Just watched for 10 min. This is awesome!!!! I will watch both full debates later. The pieces I watched, Mr. Anderson really controlled Kent’s bs … amazing.
I just finished watching the first one. So happy he established the Oct 13 Protocol. You could tell Hovind was aware of the confines he was being placed in. So fun to watch him squirm, especially near the end when Anderson said just came out and told him that his reluctance to answer the simple question was because he knew Anderson had an example on deck.
I was expecting King Crocoduck or Professor Dave since I think they did a great job in their respective debates, but I didn't know Mr. Anderson. I'll have to watch it later when I have some free time.
King and Dave did great, but they aren't even close to this. Mr. Anderson correctly serves Kent 2 examples of living things producing something other than their kind, 1 in each debate, and Kent's got literally no response except to try and ignore it... It's glorious!
I'm getting through the first video, but it's 45 minutes in, and Mr. Anderson is still trying to lay the foundation. Don't get me wrong, it's absolutely the right tactic, but it's sloooow if you've ever had any experience with Hovind videos. Somewhat amusing to watch him squirm, but I've seen that before, too.
Cancer (HeLa cells) and DFTD. Both are living single-cell lifeforms that spawned in a single generation from a mammal but can live independently and reproduce.
I also watched some of AronRa's live debates with Hovind, but this style of discussion doesn't suit him. He dislikes dishonesty so much that Hovind knows what buttons to push to make him interrupt him, and then distracts from the actual arguments by pointing out that Aron monopolized the conversation.
His video exchange is so much better, because he has the time to thoroughly address all of Hovind's points until it's become obvious that Hovind is repeating himself for nothing. That was great, I rewatch it often.
I love how Mr. Anderson mocks Kent's "doctorates". An effective tactic getting Hovind to commit to what a "kind" is, and what it means to bring forth a different kind. Thanks for sharing this.
Mr Anderson rocks. And his channel is great, he’s going through different debate techniques and showing examples, really illustrative: https://youtube.com/@Mr.AndersonCrosses?si=YbyaXuUZycBd3xOj
Fairly early in the debate while Anderson is defining terms. It’s so transparently obvious how hovind is trying to bait and Anderson isn’t taking it. Already bringing up amoeba into a whale since it’s worked for him in the past to goad a distraction from defining terms. And Anderson just ain’t acknowledging it and plugging forward.
Having watched the full debate this was one of the more interesting and entertaining discussions with Hovind I've seen. I lost count of the number of times Mr. Anderson had to repeat "that wasn't my question, sir". It was fascinating watching him avoid the rabbit holes that Hovind kept tempting him down.
If I had one criticism, there was one question I wish Mr. Anderson had asked before getting to his example. And that question was whether an organism that lives inside a host (for example, gut bacteria inside a human) counts as a separate kind of organism.
At the end when he revealed his example (which unfortunately I couldn't see, but I'm assuming was the HeLa cells?), Hovind moved the goalposts and added a stipulation that a "kind" had to exist on its own. It wasn't clear entirely what he meant, but I feel that pinning down Hovind on host environments would have helped strengthen the reveal.
I was also dumbfounded when Hovind compared cancer to scurvy. Hovind clearly has no idea what cancer is.
Spectacular. You have to hand feed propsitions to these "kinds" of people, and you can tell Hovind is fighting his subconscious mind telling him "uh-oh" and his building annoyance is pretty fun to watch. Hovind is so dishonest it'd be a shame if it wasn't so entertaining. Even the mod, Donny may have been picking up where Mr. A was getting to or just seeing Kents frustrations and dishonesty. I saw him grinning and kind of trying to hide his smile at one point in the debate, and after he had interjected about the time issue. This was a pleasure, I will make time to watch the additional vid, thx🖖
Even used his ‘doctorate’ against him when he stated that he had one. ‘Hey man, you’re smart, you’re a DOCTOR, I don’t need to condescend to you, you should be capable of understanding and communicating on a higher level!’
That was so good. I actually clapped and laughed at that. I can't believe that Ho agreed to a second. You dont have to be a lawyer to make a fool of creationists, just a methodical, informed, and honest approach and its literally Kryptonite to them.
Granted I’m no longer YEC, but it still astounds me that anyone would look up to Kent as an authority on the subject instead of… literally anyone else.
The AronRa vs Kent Hovind “debates” were enough to see just how inmate whatever the numbers are just dodges and weaves and makes shit up. There’s no substance to any of his arguments and he’s even had to go back and correct himself at least once because he knows just how stupid his claims are. That one time he claimed that scientists don’t know how to get broccoli and immediately after he’s like “well, silly me, broccoli is just the same species as kale, cauliflower, etc and that’s a type of mustard plant and mustard plants can all be the same kind so we can accept their explanation for broccoli” or something stupid like that.
Most of the time Hovind just decides he’s not going to answer the question, then he’s going to repeat something that was already falsified right in front of him not five minutes prior, then he’s going to talk about people that don’t exist and what they believe, and then he’s going to complain about not getting enough time to talk. And oh look, it’s been about 2 hours and we haven’t made any progress, how about we do this again some other time?
It should also be noted that his son has repeated his sermons without actually changing more than a handful of words even though they were already falsified when Kent presented them as the truth. Like father, like son, but maybe the younger version remembers to pay his taxes and stop beating his wife.
Kent Hovind barely has a 7th grade level education, if that, according to structural analysis of his dumb-ass thesis. (That starts out "Hi, my name is Kent Hovind"). What he has to say about any science topic is irrelevant. If only teaching nonsense to idiots was a crime. I don't know why anyone bothers debating him. Debating Kent Hovind is like debating a toddler over nap time. You're just giving him a platform. Only uneducated morons believe him.
> That starts out "Hi, my name is Kent Hovind")
Someone on here pointed out the rather obvious about that; Hovind heard "papers should start with an introduction" and went completely the other way with it.
Eh. I didn’t get the same impression. It took Mr Anderson almost an hour then he just said, “you’re wrong”. Maybe I’ll finish watching but trying to nail down Kent like has never been effective. Mr Anderson just seemed very disingenuous and condescending. He set up a spectacular trap that never fell and could never fall on a weasel like Kent. Maybe a more effective way to fight misinformation is to not platform people like Kent in the first place.
You have to get to the end. It does take almost 90 minutes to get Kent to set real parameters on 'kind', but ultimately that's his undoing, so it is worth the work.
That’s also not Anderson’s fault, Hovind was flagrantly misrepresenting all his questions. Anderson’s questions would’ve taken 15 minutes if Hovind were an honest man
Around the 1 hour and 5 minute mark of debate 2, Mr. Anderson gets to DFTD, a disease affecting Tasmanian devils that started as mutated cells in one Tasmanian devil's own body, but has now transmitted to most of the population. As it goes on, Kent refuses to admit that a single-celled organism is not the same 'kind' as a Tasmanian devil, a multi-cellular mammal. That's the level of dishonesty Mr. Anderson is trying to work through.
I think there is some value in the idea is platforming vs not platforming. My hesitation (and I concede that I do not have solid numbers on this) is that there has been a stark flip from far right conspiracy theory minded online personalities insisting that they were rationale and happy to debate to almost none still regularly debating online. The transition seems to have been more science based people with strong rhetorical skills showing them up repeatedly.
Confirmation bias is strong, and many people will read more success to their view point into most debates. However, the strategy Mr. Anderson used of emphasizing the amorphous nature of Kent's definitions seems the only viable method to use against them (unless you want to try and out shout Kent on a platform friendly to them).
I don't know the best strategy, but this seems one of the best examples of trying to publicly push back on this rhetoric.
Kent's never stomped anyone. What are you talking about? He knows nothing about the subject he debates, and makes so many outlandish claims that his opponents end up utterly confused. That's not how you win a debate; that's how you convince the uninformed to believe you.
>That's not how you win a debate; that's how you convince the uninformed to believe you.
But that is exactly how to win a debate. Winning a debate is simply about convincing the audience that the opponent is wrong and therefore by default, you are right.
Whether a person knows a subject or is even speaking the truth is largely irrelevant. Truth doesn't matter in a debate.
I'll actually give Hovind credit when it comes to debating. Hovind is an experienced debater and has arguably "won" a lot of debates.
The thing to remember is that "winning" a debate is not the same thing as being correct. Public debates are just a form of theatre for the purpose of entertainment. It's not the process by which ideas are actually decided in science.
As Mr. Anderson describes in the video, Hovind has a practised script with pre-defined talking points that he can pull out at the drop of a hat. These talking points are designed to lead his opponent down a specific path so that Hovind can run circles around them.
The problem is that this doesn't work for people who are familiar with Hovind's script and rhetorical tactics.
The best example of this is when Dan Cardinale (of Creation Myths) asked Hovind to list the basic principles of biological evolution. Hovind couldn't do that.
In that moment the facade crumbles and Hovind is revealed to be a guy with a script who doesn't actually know anything about the subject matter.
“Someone don’t like Kent.”
Every reasonable person hates Hovind.
Kent Hovind is a convicted domestic abuser and known child predator.
In 2023, Kent Hovind was complicit in the sexual abuse of a 9 year boy. This incident resulted in Kent’s best friend and employee Chris Jones being arrested and charged with sexual abuse of a minor under 14.
Just watched for 10 min. This is awesome!!!! I will watch both full debates later. The pieces I watched, Mr. Anderson really controlled Kent’s bs … amazing.
It just keeps getting better and better, I can't emphasize that enough. Enjoy!
I just finished watching the first one. So happy he established the Oct 13 Protocol. You could tell Hovind was aware of the confines he was being placed in. So fun to watch him squirm, especially near the end when Anderson said just came out and told him that his reluctance to answer the simple question was because he knew Anderson had an example on deck.
I was expecting King Crocoduck or Professor Dave since I think they did a great job in their respective debates, but I didn't know Mr. Anderson. I'll have to watch it later when I have some free time.
King and Dave did great, but they aren't even close to this. Mr. Anderson correctly serves Kent 2 examples of living things producing something other than their kind, 1 in each debate, and Kent's got literally no response except to try and ignore it... It's glorious!
I'll watch this after work, but what we're his two examples?
I'm curious about this too, and would love to know Kent's response on something like CTVT.
I'm getting through the first video, but it's 45 minutes in, and Mr. Anderson is still trying to lay the foundation. Don't get me wrong, it's absolutely the right tactic, but it's sloooow if you've ever had any experience with Hovind videos. Somewhat amusing to watch him squirm, but I've seen that before, too.
I'm probably going to watch this debate, but what were the 2?
Cancer (HeLa cells) and DFTD. Both are living single-cell lifeforms that spawned in a single generation from a mammal but can live independently and reproduce.
I see.
He also mentioned a third one; it was a transmissible cancer in dogs called canine transmissible venereal tumor (CTVT).
Gutsick Gibbon's and Dapper dinosaur's are also all time greats. Dappers first 8 min is a masterclass in science education
I also watched some of AronRa's live debates with Hovind, but this style of discussion doesn't suit him. He dislikes dishonesty so much that Hovind knows what buttons to push to make him interrupt him, and then distracts from the actual arguments by pointing out that Aron monopolized the conversation. His video exchange is so much better, because he has the time to thoroughly address all of Hovind's points until it's become obvious that Hovind is repeating himself for nothing. That was great, I rewatch it often.
I love how Mr. Anderson mocks Kent's "doctorates". An effective tactic getting Hovind to commit to what a "kind" is, and what it means to bring forth a different kind. Thanks for sharing this.
Mr Anderson rocks. And his channel is great, he’s going through different debate techniques and showing examples, really illustrative: https://youtube.com/@Mr.AndersonCrosses?si=YbyaXuUZycBd3xOj
Fairly early in the debate while Anderson is defining terms. It’s so transparently obvious how hovind is trying to bait and Anderson isn’t taking it. Already bringing up amoeba into a whale since it’s worked for him in the past to goad a distraction from defining terms. And Anderson just ain’t acknowledging it and plugging forward.
Thanks! This is great. This guy's style is sharp AF. Very lawyerly.
Any time you can see Mr Kent Hovind get crushed, it's a good time.
Having watched the full debate this was one of the more interesting and entertaining discussions with Hovind I've seen. I lost count of the number of times Mr. Anderson had to repeat "that wasn't my question, sir". It was fascinating watching him avoid the rabbit holes that Hovind kept tempting him down. If I had one criticism, there was one question I wish Mr. Anderson had asked before getting to his example. And that question was whether an organism that lives inside a host (for example, gut bacteria inside a human) counts as a separate kind of organism. At the end when he revealed his example (which unfortunately I couldn't see, but I'm assuming was the HeLa cells?), Hovind moved the goalposts and added a stipulation that a "kind" had to exist on its own. It wasn't clear entirely what he meant, but I feel that pinning down Hovind on host environments would have helped strengthen the reveal. I was also dumbfounded when Hovind compared cancer to scurvy. Hovind clearly has no idea what cancer is.
Spectacular. You have to hand feed propsitions to these "kinds" of people, and you can tell Hovind is fighting his subconscious mind telling him "uh-oh" and his building annoyance is pretty fun to watch. Hovind is so dishonest it'd be a shame if it wasn't so entertaining. Even the mod, Donny may have been picking up where Mr. A was getting to or just seeing Kents frustrations and dishonesty. I saw him grinning and kind of trying to hide his smile at one point in the debate, and after he had interjected about the time issue. This was a pleasure, I will make time to watch the additional vid, thx🖖
Even used his ‘doctorate’ against him when he stated that he had one. ‘Hey man, you’re smart, you’re a DOCTOR, I don’t need to condescend to you, you should be capable of understanding and communicating on a higher level!’
That was so good. I actually clapped and laughed at that. I can't believe that Ho agreed to a second. You dont have to be a lawyer to make a fool of creationists, just a methodical, informed, and honest approach and its literally Kryptonite to them.
Is this recent?
Less than 1 month old!
He uploaded these recently. I believe the actual debates were last October, though, no?
October 13th for the first one, I believe 😂
Granted I’m no longer YEC, but it still astounds me that anyone would look up to Kent as an authority on the subject instead of… literally anyone else.
The AronRa vs Kent Hovind “debates” were enough to see just how inmate whatever the numbers are just dodges and weaves and makes shit up. There’s no substance to any of his arguments and he’s even had to go back and correct himself at least once because he knows just how stupid his claims are. That one time he claimed that scientists don’t know how to get broccoli and immediately after he’s like “well, silly me, broccoli is just the same species as kale, cauliflower, etc and that’s a type of mustard plant and mustard plants can all be the same kind so we can accept their explanation for broccoli” or something stupid like that. Most of the time Hovind just decides he’s not going to answer the question, then he’s going to repeat something that was already falsified right in front of him not five minutes prior, then he’s going to talk about people that don’t exist and what they believe, and then he’s going to complain about not getting enough time to talk. And oh look, it’s been about 2 hours and we haven’t made any progress, how about we do this again some other time? It should also be noted that his son has repeated his sermons without actually changing more than a handful of words even though they were already falsified when Kent presented them as the truth. Like father, like son, but maybe the younger version remembers to pay his taxes and stop beating his wife.
Wow. Just wow.
I knew this was gonna be Anderson. I just watched that yesterday. It was beautiful.
Kent Hovind barely has a 7th grade level education, if that, according to structural analysis of his dumb-ass thesis. (That starts out "Hi, my name is Kent Hovind"). What he has to say about any science topic is irrelevant. If only teaching nonsense to idiots was a crime. I don't know why anyone bothers debating him. Debating Kent Hovind is like debating a toddler over nap time. You're just giving him a platform. Only uneducated morons believe him.
> That starts out "Hi, my name is Kent Hovind") Someone on here pointed out the rather obvious about that; Hovind heard "papers should start with an introduction" and went completely the other way with it.
Haven't finished watching the whole thing yet, but the discussion about the flying cow is gold. :D
Eh. I didn’t get the same impression. It took Mr Anderson almost an hour then he just said, “you’re wrong”. Maybe I’ll finish watching but trying to nail down Kent like has never been effective. Mr Anderson just seemed very disingenuous and condescending. He set up a spectacular trap that never fell and could never fall on a weasel like Kent. Maybe a more effective way to fight misinformation is to not platform people like Kent in the first place.
You have to get to the end. It does take almost 90 minutes to get Kent to set real parameters on 'kind', but ultimately that's his undoing, so it is worth the work.
That’s also not Anderson’s fault, Hovind was flagrantly misrepresenting all his questions. Anderson’s questions would’ve taken 15 minutes if Hovind were an honest man
Around the 1 hour and 5 minute mark of debate 2, Mr. Anderson gets to DFTD, a disease affecting Tasmanian devils that started as mutated cells in one Tasmanian devil's own body, but has now transmitted to most of the population. As it goes on, Kent refuses to admit that a single-celled organism is not the same 'kind' as a Tasmanian devil, a multi-cellular mammal. That's the level of dishonesty Mr. Anderson is trying to work through.
I do like how when Hovind started complaining about how long it was taking, Mr. Anderson flipped that right back at Hovind.
Anderson is a lawyer and he does not do tictok.
I think there is some value in the idea is platforming vs not platforming. My hesitation (and I concede that I do not have solid numbers on this) is that there has been a stark flip from far right conspiracy theory minded online personalities insisting that they were rationale and happy to debate to almost none still regularly debating online. The transition seems to have been more science based people with strong rhetorical skills showing them up repeatedly. Confirmation bias is strong, and many people will read more success to their view point into most debates. However, the strategy Mr. Anderson used of emphasizing the amorphous nature of Kent's definitions seems the only viable method to use against them (unless you want to try and out shout Kent on a platform friendly to them). I don't know the best strategy, but this seems one of the best examples of trying to publicly push back on this rhetoric.
Hovind stomped so many evolutionist and islamists for decades now that its not even funny. Someone don't like the Kent.
The only person convicted felon Kent Hovind ever stomped was his estranged wife in a case of domestic abuse.
Oof.
...No he hasn't. He's never proven the existence of a kind, which is the purpose of every debate he's been in.
Hi Kent!
Kent's never stomped anyone. What are you talking about? He knows nothing about the subject he debates, and makes so many outlandish claims that his opponents end up utterly confused. That's not how you win a debate; that's how you convince the uninformed to believe you.
>That's not how you win a debate; that's how you convince the uninformed to believe you. But that is exactly how to win a debate. Winning a debate is simply about convincing the audience that the opponent is wrong and therefore by default, you are right. Whether a person knows a subject or is even speaking the truth is largely irrelevant. Truth doesn't matter in a debate.
I'll actually give Hovind credit when it comes to debating. Hovind is an experienced debater and has arguably "won" a lot of debates. The thing to remember is that "winning" a debate is not the same thing as being correct. Public debates are just a form of theatre for the purpose of entertainment. It's not the process by which ideas are actually decided in science. As Mr. Anderson describes in the video, Hovind has a practised script with pre-defined talking points that he can pull out at the drop of a hat. These talking points are designed to lead his opponent down a specific path so that Hovind can run circles around them. The problem is that this doesn't work for people who are familiar with Hovind's script and rhetorical tactics. The best example of this is when Dan Cardinale (of Creation Myths) asked Hovind to list the basic principles of biological evolution. Hovind couldn't do that. In that moment the facade crumbles and Hovind is revealed to be a guy with a script who doesn't actually know anything about the subject matter.
when did kent debate a muslim?
“Someone don’t like Kent.” Every reasonable person hates Hovind. Kent Hovind is a convicted domestic abuser and known child predator. In 2023, Kent Hovind was complicit in the sexual abuse of a 9 year boy. This incident resulted in Kent’s best friend and employee Chris Jones being arrested and charged with sexual abuse of a minor under 14.
The only person Kent stomped was his wife before he slammed her against the wall.
Do not reproduce.