This is a moderately thought-provoking item from Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo), the ayatollah of Appalachia, who ceaselessly promotes himself as the world’s holiest man who knows more about religion and science than everyone else.
The title of Hambo’s latest is Can Creation Scientists Do Real Science? Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis:
Creation scientists are often accused of not being “real” scientists because they supposedly don’t publish in secular journals.
[*Groan*] Let’s get this straight. So-called creation science isn’t science, so of course it doesn’t get published in science journals. However, if a creationist stays away from that young-Earth, Noah’s Ark stuff and does some real science, that could get published in a respectable journal. Then Hambo says:
But then anything that even hints at a Creator God — let alone a biblical view of a young earth, special creation, or global Flood — is censored and will probably never be published because it contradicts the prevailing mindset. Secular scientists are incredibly inconsistent in their accusation.
Yes, secular scientists censor that creation stuff, then they say creationists aren’t scientists because their work is censored. It’s so unfair! After that he tells us:
In a recent interview, Dr. Danny Faulkner, an astronomer here at Answers in Genesis, responded to the claim that creationists can’t be scientists. Dr. Faulkner holds a PhD in astronomy and taught astronomy and physics for over 26 years at the University of South Carolina Lancaster before he “retired” to come to AiG. Here’s his response to the secular claim about creation scientists.
Hambo doesn’t mention that Danny’s undergraduate degree is from Bob Jones University, and that he had to sign the Statement of Faith Hambo requires from everyone who works for AIG. Anyway, here’s what Danny says:
Some people want to make this arbitrary distinction that you have to buy into the metaphysical assertion that there is nothing more than the physical world. In his book and TV show Cosmos, the late Carl Sagan began with this very famous statement: “The cosmos is all that is or ever was or ever will be.” And many people hearing that think that’s a very profound scientific statement, but there’s not a bit of science in that — it’s a very broad, bold assertion of his worldview. It’s a denial of anything other than the physical.
Danny’s right. Sagan’s statement is an arbitrary denial of Oogity Boogity! He continues:
But you can’t know that as a scientist. You can believe that, and you can assume that. But it’s an assumption, a belief, a faith statement. Now people say it’s not religious — but it’s a faith statement of no faith, so it is a faith statement.
Hey — he’s right again. What Sagan says is “a faith statement of no faith.” Let’s read on:
They’re trying to say, “Well, science is all physical, all natural” since it involves studying the physical world using the five senses. But that does not mean that it is the only reality.
[*Begin Drool Mode*] Ooooooooooooh — that is so profound! [*End Drool Mode*] Another excerpt:
Do we conduct our science usually [Hee hee!] without invoking miracles? Yes! That’s because the world exists and that’s what we’re trying to model. There’s a certain pattern and regularity to the way the world works, and science studies that; but that doesn’t mean the world has always worked that way or always will. I can’t prove scientifically that miracles have happened, and I can’t prove scientifically that they haven’t happened.
Some miracles can be disproved, and the others are irrelevant to science — see The Curmudgeon’s Guide to Miracles. Here’s more
There’s no incompatibility at all between belief in science and belief in God and in Christianity. And I’m not the only person saying that! The person who literally wrote the book on physics and astronomy, and who invented calculus, was Sir Isaac Newton. And he wrote ten times more on theology and the Bible than he did on math and science. So if you are going to take that approach, you just kicked one of the greatest scientists of all time to the curb because he can’t be a scientist.
Ah yes, Newton. It’s true that he spent most of his time on theological matters — and all of that was scientifically worthless. One last excerpt from Danny:
What those kinds of tactics tell me is just how vacuous and depraved their worldview is. … It’s an attempt to stiff-arm people to get them to ascribe to their secular faith system.
Are you paying attention? Danny says that your worldview is “vacuous and depraved.” Now ol’ Hambo chimes in at the end:
There are many gifted and highly qualified scientists both from history and present day who are biblical creationists. Nothing about believing in and starting with God’s Word disqualifies someone from being a scientist.
If that doesn’t convince you, dear reader, then you have a problem. It’s your vacuous and depraved worldview.
Copyright © 2017. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.