Ken Ham Wants Soldiers for the Battle

A few weeks ago, when London’s Telegraph reported this story, BBC staff told to stop inviting cranks on to science programmes, we didn’t post about it because … well, the story made sense. How can we have any fun around here if we report that the sun rose in the east this morning? For example, the Telegraph said:

BBC journalists are being sent on courses to stop them inviting so many cranks onto programmes to air ‘marginal views’

[…]

Some 200 staff have already attended seminars and workshops and more will be invited on courses in the coming months to stop them giving ‘undue attention to marginal opinion.’

[…]

“Science coverage does not simply lie in reflecting a wide range of views but depends on the varying degree of prominence such views should be given.”

Everyone knows that’s how it should be done — well, some journalists apparently don’t know that. This last excerpt from the Telegraph is another reason we didn’t write about their news:

The [BBC] Trust said that man-made climate change was one area where too much weight had been given to unqualified critics.

Again, that makes sense, but it’s not the sort of issue we write about. However, we failed to grasp what that news would mean to creationists. Today we bring you the reaction of Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo), the Australian entrepreneur who has become the ayatollah of Appalachia, famed for his creationist ministry, Answers in Genesis (AIG) and for the infamous, mind-boggling Creation Museum.

We should have realized what “marginal views” would mean to a flaming creationist like ol’ Hambo. He’s red in the face, foaming at the mouth, and sputtering mad. At his personal blog we find this: BBC Staff Told Not to Represent “Marginal Views” on Science Programs. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us:

First the United Kingdom bans the teaching of creation in schools, and now the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) Trust prevents BBC journalists from fairly representing [BWAHAHAHAHAHA!] views on its science programs. According to a recent report in the UK’s Telegraph, journalists with the BBC have to take courses that teach them not to air “marginal views” — and they include controversies surrounding climate change.

Okay, but why does Hambo care about climate change? He tells us:

Now, many secularists claim that climate change is almost completely man made, but biblical creationists hold that major climate change really began with the global Flood of Noah’s day, and has been changing ever since.

Aaaargh!! Let’s read on:

Well, what the UK is doing to “marginal views” of climate change is really no different than what has happened to the question of evolution and creation in UK schools. Rather than allow viewers to critically evaluate various claims, the BBC in the UK wants to only air certain views.

It’s a Satanic Darwinist conspiracy to suppress The Truth. Send money to AIG. Do it now! Hambo continues:

This attempt to completely remove or significantly minimize “marginal views” from BBC is an outcome of the blatant intolerance of Christianity by the secularists. They reject God and His Word, so of course, climate change cannot be attributed to a global Flood of Noah’s day as described in the Bible.

And here’s where ol’ Hambo ties it into creationism more directly:

In many ways, the climate change controversy is similar to the creation/evolution debate. Creationists don’t deny animals change or different species form, and they don’t deny climate change — but what is debated is to what degree animals change and why climate change occurs!

And as I’ve said before, what has happened in the UK is now happening in the U.S. when it comes to such issues. Many journalists here in America already severely distort views that are considered “marginal,” such as biblical creation — and some do not represent such views at all.

Here’s one more excerpt, and it’s somewhat alarming:

We are definitely seeing an increasing intolerance of Christianity in our Western world. This should wake up Christians to the spiritual battle raging around us — and we need to be soldiers actively involved in this battle.

Hambo’s rant goes beyond being just another a marginal view, or the usual preacher’s solicitation for contributions. It borders on being a call for violence against his imaginary adversaries. That’s not very smart.

Hey, Hambo: You’ve got a nice little tourist attraction for drooling rubes, and it provides you and your family with a good income. It’s one thing to preach about Genesis, but don’t throw it all away by trying to stir up a “spiritual battle” that can easily spin out of control.

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

19 responses to “Ken Ham Wants Soldiers for the Battle

  1. His Hamlieness writes: “…but biblical creationists hold that major climate change really began with the global Flood of Noah’s day, and has been changing ever since.”

    Citation needed, even a citation to your Creationist rag. Show me that Biblical Creationists held this belief before climate change became a political football for you to push your private agenda.

  2. It seems to me that Kanny “I Have a Book” Hambug’s desperate keening against perceived forces of oppression is not achieving what he clearly hopes for. Insofar as it considers him at all, the rest of the world considers him simply irrelevant, a sad gasping remnant of an outdated worldview.

    BTW, unless intentional mockery was intended, “That That’s not very smart.

  3. “Rather than allow viewers to critically evaluate various claims, the BBC in the UK wants to only air certain views”. Yesterday, as on every Sunday evening, the BBC airs Songs of Praise, which is songs sang by a congregation in a Christian church. There is no mention of climate change, evolution or any perceived controversy. Why? Because it’s a religious programme. Hence in a science programme, there is no mention of religion.

    I suppose the good news is the more insane his rants are becoming, the more threatened he feels.

  4. “Hence in a science programme, there is no mention of religion.”

    In Hambo’s demented mind, there really is no difference between science and religion. To Hambo and his drooling followers, their invisible friend in the sky runs everything in his holy and capricious way.

  5. Charles Deetz ;)

    Understanding how CO2 works as a greenhouse gas is about as easy to explain as how tree rings work to mark time. Oh, nevermind, dammit.

  6. Hey folks, Ol’ Hambo talks about Armstrong and co as well! That’s clearly intervention by the Grand Old Designer, so apparently He/She/it likes Curmy’s blog.

    http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2014/07/20/well-find-a-new-earth-within-20-years/

    “This means that any aliens would also be affected by Adam’s sin, but because they are not Adam’s descendants, they can’t have salvation.”
    Ol’ Hambo’s inimitable logic gives us this conclusion (actually he gives it first):

    “there can’t be other intelligent beings in outer space”
    So the Ayatollah of the Appalachian no way can approve of

    “the countless hundreds of millions of dollars that have been spent over the years in the desperate and fruitless search for extraterrestrial life.”
    I have a hunch he’d rather spend it on that silly boat of his.

  7. Con-Tester helpfully mentions: “That That’s not very smart.”

    Good catch. [*sigh*] Thanks.

  8. The following is from Hambo’s latest blog.

    “The search for extraterrestrial life is really driven by man’s rebellion against God in a desperate attempt to supposedly prove evolution”

    This is a declaration of war on the part of Hambo against Astronomy and space exploration. He is exhorting his “soldiers” to battle against the whole concept of scientific inquiry and intellectual curiosity.

    Hambo is determined to destroy the fruits of the Enlightenment and return to what he sees as the good old days; The Thirty Years War.

  9. Stephen Kennedy says:

    The following is from Hambo’s latest blog.

    “The search for extraterrestrial life is really driven by man’s rebellion against God …”

    Yeah, that’s too good to pass up. I’ve gotta do a whole post about that one.

  10. Charles Deetz ;)

    Curmie, that would make a good fill-in-the-blank post. “The search for _____ is really driven by man’s rebellion against God.”

  11. waldteufel

    How ’bout: The search for an intellectually honest creationist is really driven by man’s rebellion against God.

  12. BlackWatch

    Dear Ken,
    Problem solved with regards to your staffing problem.
    “There are older and fouler things than orcs in the deep places of the earth”
    What you need is a corps of ring wraiths.

  13. I know it’s a nit, but why does Ham capitalize “Flood”? Is that a proper name now?

    …biblical creationists hold that major climate change really began with the global Flood of Noah’s day, and has been changing ever since.

    This is interesting, because the flood occurred well after Adam and Eve’s eating an extra helping of fruit. If, per Ham, the climate did not change during that intervening period, climate change must not have been directly linked to “the fall”. Thus, if Ham wants to proclaim that climate change is an act of god rather than a consequence of burning fossil fuels, he needs to find support for that assertion somewhere in the bible. If there is a god, he’s probably getting pretty ticked off by now at people like Ham for blaming him for every bad thing that happens on this planet.

  14. docbill1351

    Yeah, and I thought it was spelt “Flud.”

  15. Ed, because it was the Big One, the flood to end all floods, literally. There will never be one bigger than it because God totally pinky-swore there wouldn’t be.

  16. Ham gives us such quotable lines as: “Jesus did not become the “GodKlingon” or the “GodMartian”! Ham also wants us to pray, and fast at least once a month.

  17. Ham laments, “We are definitely seeing an increasing intolerance of Christianity in our Western world.”

    Hopefully, what he is actually seeing is an increasing intolerance of irrationality and misrepresentation of reality in the Western world. If Christians are guilty of this misrepresentation, then they have brought the problem upon themselves.

    But are we truly seeing an intolerance of Christianity in the West? Judging by the fact that the vast majority of North, Central, and South Americans identify themselves as Christians, I would think not. If Ham perceives a problem, perhaps it’s because he and others of his ilk have strayed from the central tenet of Christ’s teachings — “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” Mr. Ham needs to learn that people don’t want to be lied to as he attempts to get them to part with their money solely for his own aggrandizement.

  18. Creationists don’t deny animals change or different species form, and they don’t deny climate change — but what is debated is to what degree animals change and why climate change occurs!

    Shame on Ken Ham. Isn’t he violating at least one of the Ten Commandments here? My understanding is that creationists do deny that “animals change different species form.” Isn’t that what makes them idiots, er, creationists?

    I just can’t decide whether only one commandment (“Thou shalt not lie”) is on the chopping block here or whether “Thou shalt not bear false witness” is also at stake, since Ham is essentially accusing his fellow creationists of believing something they insist is “straight from the pit of Hell.”