Kent Hovind is a busy, busy man


Wow. Kent has a full schedule this month, with lots of debates to brag about. He’ll “win” them all, too!

I am a bit dismayed. I’ve never heard of any of his opponents, they’re all “debating” exactly the same topic — which tells me that Hovind set it — and also, they’re all hosted on the same “impartial” YouTube channel, Standing for Truth Ministries. You’ve been suckered, gang. You’re getting gamed. These are all a sham. Why do people keep falling for this nonsense?

I can guess why. Hovind is stupid, shallow, and repetitive; you listen to him talk and you think, “that’s all wrong, I know enough to counter that argument,” and you confidently challenge him to a debate. But then you let him set the agenda, since he’ll refuse to talk to you if he doesn’t, and he decides the venue, because, again, he’ll refuse if you don’t let him. Then when you do engage him, he just says the same dumbass crap every time. Evolution is the dumbest religion in the world. Do you believe you came from an amoeba? Cats have never given birth to dogs. Yadda yadda yadda.

You might precisely and eloquently deliver the facts that demonstrate he’s wrong on every point. You think you’ll get him this time, because you listen to a few of his “debates” and discover that they never change, he always says exactly the same stupid things, so you will be prepared. It doesn’t matter, because Hovind will consider it a victory if he obtusely refuses to accept anything you say. He’s got the mind of a two-year-old who has learned the word “NO”. He’ll sail through your debate, rejecting all evidence and reason, and emerge at the end not having learned anything, and then he’ll sign up another sucker who will let him execute the same performance.

Stop doing this. Show a little spine. If you really want to debate him (I can’t understand why, it’s not going to look good on your CV), then demand a debate on a much narrower topic, and get a moderator who is not a fawning lickspittle creationist like SFT, one who will actually shut you down if you veer off topic. This is the way. It is the only way.

You’ll at least get the satisfaction of seeing Kent Hovind yip-yip-yip as a runs away from your conditions.

Comments

  1. gijoel says

    If I were to debate him, I think I’d spend it needling him about his wives, his tax fraud conviction and the fact that not even his own bible bashing son can stand him.

  2. birgerjohansson says

    Fight fire with fire. Tell what is left of the Westboro Baptist Church Kent Hovind has adopted a heretic form of Christianity (use some photo-shopped stuff as “evidence”, they will never check).

  3. Snarki, child of Loki says

    “get a moderator who is not a fawning lickspittle creationist like SFT, one who will actually shut you down apply high-voltage electric shocks if you veer off topic.”

  4. bcw bcw says

    googling:
    A Conversation with Tom Jump – Analogical Thoughts
    https://www.proginosko.com › 2020/01 › a-conversation-…
    Tom Jump is an atheist who posts conversations with philosophers and theologians on his YouTube channel. I accepted his invitation to …

    So he’s like one of the “liberals” who act as stalking horses for FOX news.

  5. PaulBC says

    You might precisely and eloquently deliver the facts that demonstrate he’s wrong on every point.

    Aside from being a waste of time, it’s strictly impossible. Cats don’t give birth to dogs, and the unicellular ancestors of humans weren’t (as far as I know) anything like amoebas. Can you “win” a debate by showing that his statements are irrelevant? Probably not. You could stand there and say “Uh, so what?” but you’d just be giving him a platform.

  6. says

    So this Tom Jump is a philosopher/theologian sort of fellow? So why would he choose to argue on whether evolution is a reasonable scientific theory?

  7. tuatara says

    That screenshot of Hovind nicely captures his essence, and that of the other creationists;
    Closed of eye.
    Debating xians is pointless because they have the ultimate exclusion clause.

  8. says

    If real scientists/philosophers/theologians refused to debate him he would just find some actors to take their place. Truth and honesty are not his strong points.

  9. bcw bcw says

    @7 because Tom Jump seems to be about publishing youtube content that gets clicks.

  10. Akira MacKenzie says

    Did Kent have a stoke at some point? His mouth never seems to work right.

  11. nobaddays says

    I’m so tired of watching perfectly smart people like Professor Dave and Aron Ra, et al, get thrown off track my this con man. I understand it’s hard for smart people to talk to an idiot; they get very frustrated and then start name calling and raising their voices, and trying to reason with the idiot, as though it will be a personal failing on their part if they can’t make something stick in the idiot’s head. Can I make some suggestions? 1/ If you’re on Modern Day Debate, make that useless moderator earn his money, like Hovind does. Do you think Hovind would get away with this crap on Non Sequitur? No. 2/ Smart People: Do not get side-tracked by the con man. Hovind is a pro at this. I see it happen time and time again and then I can’t watch anymore. I just give up. 3/ Dave, Aron, TJump: Please, do me a solid and take this guy down by remaining calm and reducing your expectations to almost nil, as though you were trying to train a turtle, or a turtle kind. Just make him answer one effing question and take a bow.

  12. says

    Ugh, Modern Day Debate: a channel run by a creationist to facilitate leveraging creationists into debates with people ten times smarter than they are. I hate that channel.

Leave a Reply