Hambo & the Lilies of the Field

This one is really inspiring! It’s from Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo) — the ayatollah of Appalachia, the world’s holiest man who knows more about religion and science than everyone else.

At the website of Answers in Genesis (AIG), Hambo’s creationist ministry, he just posted Surprise: “Oldest” Fossil Lily Looks Just Like a Lily. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

Creationists were shocked [Shocked!] to read a news article [in ScienceDaily: Oldest completely preserved lily discovered] about the evolution of lilies — astonishingly, a fossilized lily, the supposed oldest ever discovered (115 million years), looked just like. . . a lily! The evolution is incredible! Actually, it forgot to evolve! Okay, so that was very tongue-in-cheek — we weren’t surprised to see that lilies have always been lilies. That’s exactly what we’d expect based on God’s Word.

In case you didn’t realize it, that was creationist humor. Ol’ Hambo is a very funny guy! Then he says:

This particular specimen was “extraordinarily well preserved,” including roots, flower, and even the individual cells. And it has all the features of that specific class of plant (monocotyledonous): “parallel-veined, narrow leaves with a leaf sheath, a fibrous root system and triple flowers.” The scientists say, based on this new specimen, “it can be deduced that the tropical flowering plants were already very diverse.”

Okay, lilies have been around for a long time, and for some reason that has Hambo all excited. He tells us:

This find is no surprise to biblical creationists. God created each kind — including the kind that includes lilies — to reproduce according to their kinds. So, we see great variety within a kind, but lilies stay lilies.

Now do you understand that fossilized lily, dear reader? And there’s more to it — much more. Hambo continues:

This remarkably well-preserved fossil wasn’t buried 115 million years ago — it was catastrophically buried during the global flood of Noah’s day just about 4,300 years ago.

Wow! You didn’t see that coming, did you? Let’s read on:

And it’s so incredibly preserved because it was buried so quickly — not slowly and gradually, which we’d expect if this fossil had been growing in a quiet freshwater lake, as they describe in the news article.

That explains why all fossils are so well preserved. The flood buried them. Hambo ends his brief post with this:

It points to the catastrophic processes of the flood, not the slow and gradual processes of our day.

All that from one lily fossil! Isn’t creation science amazing?

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

9 responses to “Hambo & the Lilies of the Field

  1. Derek Freyberg

    “Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin.”
    Yet I say unto you that even Hambo in all his mind-boggling inanity shall not destroy their beauty.

  2. Dave Luckett

    Of course, this ignores the obvious fact that lilies, like all flowering plants, emerge in the fossil record long after terrestrial animals. Genesis, however, says that all the plants, including flowering ones, were created on the third day and all the land animals on the sixth. But ignoring inconvenient facts is part and parcel of creationism.

  3. “Ol’ Hambo is a very funny guy!”
    Indeed – he’s a master of self-parody.

    @Dave woefully misrepresents creacrap: “this ignores the obvious fact that lilies, like all flowering plants, emerge in the fossil record long after terrestrial animals.”
    Of course it doesn’t. Just one blogpost ago you can read how Brawny Brian tackles this! And he, how extraordinary, even made a testable prediction!

  4. If it was catastrophically buried during the flood, how come all its siblings and their seeds weren’t catastrophically buried as well?

    If the Bible is true, why are there still lilies?

  5. Christine Marie Janis

    Those lilies are like the creationists: they toil not, they only spin.

  6. If it was catastrophically buried, why wasn’t it torn apart? Isn’t a lily flower delicate? We’re dealing with waters which carved out the Grand Canyon in a year.

  7. In the end there is always: it’s a miracle! God’s message to you! What are you going to do with this precious gift, accept it or reject it?

  8. @FrankB
    And then why try to offer a naturalistic explanation? The Bible does not say anything about burying things in the Flood. Nor about micro-evolution, speciation, fossils or extinction.

  9. ” lilies have always been lilies”

    Not always! I grew up with a guy named Lyle, who now goes by Lilly. So no Ken, not all “Lillies have always been Lillies”

    But I’m sure that story pisses you off even more.