(November 21, 2014 at 12:30 pm)Crossless1 Wrote:

(November 21, 2014 at 12:18 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: Well, since Origin of Species, there was a movement within the scientific community A movement which consists of people that believe in voodoo science. I'd call that a movement.

---

Yeah, Kent Hovind.

You're either a Poe or an unbelievable jackass -- the 'kind' not the species (I know them when I see them).

He is a 'kind' of moron and a 'kind' of jackass.
lets start calling people 'kinds' like HM is a 'kind' of delusional person.
He is a 'kind' of person who believes in creationism.

(November 21, 2014 at 12:42 pm)dyresand Wrote: He is a 'kind' of moron and a 'kind' of jackass.

Ah, a sterile hybrid perhaps? Impotent, for sure.

(November 21, 2014 at 12:18 pm)His_Majesty Wrote:

(November 21, 2014 at 5:07 am)rexbeccarox Wrote: I don't know if the following belongs here or in the Ground Gears thread, but I'll put it here.

I don't understand this term "evolutionist". In order to be an "evolutionist" there would have to be a movement or group or something that would be "evolutionism". That's like saying someone who accepts the theory of gravity as a "gravitist" who believes in "gravitism". It's ridiculous.

Well, since Origin of Species, there was a movement within the scientific community A movement which consists of people that believe in voodoo science. I'd call that a movement.

---

(November 20, 2014 at 9:50 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Kent Hovind?

I really do apologise, I don't normally do mockery as a rule, but...

Seriously?

Kent Hovind??

Yeah, Kent Hovind.

---

(November 20, 2014 at 7:49 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: Say, where is the illustrious Mr. Hovind these days?

Oh, yeah - in prison, for tax fraud.

Speaks volumes to his character.

Fallacy of Ad Hominem..and borderline Genetic Fallacy.

Keep the fallaciousness alive, people.

It is not ad hominem you have no argument, have had no argument since the beginning, but your lips keep flapping.

(November 21, 2014 at 12:45 pm)Crossless1 Wrote:

(November 21, 2014 at 12:42 pm)dyresand Wrote: He is a 'kind' of moron and a 'kind' of jackass.

Ah, a sterile hybrid perhaps? Impotent, for sure.

i'm pretty sure. He is a 'kind' of sterile hybrid.
most creationists are 'kind' of dumb.

(November 21, 2014 at 12:51 pm)dyresand Wrote:

(November 21, 2014 at 12:45 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: Ah, a sterile hybrid perhaps? Impotent, for sure.

i'm pretty sure. He is a 'kind' of sterile hybrid.
most creationists are 'kind' of dumb.

Yes, but most creationists aren't this proudly, tenaciously, and aggressively dumb. I really want to believe he's a Poe. The thought of Hovind having hoodwinked another is too fucking sad and infuriating.

(November 21, 2014 at 12:55 pm)Crossless1 Wrote:

(November 21, 2014 at 12:51 pm)dyresand Wrote: i'm pretty sure. He is a 'kind' of sterile hybrid.
most creationists are 'kind' of dumb.

Yes, but most creationists aren't this proudly, tenaciously, and aggressively dumb. I really want to believe he's a Poe. The thought of Hovind having hoodwinked another is too fucking sad and infuriating.

fucking kent hovind needs to rot in jail for all that he has done.
he is like peter popoff and tv evangelists. Send me money and ill make sure god answers your prayers just a small donation will do. People think they can get away with stuff here like in Europe its a big no you will laughed at and there penalties.

(November 21, 2014 at 12:55 pm)Crossless1 Wrote:

(November 21, 2014 at 12:51 pm)dyresand Wrote: i'm pretty sure. He is a 'kind' of sterile hybrid.
most creationists are 'kind' of dumb.

Yes, but most creationists aren't this proudly, tenaciously, and aggressively dumb. I really want to believe he's a Poe. The thought of Hovind having hoodwinked another is too fucking sad and infuriating.

You haven't spoken to many creationists, have you?

They may show different superficial temperaments, and not come across as quite so aggressive, but underneath they are usually every bit as proudly and tenaciously dumb.

(November 21, 2014 at 12:18 pm)His_Majesty Wrote:

(November 20, 2014 at 7:49 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: Say, where is the illustrious Mr. Hovind these days?

Oh, yeah - in prison, for tax fraud.

Speaks volumes to his character.

Fallacy of Ad Hominem..and borderline Genetic Fallacy.

Keep the fallaciousness alive, people.

I'm sorry, did you detect an argument in what I wrote? Absent an argument, it would be difficult for it to be fallacious. Do fuck off, you pompous windbag.

What I was engaging in was character assassination, or more correctly: character assisted suicide - since Mr. Hovind is really doing most of the work.

(November 21, 2014 at 2:15 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:

(November 21, 2014 at 12:18 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: Fallacy of Ad Hominem..and borderline Genetic Fallacy.

Keep the fallaciousness alive, people.

I'm sorry, did you detect an argument in what I wrote? Absent an argument, it would be difficult for it to be fallacious. Do fuck off, you pompous windbag.

What I was engaging in was character assassination, or more correctly: character assisted suicide - since Mr. Hovind is really doing most of the work.

Besides, you weren't saying Hovind's position was wrong because he was in prison, just that the fact that he was in prison speaks to his moral character. The reason Hovind's position is wrong is because it is a breathtakingly dishonest example of mercantile speechifying, so full of outright misrepresentations and simple idiocy that to fully rebut it would be both a tremendous undertaking due to sheer volume of incorrect claims, and a waste of time due to the unwillingness and inability of both Hovind and anyone who would actually respect him to understand any of it. Any of you guys read his dissertation? It reads like an elementary school book report, which to be honest, it kinda is, given that it was submitted to a degree mill.

The point is, H_M has terrible taste in role models, and he apparently doesn't understand fallacies either.

(November 21, 2014 at 2:24 pm)Esquilax Wrote:

(November 21, 2014 at 2:15 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: I'm sorry, did you detect an argument in what I wrote? Absent an argument, it would be difficult for it to be fallacious. Do fuck off, you pompous windbag.

What I was engaging in was character assassination, or more correctly: character assisted suicide - since Mr. Hovind is really doing most of the work.

Besides, you weren't saying Hovind's position was wrong because he was in prison, just that the fact that he was in prison speaks to his moral character. The reason Hovind's position is wrong is because it is a breathtakingly dishonest example of mercantile speechifying, so full of outright misrepresentations and simple idiocy that to fully rebut it would be both a tremendous undertaking due to sheer volume of incorrect claims, and a waste of time due to the unwillingness and inability of both Hovind and anyone who would actually respect him to understand any of it. Any of you guys read his dissertation? It reads like an elementary school book report, which to be honest, it kinda is, given that it was submitted to a degree mill.

The point is, H_M has terrible taste in role models, and he apparently doesn't understand fallacies either.

If kent hovind is or was my role model i would really have to do some deep changes with my life and the view of the world to get him out of it.