Lie #112 (you thought I had quit numbering, didn't you?). As I mentioned earlier, it was not Lyell, but Malthus who set Darwin going, but the final push came from Alfred Wallace.

Hovind: "The Origin Of Species By Means Of Natural Selection Or The Preservation Of Favored Races In The Struggle For Life. Favored races? Ugh, Oh! Charlie, thats not politically correct. You see, Charles Darwins book came out in 1859. We still had slavery in this country."

But not in England where Darwin lived and where "Origin" was published. Hovind's mention of the word 'races' in a pathetic attempt to once again label someone as a racist when he cannot defeat their argument is very revealing. Here he is, red-handed, yet again attacking Darwin by calling him a racist, since he cannot prove scientifically that there is no such thing as genetic change. Sad, isn't it?

Hovind: "It was a great pseudo scientific way to justify racism."

And being a fanatical part of a religion which insists on a chosen people who will be saved and the rest of the world who will rot for eternity in hell is what, if not the worst form of discrimination?

Hovind: "Charles Darwin was a racist to the extreme."

Lie #113. From Darwin's "Descent of Man" published in 1871, a dozen years after "Origin":

"But the most weighty of all the arguments against treating the races of man as distinct species, is that they graduate into each other, independently in many cases, as far as we can judge, of their having intercrossed. Man has been studied more carefully than any other animal, and yet there is the greatest possible diversity amongst capable judges whether he should be classed as a single species or race, or as two (Virey), as three (Jacquinot), as four (Kant), five (Blumenbach), six (Buffon), seven (Hunter), eight (Agassiz), eleven (Pickering), fifteen (Bory de St-Vincent), sixteen (Desmoulins), twenty-two (Morton), sixty (Crawfurd), or as sixty-three, according to Burke. This diversity of judgment does not prove that the races ought not to be ranked as species, but it shews that they graduate into each other, and that it is hardly possible to discover clear distinctive characters between them."

Does this sound to you like the thoughts of 'a racist to the extreme'? Hovind is nothing but a liar to the extreme. If you still doubt it, read this, from Darwin's "Voyage of the Beagle":

"On the 19th of August we finally left the shores of Brazil. I thank God, I shall never again visit a slave-country...Near Rio de Janeiro I lived opposite to an old lady, who kept screws to crush the fingers of her female slaves...I have seen a little boy, six or seven years old, struck thrice with a horse-whip (before I could interfere) on his naked head, for having handed me a glass of water not quite clean;...I was present when a kind-hearted man was on the point of separating forever the men, women, and little children of a large number of families who had long lived together. I will not even allude to the many heart-sickening atrocities which I authentically heard of...It is often attempted to palliate slavery by comparing the state of slaves with our poorer countrymen:...as well might the use of the thumb-screw be defended in one land, by showing that men in another land suffered from some dreadful disease...picture to yourself the chance, ever hanging over you, of your wife and your little children...being torn from you and sold like beasts to the first bidder!...It makes one's blood boil, yet heart tremble, to think that we Englishmen and our American descendants, with their boastful cry of liberty, have been and are so guilty...."

Hovind is lying scum of the worst possible kind.

Hovind: "A philosophy of life that says, There is no God. We got here by blind chance. There is no one that you must account to when you die. This theory will destroy you."

Lie #114. This has nothing whatsoever to do with evolution, and is nothing more than ad hominem argument from Hovind the Divine. The theory of evolution says nothing whatsoever about god. Science cannot comment on the supernatural unless aspects of it lend themselves to scientific testing.

Hovind: "Thats what destroyed Charles Darwin, his own theory of evolution. It was his own undoing. Darwin thought that women were inferior. He said, A married man would be a poor slave, worse than a Negro."

Lie #115. That's why Darwin married, I guess.... I have no idea where Hovind digs up these monstrous lies since he never offers any references, but again, Darwin himself refutes Hovind. Here is another excerpt from "Descent":

"With women, marriage at too early an age is highly injurious; for it has been found in France that, "Twice as many wives under twenty die in the year, as died out of the same number of the unmarried." The mortality, also, of husbands under twenty is "excessively high," but what the cause of this may be, seems doubtful. Lastly, if the men who prudently delay marrying until they can bring up their families in comfort, were to select, as they often do, women in the prime of life, the rate of increase in the better class would be only slightly lessened."

How about this one: "The advancement of the welfare of mankind is a most intricate problem: all ought to refrain from marriage who cannot avoid abject poverty for their children."?

Hovind: "What effect has evolution had? If you teach a child that he is an animal, what can you expect?"

Lie #116. Well what did Darwin have to say on the subject? This, again, from "Descent of Man":

"The feeling of religious devotion is a highly complex one, consisting of love, complete submission to an exalted and mysterious superior, a strong sense of dependence, fear, reverence, gratitude, hope for the future, and perhaps other elements. No being could experience so complex an emotion until advanced in his intellectual and moral faculties to at least a moderately high level."

And later:

"The ennobling belief in God is not universal with man; and the belief in spiritual agencies naturally follows from other mental powers.

Does that sound to you like the work of a devout atheist, dedicated to overthrowing god and religion?

Hovind: "There is a great magazine that you ought to subscribe to called Creation Magazine, published in Australia. One of the articles, from March to May of 1992, tells about the racism propagated toward the Aborigines in Australia."

But not by Darwin. Here is something he says in "Descent":

"The same remark holds good with equal or greater force with respect to the numerous points of mental similarity between the most distinct races of man. The American aborigines, Negroes and Europeans are as different from each other in mind as any three races that can be named; yet I was incessantly struck, whilst living with the Feugians on board the Beagle, with the many little traits of character, shewing how similar their minds were to ours; and so it was with a full-blooded negro with whom I happened once to be intimate."

Is this the work of a racist? Is this the work of someone who would see the Australians treated as inferior? Hovind is a liar.

Hovind: "Matter of fact, they went down to Tasmania and shot Tasmanian Aborigines off the coast of Australia... Hundreds and hundreds, and even thousands were killed...It was the philosophy of evolution that drove them."

I am willing to bet that these figures are a lie, too, but I won't count this, because I know that all over the world, atrocities were committed against native peoples by the white invaders. This has nothing to do with Darwin or evolution. Does Hovind seriously think that all of these criminal white people were atheist evolutionists? No - every last one of them - at that period in history, believed firmly in a white man's god, I guarantee it.

NOTE: Thousands of Tasmanian Aborigines were killed -- some indirectly. This was well underway by 1859.

Hovind: "The philosophy of evolutionism and humanism is what drove Karl Marx...He said later in life, My objective in life is to dethrone God, and destroy capitalism"

I am not going to call this one, either, since I cannot check on it, but I can assure you that the Communist Manifesto, authored by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, makes no mention of god. It's only concern is about the difficulty of oor people making a decent living. The sins of the old Soviet empire cannot be blamed on Marx or Engels - all they wanted was a decent lot for everyone. How is that any different from what religion claims to offer?

Hovind: "You see; we would not have communism today if it had not been for evolution succeeding in the middle 1800s.'

Lie #117. I am willing to go out on a limb and call this one. I think I would have an easier time proving my side than Hovind would his. "Origin" was not published until 1859, "Descent" later yet, and in that time, evolution had a hard time gathering adherents.

Hovind: "Evolution was John D. Rockefellers philosophy of life. John D. Rockefeller, and many of the industrialists back in the 1800s, like Andrew Carnegie, believed in evolution."

So now the communists and capitalists are pulling together? Next time you see Hovind, ask him: did Rockefeller and Carnegie pay their taxes, or did they try to get out of paying by pretending they were a citizen of god? Hovind will know what I am talking about.

Hovind: "You see, evolution teaches that only the strongest survive"

Lie #118. Evolution is concerned with adaptation to the environment, not strength. Strength and wealth have nothing whatsoever, in any way, shape, or form, to do with it. What was it Jesus supposedly taught? If someone compels you to go a mile, go two? If someone takes your coat, give him your shirt? Turn the other cheek? What is that, if not adaptation to the environment? Jesus was an evolutionist!

Hovind: "Evolution was Theodore Roosevelts problem...Have you ever wandered why we broke all the treaties with the Indians?"

Wandered? Have I ever wandered why we broke the treaties? No, but I have wondered, and what I wondered was why the massive religious majority in this country, enjoying their religious freedom from Europe, unfettered by the 'evils' of evolution and atheism, did nothing to stop the slaughter.

Hovind: "In 1871, Congress scrapped all treaties with the Indians and moved them out to the worst property that they could find."

Lie #119. The Cherokees, at one point, lost a goodly portion of their land for no other reason than that they sided with the south in the Civil War, and of course, paid the price for being on the losing side.

Hovind makes a big issue out of the 'Trail of Tears'. Regardless of what he says, here is what happened. This is the chronology of the 'Nunadautsunt' or 'the trail where we cried' - now known to us, in that peculiarly American penchant for the sound bite, as The Trail of Tears:

1802: Indian eviction to the west of the Mississippi suggested by Thomas Jefferson - the All-American hero.

1825: Indian eviction to the west of the Mississippi recommended by departing president James Monroe in his final address to Congress. Another American hero.

1829: Indian Removal Act introduced in Congress, with complete approval of President Andrew Jackson, a Christian who joined the Presbyterian church when his presidential office came to term.

1839: Removal of the Cherokees begins. Start of the Nunadautsunt.

1859: Publication of Darwin's "Origin," which, according to Hovind, precipitated all this racist, atheist, communist, evil, evolutionist hatred towards the same Native Americans who had been killing each other and stealing each other's land long before the white man ever set foot in this country. The white folks were just much more efficient at it, is all.

Hovind: "Evolution is largely responsible for what happened to the Indians."

Lie #120. "Origin" was published a full 20 years after the Nunadautsunt. That's pretty good that Darwin managed to force something to happen 20 years before the book which caused it was published....

Hovind: "There would not be communism in Russia today if had not been for Charles Darwins book on evolution."

Lie #121. I am not even going to dignify this with a longer response.

Hovind: "Benito Mussolini was a dictator in Italy during World War II. He was an outspoken evolutionist. He thought that the Italians were a superior species. The Italian troops slaughtered the Ethiopian troops, after all the Ethiopians were just black. They were inferior."

And then he signed a pact with the Japanese to go attack the white folk up north.. Yeah - makes a lot of sense. Is this the same Mussolini who was jailed for opposing his nation's war in Libya? Is this the same Mussolini who advocated Italy's joining the allied side in World War 1? Is this the same Mussolini who founded the Fasci di Combattimento in March 1919, a nationalistic, antiliberal, and antisocialist movement - all causes espoused by Hovind in his seminar? Is this the same Mussolini who advocated capitalism and expanded social services?

Unfortunately, he turned out to be a complete moron. He invaded Ethiopia not because they were black (why go that far when there were other black nations closer?), but because it was (in his sight) easy. Besides, why does Hovind pretend to care about a nation that is 45% Muslim? These people do not recognize the deity of Jesus. Aren't they enemies of Hovind's belief system? I would love to hear his opinion on this.

Hovind: "The fellow on the right is Adolf Schicklgruber. Have you ever heard of him? He couldnt spell Schicklgruber in kindergarten, so he changed his name to Hitler."

Lie #122. Schicklgruber was never Adolf Hitler's name. Hitler's father had used that name, but his son was born Adolf Hitler. Hitler was never a house painter (he did paint, but not houses) or a paper hanger.

Hovind: "He wrote the book Mein Kampf. You ought to read Mein Kampf and see how many times Hitler refers to racial crossing, superior races, or higher races. The major theme of the book is Germans are a superior race."

You ought to read it. For once, take Hovind's advice and do please read Mein Kampf. In it, you will see that Hitler believed he was doing God's work in destroying the Jews. It had nothing to do with evolution. The Catholic Church, even at the height of the atrocities, never excommunicated Hitler, nor spoke out against his activities.

In reading Mein Kampf, you will see how much Hovind and Hitler have in common as to their views on Marxism, and their views on a race of chosen people - Hitler thought it was the Aryans, Hovind thinks it is people who believe precisely what he does. A least Hitler was willing to allow some variation in thought!

Another similarity between Hitler and Hovind is that the latter's methods are the same routines that the Nazis used to abuse Jews, gypsies, gays and other 'undesirables' in the 1930's and 40's. Dehumanize them, fabricate stories about them, hide the truth, and they're easy pickings. It is shameful, but very revealing that Hovind and the creationazis have adopted such a methodology.

Hovind: "Whenever I have free time, I enjoy going to the library and reading books. Keene State has an entire section devoted to Adolf Hitler and the holocaust...I spent forty dollars photocopying pages."

Too cheap to buy the books, and ignorant of copyright laws.

Adolf Hovind: "That was Margaret Sangers philosophy of life as well: Wipe out the inferior."

Lie #123. Sanger was a trained nurse who chose to work among the poor, spread information about birth control early this century, when very few cared about the poor - including a wealthy and powerful church.. For Hovind to cheapen her work and memory is despicable. Is there nothing this slug will not slime? Is there no depth to which he will not sink, in enforcing his insane vision?

Hovind: "There are still those who believe in the Aryan supremacy."

And they are no better than those who believe in religious supremacy. Period.

Hovind: 'If you think that I leave my family 60 percent of the year...because I dont want to be with my gorgeous wife, youre mistaken. I would much rather be at home, but there is a war going on. Somebody must warn the troops."

Lie #124. I'm calling this piece of self-serving bullshit. For someone who pontificates endlessly against pride and arrogance to offer up this proud and arrogant trash is nauseating. For someone to spout, in this very seminar about the evils of people taking pride in their appearance, and then spout about his gorgeous wife is pathetic. Oh how self-sacrificing of him!

This is why (he claims) he will not have an Internet debate with me - no time! One worldwide Internet debate would settle so many of these issues and reach more people in one night than he could possibly reach in a year of traveling. He could even be home with his wife while debating me, yet Hovind has such an ego to feed that he needs to travel and be there in person so he can soak up the adoration of his limp-brained audiences. If he had any real material to offer, he would do it professionally, and effectively, not self-servingly. What a dirt bag and a lowlife he is.

Hovind: "God is not in favor of racism."

Lie #125. This is why god made the Jews the chosen race, of course. This is why god repeatedly helped his chosen ones to kill all and sundry in the lust for land, depicted clearly, repeatedly, and graphically in the old testament. No one's hands are free of blood - just as Hitler slaughtered Jews horribly, so the Bible depicts carnage inflicted upon others by the Jews themselves. No one is above anyone else - no one can stand up and paint others black. We are all responsible and all in this together. Obviously Hovind cannot see the other side of the coins he tosses so casually.

Hovind: "If you will give money to send a missionary across the ocean to win a black man to Christ, and you will not go across the street to win a black man to Christ, or invite a black man to your church, you are a HYPOCRITE!"

And what about black women - are they supposed to go to hell?

Hovind: "Did you know that Russian teachers come to America to study education because the American educational system is considered the best in the world for teaching students these three principals. This prepares them to be good communists and to doubt the word of God."

Lie #125. Again I am not going to dignify this trash with a long comment.

Hovind: "Thats right boys and girls this is the way that we are going to take over this world. We are going to strike and take a country, and then we are going to back up and say, Weve changed; were nice now. Send us your aid. Then, we are going to strike and take another one, and back up and say, Hey, weve changed. Send us more money please."

Lie #126. Obviously Hovind's gift of prophecy is not as great as his gifts of profits.

Hovind: "American capitalism has helped finance the communist take over of the world. Somebody is going to answer to God for this.

Hovind can kiss my assets.

Hovind: "Although it is true that people are starving in Russia, nothing has changed. When you feel that we should be sending them aid, ask yourself why they are producing six times more military hardware now than they were ten years ago? Six times!"

Lie #127. I am not even going to look this up. Hovind needs to come up with hard facts to back up his wild assertions. Who knows, perhaps he is right and the Russians are producing and selling arms because it is the only way they have to make money. Let Hovind prove it, if it isn't a lie.

Hovind: "One solution would be to tell your congressman or senator that the next time Russia says they need aid to offer to buy all of their tanks, helicopters, and nuclear submarines for ten cents on the dollar."

So much for turn the other cheek and give them your shirt....