Kent Hovind, Kent Hovind's dissertation

Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In Forums

Quote# 68737

David Kitts, in "Paleontology and Evolutionary Thought" magazine, said, "Evolution, at least in the sense that Darwin speaks of it, cannot be detected within the life time of a single observer." It cannot be detected. It is not part of science. It is just a religion.

Kent Hovind, Kent Hovind's dissertation 47 Comments [12/18/2009 1:34:17 PM]
Fundie Index: 53
Submitted By: Tom S. Fox

WTF?! || meh

Username:
Comment:

Check here

1 2

#1074785

rfraudreignz

Isn't there a bar of soap on the floor for you to pick up?

12/18/2009 1:42:03 PM

#1074794

Swede

Dumbass! Evolution is the change over generations. Of course it can't be observed in just one lifetime.

You have a VERY young country, barely 300 years old. When you can trace observable facts in your country, back at least as long as 900 years, then we'll get back to you.

12/18/2009 1:48:45 PM

#1074795

Caustic Gnostic

Ask any microbiologist how many generations of bacteria live and die in your colon during a single month.

12/18/2009 1:49:11 PM

#1074834

12/18/2009 2:02:47 PM

#1074837

COLGATE

Supposed "Dr" Hovind apparently has never heard of viral mutation such as, I don't know, maybe H1N1???
Idiot!

12/18/2009 2:03:58 PM

#1074882

Osiris

That's some good quote mining there.

12/18/2009 2:28:34 PM

#1074883

Smilodon

No, you're wrong.

12/18/2009 2:29:15 PM

#1074907

aaa

Big bubba is not impressed by your BS.

12/18/2009 2:39:41 PM

#1074938

Anevilmeme

Kent's dissertation, the gift that keeps on giving. Even Answers in Genesis thinks he's crazy.

12/18/2009 3:16:11 PM

#1074968

Brain_In_A_Jar

Evolution can easily be directly observed within one's own lifetime in species with a much shorter time between successive generations. It can still be observed, in a more limited way across one or two generations, within our own species, as the average time between subsequent human generations is, thanks to modern medicine, much less than the average human lifespan.

In any case, thanks to the invention of spoken language, writing and other recording media (which you'd really think that, by now, first-world inhabitants like Hovind might have noticed exist), not to mention things like radioisotope dating, one is no longer constrained to base ones deductions about the universe one finds oneself in entirely on events directly observed within one's own lifespan, although the possibility of fraud in the others one must rely on to produce those records means this can be somewhat less accurate and, very strictly speaking (i.e. to the point of total impracticality) this does actually violate the personal reproducibility requirement of the scientific method (though a coordinated group of people working across the generations could, at least, reproduce the work of earlier groups and still drastically reduce the likelihood of fraud or error, if not entirely eliminate it the way an individual reproducing everything for himself might, from his point of view).

12/18/2009 3:44:01 PM

#1074995

David B.

What's the next line say, Kent? Betcha don't even know.

12/18/2009 4:08:54 PM

#1075039

PWEOTWEB

Apparently you missed the "within the life time of a single observer" part. That means that if it can be detected, then it'll take several generations, so there will be multiple observers. Who says that scientific studies have to be observed by one single observer?

In short, like #1074785 said, go pick up the fucking soap, you lying bitch.

12/18/2009 4:52:08 PM

#1075041

Beam Me Up Scotty

I think this quote from MR Hovind's "dissertation" pretty much sums him up as well as his supporters:

"I can't explain it, because I don't understand it."

I believe this came from page 87, as there is a handwritten "88" on the next page.

I teach EFL in Japan, and my students can pretty quickly grasp you don't write academic papers in the 1st/2nd person, use contractions, contain basic errors like the "6 colors of the rainbow", etc... I really don't see how anyone could actually read the entire thing, it is that poorly written.

12/18/2009 4:53:20 PM

#1075048

TheDoc

Comedy gold.

12/18/2009 4:58:25 PM

#1075065

Dr. Razark

WTF?!?

If you are going to quote mine, don't give the full quote. Try something like "Evolution... cannot be detected...."

For example: "It can... be detected. It is... part of science. It is just...."

Kent Hovind quote confirming evolution!

Next time, just buy a $20 doctorate somewhere. I didn't even have to write a crappy dissertation.

12/18/2009 5:08:45 PM

#1075091

rw23

@swede: "You have a VERY young country, barely 300 years old. When you can trace observable facts in your country, back at least as long as 900 years, then we'll get back to you."

I'll see your 900 and raise you another 182. Oops, it was your ancestors who helped consolidate ours. In that case, thank you (if only for providing a timely bit of population pressure a few years earlier).

12/18/2009 5:33:07 PM

#1075092

WMDKitty

Oy....

12/18/2009 5:34:30 PM

#1075093

Bryan65

Kent, your husband Skull's telling you to get off the computer and give him some head.

12/18/2009 5:35:16 PM

#1075132

Malkyrian

*glances at Richard Lenski*

Uh-huh...

12/18/2009 6:06:11 PM

#1075140

Old Viking

That's what Kitts says, eh? Well I'm sure his comment has been given a lot of serious consideration.

12/18/2009 6:14:05 PM

#1075143

GodotIsWaiting4U

Wow! You're THIS BAD AT QUOTE MINING! You can't even CORRECTLY cut off the parts you don't like!

12/18/2009 6:15:27 PM

#1075167

Antichrist

But one generation takes notes and passes it on to the next generation. Why is this so fucking hard for someone who believes in a 2,000 year old text to understand.

And yeah, Darwins evolution is only a building block of the way we understand evolution today.

12/18/2009 6:32:01 PM

#1075183

Canadiest

Who is David Kitts when he's not pretending to know how it works. We can witness human changes as we'll only witness 2 to 3 in our lifetime.

Insects however will go through thousands of generations a decade (under the right (laboratory, (artificial enviroment) conditions)

But then why would Kent know about science?

12/18/2009 6:49:41 PM

#1075205

Turtle

But we have more than one observer. Anything else you'd like to be countered?

12/18/2009 7:14:41 PM

#1075207

Zimmer

Hold on...are you saying then that religion (and by association god) 'cannot be detected' and are 'not a part of science'?

Oh shi-

*ducks and covers from exploding irony meter*

12/18/2009 7:16:25 PM

1 2