Do you think Ken Ham might be as much of a fraud as Kent Hovind?

Question

only two answers and I still can't decide.

Answer 1

Yes. He's just better at it and smart enough not to do anyhting illegal.

Just like Hovind, he does no actual research or experimentation. He grossly distorts scientific findings in favor of his religious beliefs, misquotes reputables scientists out of context, and has been known to simply make up "evidence" from nothing.

Answer 2

Fraud, no, that would imply dishonesty. Creationists actually believe in what they're doing. Ham is just has a bit more common sense and intelligence not to speak some of the lamer arguments for creationism. He warns against asking why there are still monkeys around. He seems to have a better understanding of what he's arguing against. Dr Dino, on the other hand, is clueless as to how ridiculous he looks.