Kent Hovind: Perbedaan antara revisi

=== Tawaran $250,000 ===

 

 

 

====Responses====

Critics view this offer to be spurious because of the conditions which Hovind imposes. The '[[Evolution as fact and theory|theory of evolution]]' as defined by Hovind covers not only the process of evolution but also [[abiogenesis]], [[astrophysics]], and [[cosmology]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind.html|title=Kent Hovind's $250,000 Offer|publisher=[[Talk Origins Archive]]|first=John|last=Pieret|date=2002-07-18|accessdate=2009-06-18}}</ref> Also, unlike Hovind, scientists in the field of evolutionary biology do not distinguish between micro- and macro-evolution as distinct processes, instead contending that evolution takes place as microevolution, and that macroevolution is cumulative microevolution.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://atheism.about.com/od/evolutionexplained/a/micro_macro.htm|title=Microevolution vs Macroevolution|publisher=About.com|first=Austin|last=Cline|accessdate=2009-06-18}}</ref>

 

In 2001, biologist [[Massimo Pigliucci]] attempted to collect Hovind's prize.<ref>{{cite news | url=http://fp.bio.utk.edu/skeptic/Debates/hovind-1.html | title=A response to Kent Hovind |publisher=[[University of Tennessee]] (archived) | year=2002 | first=Massimo | last=Pigliucci| accessdate = 2009-04-04 | archiveurl= http://web.archive.org/web/20020612050111/http://fp.bio.utk.edu/skeptic/Debates/hovind-1.html | archivedate= 2002-06-12}}</ref> During a debate with Hovind, Pigliucci said Hovind did not send any details or names of scientists judging the evidence and Hovind "could have decided on his own" to dismiss the evidence.<ref>{{cite news | url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4q737-0QSfc | title=Dr. Massimo Pigliucci vs Kent Hovind – Part IV (25:00) mark |publisher=[[Infidel Guy|Live with the Infidel Guy]] | year=2001 | accessdate = 2009-04-04}}</ref> Pigliucci later issued a "counter-challenge" as "a spoof meant to uncover Hovind's challenge for the gimmick that it is" by asking for "empirical evidence, that Christianity is the only true religion and that a god with the exact characteristics of the one(s) described in the bible actually exists".<ref>{{cite news | url=http://fp.bio.utk.edu/skeptic/Debates/hovind-2.html | title=A counter-challenge to Kent Hovind |publisher=[[University of Tennessee]] (archived) | year=2002 | first=Massimo | last=Pigliucci| accessdate = 2009-04-04 | archiveurl= http://web.archive.org/web/20020422173810/http://fp.bio.utk.edu/skeptic/Debates/hovind-2.html | archivedate= 2002-04-22}}</ref>

 

Hovind has repeatedly declined written debates where his claims would be scrutinized by scientists, for example, when offered by [[Dave Thomas (physicist)|Dave Thomas]]<ref>{{cite news | url=http://www.nmsr.org/hovind.htm | title=The C-Files: Kent Hovind| publisher=New Mexicans for Science and Reason |year= 2000 | first=[[Dave Thomas (physicist)|Dave Thomas]] | accessdate =2012-10-17}}</ref> and Carl Marychurch.<ref name="HovindDebateChallenge">{{cite news | url=http://kent-hovind.com/response/greatdebate.htm | title=The Great Debate That Wasn't |publisher=www.kent-hovind.com (archived) | year=2003 | first=Kent | last=Hovind | accessdate = 2012-08-15 |archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20110519220200/http://kent-hovind.com/response/greatdebate.htm |archivedate = 2011-05-11}}</ref>

 

==Criticism==

===From creationists===

Hovind has been criticized by other creationists, including [[young Earth creationists]] and [[old Earth creationists]], who believe that many of his arguments are invalid and, consequently, undermine their causes. Disagreements over how to respond to Hovind's claims have themselves contributed to acrimony between creationist organizations. The Australian and U.S. arms of [[Answers in Genesis]] (AiG) were critical of Hovind<ref name="AiGresponse">{{cite news | url=http://creation.com/maintaining-creationist-integrity-response-to-kent-hovind | title=Maintaining Creationist Integrity: A response to Kent Hovind| publisher=[[Answers In Genesis]] |date= 11 October 2002 | first=[[Carl Wieland]], [[Ken Ham]] and [[Jonathan Sarfati]] | accessdate =2007-09-17}}</ref> after he had criticized<ref>{{cite news | url=http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=41 | title=Bad Creation Arguments? |publisher=DrDino.com (archived) |date=August 2, 2002| first=Kent | last=Hovind | accessdate = 2009-08-18 | archiveurl= http://web.archive.org/web/20021031104619/http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=41 | archivedate= 2002-10-31}}</ref> a position document from [[Creation Ministries International]], [http://creation.com/arguments-we-think-creationists-should-not-use "Arguments we think creationists should NOT use"].<ref name="dontuse">{{cite web|url=http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dont_use.asp|title=Arguments we think creationists should NOT use|publisher=Answers in Genesis|accessdate=2007-02-02}}</ref> In particular AiG criticized Hovind for "persistently us[ing] discredited or false arguments"<ref name="AIGCriticism" /> and said Hovind's claims are "self-refuting".<ref>{{cite news | url=http://www.ocweekly.com/2006-02-23/news/jesus-kills/4/ | title=Jesus Kills: The end of the world is coming, and some OC Christians cant wait | publisher=[[OC Weekly]] |date= Feb 23 2006 | first= | accessdate =2011-03-15}}</ref>

 

Creationist astronomer [[Hugh Ross (creationist)|Hugh Ross]], of ''Reasons To Believe'', debated Hovind on the [[age of the Earth]] during the [[John Ankerberg|John Ankerberg Show]], televised nationally on the [[Inspiration Network]] in September through October 2000.<ref>{{cite news | url=http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/hovind_fractured_fairy_tales.htm | title=Dr. Dino's "Fractured Fairy Tales of Science" |publisher=[[No Answers in Genesis]] | year=2000 | first=Karen | last=Bartelt | accessdate = 2008-04-06}}</ref><ref>{{cite news | url=http://www.reasons.org/videos/the-john-ankerberg-debate-young-earth-vs.-old-earth-introduction | title=The John Ankerberg Debate: Young-Earth vs. Old-Earth | publisher=[[Reasons To Believe]] |year= 2011 | accessdate =2012-09-17}}</ref> Ross said Hovind was "misrepresenting the field" of different sciences,<ref>[http://creation.com/rosshovind-debate-john-ankerberg-show-october-2000-analysis-by-jonathan-sarfati Ross–Hovind Debate, John Ankerberg Show, October 2000], [[Creation Ministries International]]</ref> and Ross told Hovind: "Astronomers view the credibility of the 'Young Earth' as being much weaker than that for a [[flat Earth]]."<ref>{{cite news | url=http://www.johnankerberg.org/Articles/_PDFArchives/science/SC3W0601.pdf | title=Are the Universe and the Earth Billions of Years Oldor Just Thousands of Years Old | publisher=[[John Ankerberg]] |year= 2000 | accessdate =2007-05-17|format=PDF}}</ref> Hovind and Ross previously debated in July 1999 on the Steve Brown Show.<ref>{{cite news | url=http://www.reasons.org/resources/multimedia/interview/ | title=Radio Interviews and Lectures | publisher= [[Reasons To Believe]] |year= 2000 | first= | last= | accessdate=2000-09-04 | archiveurl= http://web.archive.org/web/20010223165516/http://www.reasons.org/resources/multimedia/interview/ | archivedate= 2001-02-23}}</ref>