Dr. Dino (Hovind) exposed?

Vance · #1 27th August 2003, 11:48 AM

For those who seem to swallow the claims of this "doctor", please read the following link:

http://members.cox.net/ardipithecus/...es/lie001.html

especially the bottom, where one Creationist withdrew his claim when shown it to be in serious error, but Hovind sticks with it.

It is exactly this type of action which caused even AIG to all but disown him and call his varacity into question.

obediah001 · #2 27th August 2003, 11:59 AM

Yes Creationist on occassion misquote a source, but a rare typo or such hardly proves creation to be false & Evolution true. As for outright lies & deciet the history of Evolutions proponents are legion. All said & done Evolution is a silly & unscientific theory which defies scientific inquiry.

Jet Black · #3 27th August 2003, 12:02 PM

I think we need a dedicated rebuttal site for "Dr" Dino.... anyone want to join me?

Karl - Liberal Backslider · #4 27th August 2003, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by obediah001

Yes Creationist on occassion misquote a source, but a rare typo or such hardly proves creation to be false & Evolution true.

No. It proves Hovind's attitude to truth is not what it might be though.

As for outright lies & deciet the history of Evolutions proponents are legion.

Really? Some examples would be nice.

All said & done Evolution is a silly & unscientific theory which defies scientific inquiry.

Nonsense. It makes lots of predictions that we can test. I could give you some examples if I thought you'd actually follow them up.

Karl - Liberal Backslider · #5 27th August 2003, 12:07 PM

Originally Posted by Jet Black

I think we need a dedicated rebuttal site for "Dr" Dino.... anyone want to join me?

I think Dave Matson's already done it - http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood.html

But a revamp wouldn't be a bad idea - to address some of the other non-evidences Hovind raises.

Jet Black · #6 27th August 2003, 12:08 PM

wrong forum... sorry. I wasn't paying attention there. I just saw hovind mentioned and looked at it. sorry to any mods and stuff.

obediah001 · #7 27th August 2003, 12:12 PM

As for examples of Evolutionary frauds well all the supposed misssing links which have been claimed i nthe past have been proven documented frauds or wildly fanciful. e.g. Nebraska Man turned out to be created soley from hogs teeth; in recent months a # of claimed discoveries were shown to be frauds, the one from China, forget title; or the life from mars rock ultimately a complete hoax. There are books written full of the frauds,....... how about hekel's fraud, which by the way is still used in school texts despiteits proven fraud status. comeon now you can find all these facts, LOOK!

notto · #8 27th August 2003, 12:23 PM

Originally Posted by obediah001

As for examples of Evolutionary frauds well all the supposed misssing links which have been claimed i nthe past have been proven documented frauds or wildly fanciful. e.g. Nebraska Man turned out to be created soley from hogs teeth; in recent months a # of claimed discoveries were shown to be frauds, the one from China, forget title; or the life from mars rock ultimately a complete hoax. There are books written full of the frauds,....... how about hekel's fraud, which by the way is still used in school texts despiteits proven fraud status. comeon now you can find all these facts, LOOK!

Can you provide reference to any textbooks that show hekels' drawings in anything other than a historical discussion?

The main difference with these claims is that mainstream science no longer uses exposed frauds or falsified claims. Creationists (and especially Hovind) continue to use various claims even after they have been shown to be incorrect beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Who do you think exposes the frauds in science related to the things you discuss above? It certainly wasn't any creationists.

Every mainstream scientists agress that the things that you mention are frauds and no longer uses them.

Why is their so much disareement between creationists on what is good evidence and what has been falsified.

AIG has thorough investigated the "man tracks" and has come to the conclusion that they are not what other creationists claim. They also have a great list of other evidence not to use.

Why do creationists like hovind continue to use them. He is shown to be wrong and continues to use bad evidence as if nobody will notice.

This is the differene between mainstream science and religious hucksters like hovind.

Karl - Liberal Backslider · #9 27th August 2003, 12:39 PM

Originally Posted by obediah001

As for examples of Evolutionary frauds well all the supposed misssing links which have been claimed i nthe past have been proven documented frauds or wildly fanciful. e.g. Nebraska Man turned out to be created soley from hogs teeth; in recent months a # of claimed discoveries were shown to be frauds, the one from China, forget title; or the life from mars rock ultimately a complete hoax. There are books written full of the frauds,....... how about hekel's fraud, which by the way is still used in school texts despiteits proven fraud status. comeon now you can find all these facts, LOOK!

I'm familiar with the claims, but shall we examine them?

Nebraska man. Not a fraud, but an honest mistake. And who discovered it was a mistake? The same evil lying evolutionists who discovered the tooth.

"The one from China" - you mean Archaeoraptor? Yes, a hoax. By a chinese farmer to make money, not by evil lying evolutionists. It was the evil lying evolutionists who actually showed the fossil was a hoax, or more accurately, a composite of two very real and very interesting bird/reptile transitionals.

"Life from Mars rock" - again, not a hoax. Turns out what some scientists thought might turn out to be primitive organisms weren't. How is this a hoax?

Haeckel - yes, he did forge his diagrams. Could you give me the title of a modern text book that uses his drawings as evidence for evolution? Hardly likely, since Haeckel's hypothesis, that embryos recapitulate the adult forms of their evolutionary history, is not one held by modern evolutionary biologists.

Do you have any more half remembered stories of hoaxes?

obediah001 · #10 27th August 2003, 12:40 PM

As for the specific textbooks I have seen them myself & as said all but a couple to date have been proven frauds, others to follow. I do not have the time to dig out the specific texts. Why would we need a historical discusion of a fraud in a elementary school? Though you claim mainstrean sience nolonger uses proven frauds, you could not deny they have benefitted form them by molding public perception. By poiting then out Hovind is making a case for tghe pattern of deception of the Evolution supporters. Sorry I saw a debate this year at Rutgers where the proffesor did use proven frauds as evidence. Hovind has other videos where other proffesors do likewise! GET THEM & SEE FOR SELF; then stop making this claim! AIG is one ministry I do not trust; as for the man tracks they were dug out by a dozer while the scientists watched & they still denied what they saw. go figure! AIG is an enigma in Christian circles for me. Hovind has an excelent wittness you are proff of that as you chaff at his wittness & call him names as well as attack his character. He clearly is doing a mighty work!