Answers in Genesis: They Get Email #2

Once again they’re answering the mail at 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.

A week ago when we posted Answers in Genesis: They Get Email, we didn’t imagine that it might be the start of a whole new series; but that may turn out to be the case. The title of the new AIG piece is Feedback: Sour About Dinosaurs Living with People. (They just changed the title to “Dinosaurs Living with People—The Biblical Worldview.”)

Like the previous article in this series, only the questions are noteworthy. AIG’s answers are both predictable and tedious. The composition of the latest question they received is unfortunately amateurish (which AIG’s original title exploited), but the sentiment is admirable. We’ve highlighted the typos and added a bit of bold font for emphasis, but otherwise, here’s the question:

I was just informed my [sic] my aunt that my cousin had to do a report on dinosours for school. He found your website and was so interested in your theory about dinosour [sic] he decided to write his paper based on your beleifs [sic]. After I was informed of his failing grade and a parent teacher meeting that ended with his teacher informing my family that she was stupid I had to inventigate [sic]. I looked up your website and read your theory myself. This by far was the most bizzare and retarded thing I have ever read in my life. Dinosours [sic] and humans lived together?

Great, isn’t it? But that’s only the first paragraph. There’s one more, and the last bracketed phrase in the final sentence is in AIG’s original:

Dinosours [sic] lived only a few thousand years ago? Your website tells that animals and humans were vegetarians at first because that was God’s wish correct? Now animals eat meat; thats [sic] evolution idiots. Whoever approved this nonsence [sic] should go [vulgarity removed] and quit analyzing things in the bible that are not there.

Well! That’s certainly telling it like it is. Then, as in our earlier post, AIG painfully responds to the email, sentence by sentence, defending their teachings as only AIG can do. We’ll give you just a few excerpts, because you can click over there for the whole thing. Here we go, with bold font added by us:

You see, since the Bible is the Word of God, and since God cannot lie, then the Bible is trustworthy. That is our starting point. We are told that land animals were created on Day Six, and this would include dinosaurs. Since Day Six is also when man was created, we certainly believe dinosaurs lived at the same time as man.

That’s good, but it’s not AIG’s only defense. They have evidence! Let’s read on:

How do you explain the various petroglyphs of dinosaurs found around the world? How do you explain the fact that so many dragon legends from around the world describe creatures that match what we know about dinosaurs from their fossils? How do you explain the biblical account that seems to describe something like a brachiosaurus, called behemoth in Job 40:15–24? The easy answer to these questions is that people have lived with dinosaurs, which were often called dragons. Yet this conclusion is unthinkable for those who believe in billions of years.

They’ve discussed dragons before (see There Were Dragons on Noah’s Ark). After much more of the same, AIG throws in the usual fiendish threat. We’ve omitted the scripture references:

I encourage you to spend time reading the Bible instead of attacking it. You can learn the truth about both man and God. Like the rest of us, you have rebelled against the very Creator who gave you life and deserve the appropriate punishment — eternity in the lake of fire. … Those who turn (repent) from their rebellion (sin) and place their faith in Jesus Christ will be given eternal life. Those who refuse the Lord’s gracious offer of salvation will endure everlasting destruction

So there you are. Great question, typical answer. Some things never change.

Copyright © 2012. 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

14 responses to “Answers in Genesis: They Get Email #2

  1. Well, they fail in basic logic (or is it reading skills) again. If the Bible is God’s word and he can’t lie, why did he say in Chapter 1 of Genesis that plants were created before man and in Chapter 2 that man was created before plants. (Or is it vice-versa?) I am sure glad I can depend that there are no mistakes in the Bible because otherwise I would be finding them right and left.

    If they won’t own up to the mistakes in the Bible, how can they own up to their own mistakes in thinking. There is a word for that, oh, I think it is hubris.

  2. How do you explain the various petroglyphs of dinosaurs found around the world? How do you explain the fact that so many dragon legends from around the world describe creatures that match what we know about dinosaurs from their fossils? How do you explain the biblical account that seems to describe something like a brachiosaurus, called behemoth in Job 40:15–24?

    Easy. Ancient people were just as likely as modern people to stumble across large fossil bones, and they made up stories about them.

    AiG takes another made-up story, and uses it evidence to prove the made-up dragon stories.

    In the original story, Ham indicates “I would grade based on how well the paper was researched and written—and not necessarily on whether I agreed with the conclusions of the paper.” He wouldn’t grade on whether the student was right or wrong, on whether the student learned the material? I think he is lying, but if not, it’s no wonder he is no longer a teacher.

  3. waldteufel

    I think the “original” letter was written by an AiG flack.
    I call Poe.

    *Shrugs*

  4. Christine Janis

    Sigh: as with all debates with creationists, it always comes down in the end to threats of eternal damnation

  5. They think they have a right to play god when they make threats like that. All because the emailer told them the truth about their lies and idiocy. With such an attitude, I would prefer the likes of AiG and ICR to be a devastating religious cult than a church ministry.

  6. @stephenpruis –

    Literalists have had generations to construct interpretations of the Bible so that the Bible agrees with the culture that is being defended. I find it mostly pointless to argue Biblical interpretations with those who know that the Bible can’t differ from the norms of their culture. I have hopes, though, that one can objectively point out that the universal interpretation of the Bible to say that the Sun moved around the fixed Earth has been changed by acceptance of the naturalistic argumentation for the modern model of the Solar System. No one thought that one ought to read the geocentric passages of the Bible as being figurative except in the light of extra-Biblical evidence.

  7. retiredsciguy

    Does anyone have an idea what petroglyphs of dinosaurs Ham is referring to? I have never heard of them.

  8. Here’s what Ham is referring to along with the rebuttal to them.
    A Faint Image Under a Natural Bridge in Utah

    And here’s a rebuttal to another alleged dinosaur petroglyph.
    Part 9 of Pseudo Dragons of Genesis Park

  9. craigshearer

    I’m would think that they probably select feedback to publicize on the basis of making their critics look bad. Maybe they get plenty of well-reasoned, and grammatically correct email which doesn’t suit their purpose and so they never publicize.

    I’ve often thought about writing them an email, point out a few of their problems, but in the end, what good would it do?

    (Oh, and I’m new here – been reading and enjoying this blog for a few weeks, but thought I’d get around to leaving a comment today.)

  10. craigshearer says: “Oh, and I’m new here”

    Welcome aboard.

  11. AiG’s correspondent may have been just a kid with juvenile spelling and compositional skills, but I have to give him credit for practical problem-solving ability. He managed to find an address for AiG to which he could send a query about evolution-related topics and get some kind of answer. I’ve never been able to find one that seems to work. It’s almost as though they prefer to avoid serious questions and significant debate… Incidentally, i do think Brother Ham should have answered that one. He’s much better at coming off sweetly reasonable in defending his astonishing doctrines. The low-level clerk assigned the job instead just sounded peevish. I’m sure Brother Ham would have finished in much more conciliatory fashion, too, rather than calling down hellfire and damnation on the kid for being impertinent.

  12. deklane says:

    Ham would have finished in much more conciliatory fashion, too, rather than calling down hellfire and damnation on the kid for being impertinent.

    Maybe, but everyone at AIG is speaking for Hambo.

  13. aturingtest

    AIG: “The easy answer to these questions is that people have lived with dinosaurs, which were often called dragons.”
    That sounds like an appeal to the usual misunderstanding of Occam’s razor- that the best answer is the simplest. That’s wrong, of course- it should be “the answer involving the fewest unevidenced assumptions.” Based on that, since any and all creationist answers will always involve at least one more such assumption than any naturalist explanation- well, you do the math. But, that’s logic- and since god gave us logic, therefore god, amirite?

  14. The easy answer to these questions is that people have lived with dinosaurs, which were often called dragons.

    Yes, and the easy answer to stories of Ra, Enki, Vishnu, etc… is that these other gods are real. Um, uh, what we meant was you can’t assume everything people wrote down in their holy books is true. Ungh, no, pretend we didn’t say that, what we really mean is….hey, look over there!