Is Michael Shermer a Disciple of Satan?

  1. Young earth creationist Kent Hovind sure thinks so.

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1410330225420430733

    This is a "debate" between Michael Shermer, director of the skeptic society, and Kent Hovind, creationist extraordinaire. This was quite entertaining, not only because Hovind asserted that Shermer worked for Satan. Although debating creationists is just as much of a "debate" as hunting dairy cows with a high-powered rifle and scope is hunting, this is just sad.

    Some more glaring and quite amusing errors made by Hovind includes

    - Asserting that evolutionary biology implies moral nihilism.
    - Asserting that a world-wide flood can produce the geological column and fossils.
    - Asserting that flood geology is compatible with oil and coal deposits.
    - Asserting that the flood produced grand canyon and at the same time asserting that the strata layers seen is also produced by the flood, which is contradictory.
    - Asserting that a world-wide flood can produce petrified trees.
    - Asserting that evolution is a religion.
    - Asserting that abiogenesis is spontaneous generation in the Pasteur sense of the word.
    - Asserting that nuclear fusion has never been observed.
    - Asserting that evolution is the dumbest and most dangerous idea in the history of the world.
    - Asserting that the big bang and planetary formation leads to Hitler and Marxism, the rejection of logic and abortion (and hell if you do not trust Christ).
    - Asserting that evolution claims that a dog came from a rock.
    - Asserting that evolution is a dying religion surviving on your tax dollars.
    - Asserting that evolution is anti-science.

    I especially liked this line from Hovind.

    "Michael Shermer is the editor of skeptic magazine. He is absolutely correct to be skeptical of some of the dumb things people believe out there. There are some weirdos in this world folks".
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Though I think most of christianity is worthless, I would still fight for anyone's right to believe/practice it.... these "young earth" creationist however, should not even be given opportunities to speak in a scientific setting... maybe a century ago, maybe, but now NONE of their arguments have ANY scientific validity.

    As an aside, it really saddens me to see the shows now playing on History Channel/Discovery Channel: several UFO conspiracy shows, Monster Quest, Search for the Lost Arc, ect...

    Funny thing though, they play these right along side The Universe and Wild Discovery and Modern Marvels....
     
  4. Discovery went to Hell many years ago.

    They've replaced science with crap like "Monster garage", "American Chopper", "Man vs Wild" etc..

    Don't get me wrong, those shows are enetertaining, and I find myself watching from time to time, bit I think it was too much of a departure for Discovery, and not for the better.
     
  5. Man, I'll give Hovind the fact that the guy is one of the quickest, most clever and charismatic debaters I've seen ... Shermer (who is a good and charismatic public speaker) comes off a tad slow and unsure in the debate; and too many times either fails to rebut Hovin's claims, or completely misses the point and goes off on some straw-man.

    Shermer (and other skeptics I've seen debate) should understand what Hovind clearly does about debate: he is not there to preach to the choir; he is there to gracefully defeat an opponent. For every one of his opponent's attacks, he must reciprocate with an offensive defense.— there's no point in bringing in more men into the battlefield if you're not using them to kill off your enemy's; all you get is more dead soldiers.

    (GONG) :rofl:


    Ugh. I know what you mean. It is possible to be entertaining and educate at the same time (I.e myth busters)... but where does making a bike for Will Smith come into the picture.

    And all those conspiracy/ghost/paranormal shows are just disgusting.
     
  6. Yeah I grew up on the old discovery and have slowly watched them go down hill... I guess ratings are more important then science over there.... History Channel is playing The Universe tonight though! That is an excellent show!

    Sorry Mordin not trying to hijack your thread! :redface:

    It is sad that there are people who actually believe the crap that people like Kevin Hovind are vomiting out...
     
  7. D H

    Staff: Mentor

    It is far easier to conduct a debate when one is not hindered by constraints such as avoiding logical fallacies, staying on topic, answering the question that was asked, or just plain making sense.
     
  8. Vanadium 50

    Vanadium 50 18,035
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    When was this debate? Isn't Hovind in prison now?
     
  9. I know it's not exactly related but...Anybody here ever seen a picture of a Church of Satan mass? Its so stupid, its just like Halloween for these people.
     
  10. And yes, according to Wiki he's in the can for tax evasion.
     
  11. I agree. There are lots of people who can simply go on automatic and let the verbal diarrhoea flow without inserting any of the "filters" mentioned by DH between brain and tongue.
     
  12. Oh boy, Kent Hovind just started talking and hes describing a computer and how it does not know what made it. Yooooookay..........:rolleyes:

    HAHAH, hes making "Predictions" on KNOWN RESULTS. What BOZO.

    "Dogs came from a rock"??? Does this guy even have an ounce of listening comprehension? I dont think he came from a rock, that would be insulting to rocks everywhere. Even they are less dense than this guys head.

    How can people be this stupid.
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2008
  13. Why can't all the fanatics find a remote island and all move there? Then they could come up with all the crackpot ideas and have as many "spiritual unions" (damn FLDS....mormons in general are weird...) as they want.
     
  14. I'd drop a thermo-nuclear bunker busting bomb on their island :devil:

    EDIT: No, Id drop them leaflets on how they are stupid. Because they are on an island, theres nothing they can do about it! HAAH!
     
  15. I think anybody would bomb the place.
     
  16. It'd be so much more fun to make them suffer though.
     
  17. Yes. He went to jail because he refused to pay taxes because he did not want to contribute money to public education.
     
  18. Boy, you're some sort of world class scientist eh? Nice try, I suggest you read some more (and I dont mean your bible).

    Your post shows you know absolutely nothing about science, and cant even pay attention to what was said by Shermer at the start of his talk.

    Did you know darwin has an award? I'd look into it, I think you are a prime candidate to win it!
     
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2008
  19. I don't think you have the proper evidence to say that Darwin renounced his own theory on his deathbed. Even if you had, would that really change anything at all?

    I can't recall evolution claiming that anything evolved from a rock. Evolution explains the diversity of life, not it's origins.

    Do a search on google on "observed instances of speciation".
    Also look at this;
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peppered_moth_evolution
     
  20. Do you have a link to articles about either of these claims? — If this is true then it is definitely interesting, but I haven't been able to find a source for this.

    The reason no biologist will answer this question, is because this is beyond the realm of a biologist, and beyond the realm of evolution. This is where chemistry comes in, and organic chemistry is a relatively new science (especially when we are talking about studying the chemical processes related to living organisms), so you can't possibly expect us to have all the answers right now (i.e: The God Of The Gaps).

    Organic compounds have been shown to form from inorganic compounds under various conditions (is it a coincidence that these conditions are very much like the conditions we expect the earth to have had during its youth?).

    It doesn't mean a cell just formed from a rock. It would've been enough for a replicating RNA-like (though much much more rudimentary) molecule to have formed to start the process, which is not at all inconceivable, considering the billions of billions of chemical reactions that were going on at the moment throughout the earth.

    I don't know much about the subject, and even those who do are far from really working out the details, but if you do some research or ask others here who might know more about this, I'm sure you'll understand why saying that evolution means a dog came from a rock (or even that a cell came from a rock) is beyond hyperbole.

    Yes. Most of us are aware of that myth, which arose from a fiction story published for a religious magazine (look up "The Lady Hope Story"). Darwin and his family have clearly stated that he was an agnostic to his death.
     
  21. Gokul43201

    Gokul43201 11,141
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    tourettes, your post is so filled with blatant nonfacts, it's hard to decide how far to go with a debunking. I'll pick one rather unimportant but oft repeated piece of untruth. It's unimportant to anyone that has half a clue about how science works, but seems to be a big deal to the YEC crowd.
    Right, and rightfully so. Because, for one thing, science does not concern itself with deathbed conversions, as you imagine it does. And secondly, this story is nothing more than a rumor spread by christians following Lady Hope's original speech through her hat.

    http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_cul4.htm
    http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CG/CG001.html
    http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v18/i1/darwin_recant.asp

    From the last link:
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share a link to this question via email, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Similar discussions for: Is Michael Shermer a Disciple of Satan?
Loading...