AIG: More Advice for Campus Creationists

This is about yet another incredible article from Answers in Genesis (AIG), one of the major sources of young-earth creationist wisdom. AIG is the online creationist ministry of Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo), the Australian entrepreneur who has become the ayatollah of Appalachia.

AIG has been running a series of articles giving advice to moronic, knuckle-dragging creationists in college. Our last post on this topic was AIG: How To Be the Biggest Idiot on Campus. Their latest is Tools of Persuasion for Creationist Students. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us, and their links and scripture references omitted:

As a creationist student, you may have opportunities to share about biblical creation. After discerning the appropriate time to speak, how can you persuade someone who has bought into the lie of evolution? Whether writing a creationist paper, giving a speech, or sharing in conversations with other students, employ the following three essential tools of persuasion:

Get ready, dear reader. You’re about to learn the creationists’ three essential tools of persuasion:

First, you must clearly define in your own mind and then for your audience where you stand. Everyone has a worldview. Your worldview is simply how you view the world, interpreting life through a particular belief system. This view is shown by how you act because your behavior reflects your beliefs. Your starting beliefs, or presuppositions, will either be based on God’s unchanging, infallible Word or on the changing, fallible opinions of man.

Right. If your worldview includes the literal truth of Noah’s Ark, then that will be reflected in your behavior. Let’s read on:

As you write or speak, you must be prepared to defend the biblical worldview as the only true and rational worldview. You can unashamedly make known the Bible as the source of your worldview because only a biblical worldview makes sense of the world, providing the basis for logic, morality, and science.

Right again! Only a worldview that includes Noah’s Ark provides a basis for logic, morality, and science. We continue:

As you share evidence for your view, realize you cannot make the evidence the main issue. The issue is how one interprets the evidence based on worldviews. Highlight this for your audience.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! That’s certainly true for the Ark. Evidence alone won’t be sufficient. You need a worldview that insists on the truth of the Ark. Here’s more:

For example, if you’re writing about a particular fossil find, explain how someone with a naturalistic worldview would interpret the age of the fossil using uniformitarian dating methods and assumptions of an old earth. However, a biblical creationist would interpret the age of that same fossil using dating methods and assumptions based on biblical truth of a young earth and global Flood.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Yes, you need a worldview that rejects all that sinful radiometric dating stuff. Gotta stick with the truth! Moving along:

Emphasize how neither the evolutionist nor the creationist was there to observe the formation of the fossil; they both must rely on their worldviews to help them interpret the evidence.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! We’re only about midway through AIG’s article, but that’s enough.

There’s one thing about which they haven’t yet advised creationist students on campus: What should a creationist do when they drop a net over him, secure him in a straitjacket, and haul him off to a mental health facility? Perhaps that will be covered in a later installment.

Copyright © 2011. 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

5 responses to “AIG: More Advice for Campus Creationists

  1. Regarding “only a biblical worldview makes sense of the world, providing the basis for logic, morality, and science.” Boy is this true! If I want to learn how much I can sell a female child for or how to appease a crowd by letting them have their way with my daughters, I know where to get the information. Oh, and if I have to deal with vanquished enemies, I know straight from God himself, to kill all the men, sell the children into slavery, and to rape the women. And, slaves, boy without the help and guidance available in the Bible, I wouldn’t know anything about how to treat or mistreat slaves.

    If a religious text can’t even get the morality right, what hope do they have for logic or science? Answer: none.

  2. This is an epic win. By their reckoning, if the jury and judge didn’t see a crime, then there is no way to convict… because ‘they weren’t there’.

    Keep it up AiG. You’re doing great.

  3. What should a creationist do when they drop a net over him, secure him in a straitjacket, and haul him off to a mental health facility?

    Uh…wait…I know this one — run for their local board of education!

  4. “Emphasize how neither the evolutionist nor the creationist was there to observe the formation of the fossil; they both must rely on their worldviews to help them interpret the evidence.”

    This is a basically one of Ken Ham’s favorite questions, “Were you there?” I like P.C. Myers response (see http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/10/03/dear-emma-b/ ) to one of Ham’s article bragging about a little girl who wrote him saying, “I went to a NASA display of a moon rock and a lady said, “This Moon-rock is 3.75 billion years old!” Guess what I asked for the first time ever?
    “Um, may I ask a question?”
    And she said, “Of course.”
    I said, in my most polite voice, “Were you there?”

    If all we had to rely on is what we ourselves directly observed, then we’d still be living in the Stone Age or worse. I hear drinking can cause death. “Oh, were you there when someone drank it and died?”

  5. The creationists have a point; the difference in their position is primarily due to a different worldview. It’s an incorrect worldview, and it drives creationists to incorrect conclusions. Rather than try and prove evolution to a creationist, it might be more productive to ask the creationist to prove their worldview instead… and demand evidence.