An honest question...

[seebs]

Originally posted by God Fixation
Well, seebs, I looked at your link. I read about the first third of it. (for time's sake) And it resembled somewhat of a PG rated smear campaign. I mean it didn't give any way of contacting those people who alegedly 'saw/read/handled' the actual dissertation itself.
I mean I could say I know someone who met aliens and conversed with them but I won't even give you his name. Now how credible does that make me look?

More credible than the guy who says that his dissertation/thesis cannot be obtained except in the current "edited" form. The "smear campaign" is pointing out serious and fundamental problems that would make it *impossible* for this man to be taken seriously by an academic.

I was a faculty brat, and if someone had told me that a "Ph.D." had been "updating" his thesis, and that the original thesis wasn't available... I'd laugh.

 

[God Fixation]

Perhaps the topic intrests him and he has been adding to it as he goes along. I paint and a painting is never finished untill you are satisfied, whether you have sold it or not.

 

[mac_philo]

Originally posted by God Fixation
Well, all of Hovinds findings have ways in which you can contact the person who experienced it or what not. I just found it odd that they couldn't provide that yet they were willing to put all of that other stuff in.

Uh, that's because he wants you to contact him so he can sell you VHS tapes and other creationist memorabilia.

 

[mac_philo]

Originally posted by God Fixation
Perhaps the topic intrests him and he has been adding to it as he goes along. I paint and a painting is never finished untill you are satisfied, whether you have sold it or not.

Please don't think I'm being rude or combative, but it is precisely this type of thinking that causes creationism to be intellectually bankrupt.

Scholarship works because it has standards. Just because hovind's conclusions agree with your conclusions does not mean all of his duplicitous behavior is good, christian, and sin-free. He is breaking the rules of scholarship, you are absolving him of guilt.

This is why we despise him, and this is why creationism will never be taught in federally funded schools. It is standardless.

Most PHDs go on to refine the work done in their dissertation, but they do it in other publications, because it is dishonest and disreputable to change your thesis. Your thesis is what gets you your doctorate--just as you don't lose your doctorate, you don't change your thesis.

 

[God Fixation]

I agree with you on that point, if it is true. There is no excuse for purposfully misleading someone. But need I remind you that he is human. Though I do not condone such things as lying (like I said, if it is true)I still do not find his research as horridly taboo as you do.

 

[mac_philo]

I don't think it's taboo at all, I merely think it is irrelevant. It is how he makes his living--touring the country, telling people what they want to hear, holding neo-revivals.

It's a business, he's a propagandist speaker. It's fine--he can do what he likes. But the idea that his 'research' is scientifically relevant is just too much.

 

[RufusAtticus]

Hovind's "degree" is in Christian Education. However, he doesn’t publicize this. He uses the title of “Dr.” to mislead people into thinking he is an authority on science, specifically evolution. This is not the case. He has no experience or education in science. Wouldn’t you expect someone calling himself, “Dr. Dino,” to have gotten a doctorate dealing with dinosaurs?

If you want to see a real scientist who’s also a devout Christian, check out Robert Bakker.

Small article on Robert Bakker

 

[iLoveLife]

Whos Havind? And what did he do? What about $250K?

 

[God Fixation]

He is a Christian who travels the country (and world[I think]) debating evoloutionists and doing rallies. His website is www.drdino.com And you can find out about the 250k offer there.

 

[elephanticity]

A Christian evolutionary biologist's take
on Hovind - http://www.geocities.com/odonate/hovind.htm

The C-Files: Kent "Dr. Dino" Hovind (This one has a funny story about Hovind falling for an April Fool's prank and using the prank as "evidence" against evolution.) - http://www.nmsr.org/HOVIND.HTM

Analysis of Kent Hovind: The Hovind $250,000 Challenge - http://www.geocities.com/kenthovind/challenge.html

The Dissertation Kent Hovind Doesn't Want You to Read - http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/bartelt_dissertation_on_hovind_thesis.htm

 

[elephanticity]

Originally posted by God Fixation
Perhaps the topic intrests him and he has been adding to it as he goes along. I paint and a painting is never finished untill you are satisfied, whether you have sold it or not.

But, are you allowed to add to the answers of a test you've handed in and been graded on?

It is expected that your thesis at least points you in a direction for some of your future work...but you cannot go back and change or add to it.

 

[God Fixation]

What you are saying makes sense but You missed my point.

 

[elephanticity]

Originally posted by God Fixation
What you are saying makes sense but You missed my point.

I don't think so. Academics are held to a different standard with regard to the arguments they present than just you or i discussing personal beliefs. You can dismiss mistakes in a conversation, but when Hovind has had mistakes in doctrine or science pointed out, he ignores the criticism and continues to state the same refuted, disproven c**p time after time. He is aware of the sites that criticize him or his science, and continues to put out the same low-quality, high-profile, well-recieved by creationists stuff.
Answers in Genesis at least updates their site for stuff that has been refuted enough that they no longer present it.

Most PhD's do not remember how many pages were in their thesis, "Dr." Dino makes a point of stating his "...author of a 255-page thesis on..."

How about this. If a surgeon got a job at a hospital, and theyfound out that the school he got his medical degree at was a house, with an injunction against issuing further medical degrees due to legal problems incurred by their graduates, he wouldn't be allowed to operate.
If an engineer found a cost-cutting measure to make a building out of marshmallows, and tried to get it funded, without ever researching actual feasibility, he should never be hired.

If Hovind wants to have a website that says, "I don't believe in evolution, because..." that's fine. But he presents himself as an expert, and a lot of people are giving him money, and listening to his talks, as if he were even as much of a scientist as Gish. He isn't, and people are being mislead and lied to. And paying for the privledge.

It would be as if _I_ were to open a church and offer christians a path to salvation that cost a bit, but didn't require them to make any sort of change or sacrifice to their lives. It's unethical, it'd be a lie, and wouldn't work for anyone's benefit....except my accountants'...

 

[God Fixation]

No, we have already been through this. If that is infact what happened, I do not agree with him in that decision. Like I said above. But I do not find it my place to judge his actions. I simply made a statement above that said, "perhaps the subject intrested him and added to it as he went along." Now if he is doing this for the purpose you stated, yes it is wrong, but just as I am considering your point of veiw I expect the same curtesy in return. When I creat a painting, there may be things that need extra emphasis, maybe even corrected, so I will fix/add-to/take away at later dates. But that doesn't mean I am a poor painter. It means I am striving for higher quality. But yes I will say it again, IF he is doing it to cover his tracks, than poo on him but I am not the one that will make that decision. I am accountable for what I do and say.

 

[elephanticity]

I see your side, but it doesn't parallel the situation.

If he is adding to the thesis AT ALL he is being unethical. No matter his interest, he could use the thesis as the basis for a book and add all the new information he wants, but he cannot ethically call it his thesis anymore.

It is not the same as a painting or a novel, or any other work of creative art. Editing, touching up, correcting and spellchecking are encouraged, in fact demanded...right up until you hand it in and defend it. That is supposed to reflect the state of your knowledge and the rationale of your argument at that time. It doesn't get 'fixed' or 'added to' after handing in.

When he calls his thesis his 'most current version' he removes all standards of academics from it. It is accountable, as it is held to the same standards as any other 'PhD' out there. If you don't want to judge him, fine. But if you want to find creationist literature to use in your personal search for the truth, or in arguments with evolutionists, avoid him. From the word 'Go' he does not meet even the bare minimum standards for 'expert.' The only standard he meets is that his conclusions match what creationists are looking for, and they are swallowing great clouds of bullsmoke, without realizing the emptiness of the source.

One of my art instructors crushed a coke can a bit, put it under a strong light, and told us to sketch it. At the end of the session, what we handed it was for our final grade. He took a polaroid of the can from each student's point of view, and compared view to product.

Now, say i took that sketch, and took more art classes, and practiced for a few years and went back and improved that sketch. Then hung it up in my living room, next to the polaroid, and said, "THAT is how well i was drawing in high school. Can you believe i only got a 'C' on it."

I can improve, fine, on the intellectual property. I just need to label it properly.

And, he has been told about how the rest of academia views this practice. He hasn't changed.

 

[seebs]

Originally posted by elephanticity

Now, say i took that sketch, and took more art classes, and practiced for a few years and went back and improved that sketch. Then hung it up in my living room, next to the polaroid, and said, "THAT is how well i was drawing in high school. Can you believe i only got a 'C' on it."

I can improve, fine, on the intellectual property. I just need to label it properly.

This is an excellent summary of the ethical and moral issues involved.

 

[God Fixation]

Originally posted by elephanticity
I see your side, but it doesn't parallel the situation.

If he is adding to the thesis AT ALL he is being unethical. No matter his interest, he could use the thesis as the basis for a book and add all the new information he wants, but he cannot ethically call it his thesis anymore.

That was exactly what I meant. Sorry if it was worded wrong or what not. That's what you get when you discuss such things with a 17y/o.

 

[elephanticity]

Originally posted by God Fixation

That was exactly what I meant. Sorry if it was worded wrong or what not. That's what you get when you discuss such things with a 17y/o.

That's okay, i have agreements with people all the time. Sometimes at the top of our voices.

Anyway, NOW do you see what we have against hovind?

He doesn't adhere to academic standards, which puts his 'research' into dubious areas from the start. Beyond that, his statements are exagerrated, his sources suspect, and his references illegal. He may mean well, i haven't made up my mind on that, but he is competing in science with sound bites and tabloid stories. If you know enough of the subject, he can be entertaining, but please don't try to get info from him.

 

[God Fixation]

LOL, ok, that was ineresting... anywho, thanks for your patience and insight.

 

[elephanticity]

Originally posted by God Fixation
LOL, ok, that was ineresting... anywho, thanks for your patience and insight.

Glad to be of service. Hey, if you have any more questions, feel free. Or even just email direct.

Have a nice day, tell them to put it on my account.