Mooching around the internet today allowed me to stumble upon a site I’ve visited in the past but largely had forgotten about – despite the fact it reaches a new level of bizarreness. The site is CSE Blogs, for those of you who (like me) wondered what CSE stood for, it isn’t “Combined Services Entertainment<\/a>” or even the “Centre for Sustainable Energy<\/a>.” No, it stands for the complete headcase Creation Science Evangelism<\/em> promoted by “dr” Tax-Dodger Hovind. Surely some one can sue the creation “science” nuts over the use of CSE?<\/p>\n

Anyway, as I said, this is a painfully weird site. The posts seem to be made by a lackey of Hovind called “pabramson” (which seems to be missing a “h” in my mind but …) and are largely examples of weird imagined conversations between Hovind and various mythical figures. When I say weird, I don’t mean in the nice, funny sort of way. While the larger part of me assumes that Hovind and his lackeys all know it is a load of crap, there is a little bit which is screaming that the gullible rubes visiting the site and leaving gushing comments (example follows) actually believe the nonsense. Now that is scary.<\/p>\n

Thank you Brother Kent, and Brother Paul, Brother Eric, and everyone else at CSE. I needed this today! I have my own ministry and I speak about Creation, evolution, and share the salvation plan with everyone who will listen, and I have never been backed down or proven wrong. (from Micheal Deas<\/a>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Great isn’t it. I suspect the reason he has never “been backed down or proven wrong” is mostly down to the fact he preaches to other idiots.<\/p>\n

The main thing I find weird about this site, is the sheer volume of Knee-Mail<\/em> posts. First off, the play on words is one which would embarrass a mildly educated ten year old after a while (which could explain why these lunatics<\/strike> nice people are still getting kicks from it) but each and every one seems to think it is a brand new and funny way to open a “sermon.” That, in effect, is all the posts are – a sad attempt by a criminal to try and preach to the public over the internet in the style of some one in an electronic conversation with a mythical figure.<\/p>\n

Take the latest one<\/a>, the one I came across first, which presents itself as a conversation between “Kent and the Captain.” This is how it begins (note the attempt to recreate an e-mail header at the start, how funny…)<\/p>\n

From: Kent Hovind
\nSent: August 17, 2007
\nTo: Captain of Ship to Italy with Passenger, the Apostle Paul
\nSubject: Re: Discussions on the Wisdom of Sailing Against the Advice of the Prisoner Paul and the \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Preserved Word\u00e2\u20ac\u009d from which He Preaches
\n(Read Acts 27:6-44)<\/p>\n

KH: Hey Captain! I hate to bother you at this busy time, but can you talk for a minute (between verses 11 and 12)?<\/p>\n

Captain: Sure, knee-mail suspends time; so it won\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t effect me at all.<\/p>\n

KH: I understand that you own the ship that is headed to Italy.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Like I said, it is weird but I will try to identify all the things which I<\/strong> think are odd – please feel free to correct me if you think I am missing the point…<\/p>\n

First off, it was posted on 19 Nov 07. Why does the faux-header say 17 August? Is that when Kent sent the message out of prison? Does “knee-mail” suspend time but take three months to get anywhere? More importantly, why is the Captain of the ship carrying the supposed Apostle Paul getting a message in 2007? Are creationists unable to maintain a coherent line of fantasy? (Oh, yeah, scratch that one…)<\/p>\n

I am bit thrown by the reference to “between verses 11 and 12,” when Kent then goes on to make references to verses after Acts 27:12. Having said that, Acts is a bit of a mixmash anyway – trying to read the verses in chronological (or any logical) order is like hammering a nail into granite with your forehead. For example look at the flow between Acts 27:34 – 38: (this is after they had apparently been starving for 14 days)<\/p>\n

34:<\/strong> Wherefore I pray you to take some meat: for this is for your health: for there shall not an hair fall from the head of any of you.
\n35<\/strong>: And when he had thus spoken, he took bread, and gave thanks to God in presence of them all: and when he had broken it, he began to eat.
\n36<\/strong>: Then were they all of good cheer, and they also took some meat.
\n37<\/strong>: And we were in all in the ship two hundred threescore and sixteen souls.
\n38<\/strong>: And when they had eaten enough, they lightened the ship, and cast out the wheat into the sea. (source Biblos.com<\/a>, KJ version)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

That is one of the more readable sections, yet it still manages to insert a seemingly out of place head count and have some drivel about baldness. (Also, as they are starving, not having eaten for 14 days Acts 27:33<\/a>, why did they throw their wheat into the sea – in fact, as they obviously had bread, meat and wheat, why had they starved themselves for 14 days!)<\/p>\n

From this bit of biblical madness it becomes a touch easier to see where Hovind gets his writing style from. The thing I can’t understand is why is he being allowed to carry on doing this? Surely there are some regulations on what inmates can and can’t do with regards to contact with the outside world?<\/p>\n

Great irony can be found in the comments, especially where Paul Abramson is talking about people writing to Kent in jail (to lift his spirits etc) and he writes:<\/p>\n

Do not put \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Dr.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d on his name, or it may get thrown away by the guards, unfortunately.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Oh, how that made me giggle.<\/p>\n

Less funny, although giving a better insight into the minds of the creationist, is the reaction to Dermot’s comment. Basically Dermot writes creationism is not scientific, so Paul Abramson cuts him off (yet doesn’t delete the post, just slices it) to say they are not going to talk about creationism, then talks about creationism. Weird but true.<\/p>\n

I like this bit in particular:<\/p>\n

For a *believer* then creation is non-negotiable. Either the Bible is true (including Exodus 20:11) or it is not true. Either God is strong or weak. One cannot have both. That is what makes this non-negotiable – for believers. <\/em><\/p>\n

The God of the Bible is strong. The god of evolution is weak and bumbling or is non-existent. It is incoherent to try to mix evolution with Christianity, I would contend.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Great, isn’t it. Just like six year olds in a play ground arguing whose father is the toughest. I am starting to get an idea of the mental age of these creationists…<\/p>\n

Edit to add: Seriously, if this was anyone else, or if it wasn’t supposed to be a hommage to the great sky pixie, people would have put Kent in a padded cell and be force feeding him all manner of chemicals. The man is either a callous con artist or criminally insane. You chose which.\u00c2\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

Share this:<\/h3>

• <\/span>Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)<\/span><\/a><\/li>
• <\/span>Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)<\/span><\/a><\/li>
• More<\/span><\/a><\/li>
• <\/li><\/ul>
  • <\/span>Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)<\/span><\/a><\/li>
  • <\/span>Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)<\/span><\/a><\/li>
  • <\/li>
  • <\/span>Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)<\/span><\/a><\/li>
  • <\/li><\/ul><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Mooching around the internet today allowed me to stumble upon a site I’ve visited in the past but largely had forgotten about – despite the fact it reaches a new level of bizarreness. The site is CSE Blogs, for those … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

    Share this:<\/h3>

    • <\/span>Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)<\/span><\/a><\/li>
    • <\/span>Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)<\/span><\/a><\/li>
    • More<\/span><\/a><\/li>
    • <\/li><\/ul>
      • <\/span>Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)<\/span><\/a><\/li>
      • <\/span>Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)<\/span><\/a><\/li>
      • <\/li>
      • <\/span>Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)<\/span><\/a><\/li>
      • <\/li><\/ul><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"spay_email":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false},"categories":[5,7],"tags":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/pnUcF-lm","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.whydontyou.org.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1324"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.whydontyou.org.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.whydontyou.org.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.whydontyou.org.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.whydontyou.org.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1324"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/www.whydontyou.org.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1324\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.whydontyou.org.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1324"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.whydontyou.org.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1324"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.whydontyou.org.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1324"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}