Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Creationist bloggers can be infuriating. If one has infuriated you by persisting in nonsense even when corrected, or refusing to reply to your criiticsm, you may feel driven to recording the fact. If so, you may register your disapproval here and hope a response is forthcoming.

Moderator: Moderators

The comet is no more but the YEC lies carry on

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sun Dec 08, 2013 1:27 am

E mail as sent:


Request to Ken Ham

WILL MR KEN HAM PLEASE EITHER TELL THE WORLD WHERE HE THINKS EX-COMET ISON CAME FROM (IF HE INSISTS THAT THERE IS NO OORT CLOUD). OR ELSE STOP LYING THROUGH HIS TEETH THAT IT WAS 'CONFIRMATION' OF A YOUNG UNIVERSE?
http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs ... lelinkedin
"Comet ISON's recent decay gives us even more evidence confirming a young universe". With respect that is total NONSENSE. You should address ALL the evidence Mr Ham, not just one recently destroyed comet.
http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs ... here-finis
"If the solar system is billions of years old, there ought not to be any comets left...".
ONLY if comets spend their whole lives close enough to the Sun that they will be losing mass all the time. Many of them DON'T.
As Dr Faulkner is an astronomer I can only conclude that he seeks deliberately to mislead those who are NOT.

Somebody here - who apparently IS a young Earth creationist - is UNPERSUADED by Mr Ham's wild claims. I quote:
"I read the article, but I'd like to know HOW comets mean a young universe. Couldn't they just be debris in our galaxy that gets pulled in by the sun? In that case, it wouldn't be proof of a young universe. I just want to be able to explain if I'm asked";
"Couldn't they just be dirty ice floating throughout the galaxy that gets caught in the sun's gravity? That wouldn't be proof either way".
https://www.facebook.com/aigkenham

It's a risky pastime to start thinking carefully about the dogmatic claims made by YECs. You might start noticing that most of them hold no water whatsoever (unlike comets - which don't lie).

Genesis 1 does not mention an Oort Cloud. But it does not mention comets either - and Ken Ham does believe in them. Mr Ham appears to be arguing - of necessity in order to maintain the fiction of a very 'young' universe just 6,000 years' old in American culture - that something for which there is strong circumstantial evidence was NOT created by God because it 'doesn't' really exist. How does he know precisely what God did and did not create beyond planet Earth (according to Genesis)?
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby Peter Henderson » Sun Dec 08, 2013 2:53 am

What's happened to their website Ashley ? Seems to have gone a bit weird and appears to have been downgraded for some reason.
Peter Henderson
 
Posts: 4353
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sun Dec 08, 2013 3:44 am

Peter Henderson wrote:What's happened to their website Ashley ? Seems to have gone a bit weird and appears to have been downgraded for some reason.



Search me!
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby Peter Henderson » Sun Dec 08, 2013 3:49 pm

a_haworthroberts wrote:
Peter Henderson wrote:What's happened to their website Ashley ? Seems to have gone a bit weird and appears to have been downgraded for some reason.



Search me!


Seems pretty strange to me Ashley:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/
Peter Henderson
 
Posts: 4353
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sun Dec 08, 2013 4:39 pm

It's gone all stripy!
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sun Dec 08, 2013 6:08 pm

Further email just sent:


I have seen differing suggestions that ISON might have taken either
10,000 years (BBC Horizon website entry), or 200,000 years (based on an
article by Phil Plait at slate.com cited as footnote 24 at the
Wikipedia ISON page) or 1 million years (Prof Brian Cox on the
'Jonathan Ross Show' on ITV) to travel from the Oort Cloud (or
wherever) to its close and fatal encounter with the Sun.

Also, astronomer Danny Faulkner of AiG has apparently stated: "This
sun-grazer comet has an orbit that's virtually parabolic, as near as we
can tell. That means that its orbital path extends very far out from
the sun, which, if the Oort cloud exists, would be in the region of the
Oort cloud". Thus ISON's orbit suggested that it came from the right
distance at which any Oort Cloud would be located - even though AiG
wish to deny the existence of a 'cloud' of would-be comets at that
distance from the Sun.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/article ... n-not-oort
Please see also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oort_cloud

Two more questions for Mr Ham:
- how did ISON (and all previous long period comets that have been
observed from Earth) manage to travel to the vicinity of Earth in less
than 6,000 years?
- if there's no Oort Cloud but all long period comets were created as
'live' comets starting to travel towards the Sun just 6,000 years ago,
at 'Oort Cloud' distance (just under one light year) from the Sun, how
long will it be before we stop seeing ANY more long period comets (if
the universe is just 6,000 years old)?

I hope these questions make sense as I don't claim to be an expert in
astronomy or physics. (By contrast Mr Ham claims that those who have
suitable qualifications but who disagree that the universe is just
6,000 years old - such as Bill Nye - do not understand science
properly.)

PS I understand that Mr Gilleand, copied in, has met Mr Ham this
weekend and is planning a blog post on the ex-comet at Grace with Salt.
It is not clear that Mr Ham told Mr Gilleand where he thinks the comet
might have come from.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Rabble rouser and liar Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby a_haworthroberts » Tue Dec 10, 2013 12:33 am

More evidence that YECs think they are justified in behaving in a way which they condemn in others:
http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs ... ationists/
"This charge is typical of many evolutionists. They cannot find enough support for their ideas and they cannot refute the creationist view, so they just call biblical creation a “lie” and refuse to debate". That is a filthy LIE. Ham appears incapable of ever speaking truthfully. I cannot believe he does not know about this:
http://bcseweb.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/i ... ccept.html
Not a single YEC I have read has once claimed that the evolutionists 'lost' in this debate.
http://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com ... ationists/
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:19 am

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/c ... sit-121013
'Current' insanity gripping the Republican Party?

EDIT: I've now skim read this - it's just a rushed-looking bad language rant that tells the reader next to nothing about the Creation Museum. A disappointment.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby Peter Henderson » Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:58 pm

From today's Facebook message:

Actually if Noah's Flood did occur, one would expect to find billions of dead things buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the earth--which is exactly what we do find.


Bollocks.
Peter Henderson
 
Posts: 4353
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby a_haworthroberts » Tue Dec 17, 2013 9:41 pm

It looks like Ken Ham has been demonising atheists (some of whom are strident) but also the US media (for daring to listen to a 'minority'), and generally playing the martyrdom card (after an appearance on US TV yesterday):
http://www.christianpost.com/news/creat ... ew-110977/

Just another day.

It might help if his god had provided a few more facts that actually back up his Bible-inspired beliefs (notably his beliefs that attack established science).

The (decidely not unfriendly) interview can be viewed here:
http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs ... -atheists/
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed Dec 18, 2013 3:09 am

I am not sure that I can stomach all this propaganda/advertising hubris and then steel myself to watch Ken's new anti-atheism video...
http://www.answersingenesis.org/article ... kbrainwash

Meanwhile an apparent atheist/non theist has turned up on the AiG Facebook page, under the link to that Christian Post article about Ham's complaints following atheist displeasure at his TV interview. He is being given a typical YEC 'welcome' I see.

EDIT: this is 63 MINUTES long. No, thanks.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/media/v ... g-our-kids
Last edited by a_haworthroberts on Wed Dec 18, 2013 3:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed Dec 18, 2013 3:41 am

According to Ham's latest blog post, atheism is "a blind faith as there is no evidence consistent with it". Yet there is no evidence that an all powerful (or is he) omniscient omnipresent supernatural creator-judge God could possibly exist yet be invisible as well. Just the Bible (and other religious texts) saying so - which is why Christianity and the other theistic religions require FAITH.

And despite his confidence that there is NO evidence consistent with atheism (or naturalism alone) Mr Ham ran AWAY from the possibility of a one on one debate with this bloke. Funny that.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/aronra/2013 ... cine-show/
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sat Dec 21, 2013 10:18 pm

Message as sent to Answers 'in' Genesis (Ham was quoting one of his lying/stupid/both researchers):


http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs ... Ken+Ham%29
"But there’s no evidence that dinosaurs had feathers. Such claims are just the evolutionists’ way of making the evolutionary story seem true."
LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR
Revelation 21:8 (NKJV)
""But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.""
Just quoting from YOUR book.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Steve Golden - researcher for AiG and a liar beyond cure

Postby a_haworthroberts » Fri Dec 27, 2013 11:08 pm

a_haworthroberts wrote:Message as sent to Answers 'in' Genesis (Ham was quoting one of his lying/stupid/both researchers):


http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs ... Ken+Ham%29
"But there’s no evidence that dinosaurs had feathers. Such claims are just the evolutionists’ way of making the evolutionary story seem true."
LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR
Revelation 21:8 (NKJV)
""But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.""
Just quoting from YOUR book.


As just sent to Answers 'in' Genesis:

"
http://www.answersingenesis.org/article ... -dinosaurs

"Unfortunately for the evolutionists ... all they really can tell about fossils are fictional stories".
That is an unprovable and anti-scientific claim ie DOGMA.
Science does NOT depend solely upon eye witness accounts or so-called eye witness accounts for its discoveries. It is YOU who is peddling fiction about the distant past, Mr Golden. (How else would you get to work for 'Answers in Genesis?) The claim by Ken Ham that fossils are evidence for 'Noah's Flood' is utter garbage. And his claim that the fossil record does not in any way point to evolution over millions of years ignores the layers in which the various types of fossil have consistently been found (as well as all the other evidence pointing to millions of years of time and morphological and genetic changes in nature on this planet over such timescales).
Which is WHY you do not refute any of my messages to AiG but instead pretend that you never received them - as I document in full at the British Centre for Science Education community forum.
"Over the years, more and more claims have surfaced that dinosaurs were not in fact covered in scales, but in feathers, which is convenient since evolutionists often teach that dinosaurs evolved into birds." Yes - MORE evidence that evolution is true - and that you are nothing more than ENEMIES of science and just religious bigots.
"The bottom line is that there is no evidence dinosaurs had feathers. Such claims are just the evolutionists’ way of making the evolutionary story seem true". The bottom line is that you and your bigoted colleagues are ****ing LIARS, Mr Golden.
The Menton article you cite at your footnote 2 is five years old and - given the fast-moving nature of recent discoveries in palaeontology - OUT OF DATE in its pathetic attempts to deny the fact that some dinosaurs WERE feathered. How do you think God feels if he created feathered dinosaurs (the Bible does not even mention dinosaur-like creatures never mind what they looked like) and YOU say "No he didn't!" because you hate evolution and by extension those who believe in it?"
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sat Dec 28, 2013 5:11 pm

Someone has posted this on the AiG Facebook page (22 hours ago):


"Don't know the colors, huh? Apparently your "researchers" missed the announcement about REAL researchers having found the pigmentation cells in feathers on feathered dinosaurs, which came out about a year & 1/2 ago."Bone fragments", huh? How about all the nearly complete & even fully complete skeletons found? While rare, in 200 years of fossil collecting, even rare finds begin to add up. "Can't tell feather patterns from fossils", huh?Have your "researchers", perchance, heard about all those fossil skin imprints; which show scale/feather/fur patterns on various prehistoric creatures? Another typical example of creationist propaganda, claiming that science doesn't know this or that, while ignoring the fact science CAN & DOES know it, while covering up the fact that it is creationism which cannot & does not knows."



"
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

PreviousNext

Return to Conversations with Creationists

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

cron