Hovind 1st Argument
Prewitt 1st Argument
Schultz 1st Argument
Power 1st Argument

Hovind 1st Rebuttal
Prewitt 1st Rebuttal
Schultz 1st Rebuttal
Power 1st Rebuttal

Hovind 2nd Argument
Prewitt 2nd Argument
Schultz 2ndArgument
Power 2nd Argument

Hovind 2nd Rebuttal
Prewitt 2nd Rebuttal
Schultz 2nd Rebuttal
Power 2nd Rebuttal

The linked texts present a transcript of a "debate" on the topic of "scientific creation vs. evolution," held at the University of West Florida on October 12, 1999.  The participants in the discussions included Kent Hovind (Creation Evangelist) and Terry Prewitt (Professor of Anthropology), two longtime adversaries in discussions of the significance of Genesis 1 and 2 (and other biblical texts) to modern scientific explanations of the origins and development of life on this planet.  They were joined by their colleagues, Nicholas Power (Assistant Professor of Philosophy) and Mike Schultz (Creation Evangelist), more recently engaged participants in the debate over the religion-science issues raised by scientific creationists.

The original discussions were chaired by Mr. Chuck Baldwin, a Pensacola minister and radio talk-host, and recorded by Kent Hovind's support team in the Mainstage Theatre of the University of West Florida Center for Fine and Performing Arts.  Videotapes of these sessions are available through Kent Hovind's Ministry (see http:// www.drdino.com/index.jsp). They include edited visual supports for the creation segments, most of which were also used during the live presentations by Hovind and Schultz. 

This transcript of the session, taken without the introductions and connections provided by Mr. Baldwin or the visual scriptural/bibliographic accessories projected by Hovind and Schultz, was prepared by David Thole, working from the edited videotapes.   Additionally, the segments of the debate have been placed in separate web documents which can be accessed from the side bar of this introduction page.  Some notes in the texts represent a logical/rhetorical reading by Mr. Thole.  Additional notes, marked TJP,  offer background comments provided by Terry Prewitt.  Most of the comments are not designed to elaborate on basic debate points (as do the visuals included by Hovind and Schultz in the video), but instead clarify the debate or rhetorical strategies being pursued in particular arguments along the way. 

In the live session, Prewitt and Power appeared much less "flashy" (perhaps even dull or glib), working in the face of a slick, somewhat busy, media-supplemented presentation which mixed scripture quotations and rapid-fire empirical claims. This was indeed an observation of some UWF Psychology Professor Jay Gould's students in reaction essays completed the day after the sessions.  The notes presented here are designed to help students understand why, at times, Prewitt and Power made arguments which seemed to be either concessions, non-responses to direct challenges, or points leading away from the key questions of the "debate" as it was developed on the other side.  For those interested in specific refutations of the creationist positions, follow the links embedded in the text.

This annotated transcript underscores the sense in which evolution can and should be pursued through the agenda and pertinent questions grounded in scientific epistemologies, rather than through responses that tacitly accept the creationists definitions, misrepresentations, and overall agenda.  We should stress, then, that the transcript presented here does not record "a debate on creation and evolution," as much as it does a "rhetorical fight" over what the proper subject matter of such a debate should be. 

In producing this critical/rhetorical view of the sessions, we discover the limited utility of "debating" creation versus evolution at all, aside from the need to teach critical thinking.  For students who otherwise might pursue both "science" and "religion" as though they were merely belief systems, this text may offer some avenues for deeper thought about what both of these philosophical areas represent in our lives.  "Evolutionary theory" is neither a religion (i.e. the cultural enactment of a belief system), nor a "theology" (i.e. a philosophical perspective on god concepts), and clearly should not be uncritically accepted on either the bases of "belief" or "authority."   On the other hand, it is clear that evolutionary theory, taken on its actual scientific merits, involves empirical descriptions and generalizations which challenge any literal interpretation of the Hebrew origin traditions.  We understand, therefore, the consternation  evolution presents to individuals who believe their salvation (or some other personal religious tenant) must rest upon such strict readings of scripture.  The discussion presented here touches upon some important issues relating to scriptural interpretation, empiricism, knowledge building, and faith.  We know our arguments will not likely impact the belief systems of those who encounter "evil evolution" as disconcerted believers in biblical "Truth," but we hope we can reach the larger group who want to find the common philosophical grounds that determine the limitations and potentials of both religious interpretation and natural science.