Dissassembly of a Dissertation - Episode 3

On December 9th 2009 Wikileaks.org published the first 102 pages of Kent Hovind's doctoral dissertation. We say the first 102 pages but in fact the whole thesis is apparently published in full.

Although the introduction states that there are 16 chapters it only details the first three in any detail with only a single sentence used to define chapters 4 through to 16. In fact when the whole document is examined it only goes up to chapter 4.

The dissertation is untitled and is simply labeled as "Dissertation for Doctor of Philosophy in Christian Education" and has been printed on a dot matrix printer.

The writing style of the whole document, including spelling and grammatical errors, is laughable and is more akin to a high school assignment than the kind of work that would be submitted to a university as a submission for a doctorate. The subject matter rambles wildly off topic frequently and does not in fact in any way address the subject matter it is purported to relate to.

If this is the full and final dissertation and not a very rough draft or a sample of notes - independent sources indicate that it is indeed the finished article - then either nobody at Patriot University actually read it before they gave Kent his qualification or they didnt need to and that one could obtain a PhD from this university by simply faxing them a copy of the Beano as that is about as relevant to the subject concerned as Kent's dissertation is.

When previously questioned about his dissertation by others who have previously obtained this manuscript, MR Hovind has stated that the manuscript is indeed the dissertation submitted in 1991 and that it has been greatly expanded upon since however a doctoral dissertation is intended as a completed work and once submitted as evidence of a doctorate is NEVER amended or expanded afterwards.

As this document has been published on a public web site and is a dissertation submitted as evidence of academic study in order to obtain an academic qualification I have subjected it to peer review.

This video is the third in a series that disassembles MR Kent Hovinds dissertation page-by-page, line-by-line and exposes that fact that not only is MR Kent Hovind a tax fraudster but he is also an academic fraudster as well.

Can this man tell the truth about anything?

And yes, before it is pointed out that the word dissassembly in the title is spelt wrong, this spelling mistake is a deliberate homage to the many spelling mistakes in MR Hovids dissertation.

The full document can be downloaded in pdf format direct from Wikileaks HERE:
http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Young-e...

Music
Eddy Goombah
"Tribute to Kent Hovind"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sEIiW...

Eddygoombah's Channel:
http://www.youtube.com/user/eddygoombah

***TECHNICAL NOTE***

I am running CS4 on Win7 and some viewers may have noticed that the audio tends to clip here and there. I am having problems with the encoder when encoding into wmv format clipping a fraction of a second off the end of each audio segment in the video.

In Premier Pro CS4 the sequence runs correctly without the clipping so it is definately the encoder. I am getting an alarming number of API failures too after about 30 minutes of encoding. Some videos will absolutely not encode to wmv.

The voiceover is vastly edited down from about 20 - 30 mins per video for these videos to fit inside 10 minutes so there are many cuts, maybe a second here and a few seconds there but they all add up so a 10 minute sequence can be up to 80 - 100 audio segments.

For now I am encoding to FLV and it seems to be a lot better but if anyone knows how to get around this problem other than to encode into FLV please message me.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• coughlan666
• yt:stretch=16:9
• kent
• hovind
• doctoral
• dissertation
• leaked
• atheist
• atheism
• religion
• sam
• harris
• hope
• hopeless
• atheists
• God
• Godless
• Jesus
• Christ
• Bible
• love
• freedom
• epistemology
• truth
• heaven
• hell
• philosophy
• fundies
• creationists
• FSM
• satan
• dawkins
• 666
• Atheism
• Christianity
• Christians
• Creation
• Evolution
• TheAmazingBeliever
• evolution
• yokeup
• theTRUTHgroup
• venomfangx
• hitchens
• dennett
• delusion
• morality
• patcondell
• aronra
• thunderf00t

[LordZentei]

Small nit-pick here: it was not Galileo who proved that the Earth moves around the sun, it was James Bradley who did so, in 1725 when he discovered stellar aberration (the yearly apparent motion of the stars due to the Earth's own motion). Galileo provided the telescope and the start of the scientific method, and the discovery of the moons of Jupiter (showing that not everything moves around the Earth regardless of how you arrange your astronomical model). Otherwise, very nice disassembly. :)

[paulchartley]

You are absolutely correct however Kent does not bring up Bradley, he dismisses Galileo's more famous ideas in favour of a minor disagrement about the smoothnes of the moon not mentioning the more famous controversy.

The telescope was indeed invented by a pair of dutch specticle makers not Galileo as you say.

Unfortunately when I got to the Galileo segment of the series, I was badly running out of time and had to be brief just to get inside the ten minute limit :(

[LordZentei]

@paulchartley

No problems. Besides, there will probably be a lot of more to cover. How many videos like this do you think you'll need? :)

Anyhow, one can't be too surprised that Hovind would miss the main point while quibbling about details, and getting these details wrong too.

And somehow I managed to delete the second part of my post where I corrected myself about who invented the telescope (oops). Oh, well.

[paulchartley]

Feel free to repost your second segment. You are absolutely correct that Galileo did not invent the telescope. He refined it and was the first to be recorded as using it for astronomy. My post above suggests that you infered that he invented it however that was not my intention. I understood fully what you were getting at :)

So far by tonight there will be 29 parts uploaded to youtube. This gets to page 47 of 102 so I suspect this will run to about 70 parts in the end.

[jcgadfly]

If I remember, he considers his dissertation a work in progress that he is continually adding to.

I don't think it works that way but he does have a lot of time left to write while he's in prison

[paulchartley]

This is just crap. A dissertation is the equivelant of an exam. You right up your dissertation and hand it in. It is supposed to be the result of your research and present original ideas and not be a rehash of other people's work.

You do not add to it after the fact in the same way you dont add to your exam papers after the exams have been marked.

If this is what he handed in it is saddly lacking and not deserving of a doctorate in any way. It isnt even worth a GCSE mark

[Felix1049]

I hope you won't take this the wrong way, but I don't think you qualify as a "peer" of Hovind's. In order to meet the criteria for being considered a "peer", you'd have to be an uneducated, shit for brains, gene spliced tax evader. Your ability to read disqualifies you.

Sorry!

[Grymyrk]

No, just no. He would be a good debater if he actually knew something about what he was debating. He does nothing but create strawmen and ignore what the real scientists have to say. I know, I have seen some of his debates. They are no more well planned out than this shit in the video. Quite frankly there is no doubt that evolution is a scientific FACT.

[toelesshoe]

The only thing hovind got right was that religion doesn't belong in school

[mphello]

Seriously, Paul: HOW could you stand READING this crap?

Let alone listen to this fucktard's radio program?

[rkyeun]

@Grymyrk

Not all subjects are valid recipients of all actions. You can't play a tree. A tree is not a collection of notes and rhythm. You can't smell purple. A color is not an aromatic dispersive molecule.

You can't climb the ocean. You can't breathe houses. You can't milk a rock.

And in the same vein, it's not possible to debate a creationist. They are not rational people using logic to analyze their position for weaknesses.

[xSilverPhinxx]

Damn, sounds like you're trying your best to hold in your laughter here, paulchartley.

[Trbitt213]

i'm reading along with you - it took me a while to look it up - and i could not stop laughing. i smoke some good stuff myself, but i would like know what he was smoking when he wrote this.

[janto58]

@flypejose hard to prove by watching his videos.

[LithodidMan]

To Hovind's credit (and I do absolutely despise the man and everything he stands for) he did indeed have at least some of those missing chapters. Wikileaks did not post his whole thing. When I was an undergrad a copy of the dissertation was being posted on various sites and ridiculed, and what was posted was 250 pages long not 120 pages. At the time I did not think it important enough to save and I regret that. I did save some of my email exchanges with him that I may sometime post.

[flypejose]

I hope U will be able to recognize that Kent Hovind is a formidable debater, with incredible teaching ability (much more than many Dr). On many occasions, he was able to challenge recognized scientists in their respective field in regard to their belief in Evolution. Don't waste Ur time! Get back to the arguments. Character assasination won't help U!

[Boognish64]

I have to ask this seriously: How to be sure that this IS in fact a real dissertation? Even for some idiot like Hovind, it's unfathomable to me that anyone would actually preview several chapters and then leave them out.