View Full Version : Creationist Ken Hovind, 10 year sentence?
Searched Kent Hovind on wikipedia and found he had a record and is currently serving 10 years.
This surprised me to say the least.
Orleander
07-29-07, 04:16 PM
what did he do?
IRS has taken his evangelical soul, sliced his wife's throat, and made him kneel before the law.
Hovind is currently serving a ten-year term in Federal Correctional Institution, Edgefield in Edgefield, South Carolina for 58 tax offenses, obstructing federal agents and related charges.
Celpha Fiael
07-29-07, 07:09 PM
Hovind is currently serving a ten-year term in Federal Correctional Institution, Edgefield in Edgefield, South Carolina for 58 tax offenses, obstructing federal agents and related charges.
He probably figured the Rapture was coming, so there was no point in paying those. :D
If you've watched some of Kent's seminars, you know that the reason he refused to pay taxes is because they teach evolution in school, which is tax supported, and he considers evolution to be a religion. It's illegal to teach religion in USA. He also said that taxes are a stupid system invented by rich people so that they can earn money by doing nothing. i don't know much about money but: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dmPchuXIXQ
Yorda, please tell me you don't agree with him...evolution is a scientific theory backed by empirical evidence. Hence, not a religion.
SkinWalker
09-05-08, 08:33 PM
in other words, he refused to pay taxes because he was ignorant and undereducated.
That sounds about right, Skin. But I'd assume that was simply his response after getting caught...though I don't know that for sure. Most of these Evangelical bigwigs are scam artists in it for the money alone, and either end up getting busted on fraud charges, or for soliciting a male prostitute, so it should be no surprise that this one is doing time.
Yorda, please tell me you don't agree with him...evolution is a scientific theory backed by empirical evidence. Hence, not a religion.
i agree with him that evolution is not true, and i can also understand his point when he says that it's a religion. there is no evidence for evolution, and it's much like a religion. i believe in evolution (and ID), but i'm absolutely sure that it didn't happen the way scientists today theorize. i also believe that humans and apes have a common ancestor, but it's not quite as scientists think.
i like to defend those who are smaller. the minority. that's why i'm a theist on this forum. if i was on a christian forum, i would defend the atheists. i think a lot of people are mean against kent hovind, that's why i defend him.
That sounds about right, Skin. But I'd assume that was simply his response after getting caught...though I don't know that for sure.
no, like i said, he mentions that many times in his seminars. if you haven't watched any of his seminars, you don't understand his point of view. i also thought he was a bad guy at first, before i looked at the world from his point of view. i think it's an interesting idea that the world would be only 6000 years old, but i don't agree with it. i also don't agree with scientists who say that the earth is 4.6 billion years old.
he has quite much evidence that the earth is only 6000 years old. it shows that your ideas don't have to be true for there to be evidence for them. evolution doesn't have to be true even if there appears to be evidence for it, because evidence has a lot to do with interpretation.
Most of these Evangelical bigwigs are scam artists in it for the money alone, and either end up getting busted on fraud charges, or for soliciting a male prostitute, so it should be no surprise that this one is doing time.
people are quick to judge other people without being in their shoes.
Betrayer0fHope
09-05-08, 10:41 PM
Evolution has evidence, and it's a lot more believable than anything Ken Hovind can say for the Earth being 6,000 years old. And yes, I have watched seminars of his.
i agree with him that evolution is not true, and i can also understand his point when he says that it's a religion. there is no evidence for evolution, and it's much like a religion.
Unbelievable. You've not done one day's worth of study on the matter, but you're willing to agree with him, and make an ignorant comment like "there is no evidence".
There are mounds of evidence. Open your eyes and look before you shove your foot in your mouth.
Unbelievable. You've not done one day's worth of study on the matter, but you're willing to agree with him, and make an ignorant comment like "there is no evidence".
There is as much evidence for macroevolution as there is for Intelligent Design. Macroevolution just doesn't sound convincing or logical to me.
Betrayer0fHope
09-06-08, 04:22 PM
There is as much evidence for evolution as there is for two digit multiplication doesn't make sense to me. Two digit multiplication just doesn't sound convincing or logical to me.
SkinWalker
09-06-08, 04:38 PM
Evolution has the entire fossil record which stands as evidence. If you count that as a single point of evidence, the tally is still: evolution 1, 'intelligent' design 0. There is no scientific evidence at all -not a shred- for 'intelligent' design.
Betrayer0fHope
09-06-08, 04:41 PM
Someone on this very site I think said that believing in microevolution and not macroevolution was analogous to believing in single digit multiplication and not two digit multiplication. I agree. And btw, Speciation HAS been observed.
There is as much evidence for macroevolution as there is for Intelligent Design. Macroevolution just doesn't sound convincing or logical to me.
Ridiculous. There is plenty of evidence for both. Again, you have not read one paper, looked at one website, or studied one course on this subject, and yet you feel you are obligated to deny it. The only side of the story you are even aware of is the evolutionist's side, because that's the one you're regurgitating.
Do the research.
Ridiculous. There is plenty of evidence for both. Again, you have not read one paper, looked at one website, or studied one course on this subject, and yet you feel you are obligated to deny it.
your psychic abilities are not so good. i have read about evolution. i know know equally much about evolution and ID.
The only side of the story you are even aware of is the evolutionist's side, because that's the one you're regurgitating.
you probably mean the creationist's side.
your psychic abilities are not so good. i have read about evolution. i know know equally much about evolution and ID.
Obviously not, Yorda, unless you know nothing about either side. You prove that by saying there is no evidence for macroevolution, when the truth is that there is a great deal of evidence for it.
you probably mean the creationist's side.
Yes, I did. That was an embarrassing error...
Betrayer0fHope
09-06-08, 09:41 PM
I will repeat myself in order to increase my post count: Speciation HAS BEEN OBSERVED! How can you argue with that?
I will repeat myself in order to increase my post count: Speciation HAS BEEN OBSERVED! How can you argue with that?
It's that they don't know, Betrayer. They don't know a thing about evolution beyond what they hear from creationists, who are, of course, twisting it to fit their agenda. All it takes is google, and you'll know that it has been observed, but these people won't be bothered to even do that.
apokalupsis
04-25-09, 04:14 PM
In my opinion, we haven't observed anywhere near the level of speciation that would support the conclusion that these processes brought about the formation of the world we have today. In fact, I dare say very precious few speciation events have ever been observed that would be considered much more than what is sometimes termed micro-evolution. Even fewer that occured without cross breeding by intelligent designers. It's like saying my particular car is the cause of global climate change. It's not that my car doesn't produce carbon, but to claim it can produce climate change by it's lonesome is where the leap is. Especially in a mere 4 billion years. And the problem with the geologic column is it just so happens to be the same geologic column that creationists use to prove their point. Makes a more neutral person wonder if both are right and wrong.
PieAreSquared
04-25-09, 04:34 PM
ahhh..poor dr. dino
chris4355
04-25-09, 04:34 PM
good riddance
PieAreSquared
04-25-09, 04:40 PM
maybe he can shack up with Thomas Noe, a bush butty ..coingate
Norsefire
04-25-09, 04:57 PM
The guy is an idiot, but kudos to him for refusing to be robbed.
And evolution is practically a fact (if it simply isn't one anyway). How can you argue against something that has been observed?
apokalupsis
04-25-09, 07:28 PM
The guy is an idiot, but kudos to him for refusing to be robbed.
And evolution is practically a fact (if it simply isn't one anyway). How can you argue against something that has been observed?
Hovind's organization offers (or used to until recently) a $250,000 reward to anyone who can provide "proof" of evolution. Now I think they define "proof" by changes that produce new information in the DNA, but don't quote me.
Medicine*Woman
04-27-09, 01:11 PM
It's illegal to teach religion in USA.
*************
M*W: It is not illegal to teach religion in the USA. Religion is taught everywhere everyday in the USA but is not allowed to be taught in public schools.
Searched Kent Hovind on wikipedia and found he had a record and is currently serving 10 years.
May be there is a god. :D
vBulletin® v3.8.1, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.