Kent Hovind is a Doctor (READ ON) personally debunks the issue

Yes, I noticed it seemed strinkingly similar to a response from him listed on other sites. Perhapse he sends it as a form letter?

And I know a man who got his divinity degree from a degree mill and became a "minister" as a combination joke and dodge. Does that mean he knows anything about religion, no he does not. And he has the moral fiber to admit it, unlike that POS Hovind. Hovind performed no original research, wrote no dissertation and earned no degree. His claims to be a "Doctor" of anything are fraudulent and a lie. He and Carl Baugh are both frauds who work with groups who SELL degrees. There is a difference between selling a degree and earning one. The only proof that is there for the seeing is the proof that Hovind is a contemptable POS who is a liar, a fraud and, if there is a god, a candidate for hell for bearing false witness. There is also the proof of people who believe him not understand what in the hell they are talking about.FYI, if you wonder as to my tone, I spent 5.5 years of 80 hour weeks earning my degree. I hold those who claim to have an advanced degree, without earning it, in complete and utter contempt.------------------
"Chance favors the prepared mind." L. Pasteur
Taz

Yes, if you care to look closely at the web address for Patriot University, messenjaH, you'll see it ends with ".com" rather than ".edu."

Messenjah,Since you really seem to want to believe that KH is a "real" doctor with a real PhD. I suggest you read this article discussing his supposed dissertation.Not only is his supposed PhD not in the sciences, (which he admits), but his dissertation wouldn't even get him a PhD in Education which he DOES claim.Account Suspended------------------
Asgara "An unexamined life is not worth living" Socrates via Plato

The thing that puzzles me is why evolutionists work so hard to discredit a single creationist. This thread is a prime example, why do you all try so hard. I mean like Hovind said in his response, Darwin only had a degree in theology but is known today as a great scientist. Look at Shakespeare a peasant with no education that grew up to write the best literary works known today. Seeing evolution is fallacy doesnt take much more then common sense.------------------
"I believe in christianity as I believe the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else."-C.S. Lewiscontact me for any reason at: messenjahjr@yahoo.com

Neither Darwin nor Shakespeare claimed to be something that they are not. And many creationists either lie outright about their credentials (Hovind and Baugh are just two) or misrepresent their fields of study. I know of people who have gone outside of their fields and have perfromed brilliant work, L. Alveres for one, but not only are Hovind and Baugh liers, but they are unbelievably sloppy as well w.r.t. facts pertaining to the fields which they are trying to address.Discrediting these blivots is not hard, merely repetitious.------------------
"Chance favors the prepared mind." L. Pasteur
Taz

messenjah, Because Hovind is a liar, regardless, he still has an effect on the impressionable. ie YOU! That's twice we've shown him to be being a misrepresenting liar, what don't you get?I'm still all up for shooting down what YOU think is HIS best case.Mark

Do you think this is trying hard? It takes like 10 minutes on google. Discrediting Kent Hovind is only as hard as quoting most of the garbage from his own mouth. In other words it's pretty simple to discredit him. Sure, because he did science. he didn't just graduate the seminary and write "The Origin of Species". He served for years as a naturalist aboard the Beagle, studying and classifying plants and animals across the world.Kent Hovind calls himself "Dr. Dino." What dinosaurs has he discovered? What digs has he been on? What scientific papers has he published?He's right, it's not the degree that makes you a scientist. It's doing science. Kent Hovind, however, has neither. Must you be so totally ignorant about everything? Shakespeare wasn't a peasant, he was the son of a well-off tradesman. It's the difference between growing up homeless and growing up in Beverly Hills. And he did indeed have an education - he had a grammar school education, which at the time involved about as much study as getting an undergraduate degree in the classics, today.But most importantly, he was a student of human behavior. Since that's what he wrote about, his studies are most relevant to his works.But Kent Hovind has no education in paleontology, nor any other science. So his degree has nothing to do with his thoughts on evolution or creationism. On that subject he knows no more than you or I. Probably significantly less than I, actually. But how is it common sense to ignore evidence? We use evolution today to design circuits and jet planes, and it works better than human design. Common sense to me says that if evolution can design circuits in weeks, it can design all life in a billion years. Simple logic.

What does lying, deliberately misquoting, cheating on your taxes, assaulting women that rent houses from you (when you've told the judge you have no property), and trying to mislead uneducated people take? DrDino has it, whatever it is.

And save his second best for me, Messenjah.

I don't know why you are so puzzled. Hovind is a "big name" - adn an easy target. He's even got into a spat with Answers in Genesis because he wants to keep using arguments that even AiG think are dubious.The real question is why you are insisting so strongly that Hovind has a real doctorate when your best supporting evidnece is htat Hovind says so.

If you were to buy an "olympic gold medal" from the "world olympic commitee" should we place the same credence on that as the gold medal that a real athelete won at a real olympic games sanctioned by the IOC?I mean it says olympic gold medal on the thing right, never mind that you skipped the whole talent, hard training and proving yourself in competition part......I am sure it says PHD on whatever piece of paper Mr Hovind has, what doesn't go along with that is the years of learning, skull sweat, and eventual expansion of the field of study that would make the rest of us acknowledge it....In Starship troopers Heinlein makes the point that something that is not earned should not hold any value, that Hovind places so much emphasis on a worthless mockery of a doctorate says much about him, about his delusions, self import and willingness to decieve (if not others then himself), the rest of us however place no value upon a doctorate bought from an unacredited (and unacreditable) source for a sum of dollars and a token mistake ridden psuedo-thesis......As little value as one would hope you would put in that "gold medal" from a spurious olympic comitee.....

Joz - Thank you immensely for that analogy. I'll try very hard to remember who wrote it when I have to use it someday.

How can you two tell the difference, they are all so BAD. Not Carl Baugh bad but bad nonetheless.------------------
"Chance favors the prepared mind." L. Pasteur
Taz

Oh I paraphrased quite grossly but the point remains intact....I hope....As I remember the original has Col. Dubois giving the books protagonist Juan a prize for first place in a foot race, Juan angrilly tears up the prize declaring that Col. Dubois knows he placed fourth. Thus the Colonels point is made, Juan values his fourth place as he earnt it, he placed no value on the spurious first he was gifted.....It obviously has a few holes, water given to a man dying of thirst is immensely valuable to a dying man though he has not earnt it, I fancy that the value he talks about is pride in accomplishment rather than utillity, although the point could be expanded that a proud man would attempt to pay back his benefactor untill he felt he had in some fashion earnt the assistance....[This message has been edited by joz, 08-08-2003]