I perused as far as page 10.
I may sit down and actually
read the whole thing. Just for laughs, you understand.
Spelling errors, appalling writing, mis-stated scientific laws (and yet he claims to have done "research", and typed this up on a computer, so why the errors?) and unsupported inanity about. And that's on a quick overview of 10 pages.
Look, I'll be honest here:
I went to Winnipeg Technical Vocation High School (
Tec-Voc). It is not exactly the best school in the city, academically speaking. In fact, it is (or was, at the time), on the unfortunate side of the curve. Very unfortunate. I did not go there for the academics, though. I went there for the machining program, because the vocational training there
is good. It's a vocational school, and I figured knowledge of manufacturing processes would be helpful in Engineering (and I was right, and yes, this means I was planning on taking engineering well before I started high school).
But personal stories aside, this level of writing is on par with the grade 12 (sorry,
Senior 4) general-level English. Not the advanced English course for university-bound students (which I couldn't take, as it conflicted with machining), but the base-level one, where half the senior class were functionally illiterate. You don't need to be able to read big words or write coherently to get a job hammering nails.
That is the writing quality of Kent Hovind's
Doctoral (I confess I cannot say that aloud without laughing) "thesis".
Sub-par-high-school idiot course standards.
How did that man manage to get any sort of pre-doctoral degree conferred upon him? Or GED, for that matter?