Kent Hovind

Don't worry, this post is in no way an attack on you but this threads appearance has spiked some thoughts.I stay away from individuals personally. Hovind, to me - well, to be honest, you might have noticed this yourself RAZD, but he can be used as a kind of stereotypical creationist.It should be noted, I have never based any of my beliefs on anything he has ever said. I once watched a very entertaining four hour debate with Hovind and Hugh Ross, and that is the totality of my knowledge of the man and I AM a creationist.It struck me that he seemed to have the style of a political rhetoricist. Hugh Ross seemed to be a genuine intellect but Hovind seemed evasive and almost condescending or so it seemed he came across that way. I will never judge an individual person of course, but if you were to ask me if Hovind was a genuine Christian, I have to confess I doubt it very strongly.But what I find very weird is that "creationists" are supposed to buy into everything he says, or that we need to. Not likely - chances are Bubba and his friends might, but somehow I think mikey wouldn't given Bubba would think Ad-Logicam was some sort of ice-cream, if mikey was to mention the fallacy. (Disclaimer: I'm not accusing anyone of using that fallacy, but it is very relevant if statements about all "creationists" are going to be made. For example I could argue I am a human, because I have every element that makes me human, but if a man came along called Bubba Hovind, and concluded I was human because I am Jonah Johnny-cake Jesus, from the planet Mars that wouldn't mean I would have to sacrifice my conclusion that I am human, just because he argued I was human for that reason)(i.e. A common denominator between me and Hovind, is "creationist", but really so what - RAZD is an intelligent evolutionist that doesn't commit fallacies and behaves exceptionally, but does that mean all "evolutionists" are? Does it also follow that atheists that argue evolution Ipse Dixit, are genuinely scientific people, by association with the epithet, 'science' or, 'scientific'?) Let's be honest, a lot of them are as ignorant as Bubba, but they have respect because they accept evolution - I guess that's the kind of respect Percy and his cohorts have, respect for ineptitude and bad-behaviour, but as long as you're on the evolution-side, you're alright, Jack!For me, atheists use guys like this to make out we are, guilty by association with him. Which is a bit like saying, "mike, please apologise for the crusades, and please tell me why you and Hovind argue that a unicorn used to exist.".My goodness, Bubba, I wasn't in the crusades! . "mike, you still haven't apologised for the crusades""I know, I've been meaning to get around to it but too many telephone calls between me and Hovind about how I can avoid paying tax, have been going down, I promise I'll get around to it some day, and all of this dishonesty about how a resistant bacteria doesn't explain the creation of an organ or echolocation of a whale, is abounding mightily with me at the moment. You know, I just don't know what it is but being a Christian just makes me such an ignorant guy because we can clearly see a novel new motor is created when a bacteria mutates." mikey-mischief complete.(Of course, this post isn't really relevant to RAZD, but he seems to appreciate the mikey-madness a bit more than those regular old dirty birds, Percy and Dr A! Those cockadoodie-brats! Those miserable snozzcumbers! (Please note, the Annie Wilkes personality intermingled with Roald Dahl characters comes free of charge, feel free to request it at any time, and I shall forthwith dispatch it up your "cockadoodie bumhole".)There aint no mike like a mikey-mike! Can we agree, at least?babas be blessed! (like my flying baba-worm? He migrates north in the winter)