to set the record straight. I wish I could take credit for the "Gishian Gallop" reference. I can't remember off-hand where I originally read it, but it might be attributable to Joyce Arthur (who's made something of a hobby of exposing Gish). Here's a great Skeptic magazine article by Arthur on our friend Duane Gish, Bad Science or Immoral Pseudoscience?", with links to Gish's rebuttal.

Say Hey, TC:I am very glad you were able to use your readings in science to see through the likes of Kent Hovind. Although he's probably the most obvious fraud on the circuit, you might find it instructive to look at some of the writings of other "creationist leading lights" with the same skeptical view. I would suggest John Woodmorappe, for starters - he writes a lot on geology and the Flood, which is apparently one of your favorite topics. Just compare his assertions with the evidence you've seen presented by geologists in some of the books you've said you've read. Make up your own mind.Be careful! The more you learn about the evidentiary basis of science, the less creationist writings make sense. Science is very sneaky like that - it insinuates itself into your mind before you know it. Keep reading!