Skip to main content

Enemies of Reason: Ken Ham

This one is almost too easy. Ken Ham, the co-founder of the Creation Museum (2007) and Answers in Genesis (1994), is a Biblical literalist who formerly taught biology in Australia before moving to the United States in 1987. Author of The Lie: Evolution, Ham is in the vanguard of creationism as one of its most vocal proponents. He regularly posts blogs and articles on the Answers in Genesis website, claiming over 1.25 million visitors to the Museum and ten million hits on the AiG website.
Ham promotes the notion that dinosaurs were on the Ark, that they can exist comfortably within the framework of the Bible and that any Christians who find that evolution is compatible with their faith are nothing but a bunch of compromisers who ignore that a literal Genesis is fundamental to a Christian worldview. He is also fond of repeating that the creation-evolution "debate" is a choice between God's inerrant Word and "man's fallible opinion", along with the standard well-worn creationist retorts that frame evolution as an atheistic fable to free them up to do whatever they want.To accept millions of years, for Ham, is to go against the Word of God's clear message and clouding it with man's fallible interpretations.
These are anti-science and irrational positions to hold, especially in regard to a literal six-day Creation event and a literal Noah's Flood, and the fact that he tries to fit dinosaurs (always the iconic dinosaurs; what about trilobites, giant ground sloths or equally interesting non-dinosaurs of the Permian and Triassic like Dimetrodon or Postosuchus, respectively? Were they on the Ark too?) into a Young-Earth time frame. While a few Ph.D. scientists assist Answers in Genesis with more "scientific" articles, Ham seems to focus his own time on the young, with home schooling material and talks to kids teaching them how to "rebut" the idea of millions of years. In fact, in spite of what AiG would have you believe, the deep time of geology and evolution have never been more well-supported than they are now.
For actively heading a creationist organization dedicated to attacking the good and proven science of evolution while promoting the strange and outdated ideas of creationism, Ken Ham is an Enemy of Reason. On a scale of one to ten, Ham is a six as one of the more recognizable faces in the creationist landscape. Further, I recently read on Ham's blog that he gets email alerts whenever "Answers in Genesis" appears on the web. So, hello to Mr. Ham, who I assume will be getting an email alert about this post.

Comments

  1. Haha. I love that last bit. If you are reading this, Mr. Ham, you are a tool who is helping to f**k up the minds of many of my friends. Shave your face.

    ReplyDelete
  2. On the 1 to 10 ranking system, which is worse, 1 or 10?

    In all honesty, I don't view any of these people as a threat except for the ones that deal with child indoctrination. Get them young lol.

    ReplyDelete
  3. On the ranking scale, ten is the worst. I admit, I haven't set down a rigorous scale of ranking, it's more a sense I have of the level of threat based on education, intent and the number of people who listen to them. Thus they rank higher than Conserv&pedia because I believe they reach more people.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"Unanswerable Questions" for Evolution Part One

Creation Ministries International has launched a new initiative, which seems a lot like all the other creationists blitzkriegs before it. With the wonderfully creative tagline of "Question Evolution", CMI intends to challenge "evolutionists" and their "indoctrination" of high school students with the supposed dogma of evolution. They also aim to  cut the population of atheists by half , presumably by challenging the "faith" that every atheist (and only atheists, no "real Christians") is supposed to hold in Darwin's great idea. The main thrust of this is a tract with fifteen "unanswerable" questions for evolutionists. I'm done putting quotation marks around the word, evolutionists; from here on out I ask my readers to recognize that it is a creationist term that is about as silly as calling someone a general relativist (accepts general relativity) or germist (for accepting germ theory). Regardless, CMI seems just as i...

What Creationists Don't Understand

There are quite a number of concepts that one could successfully argue that creationists fail to understand; whether this is out of a simple lack of knowledge or willful ignorance is hard to say and certainly can't be generalized to every creationist. Some, the everyday creationist, I would like to think simply haven't been exposed to the evidence. Others, the holders of Ph.D's in various fields, especially in the sciences, who happily reject evolutionary theory are willfully ignorant (John Whitmore comes to mind). But I think there is one idea that creationists of all stripes simply fail to understand; evolution is based on solid, visible evidence. Evolution is not some tenant of a "science religion" that descended down to Darwin from on high, it is an explanatory framework based on quite a lot of facts and mountains of evidence. It is evidence that leads to the conclusions of evolution, that life changes over time and, given the long history of the earth, all ...

The Absurdity/Agony of War

Science writer Mary Roach is never one to shy away from parts of science that verge on the absurd, as anyone who has read any of her books surely knows. I'd read two of her previous books, and been enchanted enough by Roach's unique combination of endless curiosity and a wry sense of humor that I rushed to lay my hands on her newest book. Grunt: The Curious Science of Humans at War will not fail in living up to the expectations that fans of her work will bring. Those who have never read her before will be hard-pressed to put down a book that I finished in a few short days.  The real joy of reading something by Mary Roach is her talent for seeking out strange areas of science that a reader might never have known about. As an investigator, she answers questions you never knew you had. Her newest work   is no exception. We discover, for instance, how the military tests the ability of a fighter jet to survive a mid-air collision with a large bird--by firing a dead chicken...