Why Do Atheists Hate Kent Hovind?

[trivista]

In the latest entry on my blog I ask why is Kent Hovind such a hate figure?


click below
http://dawkinswatch.wordpress.com/2...eist-manifest-demons-when-they-hear-his-name/

Because he is a lying, cheating, deceiving jerk?

 

[corvus_corax]

Utter rubbish! Kent Hovind presents pretty much the same arguments in all of the debates that I have watched.

Quite right
He spouts the same lies each and every time

There is no excuse for not being aware of his arguments.

Ah, but when he delves into "purpose", "reason for existence" and ad hom attacks, that's another thing altogether.

Any "professor" debating him, unable to present a counter argument there and then has no excuse.

It's been generally concluded by many that an open public verbal debate is nearly always owned by the Creationists.
However, in a court of law (you know, where actual EVIDENCED is demanded), Creationism gets killed EVERY SINGLE TIME

Kent Hovind PWN's them every time.

Duh, In a public speaking forum, FACTS are (apparently) not important, due to the fact that Hovind was directly playing to an audience already aligned with him

I, for one, don't want him to do written debates.

Of course you dont
You lose every single time in such a debate, and Hovind KNOWS he would as well
Duh.

I prefer to watch the evos squirm as he reels off point after point after point and all they can do in response is question The Biblical account of creation as if an argument against Genesis is an argument for evolution..... Pathetic.

Yep, you've reduced yourself to self confirming bias by watching videos that do nothing but fulfill your confirmation bias.
Have fun with that.
On a related note, why is it, FoeHammer, that NO Creationist can provide one whit of actual objective empirical evidence for Creationism?
Pathetic.
I can answer that just as perfectly as AV1611VET answered it-
There is no such evidence.

Period.

If you think there is, then why dont YOU sack up and take AV1611VET's "Apple Challenge"?

Never mind, I'll answer that for you-
You can't
Ever
At least not while maintaining any self-deluded integrity regarding your belief.

Have fun with that

 

[Tenka]

I for one like Hovind. He fills a very important niche: separating fools from their money.
I only regret that so many truly goodhearted and charitable atheists spend so much of their valuable time to look out for the interests of their more credulous brothers by exposing the dishonesty of Hovind.

The EAC still loves you Hovind, we will see you free again soon, brother.

 

[Atheuz]

I think Dawkins said something about not debating Creationists, as they're a complete waste of time.

 

[BeamMeUpScotty]

I for one like Hovind. He fills a very important niche: separating fools from their money.
I only regret that so many truly goodhearted and charitable atheists spend so much of their valuable time to look out for the interests of their more credulous brothers by exposing the dishonesty of Hovind.

The EAC still loves you Hovind, we will see you free again soon, brother.

The trouble is many of these hucksters (e.g., Hovind, Hinn, Robertson, etc...) get many of their donations from people on fixed incomes who can't afford it. I wish these people, if they want to donate their money, go to their local church and donate it where there might be a modicum of accountability and they can have some say in how it's spent.

P.S. I wonder if Hovind has had any new insights into homosexuality since his conviction.

 

[Morcova]

Utter rubbish! Kent Hovind presents pretty much the same arguments in all of the debates that I have watched. There is no excuse for not being aware of his arguments. Any "professor" debating him, unable to present a counter argument there and then has no excuse. Kent Hovind PWN's them every time.

And yet even other creationist say the Hovind's arguments are stupid.

I, for one, don't want him to do written debates. I prefer to watch the evos squirm as he reels off point after point after point and all they can do in response is question The Biblical account of creation as if an argument against Genesis is an argument for evolution..... Pathetic.

FoeHammer.

I imagine you wouldn't want him to do a written debate.. what's the fun when you would only be able to comprehend one side of the argument?

 

[TheOutsider]

As I said before, I don't hate the guy. I don't have the time or energy to care about him that much. However, I seriously dislike his debating/preaching tactics (not to mention his bookkeeping skills). He uses nothing but strawmen, arguments from incredulity, appeals to emotion and just plain old lies. The worst thing though is the fact that he has done more than just about anyone else in the last 20 years to damage the already tense relationship between science and religion. His followers are getting an extremely distorted view of science and his detractors are given ample ammunition to debate against all forms of religion. Hopefully they threw away the key after locking him up.

 

[speakout]

I think Dawkins said something about not debating Creationists, as they're a complete waste of time.

You see the problem with Dawkins? He is supposed to be a teacher and he should be interested in presendting arguments but he is more interested in drawing attention to himself.

 

[necroforest]

You see the problem with Dawkins? He is supposed to be a teacher and he should be interested in presendting arguments but he is more interested in drawing attention to himself.

He presents his arguments extremely well. Pick up "The Selfish Gene" or "The Blind Watchmaker" sometime.

 

[atomweaver]

You see the problem with Dawkins? He is supposed to be a teacher and he should be interested in presendting arguments but he is more interested in drawing attention to himself.

He actually does both. Dawkins just sees that the arguments are simply ignored by some for the last 160-odd years... The sound-bite 'snark' is for those sorts, because that is all they respond to.
As necroforest points out, the books with the well thought out arguments are also there, for those who are interested. So, its disingenuous to pretend like they don't exist, simply because he offers up the occasional sound bite.

 

[notto]

You see the problem with Dawkins? He is supposed to be a teacher and he should be interested in presendting arguments but he is more interested in drawing attention to himself.

You do know that Dawkins does plenty of debating, right?

You seem to be presenting an awful lot of false witness towards the man based on some strawman characterization you've made up for yourself about his motivations.

Some would say that it seems you even hate him based on you visceral reaction every time his name is mentioned or how you mention him every chance you get.

Why does speakout hate Dawkins?

 

[notto]

I think Dawkins said something about not debating Creationists, as they're a complete waste of time.

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/amun_ra/

[FONT=Verdana, Arial]
Creationists don't need to win debates with evolutionists. It is sufficient for them that the debate happens at all. They need the publicity. We don't. [/FONT]

 

[Phred]

You see the problem with Dawkins? He is supposed to be a teacher and he should be interested in presendting arguments but he is more interested in drawing attention to himself.

Didn't Jesus himself say something about not bothering to cast pearls before swine?

Oh.... now you get the idea. But you never imagined it could be applied to this context.

 

[Tenka]

The trouble is many of these hucksters (e.g., Hovind, Hinn, Robertson, etc...) get many of their donations from people on fixed incomes who can't afford it. I wish these people, if they want to donate their money, go to their local church and donate it where there might be a modicum of accountability and they can have some say in how it's spent.

P.S. I wonder if Hovind has had any new insights into homosexuality since his conviction.

I swear, if I had enough sympathy in me that I could spare some for people who would rather be convinced The Flintstones was a documentary than pay rent ..I would be Saint Tenka.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

 

[RealityCheck]

It also clogs your pores and makes urination painful.

 

[Bombila]

Tossing the word 'hate' around in relation to attitudes better described as dislike, exasperation, contempt or amusement is a bit much.

I certainly don't 'hate' the man - I can't offhand think of a single individual that I hate at this point in my life. I do think Hovind's a pretentious dishonest idiot.

 

[RealityCheck]

Tossing the word 'hate' around in relation to attitudes better described as dislike, exasperation, contempt or amusement is a bit much.

I certainly don't 'hate' the man - I can't offhand think of a single individual that I hate at this point in my life. I do think Hovind's a pretentious dishonest idiot.

Hard to hate someone so incredibly inept, incompetent, and comically ignorant.

Pity him, maybe...