Ken Ham Attacks Stephen Hawking

Yes, dear reader, you read our title correctly. Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo), the genius who brought you the website Answers in Genesis (AIG) and the mind-boggling Creation Museum, is attacking Stephen Hawking, the renowned theoretical physicist.

You see, ol’ Hambo is not only the holiest man in the world, the one who understands scripture better than anyone else, and who knows more about biology, geology, and astronomy than all the world’s scientists put together, but he also knows infinitely more than Hawking. Verily, ol’ Hambo is the greatest human who ever lived. His new essay will prove it to you. The title is “Science Offers a More Convincing Explanation”.

For several days, the press has been quoting from an interview Hawking gave recently, during which he said that he’s an atheist — as if there had ever been much doubt. But the press treated it as a big deal. One of the first stories we saw was a week ago, from NBC: ‘I’m an Atheist’: Stephen Hawking on God and Space Travel.

Now Hambo is reacting. This is how it starts, and one phrase from Hawking is the title of Hambo’s essay. The bracketed material in this paragraph was inserted by Hambo:

Theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking recently said in an interview that, “Before we understand science, it is natural to believe that God created the universe. But now [what he calls] science offers a more convincing explanation.”

Observe, dear reader, that ol’ Hambo’s insertion clearly suggests that Hawking doesn’t know what science really is — but of course Hambo does. That kind of confidence comes naturally to a man who knows with absolute certainty that he speaks for God. Here are some more excerpts, with bold font added by us and scripture references omitted:

Hawking has spent much of his life and career trying to show that God is not necessary for the creation of the universe but that naturalistic processes can account for everything. Why does he spend so much of his time trying to fight against Someone he doesn’t even believe exists? But does “science” really offer a better explanation than Scripture?

You didn’t know that Hawking has spent his career in an anti-God crusade? Hambo knows it. Let’s read on:

Well, this reminded me of my debate with Bill Nye “The Science Guy” last February. … [L]ike I said to Bill Nye during the debate, “there is a book” that tells us where everything — including atoms and consciousness — came from.

Hambo’s book tells us everything! He continues:

Even though Hawking says that science (and by this he actually means unobservable, unrepeatable, untestable historical science) has made the idea of a Creator obsolete, Scripture makes it clear that Stephen Hawking knows that God exists but that he is suppressing this truth in unrighteousness. Trusting in naturalistic historical science gives Hawking a feeble way of explaining life without a Creator. As [scripture reference] explains, he has exchanged God’s truth for a lie. So the “science” he is referring to is really his religion — his blind faith to explain the universe and life without God.

Let us pause to summarize what ol’ Hambo has said about Hawking: Hawking: (1) doesn’t know what science is; (2) knows that God exists, but is so unrighteous that he denies it; (3) denies truth in favor of a lie; and (4) has blind faith in his “science,” which is really a religion. There can be no doubt — Hambo is not only all-knowing, but he’s also a warm, compassionate example of what religion is all about. Here’s more:

Hawking goes on to clarify a point from his famous book A Brief History of Time, where he says that eventually scientists will “know the mind of God.” He explains that, “What I meant by ‘we would know the mind of God’ is, we would know everything that God would know, if there were a God, which there isn’t. I’m an atheist.” He later declared that “there is no aspect of reality beyond the reach of the human mind.”

Uh oh. Hambo doesn’t like that. Here’s what he has to say about it:

This sounds very similar to Satan’s sly words to Eve in Genesis 3:5, “you will be like God.” Humanity — right from the beginning — has always tried to become like God but it has always resulted in tragic consequences. So what Hawking has declared is nothing more than the same old lie the devil gave to Adam and Eve.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! In addition to all his other slurs, now Hambo says that Hawking is like Satan!

There’s not much else to Hambo’s rant, so we’ll leave it there. And now you have a choice, dear reader. You stand at a fork in the road. Whose path will you choose to follow? Will it be that of an unrighteous, truth-denying, Satanic liar like Hawking, or a warm, loving, godly man like ol’ Hambo?

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

20 responses to “Ken Ham Attacks Stephen Hawking

  1. “Even though Hawking says that science (and by this he actually means unobservable, unrepeatable, untestable historical science) has made the idea of a Creator obsolete, Scripture makes it clear that Stephen Hawking knows that God exists but that he is suppressing this truth in unrighteousness.”

    If Ken Ham really believes Scripture makes any reference at all to Stephen Hawking, he’s not a committed Christian but a Christian who should be committed.

    Surely there’s something wrong with this quote. I mean, we all know Ken Ham is crazy, but that crazy?

  2. Charles Deetz ;)

    Hambo, I’m not going to listen to any of this claptrap until you explain to me why god put this beautiful mind in a pretzel of a body. I’m sure Hawking has gone looking for that answer at some point, and coming up empty, gave up on god. (I’d go all caps again, but it seems rude to yell unless Hammy was actually listening.)

  3. Where atoms come from?
    I’d like to know where atoms come from, according to “the book”.
    I assure you, I have carefully gone through the creation accounts in the Bible, and I don’t see where there is any room for the origin of atoms. Fish and birds come from water, land animals and plants come from the ground, but there is nothing about where the water and the ground came from. Or, by the way, where the air came from. But atoms?
    Indeed, if one reads the Bible literally, water was there, and a wind, before there was any creating being done, and there was ground which was covered over by the primordial water – all God did was to separate the ground from the water.

  4. TomS, one argument I’ve heard, in all sincerity, is that bit about how people are “knit together” in their mother’s womb is actually a reference to God creating atoms. When this argument was brought up, I asked how that gibes with the fact that there is no creation of matter or energy involved in the formation of a fetus, but received no useful response.

  5. Ham has spent his entire life fighting against leprechauns that he knows, in his heart, exist. Why does he do that? Trusting in scripture, (by this he actually means unobservable, unrepeatable, untestable, transcriptions of unknown, unsourced historical writings) Ham has come up with a feeble attempt to explain the existence of gold without leprechauns and rainbows.

  6. As I’ve read Hambo’s blathering over the last couple of years, he’s moved from being a good example of the idiocy of biblical literalism to being the very definition of megalomaniacal insanity. Add to that his predations on the minds of innocent children, and a portrait of pure evil emerges.

    While Hawking, other cosmologists and other scientists are honestly trying to understand reality, Hambo’s bony fingers are busy plumbing the depths of Bubba and Betty Sue’s pockets trying to understand how much of their hard-earned money he can scoop out.

    So yes, Eric, Hambo is that crazy.

  7. @Jim
    Thank you for that insight.
    Of course, to me, it would trigger my automatic response about that meaning that God is in a personal, one-on-one relationship, here and now, with me as my Creator, Sustainer, and Redeemer. And that that does not preclude that we all accept the naturalistic/scientific explanations of reproductive biology. So, why would the naturalistic/scientific explanations of the origins of abstractions or collectives in the remote past be felt to be problematic with the role of God?
    But you were right to stick to the subject.
    I sometimes wonder what is going on in the mind with some of these proof-texts. What possible relevance does this have to do with the origins of atoms?

  8. Well Oh Hambo if your book of BS is so wonderful, than why is it that you predecessors now nothing of disease and how to cure it? But science does and did! I challenge you as I do all xtians who think your silly buyBull is so great….SHOW me anything the buyBull or religion has given us that compares to science??? Waiting….Waiting…..Still waiting….

  9. Hambo is a viscous, wicked, mean spirited slanderer who hurls vile insults at anyone who does not completely agree with his utterly demented beliefs. Stephen Hawking is too much of a gentleman to respond in kind to Hambo’s slurs but I am more than happy to declare my opinion of Hambo on this forum.

    Hambo is so full of himself that he does not even see the absolute absurdity of claiming that he knows what real science is but Stephen Hawking does not. The people sending him money and buying his junk bonds are certainly the stupidest people on Earth but they are despicable as well for supporting someone as evil as Hambo.

  10. Ham’s idiocy seems to be growing exponentially. And, it seems as though Denver International Airport is way ahead of him with an ark.

    http://www.aci-na.org/blog/2014/06/17/denver-international-airport%E2%80%99s-hotel-and-transit-center-building-a-new-community-connection/

    Click on third picture!

  11. Ham had said:
    So what Hawking has declared is nothing more than the same old lie the devil gave to Adam and Eve.

    Ham is the liar here:

    1) the knowledge Hawking was talking about was not about the knowledge of good and evil, but learning about the natural world

    2) Genesis 3:5 (said by the “serpent”…)
    For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

    Genesis 3:22
    And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
    God himself verified this: The serpent was correct!

  12. Ken Ham A numpty idjit we’oot mathematics.
    Wha’s like us? Here’s tae us.

    Except you Ken. You go to the dunce corner.

  13. All true, but very so ironic that Ham has been able to convince politicians and others of the “worthiness” of his project, not just nickel and dimeing them, but suckering them for millions. He’s clearly not the only person with an empty head.

  14. It just occurred to me that the concept of Hambo attacking Stephen Hawking is like reporting on a maggot crawling out of the muck to attack a soaring eagle.

  15. Jim Orchardist

    Hambo (who can’t possibly still be considered Australia I hope) really stretches the fairy tale when he says atoms are mentioned in the bible. Lucky nobody asked him about amoeba or bacteria.

    Seriously, the gall and stupidity of this man knows no bounds.

  16. That is the problem of having idolatry like that of Ken Ham

  17. @Jim Orchardist
    The Bible is written to have all of the appearances of being a product of an Ancient Near Eastern culture. (It doesn’t even deny that.) Why would it be purposely designed to have those appearances? Would’t the problems associated with the “Omphalist hypothesis apply here, if those appearances are misleading?
    (I could so far as to suggest that the OH has excuses which don’t apply here: it would be impossible for the world to make a sudden arrival without the appearances; While, on the contrary, it would be extremely easy to slip in an anachronism. God told us the truth about the age of the universe; But we do not have any testimony about about the false appearances to the Bible.)

  18. Dave Godfrey

    Mr Lie either truly believes everything he writes, in which case he is insanely deluded, or he’s savvy enough to realize that if he concedes even the slightest error, he risks everything down around his ears. Because of the way he repeats the same garbage time after time after time, I suspect the latter.

  19. “Ken Ham Attacks Stephen Hawking”
    A clash of geniuses! That makes my blood run faster. The great battle Ham vs. Nye can only pale. Usually I skip Ol’ Hambo’s output, but not this time.

    “[what he calls] science”
    Ooooh!!! Take that, Hawking. Never mind decades of research. Ol’ Hambo directly goes for the jugular.

    “Why does he spend so much of his time trying to fight against Someone he doesn’t even believe exists?”
    Yes, Hawking – spend some more decades on researching this question and then come back! That’s 2-0 for Ol’ Hambo.

    ““there is a book” that tells us where everything—including atoms and consciousness—came from”
    Ah! We atheists are such ignorants. Ol’ Hambo knows where in the OT is written “Let there be atoms” and “Let there be consciousness”. 3-0.

    “It is no mystery to Christians”
    Ah, temporarly lack of focus. Even for Ol’ Hambo god is a mystery, so how he poofed atoms and consciousness into existence must be a mystery as well. 3-1.

    “he actually means unobservable, unrepeatable, untestable historical science”
    I begin to worry. Observing that the Universe expands and measuring background radiation a la Penzias and Wilson is totally repeatable and testable. Moreover Hawking is theoretical physicist. He hardly observes himself. He tries to predict what experimental physicists and astronomers will observe. Repeatedly. Testably. That’s 3-2.
    Come on, Ken, stick to your shtick! You can do it! You know what’s at stake!

    “Scripture makes it clear that Stephen Hawking knows that God exists but that he is suppressing this truth in unrighteousness.”
    Excellent comeback. The Bubble says that Hawking is indigeneous, so there can’t be any doubt. 4-2.

    “What I meant by ‘we would know the mind of God’ is, we would know everything that God would know, if there were a God, which there isn’t. I’m an atheist.”
    Now that’s good solid science a la Ol’ Hambo! Observable, repeatable and testable. You can look it up in A Brief History of Time and you will always refind the quote. This clearly shows empirically that Ol’ Hambo was right to quote Romans 1:18. So that’s 5-2. Hawking is on his knees.

    “So what Hawking has declared is nothing more than the same old lie the devil gave to Adam and Eve.”
    The knock out! The Bible already described what Hawking would do and say anno 2014.

    “He knows infinitely more than our fallible, sinful minds will ever know.”
    Now Ol’ Hambo is the clear winner I humbly add that he is a bit less fallible and sinful than the rest of us.

  20. @Eric L and others: the relevant question regarding Ol’ Hambo, Rives and the IDiots from Seattle is not “that crazy” (safe answer is always yes) but how deep the stinkhole is they jumped into long ago. Because there is one thing for sure: whether they believe the crap themselves or not, there is no way back for them. Their death will be a redemption in several respects. Until then we can only follow our own leader, SC, and mock them mercilessly.

    @DaveG: imo long ago Ol’Hambo has passed the point of no return where that dichotomy still matters.