English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-06-06 13:49:37 · 4 answers · asked by Adina 2 in Science & Mathematics Zoology

4 answers

Hovind is a loudmouthed fraud. His ignorance and mendacity puts him in a class by himself. For example, I've read the synopsis of his "doctoral" dissertation, which I have linked below, His work looks like a poorly written high school term paper. As Dr. Bartelt states, it is highly suspect of Hovind that he refuses to release the actual document itself. This is just not done in the world of doctoral dissertations! Apparently, there is no original research of any significance in it. Thus, to call him "Doctor" is a joke, and an insult to anyone who has earned a legitimate research level doctoral degree of any type.

He has made a career of spouting off about subjects in which he clearly has no expertise, deluding his audience with misinformation, misinterpretation of existing information, and in many cases, out and out premeditated lies. He is a convicted felon who richly deserves to be a convicted felon. His attempt to defraud the United States government of his fair share of taxes on his non-church expenses was long term, and unbelievably, egregiously excessive. It is for this reason that he was duly and properly sentenced to 10 years in prison, and not for any religious ideas or expressions that he has espoused. It is time for this man to be consigned to the anonymity and the oblivion he so richly deserves. Surely even those who believe in his position deserve a spokesperson more honorable and honest than this man.

See below for the link to an analysis of his "doctoral" work.

2007-06-10 10:55:52 · answer #1 · answered by Nickname (exactly 32 characters) 3 · 0 0

He's just where he belongs...behind bars!

He's just an old-fashioned snake-oil salesman...

Somewhat paradoxically, Hovind considers the King James Version of the Bible to be "the inerrant word of God that must be taken literally", which is odd since it wasn't published until 1611, more than 15 centuries after much of what it talks about. Shouldn't a "fundamentalist" trust the earliest scriptures available?

2007-06-06 21:02:21 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

No one will come up with a better answer than tentofield. Good work!

2007-06-06 21:00:21 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

You mean the charlatan, criminal, tax cheating, lying god-botherer with the fake qualifications? Or is there another one?

2007-06-06 20:54:29 · answer #4 · answered by tentofield 7 · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers