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 Roger Stanyard » Wed Nov 14, 2012 11:14 am

marcsurtees wrote:Maybe you should look again at the facts rather than ignore them because they don't fit your paradigm.


We've all read up on Malcolm Bowden's crapola. The man thinks the sun, and the universe, orbit around the earth.

Do you?

Edit: His "geocentric views" are so idiotic that even the Christian Science Movement, of which he is one of the core activists, didn't bother to promote them in its "Genesis Expo" "museum in Portsmouth. If the creationists think he's bonkers and are not listening to him, why should anyone else?
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 Michael » Wed Nov 14, 2012 12:33 pm

I see lovely Ken has commented on this on Face Book.
Michael
 
Posts: 2786
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 1:30 pm
Location: Lancaster

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby Roger Stanyard » Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:00 pm

Michael wrote:I see lovely Ken has commented on this on Face Book.


Yer, the "great man" has deigned to lower himself to read our community forum. ;-)

That he has time to suggests he doesn't have a proper job. ;-)

Edit: And, what with all that time he spends on Facebook and his blog, it's no wonder Answers in Genesis is losing money and the public are staying away in droves from his "Creation Museum" kiddies' theme park. How's that Ark Encounter project of his going? (reply not needed, we know).
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 Roger Stanyard » Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:21 pm

Michael wrote:I see lovely Ken has commented on this on Face Book.


I must admit it gave me a right chuckle. ex-Big Ken Scam lecturing to the world when he can't run his own business properly. Simple business school rules for running any organisation. Act like a CEO and don't waste time on blogs and Facebook. Don't try to be the company salesman. Don't use nepotism to fill the executive positions, do it on open competition and ability, have a structure in place for the CEO to be formally accountable to those that ultimately finance the operation and keep the roles of chairman and CEO entirely separate.

He won't as if he did he would be fired.
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 a_haworthroberts » Wed Nov 14, 2012 5:02 pm

"A 30 year old paper from the Creation Science Movement! HIGHLY convincing." [Quote]

"The really interesting thing is the fact that it is referred to by a non-creationist web site.
Maybe you should look again at the facts rather than ignore them because they don't fit your paradigm."


I confess that I assumed the site was a YEC site.
Still not convinced (yes I WAS being sarcastic earlier). There are other pseudo-science nutters out there. My paradigm suggests that Bowden was talking c**p.

The fact that Marc calls this a 'fact' shows that he is either delusional or a dishonest liar or both.
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 » Wed Nov 14, 2012 5:37 pm

The really interesting thing is the fact that it is referred to by a non-creationist web site.

Forgive me for being underwhelmed by Science Frontiers whose home page states.
Science Frontiers is the bimonthly newsletter providing digests of reports that describe scientific anomalies; that is, those observations and facts that challenge prevailing scientific paradigms. Over 2000 Science Frontiers digests have been published since 1976.


It does seem to be a conspiracy theory site as far as I can see. A couple of pro creationist articles accusing scientists of conspiratorially destroying evidence for example
Would the enemies of creationism go out at night with a brush to destroy a key datum supporting creationism? Of course we don't know.

Of course there are far more interesting articles like the prevalence of alien abductions. Are we understimating them?
If one prunes away the psychological verbiage, Twemlow seems to be saying that in the minds of the percipients, NDEs and UFO abduction experiences are pretty much the same; that is, both phenomena are mental and not physical. However, in the same issue of the Journal of Near-Death Studies, K. Basterfield asserts that physical evidence exists for UFO abductions but that there is none for NDEs! Apparently, an abductee has brought back a piece of a UFO or something like that.

Or does the AIDs virus cause AIDs
Does the aids virus really cause aids?
All but a tiny minority of scientists accept as fact that an organism called the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is the cause of AIDS. This fact is hallowed and defended as vigorously as the facts of evolution, the Big Bang, and continental drift. Extremely nasty things are being said about a handful of heretics who attack this position.


In short this looks like a website that looks for odd articles and then prints them way out of context - for nutters - and by that I mean seriously out of context.

Sort of a Sunday Sport of science journals but without the soft porn!

Anyway got to go. Going to see if ScienceFrontiers has anything on Lady Di being killed by an alien lizard called Prince Phillip.
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 » Wed Nov 14, 2012 5:50 pm

Maybe you should look again at the facts rather than ignore them because they don't fit your paradigm."



Can Marc explain how this paradigm thing works cos I don't get it.

If we can interpret evidence freely according to any half baked idea we have - than surely science ceases to exist!!! All science!

The idea of science is that paradigms have to follow and fit evidence not evidence is tweaked to fit paradigms. How can 'evidence' be interpreted in two diametrically opposed ways? If Marc were correct any old idea at all is valid, you just tweak, selectively ignore or lie about the evidence to fit. So astrology and homeopathy are fine!

Am I reallly stupid in not getting it.

Well Bowden is a nutter and geo-centrist. I have read enough of his stuff to know he is usually utterly wrong
Well I think he just has a different paradigm re the solar system - a geo centric one. To paraphrase Marc in his talk for the ECG on lying for jesus. Helio-centrics don't own the evidence we all have the same evidence we just interpret it according to our paradigms.

So I guess Bowden cannot be wrong using Marcs logic. Therefore geocentrism is a perfectly valid position and should be taught in schools. Lest the geocentrics get bullied. Is that a correct statement Marc? geo- centrics are just looking at the evidence from a different paradigm worldview and are therefore just as correct?
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 » Wed Nov 14, 2012 7:23 pm

Michael wrote:I see lovely Ken has commented on this on Face Book.


I quote:
"I thought I would share a real compliment from a secularist with you today. (By the way--I appreciate all of you who help keep us up to date with article links/what people are saying about us etc).
I am quite thrilled the secularists would say this about me. One of them stated:
"Unlike Dawkins, Ham is NOT mellowing with age."
Of course not! The 'fire in my bones' the Lord put there burns more brightly as I am so burdened by the generations of kids/young people/adults being led astray by the secular religion of our day--evolution/millions of years.
Actually, this statement comes from a chat room I've seen a couple of times before--Amazing how obsessed they are with me and AiG. I wonder if they can have jobs--they seem to sit there waiting for every statement we make to analyze it and then spend time misquoting, misrepresenting, twisting, mocking, name calling--and you know--the usually stuff these sort of people do as they attempt to 'suppress the truth' and try to convince themselves there is no God and the Bible's not true.
Here is the link if you want--in a way its interesting to have a glance at this just to see how obsessed they are and how insecure in their religion they obviously are.
But again--I'm trhilled to knowl that even the secularists can see that "Unlike Dawkins, Ham is NOT mellowing with age"
Great to hear as I start the day."

There really is no answer to that.
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 Nov 14, 2012 7:25 pm

Other than that I tell the TRUTH about you Mr Ham. I do NOT spend my time misquoting, misrepresenting, twisting in the manner that you refer to. You must either be lying or referring to somebody else.

Since you ask, due to a mental breakdown in 2004 and resulting physical disability, I AM unemployed - even though I have since recovered.

Rather than misquoting, misrepresenting, or twisting, I simply point out - by email or direct to your website (then reproduced here) - most of the lies, pseudo-science, and downright false accusations that CONTINUALLY appear online from AiG and similar YEC sources.
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 Nov 14, 2012 7:34 pm

For Mr Ham's benefit in particular, here again is my post of 1 November in this thread - which he appears not to have noticed:

"The Bible makes people behave in irrational, untruthful, and propagandist ways - if they take it as 100% infallible and then contemplate what rational, unbiased, scientific, people have to say.
Here's Ham on his daily propaganda blog:
"What we note is that these name callers and false accusers don’t give any logical arguments—they don’t give scientific arguments—because they can’t!"
Mr Ham - who has been known to read this discussion forum, where I have posted all the many science and logic based criticisms of their online pseudo-science that I have sent to them from within their website or by email over the past two years - is lying through his teeth.
Any rude or illogical atheists who condemn the likes of AiG are much more 'helpful' to Mr Ham.
How is it that Mr Ham is lying in his latest blog post? Because AiG have totally ignored EVERY SINGLE ONE of my messages sent to them since late 2010 - precisely because they did contain scientific and logical rebuttals. I am left with the impression that they were unable to deal with my points, so they simply deleted my messages - possibly without even reading them (that possibility will not of course stop me from sending further messages as they have NOT told me that my messages are not being read - and some of them are also being copied to the people that they malign so I suggest that it will be in their interests to read them even if they want me to assume they are being ignored).
What say you, Mr Ham?"
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 Nov 14, 2012 9:56 pm

"The really interesting thing is the fact that it is referred to by a non-creationist web site.
Maybe you should look again at the facts rather than ignore them because they don't fit your paradigm."

“As long as the earth endures,
seedtime and harvest,
cold and heat,
summer and winter,
day and night
will never cease.”
Words attributed to God at Genesis 8:22 (NIV)

I see no suggestion that seasons only began after the mythical worldwide Flood, simply that continuous rain during the Flood 'cancelled' one seedtime and one harvest and made one 'summer' and one 'winter' irrelevancies.

The Bowden nonsense is more YEC eisegesis attempting to 'prove' the Flood.
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 » Thu Nov 15, 2012 1:23 am

a_haworthroberts wrote:
Michael wrote:I see lovely Ken has commented on this on Face Book.


I quote:
"I thought I would share a real compliment from a secularist with you today. (By the way--I appreciate all of you who help keep us up to date with article links/what people are saying about us etc).
I am quite thrilled the secularists would say this about me. One of them stated:
"Unlike Dawkins, Ham is NOT mellowing with age."
Of course not! The 'fire in my bones' the Lord put there burns more brightly as I am so burdened by the generations of kids/young people/adults being led astray by the secular religion of our day--evolution/millions of years.
Actually, this statement comes from a chat room I've seen a couple of times before--Amazing how obsessed they are with me and AiG. I wonder if they can have jobs--they seem to sit there waiting for every statement we make to analyze it and then spend time misquoting, misrepresenting, twisting, mocking, name calling--and you know--the usually stuff these sort of people do as they attempt to 'suppress the truth' and try to convince themselves there is no God and the Bible's not true.
Here is the link if you want--in a way its interesting to have a glance at this just to see how obsessed they are and how insecure in their religion they obviously are.
But again--I'm trhilled to knowl that even the secularists can see that "Unlike Dawkins, Ham is NOT mellowing with age"
Great to hear as I start the day."

There really is no answer to that.


Just read through the predictable sycophantic comments on Ham's Facebook page.

The bias I attack is NOT Christianity it is false teaching known as 'young Earth creation science'.
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 » Thu Nov 15, 2012 1:26 am

For your delight:
http://www.truelife.org/home/category_v ... &video=138
Apparently background persistent music is required in order to make him sound vaguely plausible as he spouts the same old YEC dishonest, oft-refuted, nonsense that there is 'evidence' for worldwide global hill-covering flood inundation just 4,300 years ago.
Charlatan.
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 marcsurtees » Thu Nov 15, 2012 4:19 pm

a_haworthroberts wrote:“As long as the earth endures,
seedtime and harvest,
cold and heat,
summer and winter,
day and night
will never cease.”
Words attributed to God at Genesis 8:22 (NIV)

I see no suggestion that seasons only began after the mythical worldwide Flood, simply that continuous rain during the Flood 'cancelled' one seedtime and one harvest and made one 'summer' and one 'winter' irrelevancies.

Part from the fact that this was said about 1500 years after creation and the flood... and was a statement about the world after the flood.
Marc
_______________________________________________________
"When people stop believing in God, they don't believe in nothing
— they believe in anything." (commonly attributed to) G.K. Chesterton
marcsurtees
 
Posts: 1180
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 7:05 pm
Location: Edinburgh

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby a_haworthroberts » Thu Nov 15, 2012 7:19 pm

marcsurtees wrote:
a_haworthroberts wrote:“As long as the earth endures,
seedtime and harvest,
cold and heat,
summer and winter,
day and night
will never cease.”
Words attributed to God at Genesis 8:22 (NIV)

I see no suggestion that seasons only began after the mythical worldwide Flood, simply that continuous rain during the Flood 'cancelled' one seedtime and one harvest and made one 'summer' and one 'winter' irrelevancies.

Part from the fact that this was said about 1500 years after creation and the flood... and was a statement about the world after the flood.


For a scientist your statements are hardly a model of clarity. The statement was apparently made just after the flood - assumed to be 1,500 years after creation.

I don't know what point, if any, you are making to disagree with my comment.

The words are a promise that seasons will not cease (in seasonal latitudes anyway) from that time on. How YECs think they can use it to speculate on the climate before the flood, or on Earth's obliquity during the 'flood year', is somewhat beyond me. Particularly as Noah would not have known what 'winter' and 'summer' were if they had not occurred before the flood.
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 9 guests

cron