Our New Home

We have a new home, come join us at WeAreSMRT (We Are Skeptical Minds & Rational Thinkers)

The Forum

Tuesday, September 2, 2008

Ken Ham Abandons Creationist Model

A new model has moved in. Yes, it aligns itself more with the scientific explanation of the geologic column.

After following Ken through his ministry here in the US, I have observed certain changes in his dogma that allow for scientific findings. He still has that problem with "kinds," but hey, what is Hell among friends.....

The new article at AIG represents one of the most significant and utterly drastic changes that the fundies have attempted to catch up with the intellect of their more educated minions. They can see their irrational beliefs going up in the smoke of reason. I knew the Hamster would have to move, but I didn't think it would happen this quickley. hehe


  1. Can someone link the article?

    I'm too braindead to find it.

  2. http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n4/upgrade-time


  3. Curious. Looking at one of the diagrams you see that the Mesozoic and Paleozoic eras lasted .... one year! The dork actually believes that 500 million years of the Earth's history can be compressed into one year.

    I guess it makes things easier for Noah as at the beginning of the Paleozoic he would only have to collect a few sponges, bacteria and algae. Unfortunately for him, the Cambrian Explosion occured on board the Ark and by September he was overrun by large meat eating dinosaurs. Fortunately for him by December they had all died.

  4. Catastrophic Plate Tectonics...

    That is so fifteen years ago.

  5. Just how long must it have taken some bloke to come up with the flood story which he just cobbled together from a couple of well-known myths in order to make a point about how we must not piss off God or else? Fifteen minutes?

  6. Hey! Don't you people know that AIG has its own peer reviewed journal now? They do real scientific work there.

  7. Science: Ur Still Doin it Wrong.

  8. Hammy hasn't moved much, Dale. This article is full of creationist tricks:

    - He's careful to say his "model needs an upgrade" rather than admit his "model is fullofit." And the question mark is a classic passive-aggressive move ("wellll, I may be wrong but you can't prove that you're 100% right either")
    - Garner claims he's "trained in the earth sciences," but his credentials consist of a BSc in Environmental Science and a fellowship in the Geological Society -- a real geologist would have better credentials.
    - Garner gives lip service to the scientific principle of updating models when new evidence becomes available, and even goes so far as to mumble ungraciously "we may be wrong," but fails to mention that ALL the evidence must be considered and not just the preferred evidence.
    - As for genuine scientific work, Garner cites just enough of it (without mentioning where he got those pretty pictures) to convince his miseducated audience, not to convince anyone who actually knows this stuff. As soon as he's challenged by a real geologist, he'll whine "Persecution!" and alter the article just as Ray alters his misbegotten blog posts.

    Like the Catholic Church, the cretinists move only when they must, and only as far as they must in order to avoid complete exposure of their intellectual bankruptcy. It's like a schoolyard argument -- even if the other guy finally cries "uncle" that doesn't mean he now likes the bully. And remember, bleevers are convinced that the mean ole scientists/atheiss are bullying them.

  9. The real problem with this model is that you can't find it anywhere in nature.


Unlike Ray we don't censor our comments, so as long as it's on topic and not spam, fire away.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.