Ken Ham Is Tolerant & You Are Not

This is a good one from Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo), the ayatollah of Appalachia, the world’s holiest man who knows more about religion and science than everyone else. Ol’ Hambo is famed not only for his creationist ministry, Answers in Genesis (AIG), but also for the infamous, mind-boggling Creation Museum, and for building an exact replica of Noah’s Ark.

In addition to his other magnificent qualities and accomplishments, it now appears that Hambo is the world’s most tolerant man. His article at the AIG website is Tolerant . . . Of Only Those Who Agree With You? We’ll give you some excerpts with bold font added by us, and Hambo’s scripture references omitted. The opening paragraph clearly states his position:

Christians, like myself, who start with God’s Word often hear things like, “You can’t say gay marriage is wrong — that’s intolerant!” Secularists who claim I’m intolerant for saying gay marriage is wrong are intolerant of my position based on the Bible. Those secularists who claim to be tolerant will be intolerant of positions they disagree with and often intolerant of the person who holds them. [Bold font in Hambo’s post.] This isn’t tolerance at all! It’s a false definition of tolerance that tolerates only those who agree with them.

Got that? The intolerant person is you, dear reader! Then he says:

Why is secular tolerance so intolerant? Well, the Bible makes it clear there is no neutral position: “He who is not with Me is against Me” [scripture reference]. Secularists can’t be neutral — neutrality is a myth … . That’s why they are so intolerant — they aren’t neutral! They are actively opposing Christ.

It’s perfectly clear! After that he tells us:

Secularists are opposed to Christ — as is everyone who rejects Him — because they have an entirely different religion. Evolution, the foundation of the secular worldview, is a religion based on man’s fallible word — man’s blind-faith religion to try to justify rebelling against the Creator God.

How well he understands you, dear reader! Ol’ Hambo continues:

It’s not a matter of whether one is religious or not but which religion one adheres to. Ultimately there are only two religions — that of God’s Word and of man’s word. The spiritual battle raging around us is actually a battle between these two religions and it started in Genesis 3.

For those who don’t know, Genesis 3 describes the Fall of man because of the disobedience of Adam & Eve. This is the end of Hambo’s brief but powerful post:

As believers, we need to remain committed to our starting point — the infallible, unchanging Word of God as we boldly share the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Now, at last, you understand. The Inquisition, witch burnings, and the creationists’ war against science are necessary. Those with Hambo’s view of things are tolerant, and you, dear reader, are not. Now go forth, wiser than you were before.

Copyright © 2016. 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 #734: Darwin Was a Fool

Today’s letter-to-the-editor, like a few others recently, appears in the Daily Inter Lake of Kalispell, Montana — the gateway to Glacier National Park. It’s titled More thoughts on evolution and evidence. The newspaper has a comments section, but if there are any, you can’t see them without logging in.

Because the writer isn’t a politician, preacher, or other public figure, we won’t embarrass or promote him by using his full name. He writes a lot of letters, but that doesn’t qualify for full-name treatment. His first name is Dale. Excerpts from his letter will be enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary and some bold font for emphasis. Here we go!

He begins by referring to the last letter we wrote about — see Creationist Wisdom #733: Millions of Years?:

In his Nov. 18 letter, Gary [last name omitted] presented two reasons why the earth may be very young: Carbon 14 in specimens supposedly too old to have any detectable amount left, and collagen in dinosaur bones which should have decayed in less than 100,000 years.

We remember. Dale wants to add to those arguments. He says:

The notion of long ages did not start with Darwin. In 1835 Charles Lyell published his “Principles of Geology.” He said, “The present is the key to the past,” and claimed that present rates of erosion and deposition could explain all the world’s sedimentary layers.

That’s true, except that Lyell’s book was published in three volumes from 1830 to 1833. 1835 is when the 4th edition appeared. But why mention Lyell at all? Dale tells us:

This, of course, would require millions of years to reach present depths. Lyell continually mocked the Bible, saying his goal was to “Free the science from Moses.” He was not interested in scientific accuracy.

That remark about Moses is attributed to Lyell, but as for his lack of interest in scientific accuracy, all we can say is BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Dale continues:

Lyell made a big blunder. Slow deposition will not produce fossils.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Of course not. Lyell never claimed otherwise. It produces rock layers — which may contain fossils if a creature’s remains were preserved because it died in a bog or was buried in a landslide. Let’s read on:

An organism dies, is eaten by scavengers, and the remains decay. Fossils are preserved by deep and rapid burial. This could explain why 95 percent of all fossils are marine and mostly bottom dwellers, which would be the first creatures buried in a Big Flood.

Ah yes, the Flood. The source of that dubious 95% statistic is this old article by John D. Morris at the website of the Institute for Creation Research: The Real Nature of the Fossil Record. Another excerpt from Dale’s letter:

Darwin was heavily influenced by Lyell’s book, and it provided him with the long ages he needed to explain organic evolution.

That isn’t much of a criticism. It’s always a good thing when one’s theory is supported by evidence from another branch of science. Creationism, on the other hand, is in conflict with almost every branch of science. Here’s more from Dale:

The fossil record was the only “evidence” [scare quotes in the original] Darwin could use, and he recognized his theory’s most serious flaw — lack of “numerous transitional forms,” but he firmly believed they would be found. Now, 157 years later, we have only a short, constantly changing list of disputable examples inflated by paleontologists’ vivid imaginations.

That was an arkload! First, Darwin had a bit more evidence than fossils. He also had morphology, geology, and biogeography. As for what Dale calls a short, ever-changing, mostly imaginary list of transitionals, we’ll link once more to Wikipedia’s ever-growing List of transitional fossils.

Okay, now we come to Dale’s final paragraph, and it’s a real winner:

Example: a fossil found in Pakistan consisting of a skull cap, part of a jawbone, and some teeth was called Pakicetus and declared a whale ancestor. The paleontologist fleshed out a complete animal diving for fish, and having short legs with feet adapted for paddling. (How did he know that?) More bones were found. The new Pakicetus is definitely a land mammal who could survive quite well without having to swim for food.

Huh? Pakicetus isn’t controversial. Oh, hold on. Dale’s information on that also comes from the Institute for Creation Research: Creating the Missing Link: A Tale About a Whale, by Duane Gish.

So there you have it, dear reader. Who ya gonna believe — Darwin or Dale? Think carefully before you decide. You don’t wanna end up in the Lake of Fire.

Copyright © 2016. 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

Earthquakes Are Caused by Sin

This is about a long article at the website of Answers in Genesis (AIG) — the creationist ministry of Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo), the Australian entrepreneur who has become the ayatollah of Appalachia. The title is Why Do Some US Earthquakes Occur in Unexpected Places?

It was written by Andrew Snelling, described as “Geologist, Speaker, Author, Researcher, Editor-in-chief of Answers Research Journal.” They say he’s AIG’s director of research. Very impressive! AIG’s biography page on him on him says his PhD is in Geology from the University of Sydney, in Australia. We’ll give you some excerpts from his article, with bold font added by us for emphasis.

Snelling begins by describing some earthquakes that occurred in unexpected places, like Virginia, Arkansas, and Missouri, after which he asks:

Why would the Southeastern USA experience such a devastating earthquake, a region that sits snugly in the middle of a tectonic plate? The ground shaking usually happens in areas that rest on the edges of tectonic plates, such as in California.

Then he devotes several paragraphs to the explanations given by researchers, and says:

The research team created computer models indicating that former plate boundaries may stay hidden deep beneath the earth’s surface. They claim that these supposedly multi-million-year-old structures, situated at sites away from existing plate boundaries, may trigger changes in the structure and properties at the earth’s surface in the interior regions of continents.

But that’s all nonsense to Snelling. He gives us the answer from creation science:

If this super-computer modeling by the University of Toronto’s research team is technically robust and represents reality, then what they are actually advocating are the lingering after-effects of the biblical global Flood cataclysm that occurred only about 4,300 years ago. Of course, they do not recognize that. Nonetheless, the past geological events that have left their scars, which now affect continuing plate motions and thus generate earthquakes, occurred during the biblical global Flood cataclysm.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! It gets even better:

[I]n the biblical framework of earth history it is likely that a supercontinent was formed by God on Day Three of the Creation Week about 6,000 years ago. We are told in Genesis 1:9–10 that God commanded the waters that globally covered the earth on Days One and Two to be gathered into one place in order to let the dry land appear. And it was so. Thus if the waters were in one place which God called seas, then the dry land was also likely in one place, that is, a supercontinent.

Are you following this? The Earth had only one continent until the Flood. Snelling continues:

Then that supercontinent and the pre-Flood ocean floor are believed to have broken apart into tectonic crustal plates at the start of the global Flood cataclysm about 4,300 years ago, when the “fountains of the great deep” were all broken up [scripture reference]. This set those plates into rapid motion (brisk walking pace) across the earth’s surface. … As the Flood ended, the plate motions decelerated rapidly.

Fascinating! Let’s read on:

So the slow motions (rate of fingernail growth) between the plates we still detect today are the residual effects of the global Flood cataclysm. Any strain that builds up within the plates will result in fault movements within these deep scars which generate devastating earthquakes [like the ones described above].

Snelling’s final paragraph is titled The Lesson? This is the lesson you’re supposed to learn:

We are still suffering from the after-effects of God’s global cataclysmic Flood judgment on a wicked mankind and an earth filled with violence. Thus when devastating earthquakes occur today, they are meant to remind us of the consequences of man’s sinful rebellion against our Holy Creator God. This should drive us to cry out to Him in repentance, seeking His grace to save us, just as God saved Noah and his Ark animal cargo when the earth was engulfed in the catastrophic upheaval of the Flood.

Now you know what causes earthquakes. It’s Adam & Eve’s fault — and yours too, wicked Darwinist that you are. Repent!

Copyright © 2016. 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

Discovery Institute Celebrates Nothing

In the first month of this humble blog’s existence we wrote Discovery Institute — An Insider’s Tale. It presents recollections of the Discoveroids’ early days from the viewpoint of Ross Anderson, one of their first “senior fellows,” who wrote:

… I am a recovering Discovery fellow. For a few weeks back in 2001, I worked with Chapman and Co. — not on Darwinism, but on transportation …

Anderson described the early struggles of Bruce Chapman, the Discoveroids’ founder, until he attracted large sums for promoting intelligent design, after which:

Intelligent design was on its way to becoming an intellectual jihad in the nation’s culture war. Armed with a growing array of new books, issue papers, videos, and DVDs, the Science and Culture campaign openly aspired to drive a “wedge” (Discovery’s word) into the heart of Darwinism, to “defeat materialism” and replace it with intelligent design.

That’s when Anderson left the Discoveroids. He’s referring, of course, to their Wedge strategy, about which we wrote What is the “Wedge Document”?

With that as background, you’ll be ready to appreciate the newest post at the Discoveroids’ creationist blog: Celebrating Bruce Chapman, George Gilder, and 25 Years of Discovery Institute!, which has no author’s by-line. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis:

It’s been a year of special anniversaries. We have marked the 20th anniversary of the founding of the Center for Science & Culture, and the 20th anniversary of the publication of Michael Behe’s book Darwin’s Black Box [link omitted], which helped to launch the intelligent design revolution, as we document in the new hour-long video Revolutionary [link omitted]. Equally significant, 2016 marks the 25th year since a pair of daring visionaries and onetime Harvard roommates, Bruce Chapman and George Gilder, founded our institutional home, Discovery Institute.

[*Begin Drool Mode*] Ooooooooooooh! [*End Drool Mode*] Their 25th year! This humble blog was around back when they celebrated their 20th anniversary, about which we wrote: Discovery Institute Celebrates Its Cult Founding. Anyway, their new post then says:

So we flew to Washington, DC, for a reception celebrating the achievements of Chapman and Gilder with friends from the world of politics. Thank you to our host committee, including Becky Norton Dunlop, Ken Blackwell, Ed Feulner, Ed Meese, Steve Forbes, and Grover Norquist.

Good grief — we recognize some of those names! Steve Forbes is no idiot — he’s the Editor-in-Chief of Forbes magazine. Edwin Meese, according to Wikipedia, was Ronald Reagan’s Attorney General from 1985 to 1988, “a position from which he resigned while under investigation from a special prosecutor.” They add that he now “serves as an Adjunct Fellow at the Discovery Institute.” Ah well, back to the Discoveroids:

This is obviously a busy and exciting time in the nation’s capital. We were delighted to see new and old friends and colleagues, including Discovery Institute Senior Fellows Bill Walton (currently co-heading the economics team for the Trump Administration’s transition to the White House) [Aaaargh!!] and Jay Richards, co-author of Privileged Planet and editor of The Stream.

The celebratory post continues:

Naturally, Bruce Chapman and George Gilder were in the spotlight at the Ritz-Carlton in McLean, VA. Discovery Institute president Steve Buri introduced Gilder with reflections on the past and future:

What follows is a huge quote from Buri’s introduction of Gilder. Here’s one small part of that:

Discovery has been changing minds and influencing policies for a quarter century. [Hee hee!] We take on big challenges, and we think long term. One of those big challenges is represented by our work on intelligent design — led by Senior Fellows Steve Meyer and John West — and our related efforts to defend scientists, teachers, and students who question Darwinian orthodoxy.

The Discoveroid post ends with this:

George Gilder was brilliant as always in sketching the guiding philosophy of Discovery Institute as only he can. We will share his remarks in a subsequent post. Happy anniversary, to us all, and not least to our friends George and Bruce!

It sounds like a whole lot of nothing. Hey — wait a minute. Only a few months ago they posted about the 20th anniversary of the founding of their creationist think tank — the Center for Science & Culture. That’s when we wrote Discovery Institute: 20 Years of Failure. We discussed the goals of their Wedge Document and said: “The Discoveroids have failed at everything. Their grand crusade has gone absolutely nowhere.”

That’s still true, but they’re celebrating. Well, at least they’re being consistent. They’ve accomplished nothing and they’re celebrating nothing. That’s what creationism is all about.

Copyright © 2016. 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