Kent Hovind vs. a Molecular Biologist (The limitations of science)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Saturday, July 02, 2011, 13:51 (4894 days ago)

Hovind is a Young-Earth creationist, and the thing that's particularly infuriating is that his style of "debate" is always to answer a different question than what you ask. This guy keeps Hovind on task (somewhat) by drilling away at the point that we have technology based on evolution, yet what kind of technology could "Creation Science" derive? (Evolution has directly impacted even my field of software engineering, from software algorithms to Agile work processes.) -http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnb_pmRDpqU-Now no one here has argued that creationism of any kind is science; David has always said that his claims aren't testable, they're simply the only hypothesis that makes sense. (Though its an untestable hypothesis... David is fine with this.) But a serious question is raised; of what utility is a creator, really? If you can't directly tie your answer to the question, is it really an answer?

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"