Ken Ham Says: ‘Stop Looking for Evidence’

The scientific expertise of Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo), the Australian entrepreneur who has become the ayatollah of Appalachia, seems to be boundless. He’s the world’s holiest man who knows more about religion and science than everyone else, 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.

Ol’ Hambo’s latest blog article at the AIG website is Can Vanishing Stars Point to Alien Civilizations? We already know his attitude about aliens — see Ken Ham Says There Are No Intelligent Aliens, but today he’s criticizing a paper published in The Astronomical Journal. We can’t find it at their website yet, but this is an article about it from New Scientist: Impossible vanishing stars could be signs of advanced alien life. Here are some excerpts from Hambo’s view of things, with bold font added by us:

It seems every week there’s a new study regarding supposed alien life in outer space and yet another possibility of how we can find these elusive supposed beings. The newest attempt to find advanced alien civilizations involves looking into our universe for vanishing stars. The thought behind this method, proposed by a team of scientists from Uppsala University in Sweden, is that “perhaps . . . [the aliens are] harnessing energy from it using a Dyson sphere — a ball of solar panels around the star that blocks the light from our telescopes. Or maybe the aliens would want to hide their star from an enemy.” [Ellipsis and brackets in Hambo’s post.]

That sounds like an interesting research proposal. What’s wrong with it? Hambo says:

Apparently the research team analyzed several hundred thousand stars looking for ones that seemed to disappear. The 148 candidates quickly dwindled to one as they weeded out false positives and negatives. And the one that was left might not actually have disappeared at all “because it looks faint in the second data set.”

Hambo is delighted that they haven’t found any evidence yet. Let’s read on:

What I find interesting is that creationists doing real, observational science in astronomy, genetics, or any other field [Hee hee!] cannot reference a biblical worldview or a Creator God or their work will never be published in a secular journal — even though they have real evidence to back-up their claims. And if the researchers are known to be creationists, they will likely have trouble getting published (even if their work doesn’t mention God and isn’t in any way related to the origins debate) simply because they are creationists!

It’s a cruel world. Hambo continues:

Yet completely speculative research such as looking for vanishing stars in hopes of finding advanced alien civilizations — for which no observational evidence whatsoever exists — is accepted and published in The Astronomical Journal!

Hambo is missing the point. The scientists are suggesting that there may be evidence to be found, and saying that it if were found, it would be very useful. What’s wrong with that? Hambo explains:

When Bill Nye “the Science Guy” was touring the Ark Encounter two weeks ago, he said that it wasn’t crazy to believe we descended from Martians. He openly admitted there’s no proof that any life exists on Mars — though he hopes someday we’ll find the life that he thinks is there. Many secularists think like this.

Those silly secularists don’t know how to think! But Hambo does. Moving along:

They hold to the hope that, despite the lack of evidence, someday, somewhere, we will find life — preferably intelligent life — in the universe. It seems they are willing to believe in anything except for the biblical God and His Word. It’s all really a clash of worldviews that began in Genesis 3 — God’s Word vs. man’s word.

Hambo doesn’t need any evidence for his worldview, because he already knows it’s true, and those godless scientists are fools to look for evidence of theirs. One last excerpt:

We need to pray that these secularists will have their eyes opened to the truth of God’s Word. You see, it’s a spiritual issue, not an intellectual one. These men and women are very smart people, but they are blinded to the truth of God’s Word because of the hardness of their hearts.

Hambo should pray that the search for evidence will continue, and that it will continue to produce negative results. But deep down, he lives in terror that one day the evidence against his ancient worldview will be irrefutable. It already is in many ways, but spotting an intelligent alien civilization might be more than even he could bear.

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

12 responses to “Ken Ham Says: ‘Stop Looking for Evidence’

  1. If we’re looking for convincing evidence against his “worldview”, I’d say that his failure to build an sea-worthy, all-wooden, refuge for many animals should raise serious doubts.

  2. michaelfugate

    It is comical that Ham, even with modern technology, could not build a functional Ark and yet concludes not that the Genesis story is an allegory, but that Noah had better technology which was somehow lost even though Noah survived the Flood.

  3. There are people who would say, if modern technology could not make an Ark … Why, then, it had to be space aliens!

  4. @Michaelfugate

    Not only better technology, but also a type of tree with the strength of steel, that is unknown in today’s world, and the implements to cut down large numbers of this formidable tree.

  5. “We need to pray that these secularists will have their eyes opened to the truth of God’s Word.”
    If Ol’Hambo would focus on prayer projects iso Ark failures he totally would have had my atheist blessings.

  6. Eric Lipps

    Multiple choice: If indisputable evidence for the existence of alien civilizations were found, the Hamster would (1) dispute it anyway, claiming a scientists’ conspiracy right out of V: the Miniseries, and never mind that that one was a fraud; (2) say the aliens are demons we dare not try to contact; (3) say the aliens are sinless unfallen beings (who, in any illustrations he might provide, would be shown as blond, blue-eyed and dressed in white robes) whom we would never be allowed to contact because we might taint them with our sinful nature; (4) created 6,000 years ago just like Adam and Eve on Earth; or (5) all of the above, and never mind the logical contradictions involved. Logic? He don’ need no stinkin’ logic!

  7. Makes a lot of sense. No search, no evidence, no results. Ted Cruz wants/ed to do the same with NASA’s tracking of global temperature data via satellite, so he proposed eliminating that type of nasty research from NASA’s budget. No data, no climate change/global warming. QED

  8. They will not find evidence of life on other worlds by listening!!! Because anything they get will not be as good as the evidence for evilution and look how they deny that!!!

  9. Finding evidence of life on another planet would be the greatest discovery of our time. Finding evidence of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe would be the greatest discovery of all time.

    Ham says,

    They hold to the hope that, despite the lack of evidence, someday, somewhere, we will find life — preferably intelligent life — in the universe.

    Well, duh. If Ham had any sense of wonder and curiosity left, he would hold to that hope too.

  10. There is always the possibility that there is something which is very complex, but is so different from life as we know it that we don’t know whether to call it life – or even so different that we will call it something other than life.
    Likewise, with intelligence. Something so different from our kind of intelligence that we don’t know what to make of it.

  11. There is always the possibility that there is something which is very complex, but is so different from life as we know it that we don’t know whether to call it life

    For a brief moment there I though you were actually referring to creationists!

  12. Hypotheses proffered without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.