The Hovind-Till Debate The Hovind-Till Debate Dr. Karen Bartelt On September 11, 1993, Ken

---
Master Index Current Directory Index Go to SkepticTank Go to Human Rights activist Keith Henson Go to Scientology cult

Skeptic Tank!

The Hovind-Till Debate The Hovind-Till Debate Dr. Karen Bartelt On September 11, 1993, Kent Hovind, a "creation-scientist" evangelist from Pensacola, Florida, and TSR editor Farrell Till met in public debate at the Faith Baptist Church in Pekin, Illinois. Although the topic of the debate was "The Genesis story of the flood is scientifically accurate in all details," Hovind distributed to the audience a handout that was a generalized attack on evolution. The paper warned the audience to watch for "desperate measures" and "illogical ideas" that the evolutionist side could be expected to use during the debate. Among other things, the paper listed ad hominem arguments, ridicule and scorn, citation of majority opinion, and various appeals to scholarship. The debate was supposed to be comprised of a 30-minute opening statement each, 20 minutes of rebuttal each, and a question-and-answer period (questions sent in by the audience), but Hovind's opening statement was nothing but his well-travelled (and poor quality, I might add) slide show. He opened by stating that all evolutionists believe anyone who is a Bible-believing Christian is ignorant. Some other highlights: an 11-foot skeleton has been found in a coal mine in West Virginia, proof positive that preflood humans were bigger (so where is this skeleton now, Kent?); the geologic column doesn't exist anywhere in the world; Noah's ark contained only babies and only single "kinds." And a relatively new twist: the 23.5 degree tilt of the earth happened during the flood. A giant "ice meteor" that, because of its low temperature was magnetic, banged into the north pole and dropped mammoths in their tracks, the vapor canopy collapsed, and the earth was flooded to a depth of 12,000 feet. As Dave Barry says, "I am not making this up." The presentation was rapid fire, leaving no time for the audience to digest a topic before the next slide was flashed. Indeed, for someone who does the show 700 times a year, the presentation was unpolished, and the slides were of poor quality. Farrell Till defined science as being outside the realm of the supernatural. He spoke of the polystrate Specimen Ridge trees and attacked the seaworthiness of the ark. The audience was asked to consider how probable it was for a lone man or small group to build a huge ark sans modern tools. All wooden ships have a maximum length far below the purported length of the ark, and the audience was encouraged to search the references Till provided concerning shipbuilding. Till asked if such a ship did manage to stay afloat, how did the cargo survive the rough seas described by other creationists? Finally, if, as Hovind asserted, only a few "kinds" were present on the ark, then Hovind must also admit that all forms of bovids, from bison to cattle to deer, evolved rapidly after the flood-- something no evolutionist would ever state. Hovind's rebuttal was to put God in the same bracket as electrons and gravity--natural forces/particles that cannot be seen either! He stated, without proof, that humans "back then" were not only bigger and longer-lived but had higher IQ's. Thus they could build the pyramids, a feat we humans of today could never accomplish. (Something just occurred to me here: the pyramids had to be postflood; they date roughly from the time of Moses... another boo boo.) He stated that the Specimen Ridge trees have no roots (flatly false by my geology books). God brought the animals to Noah and took care of all the little incidentals (like tons of manure). Hovind encouraged the audience to be polite to Till, because, after all, "He is not the enemy; he just works for him." Hovind admitted he couldn't prove most of his assertions but that Till could not prove his either. Refer to the topic of the debate!!!! Till pressed the issue that since there were seven pairs of each type of clean animal on the ark, that meant 14 giraffes slopping about the ark on stormy seas, like it or not. How did they survive? He pointed out that the largest pyramids are in the Americas, not Egypt. He closed by pointing out that Hovind's assumptions--a vapor canopy, a level antediluvian earth, smarter people--were not supported by evidence. About half a dozen questions followed. I wrote two of the ones that were chosen by the moderator/minister. Briefly.... Concerning a question on missing links, Hovind stated that Lucy was a chimp and was assembled from bones found at sites miles apart. He said, "I wish I could have seen the train that hit that chimp." Of course, it is well known that Lucy was recovered over about 50 square meters of ground. I asked what the anteaters ate the day the ark landed. Hovind said that they were vegetarians, preflood and immediately postflood, and that special diets were not necessary then or now. "Pandas don't just eat bamboo today; they love meat. Ask any zoo keeper." Perhaps that is why pandas are doing so well in the wild right now! Till replied that you can't have generalist animals on the one hand, and then, on the other hand, argue that the pronuba moth and yucca plant were obviously created for each other. Till pointed out that it was a creationist anachronism that the ark would have been sealed with pitch, because this is obviously a coal (postflood) by-product. Hovind stated the word pitch could have meant any oil--corn oil, for instance. I will have to pass this new use for corn oil on to the Illinois Department of Agriculture. Let's grease up those boat bottoms. Till stood by the translation of the Hebrew word; it had to be a petroleum product. Hovind was taken aback by my question (derived from the Soroka and Nelson article) on the amount of heat that would have been released by 40 days and 40 nights of rain. He talked about craters as evidence for an "ice meteor" and said that this was all on faith. As I see it, 40 days/nights of rain still releases beaucoup de joules. He simply failed to address it, but Till, who had the article in hand, expanded the problem and made the reference available to the audience. Was anyone swayed? Unlikely. The bulk of the audience was clearly unable to understand how science differs from the supernatural. They became defensive and irritated whenever Till said, "... but it's just not science." They were for the most part quiet, although a few choruses of "Amens" resounded when they felt Hovind had made a point. The moderator/minister is to be complimented. He was polite to both parties and clearly kept a lid on what could have been a volatile situation. _(Dr._Bartelt_is_an_assistant_professor_of_chemistry_at_Eureka College._Her_address_is_22740_Grosenbach,_Washington,_IL_61571.) _ Video Tape of the Debate The Hovind-Till debate on the Genesis flood story was video taped and is available for viewing via the library-loan system announced for the Till-Dobbs debate in the Autumn 1993 issue of _TSR _. To receive a tape on two-week loan, send $1 to cover the cost of mailing. We ask that borrowed tapes be returned within two weeks so that they will be available for others to use. Since the tape is not copyrighted, we can make your own copy for $6. This debate has been shown on local-access TV in Central Illinois and could be so used in localities where "creation science" is a public issue. The tape will provide viewers with addresses where information to combat "creation science" can be obtained.

---

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank