[_ Old Earth _] Are Kent Hovind's arguments for creation credible?

[Dave Slayer]

Are Kent Hovind's arguments for creation credible? And how about Ken Ham?

 

[John]

They both have their strong and weak points.

 

[Dave Slayer]

They both have their strong and weak points.

True. Then again, we all have our strong points as well as weak points.

 

[lordkalvan]

Are Kent Hovind's arguments for creation credible? And how about Ken Ham?

You need to present those arguments before they can be debated.

 

[Dave Slayer]

Are Kent Hovind's arguments for creation credible? And how about Ken Ham?

You need to present those arguments before they can be debated.

There are many arguments by these two. Too many to post. And if I did post some of them, they would be in part and perhaps be taken out of context. This post is a general question for those who have heard arguments from Kent and Ken. Based on arguments anyone has heard from these two, do you believe their arguments hold any weight? That is the question.

 

[lordkalvan]

[quote="Dave Slayer":2fnx1anp]Are Kent Hovind's arguments for creation credible? And how about Ken Ham?

You need to present those arguments before they can be debated.

There are many arguments by these two. Too many to post. And if I did post some of them, they would be in part and perhaps be taken out of context. This post is a general question for those who have heard arguments from Kent and Ken. Based on arguments anyone has heard from these two, do you believe their arguments hold any weight? That is the question.[/quote:2fnx1anp]
Some may, some may not. They need to be considered on their own merits. Which particular arguments are you interested in?