Category Archives: Evolution

Problem for Ken Ham’s Ark Park?

Noah's Ark (by Edward Hicks, 1846)

Noah’s Ark (by Edward Hicks, 1846)

One of our clandestine operatives notified us of an editorial in the Lexington Herald-Leader of Lexington, Kentucky. It’s titled No more state aid for Ark Park; Don’t endorse discriminatory hiring policy. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis:

Kentucky has an unfortunate history of giving away money. So much so, that tax revenue given up in incentives and rebates now exceeds that collected. An especially unfortunate example of this is the Ark Encounter, approved for tax incentives three years ago but never launched.

You all know what they’re writing about. Our last post on the subject was Joy to the World — The Ark Is Approved. By the way, even if ol’ Hambo’s ark is built, it won’t be “launched” — it’ll be an ungainly, land-locked roadside attraction for drooling creationists. Back to the editorial:

It’s back now with a scaled-back version and has received preliminary approval for $18.25 million in tax incentives, or 25 percent of the total project cost, from the Kentucky Tourism Development Finance Authority.

But that’s not all ol’ Hambo will be getting. Let’s read on:

That’s in addition to the 75 percent break in property taxes over 30 years that the city of Williamstown has awarded the project, the $11 million interchange upgrade the state has agreed to at the KY-36 Williamstown exit off I-75, and the $200,000 the Grant County Industrial Development Authority gave to keep the project there, along with 100 acres of reduced-price land.

M’god — we’ve known about the road project, but the rest is news to us. The Lexington Herald-Leader continues:

Please, this has got to stop, as it should when the Tourism Development Finance Authority meets to consider final approval.

Wow! There may have been other Kentucky editorials like this, but we haven’t seen them. This could signal the start of a big change in public opinion. And they have even more reasons for objecting to all the state goodies. For example:

There have always been serious questions about whether granting tax incentives to a religious theme park violates the principle of separation of church and state, as Speaker of the House Greg Stumbo has asserted.

For news of that, which we haven’t written about, see Stumbo: State tax incentives for Noah’s Ark theme park violate constitution in that same newspaper from a few weeks ago. Back to the editorial:

But even that question is overshadowed by the recent news that the organization which gave rise to the project, Answers in Genesis, requires job applicants to profess that homosexuality is a sin, the Earth is 6,000 years old and the Bible is literally true.

We’re surprised that a Kentucky newspaper would editorialize about such things. It’s very courageous. Here’s one more excerpt, and then you can click over there to read the rest of the editorial for yourself:

The bottom line: Kentucky is willing to give up tax revenue to subsidize a project that will create few good jobs (218 of the 265 jobs projected will be part-time), that’s constitutionally questionable and that’s backed by an organization with discriminatory hiring practices.

We’re delighted. And we expect that ol’ Hambo will swiftly respond. He’ll be sputtering mad, foaming at the mouth, and furious at the “anti-God” newspaper. When that shows up — and it surely will — you may be sure that we’ll post about it. Stay tuned to this blog!

Copyright © 2014. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

Rev. David Rives: Six 24-Hour Days, No Gaps

You know how these things start. Blaring sirens and flashing lights! The Drool-o-tron™ was calling us. The blinking letters of its wall display said WorldNetDaily (WND), and our computer was locked onto WND’s presentation of the latest video by the brilliant and articulate leader of David Rives Ministries.

WND’s headline is Did Jesus refute the ‘gap’ theory?, and their subtitle is “David Rives discusses common compromise between Bible, evolution.”

If you want some background on the gap theory, Wikipedia has an article on it: Gap creationism. They say:

[The "Gap Theory" is] a form of old Earth creationism that posits that the six-day creation, as described in the Book of Genesis, involved literal 24-hour days (light being “day” and dark “night” as God specified), but that there was a gap of time between two distinct creations in the first and the second verses of Genesis, explaining many scientific observations, including the age of the Earth. It differs from day-age creationism, which posits that the ‘days’ of creation were much longer periods (of thousands or millions of years), and from young Earth creationism, which although it agrees concerning the six literal 24-hour days of creation, does not posit any gap of time.

As you can imagine, the rev favors young Earth six-day creationism — and those are 24-hour days. No gaps, no nonsense. The actual title of the video is Mind the Gap! The Gap Theory According to Jesus. It’s the rev’s usual 90-second presentation, followed by a commercial. But 90 seconds is all the time the rev needs to give you a totally convincing argument.

Not only that, but you get to see the rev wearing a suit and a necktie. This performance is one of his bible-boy best. He’s so cute! You gotta watch the video!

Go ahead, click over to WND and take a look. Don’t pretend that you’re not going to watch it. We know you find the rev irresistible.

As we always do with the rev’s videos, we dedicate the comments section for your use as an Intellectual Free Fire Zone. You know the rules. Okay, the comments are open. Go for it!

Copyright © 2014. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

Casey Says: Science Needs Checks and Balances

Casey Luskin — our favorite creationist — is making a guest appearance at a website called The Blaze. We know nothing about them except that they’re willing to publish Casey’s material — and they’ve done so in the past. There’s no need to know anything else.

This is Casey’s article: Defenders Of The Evolutionary ‘Consensus’ Could Benefit From More Fact Checking. BWAHAHAHAHAHA!

Hey — The Blaze gives some biographical information about Casey: They inform their drooling readers:

Casey Luskin is an attorney with graduate degrees in both science and law, giving him a unique combination of expertise in both the scientific and legal dimensions of the debate over evolution. He earned his B.S. and M.S. in Earth Sciences from the University of California, San Diego, where he studied evolution extensively at both the graduate and undergraduate levels. … For his day job, Luskin works as Research Coordinator at Discovery Institute, where he has worked since 2005 helping scientists and educators to freely investigate and discuss the evidence for intelligent design.

Casey’s bio goes on at great length. That alone is worth clicking over to The Blaze. The way they put it, he’s a Renaissance man! But somehow they failed to mention Casey’s greatest achievement — see Casey Luskin Is Named a Curmudgeon Fellow.

That’s enough introductory material. You’re eager for us to leap into The Blaze to inform you of what it says. Okay, here are some excerpts from Casey’s guest column, with bold font added by us:

One of the dangers of enforcing “consensus science” is a lack of competition. Just as in business, when competitors aren’t allowed, the quality of the product suffers. Anyone who has dealt with a local cable company understands this truth.

This is soooooo bad. Hey, Casey: You can’t compete if you don’t know how to play the game. If you want to try, we urge you to read this: Advice for Creationists. Let’s read on:

In science, this same principle can translate into a failure to adequately fact-check arguments. When defenders of the consensus try to squelch and ignore those who disagree with them, their arguments often become sloppy.

We’ll skip Casey’s examples of what he claims have been “sloppy” attempts to refute various Discoveroid arguments. We don’t know why anyone would waste his time that way. If the Discoveroids ever have a good point to make, it will be carefully considered. Until then, our preferred response is ridicule. At the end, Casey says:

Additional examples could be given, but the point is clear: Without checks and balances from dissenting voices, defenders of the consensus can become overzealous and promote false information. Competition from skeptics helps everyone better evaluate the truth of these important scientific questions.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Yeah, Casey. You Discoveroids have been a great help. We really appreciate it.

Copyright © 2014. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

Creationist Wisdom #463: The View from Wales

We’ve had several complaints lately, all saying: “Hey, Curmy — how come you never write about anything from Wales?” Well, okay. Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears at WalesOnline, the publisher of several Welsh newspapers. They’re located in Cardiff, the capital. Is that Welsh enough? The letter is titled Values are rooted in Christianity (it’s the second letter at that link).

We don’t embarrass letter-writers by using their full names, unless they’re politicians, preachers, or other public figures. We can’t figure out who this guy is, and he doesn’t even use his first name. His first two initials are RH, so that’s what we’ll call him. We’ll give you a few excerpts from his letter, enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary and some bold font for emphasis. Here we go!

There has been a call for “British values” to be taught in our schools, with the current Education Secretary Nicky Morgan pushing for “British values” to be added to the early years curriculum.

He’s referring to something we wrote about recently — UK Bans Tax-Funded Creationist Nursery Schools. We were wondering when we’d hear from someone who opposed that policy. RH then says:

Ms Morgan is quoted as saying that “there can be no place for extreme views anywhere in the education system.” I gather that one example of extremism would be to teach that the human race is the result of special creation rather than a “molecules to man” evolutionary process.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! “Molecules to man” is a favorite phrase of ol’ Hambo. The infection has spread to Wales. Let’s read on:

It seems to me that to teach impressionable young minds the theory of evolution as fact while incontrovertible proof of it is lacking, is as extreme as it gets!

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! We love this guy! He continues:

The founder of the Christian faith, Jesus Christ, was no evolutionist.

Perhaps not. However, there is a section of the New Testament that is entirely compatible with natural selection. We wrote about it here: Is Evolution in the Bible? (Part 2). Back to the letter:

He referred to the Biblical creation account as history. [Scripture references] and so did His disciples. Special creation is foundational to a logical Gospel message.

That too is Hambo’s position on things. RH is a worthy disciple. Moving along:

If British values is to mean anything at all, surely it must be linked with Christianity; since it is our Christian heritage which has been at the root of what is good and honourable in this country, and upon which its laws were established.

We won’t bother to present a list of the numerous religious conflicts that have … ah, enlivened British history. Nor will we mention non-religious influences that have been entirely beneficial. Okay, we’ll make an exception for the Scottish Enlightenment. It’s obvious to anyone who has read even a minimal amount of history that there’s considerably more to Great Brittan than religion.

Here’s the very predictable end of the RH letter:

So before we instruct our schoolchildren in British values perhaps we should first ensure that they are conversant with the true source of these values.

There you have it, dear reader. RH says that we should teach Oogity Boogity first. Then everything will fall into place. Great idea, RH!

Copyright © 2014. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article