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

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby a_haworthroberts » Mon Nov 12, 2012 5:08 pm

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/10/us/po ... ST_FB&_r=0

The fundamentalist Christian, narrow-minded, conservative, bossy, indigenous male white US religious lobby is dying out (or 'compromising') and being replaced by a plurality of views within a more diverse younger electorate (including people who actually think it is unfair for people to go bankrupt because they or their close relatives lose their health).

The traditionalist Christian church in the US will not be able to stop this merely by SHOUTING LOUDER as Ken Ham and Todd Friel seems to advocate - any more than King Canute could hold back the tide.

But Ham thinks he has a ministry from God to shout "woe woe", even if few people will change their beliefs or their behaviour as a consequence. Perhaps he does!
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 cathy » Mon Nov 12, 2012 5:09 pm

Unless he is advocating a theocracy, and I've never seen him expressly suggest that.

Never explicitly expressly suggest that. I think it is implicit in all creationists as they can no longer trust people to accept wilful ignorance and respect their authority without some kind of coercion :evil: :evil: :evil:
cathy
 
Posts: 3665
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:51 pm
Location: Redditch

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby cathy » Mon Nov 12, 2012 5:11 pm

But Ham thinks he has a ministry from God to shout "woe woe",
Ministry from God? I think Ken Ham thinks God has a ministry from Ken Ham myself. Ken clearly thinks he's the boss and font of wisdom in that relationship. Otherwise he'd take more notice of the ninth commandment.
cathy
 
Posts: 3665
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:51 pm
Location: Redditch

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby a_haworthroberts » Mon Nov 12, 2012 5:22 pm

cathy wrote:
Unless he is advocating a theocracy, and I've never seen him expressly suggest that.

Never explicitly expressly suggest that. I think it is implicit in all creationists as they can no longer trust people to accept wilful ignorance and respect their authority without some kind of coercion :evil: :evil: :evil:


It's the problem with democracy. All those people who are stupid - or 'stupid' depending on the example concerned - over which party/candidate they choose to vote for.
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 » Mon Nov 12, 2012 5:24 pm

Since most things pertaining to science, including the age of the Earth, aren't even mentioned in the bible what is Ham on about ?

The sooner evangelicals realise this man is a danger to the church, not an asset, the better.

Unfortunately it doesn't look as if it's going to happen any time soon.
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 » Mon Nov 12, 2012 6:33 pm

Well, I would agree that Obama's second election victory does not appear to be an anti-creationist backlash (though Roger has suggested that the influence of the YECs in the US is on the wane). (Romney is of course a Mormon ie a cultist by most peoples' definition and also considered by some republican supporters as not right wing enough. But many in the US appear to consider the republicans as too right wing - and maybe as anti-science too.)
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 Roger Stanyard » Mon Nov 12, 2012 8:08 pm

a_haworthroberts wrote:Well, I would agree that Obama's second election victory does not appear to be an anti-creationist backlash (though Roger has suggested that the influence of the YECs in the US is on the wane). (Romney is of course a Mormon ie a cultist by most peoples' definition and also considered by some republican supporters as not right wing enough. But many in the US appear to consider the republicans as too right wing - and maybe as anti-science too.)


It's not an anti-creationist backlash because the creationists are a spent force, politically. However, it was very much a backlash against religious fundamentalism which covers creationism.
Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6162
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby cathy » Mon Nov 12, 2012 10:32 pm

Well, I would agree that Obama's second election victory does not appear to be an anti-creationist backlash

I'm not so sure - it is a backlash against the sorts of churches creationists attend in my opinion.

The economy is shot to pieces and there is very high unemployment. A friend went to New York (before Sandy) and said the thing that really struck this time was the marked increase in the number of beggars. Something not noticed before in such large numbers. Yet Obama still won! Romney had to have really upset a lot of thinking people for Obama to win under those poor economic conditions. And win far more convincingly than people thought he would or should.

You can pretty much lump in all Romneys pals gaffes with creationist values and creationist religious mindsets. They'd share them all I'd guess. Anti progress, anti science, anti education, homophobic, anti welfare and most of all anti womens rights. One newspaper report said something like it was almost as if the Republicans had forgotten women could vote (guess they might have repealed that right as well had they won). Some of the comments from religious right wing Republicans on rape and abortion following rape for example, were disgusting in the extreme. Mirroring the RC church in many ways before it got a bit savvy in Europe at least.

All the republican rights attitudes come as standard with the average US creationist I'd say (and many of the UK ones). Romney managed put off educated women, younger people and ethnic minorities as far as I can ascertain! I think it was far more a rejection of what the creationist churches stand for than a positive vote for Obama!

Our creationists aren't racist at all, but I can't see them appealing to women and younger people who tend to be less inclined to homophobia and an anti science wilful ignorance. And like the US they are predominently older white males who have authority issues and like subservience. They all seem to wish to return to some kind of golden age of the 50s that I doubt ever existed. Hopefully the fact the money is drying up in the States won't drive more of them over here. They're a menace.
cathy
 
Posts: 3665
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:51 pm
Location: Redditch

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby cathy » Mon Nov 12, 2012 10:59 pm

The sooner evangelicals realise this man is a danger to the church, not an asset, the better.


I think it may be too late already Peter - the church should have stamped on creationism and the likes of Ken Ham far sooner.

The backlash has started in the US and is sort of coming over here. There is far more overt antipathy towards religion in general now than I've ever seen before in my life. And that is very recent indeed. It has mirrored the growing knowledge of creationists and creationism and all the other stuff they stand for and it is that sort of religion that most folk are vehemently against.

The problem is that there are now a lot of people for whom that sort of fundamentalist nonsense is their first real introduction to christianity. The old days when christians were regarded as basically nice people who believed in charity and caring for others is rapidly being replaced with a notion of christians as science denying rather unpleasant shouty individuals with massive egos who think they should be beyond the law.

A fact leapt upon by people like Richard Dawkins (and who can blame him - along with child abuse by priests - creationism and the christian institute are absolute gifts to new atheism).

It has never been one of those fuzzy debatable inclusivity issues that the churches seem to be allowing it to be. Creationism has always been a clear black and white issue. It is lies and deception and a breach of the ninth commandment and quite simply wrong on all levels.

The church has had ample reasons and years of opportunity to get rid or distance themselves from it!! And only a small minority like yourself and Michael has actually seen that. There comes a point where inclusivity leads to you letting in people who will destroy you.

Three years ago I could never have imagined that not only would I absolutely lose all my belief in God but that I'd move to a such a staunch anti religious position somewhere in line with Dawkins. But I have and it is solely due to creationism and the creationists I've come across.

Since most things pertaining to science, including the age of the Earth, aren't even mentioned in the bible what is Ham on about ?

You forget the bible is being rewritten by creationists to their own standards. And the fact that most of them don't seem to have bothered actually reading it, or at least can't answer simple questions about it.

Creationists get their ultimate authority from people like sobbing Sylv or Ken Ham rather than the primary source. Even if their God himself were to come down and tell them they were wrong they'd still continue. They have to be the first bunch of people that I cannot understand on any level at all. There seems to be nothing that can explain or excuse them.
cathy
 
Posts: 3665
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:51 pm
Location: Redditch

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby a_haworthroberts » Mon Nov 12, 2012 11:14 pm

This earlier post by a YEC-criticising Christian blogger was flagged at the end of his new posting dated 12 November (and reading AiG and CMI Facebook comments confirms this unhealthy uncritical hero-worship of the biased fans who join in there): http://thenaturalhistorian.com/2012/04/ ... n-geology/

(Today's post: http://thenaturalhistorian.com/2012/11/ ... /#comments)
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 » Mon Nov 12, 2012 11:16 pm

The final para from the 7.4.12 blog post:
"One of the ironies I find all to often with comments such as these is that the authors of these comments are almost certainly serious about testing the word of pastors and elders with the Scriptures. They would say that we should always be testing what we hear at church with the Word of God. To understand the Bible we need to meditate upon it, study it day and night and learn from other Biblical experts. But when it comes to understanding science the same people are perfectly willing to fawn over whoever tells them what they want to hear without testing them to see if they know what they are talking about."
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 » Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:50 am

http://www.answersingenesis.org/article ... is-the-lie
Assumptions by the author of 'The Lie':
a) That evolution is false and unscientific;
(b) That the delusion from God in 2 Thessalonians 2:11 is not either a wrong belief about eschatology and a 'lawless one', or the false religion of Islam, or some other future (or past) phenomenon.
Despite pretending otherwise, Mr Ham does NOT know that either of his assumptions is correct.
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 Nov 13, 2012 11:16 am

a_haworthroberts wrote:http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/au/what-is-the-lie
Assumptions by the author of 'The Lie':
a) That evolution is false and unscientific;
(b) That the delusion from God in 2 Thessalonians 2:11 is not either a wrong belief about eschatology and a 'lawless one', or the false religion of Islam, or some other future (or past) phenomenon.
Despite pretending otherwise, Mr Ham does NOT know that either of his assumptions is correct.


You know, we can go on about Mr. Ham all we like, his outlandish creation museum and the ark encounter, and imagine the creationists have had their day etc.

However, the fact remains that in the U.S. 46% of the population as a whole believe in young Earth creationism rather than accepted mainstream science. That equates to several hundred million people and is a figure that doesn't seem to be changing any time soon . That is the problem in the U.S (and to a lesser extent Nortern Ireland),

We can gloat about Ham's museum and ark encounter failing all we like, but that figure has remained steady all these yeras. How Henry Morris and John C. Whitcomb have convinced so many Christians to go down this route is still beyond me.

For this to change we need large numbers of Christians, en masse, to have Glenn Morton type experiences.

How this is achievable I have no idea (we can't even convince Marc).
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 Roger Stanyard » Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:17 pm

Peter Henderson wrote:
a_haworthroberts wrote:http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/au/what-is-the-lie
Assumptions by the author of 'The Lie':
a) That evolution is false and unscientific;
(b) That the delusion from God in 2 Thessalonians 2:11 is not either a wrong belief about eschatology and a 'lawless one', or the false religion of Islam, or some other future (or past) phenomenon.
Despite pretending otherwise, Mr Ham does NOT know that either of his assumptions is correct.


You know, we can go on about Mr. Ham all we like, his outlandish creation museum and the ark encounter, and imagine the creationists have had their day etc.

However, the fact remains that in the U.S. 46% of the population as a whole believe in young Earth creationism rather than accepted mainstream science. That equates to several hundred million people and is a figure that doesn't seem to be changing any time soon . That is the problem in the U.S (and to a lesser extent Nortern Ireland),

We can gloat about Ham's museum and ark encounter failing all we like, but that figure has remained steady all these yeras. How Henry Morris and John C. Whitcomb have convinced so many Christians to go down this route is still beyond me.

For this to change we need large numbers of Christians, en masse, to have Glenn Morton type experiences.

How this is achievable I have no idea (we can't even convince Marc).


Time, Peter.

The SBC, the de facto established church of the deep South in the USA and America's largest Protestant denomination, is loosing members big time. I also wonder to what extent that other bastion of fundamentalism, the Pentecostals, are losing members.

Strictly speaking, 46% of Americans are not YECers as the percentage includes OECers and Americans strongly tend to lie about their religion.

Back in 2009 I stated that the economic zeitgeist of the last thirty years was well and truly at an end. I'll stick my neck out and say that its handmaiden, the American political zeitgeist of the era, ended last Tuesday.

The USA is a deeply conservative country but it can't stay locked in the past. The arrow of time is strictly one way only.

It may well take a decade or more for alternatives to emerge, but they will and the fundamentalists will be isolated. The Americans are basically in it for the money.
Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6162
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby Peter Henderson » Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:57 pm

Ham is currently on Revelation TV telling lies about the Grand Canyon (think he's commenting on Phil Robinson's encounter with Don Prothero) and then has the audacity to claim he's telling the truth. All the usu;l crap about "observational science" and "historical science". I really would love to see someone like Prothero take on Ham directly.

The mountains were much lower before the flood, see basins weren't as deep, therefore there was plenty of water, evidence of rocks being bent and twisted while still soft, an so on.

I'm glad people like Bill Nye are now starting to take notice of this charlatan.

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

PreviousNext

Return to Conversations with Creationists

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

cron