Kent Hovind's $250,000 challenge to "prove" evolution

Questioninggeller

Illuminator
Joined
May 11, 2002
Messages
3,048
With Hovind spending the next few years in prison, I wonder if his "challenge" is going to disappear from his website since the different government agencies wants to collect 1,000,000+ in back taxes.

Hovind said:
Dr. Hovind's $250,000 Offer
Author: Dr. Kent Hovind
Formerly $10,000 offered since 1990

I have a standing offer of $250,000 to anyone who can give any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My $250,000 offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more than a religious belief.
...
How to collect the $250,000:

Prove beyond reasonable doubt that the process of evolution (option 3 above, under "known options") is the only possible way the observed phenomena could have come into existence. Only empirical evidence is acceptable. Persons wishing to collect the $250,000 may submit their evidence in writing or schedule time for a public presentation. A committee of trained scientists will provide peer review of the evidence offered and, to the best of their ability, will be fair and honest in their evaluation and judgment as to the validity of the evidence presented.

If you are convinced that evolution is an indisputable fact, may I suggest that you offer $250,000 for any empirical or historical evidence against the general theory of evolution. This might include the following:

1) The earth is not billions of years old (thus destroying the possibility of evolution having happened as it is being taught).
2) No animal has ever been observed changing into any fundamentally different kind of animal.
3) No one has ever observed life spontaneously arising from nonliving matter.
4) Matter cannot make itself out of nothing.
...

*NOTE:

When I use the word evolution, I am not referring to the minor variations found in all of the various life forms (microevolution). I am referring to the general theory of evolution which believes these five major events took place without God:

1) Time, space, and matter came into existence by themselves.
2) Planets and stars formed from space dust.
3) Matter created life by itself.
4) Early life-forms learned to reproduce themselves.
5) Major changes occurred between these diverse life forms (i.e., fish changed to amphibians, amphibians changed to reptiles, and reptiles changed to birds or mammals).
...

Full idiotic rant: http://www.drdino.com/articles.php?spec=67

See talk.origins response: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind.html

A sample:

Talk Origins said:
...
His challenge, as will be seen, is a mere humbug without value in any rational appraisal of science. The terms of the offer are formulated to be unattainable and it would be nothing but a total waste of time and effort for any proponent of evolution to participate in his charade. The only intent of the offer is to gull the credulous and confuse the uninformed.
...
 
Last edited:
Well, since the challenge is completely bogus anyway, and sincde there is no possible way to win, I think the text will always remain as a gimmic not to be taken in any way seriously.
 
Since the man doesn't even know the theory of evolution (first three items in his list of five at the bottom of the quote), how is he to judge whether or not someone has proved it? :confused:
 
When I use the word evolution, I am not referring to the minor variations found in all of the various life forms (microevolution). I am referring to the general theory of evolution which believes these five major events took place without God:

1) Time, space, and matter came into existence by themselves.
2) Planets and stars formed from space dust.
3) Matter created life by itself.
4) Early life-forms learned to reproduce themselves.
5) Major changes occurred between these diverse life forms (i.e., fish changed to amphibians, amphibians changed to reptiles, and reptiles changed to birds or mammals).

Nothing new there. When he uses the word evolution it means what he decides it means. And should anyone ever present him with "empirical evidence (scientific proof)" we shouldn't be surprised to learn that "empirical evidence (scientific proof)" means what he decides it means- and that his definition will not include any real evidence shown.
 
Well, since the challenge is completely bogus anyway, and sincde there is no possible way to win, I think the text will always remain as a gimmic not to be taken in any way seriously.
Wow.

"When I use the word evolution, I am not referring to [evolution]. I am referring to [my definition] of evolution which believes these five major events took place without God:

1) Time, space, and matter came into existence by themselves. [What does this have to do with evolution? Was there a time when time didn't exist? Sounds pretty absurd to me.]
2) Planets and stars formed from space dust. [Again, what does this have to do with BIOLOGICAL evolution?
3) Matter created life by itself. [Abiogenesis put into creationist terms? Isn't abiogenesis just a hypothesis?]
4) Early life-forms learned to reproduce themselves. [As opposed to sex ed?]
5) Major changes occurred between these diverse life forms (i.e., fish changed to amphibians, amphibians changed to reptiles, and reptiles changed to birds or mammals). [Wonder Twin powers, ACTIVATE!]
 
Well, since the challenge is completely bogus anyway, and sincde there is no possible way to win, I think the text will always remain as a gimmic not to be taken in any way seriously.

Exactly, I'm sure the Prisoner formerly known as Kent Hovind was convinced he would never have to pay out and thus didn't keep the quarter mil handy. Regardless of his mindset, it definately is such a suckers bet that he wouldn't have had to pay out anyway.
 

Back
Top Bottom