I've read it, so you don't have to

Todays experiment is filled with long periods where I sit on my ass and waste time - AKA incubation periods.  As such I managed to choke down Hovinds thesis in its entirety.  To save ya'll hours of painful reading I've prepared a coles-notes version, and if you want to read further, I've added a few comments of my own.

Later this afternoon I should be able to post a chapter-by-chapter synopsis, for those who care.  But for now...

Hovinds Argument in a Nut Shell:

1. Evolution is a new, evil religion (note: religion, not science)
2. Christianity is an old, not-evil religion and is the sole path to enlightenment

Since evolution is new and evil, while Christianity is old and not-evil, evolution is wrong and creationism is right.

Yep - that's it.  I kid you not.  102 pages, and that's what it boils down to.

My comments
This is not a thesis:
I've written a thesis, and I've read several more.  And while Hovinds document is many things, it is not a thesis.

Thesis are a pretty standardised document intended to inform readers of new knowledge uncovered by the writer.  Almost always they are structured as follows:

1. Introduction that outlines the area of research, what is known, and what unknown areas the thesis is going to delve into
2. Several chapters describing the methods used to find the new information, and what the results of those investigations were.
3. A conclusion which puts the new findings into perspective, and wraps everything up into a nice little package.

Honvids "thesis" does none of the above - his "introduction" tells us that evolution is a religion and evil, he then repeats this same argument over about a dozen chapters, and then he concludes by repeating his introduction.  No new info is introduced - and providing new knowledge is the key purpose of a thesis.  In fact, most of his arguments can be found in the transcripts of the scopes trial, 83 years ago.

This "thesis" is simply traditional creationist arguments condensed into one article.
I don't think this will be a surprise to many, but the entirety of Hovinds "thesis" is simple repetition of creationist arguments going back decades.  Nothing new is added, although Hovind does break up the usual claptrap with piss-poor descriptions of history and character assassinations of various famous (and dead) scientists.

If you've read anything by the "discovery" institute, or any other creationist propaganda machine, you'll have seen everything in Hovinds "thesis" before.


Hovind is frightenly ignorent of basic scientific principals.

In my first post on his thesis I mentioned a few errors Hovind had made in terms of basic scientific principals.  Little did I know that was the tip of the iceberg - in one chapter alone Hovind completely fucked up six separate basic scientific principals or definitions.  I'm not talking slight errors here - I'm talking 100% wrong; completely polar opposite, of what science truly says.

This is particularity terrifying, as in the beginning of his thesis Hovind proudly announces to us that he has been a high school science teacher since 1976.  If that's actually true then he has done irrefutable harm to the education of numerous students over that 30-ish year period.  Seriously - the guy doesn't even have a basic grasp of the laws of thermodynamics.  How the hell can you teach science when you don't even understand one of the most basic principals science has uncovered?