Hambo Offers Creation Science Labs

At the website of Answers in Genesis (AIG), the creationist ministry of Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo) — the ayatollah of Appalachia, the world’s holiest man who knows more about religion and science than everyone else — we found this thrilling headline: Homeschoolers — Join Us for Our High School Labs. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

Homeschoolers (and all parents who want their teens to learn from a biblical worldview perspective): we have an exciting opportunity for you!

Ooooooooooooh! What’s the opportunity? Hambo says:

Many homeschoolers miss out on hands-on science lab experiences during their high school years. [And a lot more too!] At AiG, our labs are very helpful and can encourage young people who are science-inclined to pursue a science field during their post-secondary years.

We assume Hambo means creation science, of course. He tells us:

To give homeschoolers the option of a hands-on lab, we’re offering high-school labs [link omitted] through our upcoming educational science labs. These labs feature world-class instructors [Oh yeah!], hands-on experiments, and more.

They have “world-class instructors”! Hambo continues:

And, of course, everything is taught through the lens of a biblical worldview.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Let’s read on:

Our biology labs for the 2018–2019 school year were very popular, and for the 2019–2020 school year, we’re offering:

• Biology
• Chemistry
• Forensic Science
• Physics

We know about bible-based biology, but what is bible-based chemistry — turning rivers into blood? Water into wine? And why isn’t Hambo offering bible-based astronomy? Anyway, here’s one last excerpt:

Our educational science lab is currently under construction near the Creation Museum. [How convenient!] We’re excited for the first group of students to arrive for their labs in September. [We’re excited too!] They’re sure to enjoy learning and doing science in this new facility.

Okay, dear reader, we’ve done all we can. Now that you know about this glorious opportunity, the rest is up to you.

Copyright © 2019. 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

30 responses to “Hambo Offers Creation Science Labs

  1. Michael Fugate

    I am sure they will be using your creationist scientific method throughout. I hope you get royalties.

    Creationist Scientific Method:
    1. Select a conclusion which you hope is true.
    2. Find one piece of evidence that possibly might fit.
    3. Ignore all other evidence.
    4. That’s it.

  2. Theodore Lawry

    This is crazy. Each program has 24 labs, two apiece on 12 different dates! So you not only have to pay $299-424 for the labs themselves but also have to make 12 round-trip trips between your home and the lab site! Who’s going to do that? And check out the liability waiver. God’s protection can’t be relied upon, I guess.

  3. @Theodore Lawry
    Particularly interesting is the mention of medical care. Does that mean that kids can get non-Bilbical medical care contrary to the possible objections of parents?

  4. @TomS, they will get valuable lessons in the diagnosis of biblical leprosy, and the correct way of behaving in the presence of menstruating women. But I hope that faith healing is reserved for more advanced classes

  5. Michael Fugate

    It is the perfect biblical waiver; nothing is ever God’s fault and nothing is ever AiG’s fault. You sin against God you pay with death and hell. You sin against AiG lab equipment you pay with death and hell. It is only fair. I assume burning at the stake or child sacrifice happens if you can’t pay.

  6. Science labs at AiG:

    — Biology: divine in origin. In no way naturalistic. Sometimes allows for miracles, like raising the dead (see first-hand, eyewitness accounts in the Gospels); or cancers going into remission; or someone seriously stubbing their toe and not undergoing extreme shock, cardiac arrest, etc. Students will focus on all aspects of God’s perfect design of the natural (but supernaturally Created) world.

    — Chemistry: again, divine. Students will learn to memorize the periodic table (see: miracles can happen!).

    — Forensic Science: students will examine criminal forensic evidence for sinful man killing his fellow (sinful) men, in this God-cursed, Fallen world.

    — Physics: manifestation of God’s supreme, universal laws which are subject to change by God Himself, to allow for miracles (see above).

  7. @Michael Fulgate, I thought you knew better than that. Burning at the stake is a mediaeval accretion. Stoning is the right way to do things

  8. So…. if they start calling it science, can they be held liable (finally) for lying and deceiving people about reality?

  9. Michael Fugate

    @ Paul, Mea culpa. Mea cuplpa Mea maxima culpa.
    After they have been pulled apart with horses…

  10. Forensic science? Sounds like heresy to me!! I mean, WERE YOU THERE???

  11. Considering the amount of biology, chemistry and physics in the holy babble (at least the KJV I read long ago) those should should total considerably less than 60 min.

  12. Last time we checked, the ‘forensic science’ course was restricted to studying fingerprints – obviously to show that every human is created individually. It can’t have anything to do with ‘historical science’.

  13. Don’t worry, people. The children will be put against a chroma key green background, the details will be filled in later by the Discovery Institute production team.

  14. @ChrisS You can expect a civil suit to be started immediately. How dare you put the AIG lesson plans on the internet!

  15. @tedinoz
    S’okay. I’ll just hole up in an Ecuadorian embassy for the next 10 years. However long it takes.

  16. About including “forensic science” among the more traditional physics, chemistry and biology. Not that there is anything wrong with forensic science, but one might expect a more comprehensive, basic science in a secondary school curriculum: geology or astronomy.
    ISTM that geology is too dangerous a subject. Even the basics are ruled out as “historical science”. Forensic science can be presented as an exemplar of “here and now” science.

    BTW @Draken
    Good one!

  17. Of course Ol’Hambo and co are capable of any hypocrisy. But CSIs can be about bodies that have been dead for a few hours up to several weeks, if not longer. Someone should ask Ol’Hambo how that qualifies as “here and now”, if only for entertainment purposes.

  18. “Biology, Chemistry, Forensic Science, Physics”

    Oh the irony. Every one of those scientific disciplines *requires* that the universe operate the same every day, including in the recent and distant past as well as the future. Those scientific disciplines, and in fact even science itself, could not exist as a reliable way of knowing if that were not the case.

  19. If they want to impress upon students the idea that “real science” only deals with the “here and now” (that is, about what is happening in the presence of human activity) one would immediately think of meteorology.
    That, of course, would be taboo.
    Here and now, anyway.
    If they had been thinking of a curriculum in the good old days, meteorology would have been a shoo-in.

  20. Forensic science is a popular elective in some high schools and many colleges. Done properly (which AIG can’t do with a babblical lens), they can be good ways to teach science and scientific methods. But, of course, the irony is that it’s all about finding out what happened because “you weren’t there”.

  21. @Scientist
    Thank you. I am clueless, obviously, about what is being taught in schools.
    My early reaction to this is negative, unfortunately.
    I wonder what trial lawyers would have to say about facing jurors who have learned about what to expect in a trial. The style of presenting a case to a jury is to expect that the jurors will be, in a technical sense, “naive”. They have never heard anyone talking like that before.
    And then, I don’t like the idea of teaching science from the point of view of a lawyer. Lawyers have a different way of reasoning. The purpose of a trial is “justice”. Which means that there is a limit to the resources, like time, and the goal is a definitive conclusion. Some facts are not permitted to be considered.
    Autrorative-type people like certainty that a trial presents. While scientists are more open to ambiguity.
    If I had kids in secondary school, I’d would have to have an explanation for recommending “forensic science” for them.

  22. The idea of naive jurors has been defeated for good in times where TV detectives are dime a dozen and the internet feeds you knowledge you didn’t even want to know about. Still, forensic science seems like a far too specific topic for high school.

  23. Michael Fugate

    I for one would really like to see the learning outcomes for these labs.

  24. As a teacher who has taught HS forensic science, it’s a fun course and if anything I think it makes for a more informed juror. People think what they see on tv is real and properly taught FS can correct what you may not understand properly. It also keeps
    Kids engaged in science and provides them a chance to explore a career in the field or something related to criminal justice. It’s an elective where I sub and while I’ve not been through the whole program, I’ve been in classroom multiple times and I see it as a good thing.

  25. @TomS Juries, at least where I am, used to exclude lawyers and several other professions from the pool but now it’s open to just about all professions. Obama was just called in Chicago for a jury pool. So I don’t think you have to worry about a HS class tainting the pool.

  26. @GreenPoisonFrog, I hope you teach them about the extreme unreliability of eyewitness testimony and identity parades, and the techniques used by police to exact confessions.

    Sure, God was there, but His memory will surely have been greatly influenced by His own repeated retellings, which may explain why He contradicts Himself so much

  27. @Paul Braterman
    I am not aware of anything in the Bible which tells us that the Bible testimony is “the truth, the whole truth, and noting but the truth”.

    And as far as what is said in court, only the sworn witnesses are bound by that oath. The lawyers are not, the judge is not. And one of the approved tactics of the police in interrogation is lying. It is OK for the cop to say to a suspect, “You admitted that you were at the scene of thecrime, and now you’re changing your story”, when the suspect did not say that. Or “Your friend has confessed, are you going to let him get away with a lesser penalty?” (Same thing, BTW, about testimony to a congressional committee. The congresspeople who are examining you are not sworn to tell the truth. But if you are testifying, don’t dare point that out!)

  28. @TomS, My concern about confessions is that they are highly unreliable and lead to wrongful convictions. I am particularly concerned that the police continue to use the Reid technique, although this has been shown to generate false confessions. This is perversion of the course of justice. I commend the Wikipedia articles on “false confession” and “Reid technique”.

    Your comments on congressional committees are interesting and timely

  29. Eric Lipps

    Our biology labs for the 2018–2019 school year were very popular, and for the 2019–2020 school year, we’re offering:
    • Biology
    • Chemistry
    • Forensic Science
    • Physics

    But isn’t what scientists (real scientists, not creationist “researchers”) do when studying fossils forensic science? They take the remains of something (or someone) and try to reconstruct the past from those remains.

  30. I suppose forensic science could be applied to paleontology or several other disciplines but I think that forensic which includes such things as accounting, criminology, and the like. In fact, the word forensic is defined as relating to the application of scientific methods and techniques to the investigation of crime. So while the techniques are in many ways similar, the definition is way more specific.