Answers in Genesis indeed…

A few days ago, I received one of those little books. You know the ones I mean. It said, “What REALLY happened to the Dinosaurs?” on it. I was intrigued, “Hey, I want to know!” and I proceeded to read it. I had the best laugh that I’d had in a long while, it was so funny.

It is written by a man named Ken Ham (it’s a very apt name) and he tries to explain the ‘mystery of dinosaurs’ and how their bones just prove creation science even more. I was going to scan the entire 40 page booklet, but I’ll just type out some of the more amusing passages, but I will be scanning the terrible and cartoony images of the dinosaurs, they are just awful.

Mr. Ham begins with, “Dinosaurs are used more than anything else to indoctrinate children and young adults in the idea of millions of years of Earth history. However the Bible gives us a framework for explaining dinosaurs in terms of thousands of years, and solving the mystery of what happened to them.” Well, I could say this booklet is indoctrinating children and young adults into believing your nonsense, but let’s just read on.

He continues by explaining what those dirty evolutionists think, dinosaurs ‘ruled’ the earth (his exact quote) and somehow for some unbeknownst reason to any scientist they just disappeared 65 million years ago. But wait, no he says, some silly scientists think birds evolved from dinosaurs, why that’s even more absurd than a flying dragon! Or is it?

He says that obviously dinosaurs were created 6,000 years ago, as were all life forms, and that Adam lived in the same time as these (all 600… he actually believes there were 600 ‘kinds’ of dinosaurs) gentle creatures who all ate plants. But wasn’t Tyrannosaurus Rex a carnivore? Well not to worry paleontologists, because Ken Ham says that you really can’t tell what a dinosaur’s teeth say about the eating habits because you can’t even tell what skin color was by bones! He says, “Scientists generally do not dig up a dinosaur with all its flesh intact”, which is true, does this man know anything about real science? So, T-Rex ate plants like all the good animals, until someone sinned and, uh-oh! Here comes that flood.

He also says that of course scientists are wrong about explaining the origins of dinosaurs, simply because they make mistakes all the time. Look at brontosaurus, it was really an Apatosaurus skeleton with an incorrect head and labeled mistakingly. Okay, so he got us there, but science is self-correcting, once new evidence shows up it replaces the old, outdated stuff. That doesn’t necessarily mean that it was wrong, but it was human error in the case of brontosaurus.

So Noah comes, and there’s the flood, but aren’t dinosaurs too big to fit on the ark? No! says Ken Ham, there’s plenty of room on the boat. Remember, out of the 600 ‘kinds’ of dinosaur, only like four or five were actually really big. So the smaller ones got to live, and they went on the art with Noah.

Now he gets really funny. He tries to give examples in the bible where it mentions dinosaurs, he finds ones about sea monsters, and flying monsters and ties those to Mosasaurus and pterodactyls. He references a movie entitled The Great Dinosaur Mystery and explains that in all ancient cultures, they had legends about ‘dinosaur-like’ animals which the called “dragons”. From Gilgamesh (ironic he chooses an epic that a lot of Near East texts are based off of) to a book published in the 1500s, there is evidence that dinosaurs were actually dragons, now gone due to hunting by humans.

He comes back the bones and teeth thing again. “Movies like Jurassic Park and The Lost World portray most dinosaurs as aggressive meat eaters. But the mere presence of sharp teeth does not tell you how an animal behaved, or necessarily what food it ate—only what kind of teeth it had (for ripping food etc.).” He just obliterated his own statement. Why would a plant eater need sharp teeth for ripping plants? He sites bears as a good example, “bears have teeth similar to a carnivore’s but are mostly vegetarian”. Bears are omnivores, eating whatever they can to survive. A lot of times, plants are more easily accessible than fish, or other meat. He claims that claws and fangs came about because sin was introduced and they are wicked. This guy is nuts.

Ken Ham tries to explain just why it is that dinosaurs can’t be seen anymore even though they were on the ark with Noah, and why people are still so fascinated with these creatures. He blames evolutionists (surprise) as spreading evil evolutionary propaganda to poor, little hapless Christians, who are so gullible they tend to think of dinosaurs as being ‘somewhat mysterious’. He goes on to say, “If you were to ask at the zoo why they have endangered species programs, you would probably get an answer something like this: ‘We’ve lost lots of animals from this Earth. Animals are becoming extinct all the time. Look at all the animals that are gone forever. We need to act to save the animals.’ If you then asked, ‘Why are animals becoming extinct?’ you might get an answer like this, ‘It’s obvious! People are killing them; lack of food; man destroying the environment; diseases; genetic problems; catastrophes like floods (HMM CONSPICUOUS!)—there are lots of reasons.’ Ken Ham has some good examples of why animals start to fall into an extinction vortex, and ultimately end up not existing anymore, perfectly good reasons as to why the dinosaurs might have died off, except the flood one. Now Ken explains quite enthusiastically the real reason that dinos aren’t here anymore. ‘Maybe one of the reasons dinosaurs went extinct is that we didn’t start our endangered species programs early enough!’ What a moron!

Birdosaurs? Ken Ham tries his best to debunk the theory that some dinosaurs may have evolved into birds. This man, like many others, has such a poor knowledge of how evolution works its appalling. He says dinosaurs and birds aren’t the same, birds are warm-blooded not cold-blooded like a dinosaur would be according to science. “Sadly, the secular media have become so blatant in their anti-Christian stand and pro-evolutionary propaganda that they are bold enough to make such ridiculous statements as, ‘Parrots and hummingbirds are also dinosaurs.’ I’ve never heard that. I personally do see evidence currently that some species of dinosaurs evolved into birds, what Ken Ham fails to remember is that the Jurassic age was just one of three periods in the Mesozoic era, Cretaceous, Jurassic and Triassic. Each one of those periods is marked by significant extinction, and spanned some 500 millions years, much, much longer than humans have been around.

Ken Ham is a creation science moron, and I find his drivel funny. It’s not funny when people are stupid enough to believe it. Someone from the Answers in Genesis website wrote in about the booklet, “I wanted to thank you for sending me the package of booklets for my office. I put them out yesterday and I saw at least one patient with the ‘Dinosaur’ one in her hand. At the end of the day, the young woman who ‘floats’ on our wing was reading the ‘Does God Exist?’ booklet. She commented, ‘This is really interesting!’ Her name is Laura. I already use the Focus on the Family pamphlets in my office but had never thought of using yours. I plan to keep them in stock. People really like having literature like this in the office and I get lots of comments on them and it opens up lots of avenues for conversation. Thank you again for your ministry and thoughtfulness. — Debbie E., Oregon” How nice… looking around I think more and more that Ken Ham and people like him are retarded, and deserve to go live on the moon.

365 thoughts on “Answers in Genesis indeed…

  1. I love religious quackery like this! I kind of collect it, actually. Whenever the Jehova’s Witnesses come around to give me copies of the Watchtower, I eagerly accept them. I then read them on the pot, laughing all the time.

    Seriously, though, stuff like this is utter fascinating. Kind of the way a strep bacterium is fascinating to an epidemiologist….

  2. Is it possible “Debbie E., Oregon” is a psychiatrist? That would certainly explain her response. LOL

  3. Ken Ham is the Australian equivalent of Kent Hovind——-wow, even the same initials—KH!!  If i ever meet one of them in person, i might have to go Mark Chapman on their ass.  No, seriously, i wouldn’t do that.  Dinosaurs are cool though.  If you ever watch an alligator or crocodile, it scares the shit out of you.  Think about an animal 5 or 10 times as big!!  Damn, it must have been amazing!  I love Godzilla too.  Get some Ray Harryhausen movies—-like 1,000,000 BC with Raquel Welch—just make sure you have a kleenex near by, ok?  There are some cool dinosaurs in there too.  I’m high on dope right now.  Funny thing is, i’m smarter than either KH when i’m high on dope and they’re sober. HAHA.

  4. I do believe in creation….but I’d like to think I’m somewhat more objective than the KH’s.  I think the answer to how things really went down is somewhere in the middle; as while evolution makes a helluva lot of sense for the most part, it fails to explain how a complex organism like an eye would come about, as it has hundreds of processes that need to happen all at the same time for it to work properly.  I do think that animals do show signs of intelligent design….but I also think Ken Ham is a lunatic. 

    I also find it interesting that he didn’t include any passages from Job…as they are quite possibly the most concrete evidence for dinosaurs (Leviathan, and Behemoth [and oddly enough, dragons, one of the creatures breaths fire]).  Funny thing is though, that most theologians agree that Job took place BEFORE the flood, not after.  wink

  5. “it fails to explain how a complex organism like an eye would come about, as it has hundreds of processes that need to happen all at the same time for it to work properly.”

    The eye is extremely well understood in evolutionary theory. And, processes don’t all need to occur simultaneously for them to work. Basically, as regards to the eye, all that needs to happen is that an organism develops some surface that responds to the presence of photons. Some proto-fish, for example, that could tell the light surface of the water from the dark underneath. This can then become more specialized over eons, developing first the ability to discern gradations in light, then form, then color.

    For a much better treatment of this, read Dawkins’ “Climbing Mt. Improbable,” which I think has a whole chapter on the eye. It’s a fascinating book.

  6. Well Evil One I must declare your first ‘guest’ entry to be amusing, interesting, and thought provoking.  This new feature of SEB has the potential of being a worthwhile effort.

  7. Oooh! I didn’t even realize this was a guest entry! I guess I’ll have to be checking on who the author is, more often.

    tongue rolleye

  8. > Jack Chick has a great pamphlet touching on
    > this:
    > In The Beginning

    Been reading a lot of chick tracts today. They are really funny in a ridiculous/horror story kind of way. Though you shiver sometimes – not because of the hell you are promised all the time but because of the fanatics behind such stuff.

  9. As an aside: maybe its better if Les finds a way to more clearly mark ‘Guest Bastard’ entries. Maybe a slighy ‘off’ color scheme?

    I find that I’m not the only one by far to miss it at first when its actually NOT Les at all posting stuff. No disrepect to the other posters, but I think this would be better.

  10. Yes, some difference between colors or something to denote differences in posters would probably be useful.

    I happen to be taking an Age of Dinosaurs class currently so this post served to be really interesting. I’m just wondering how Ken Ham would go about explaining the bite marks that have been found in a Triceratops hip bone that were made by a T. rex.  Oh man… just so many contradicions to state… oh well. “Ken Ham, you are a f-ing moron.”  Anybody who understand that gets bonus points in my book grin.

  11. OK, I’ve gone ahead and made some changes to indicate when an entry is a guest post. If you guys can’t tell the difference now then you must be blind.

  12. Les,

    Whatever happened to the avatars? Some of them were really good. Have they become dinosaurs? wink

  13. Ingolfson, you can order the complete set of Jack Chick pamphlets for something like $10.  I did that a few years ago and seem to have acquired a permanent subscription to all new ones, and been placed on some really amusing mailing lists.

  14. Ham also once said, “Many Christian girls go bra-less and wear clingy T-shirts or wear clingy clothes to show off their breasts or sexual parts. You can see the boys’ eyes follow them around. But what is happening? Many of those fellows are committing fornication or adultery in their hearts”*.  Can’t think one clean thought.
    In fact, just about every word he says revolves around promiscuity and sexual perversion… like any good ole-time pulpit-thumping fire-and-brimstone preacher.
    With sleazebags like this around, who needs spliff?

    *http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/3359.asp
    Can you see why he spends most of his time in Kentucky (where siblings are allowed to breed)?

  15. As a self-proclaimed “atheist” (let’s face it, there is no such beast) you make a lot of intolerant claims about Christianity and Creationist Science. Don’t you feel that you might be contributing to religious persecution to those who are freely practicing their religious freedom under the same Constitution that was founded for religious purposes?

    Perhaps some responsibility is in order.

  16. Eric,

    Can you give us clear cut examples of religious persecution of Christians in modern America? If you can, I would love to hear them; if not, then perhaps it is you who needs to learn something about responsibility in making accusations.

    We’re listening.

  17. “Help! Help! I’m being oppressed!”

    I was waiting for the reverse persecution card. We also have the “there are no atheists” and the “America was founded as a Christian nation” plays. Well done.

    By the way, I’m a self-proclaimed apathetic agnostic atheist, but now Eric will tell me that such doesn’t exist. Now who’s oppressing whom?  raspberry

  18. PHILADELPHIA – Yesterday, five Christians with the Philadelphia-based Repent America were ejected from the 2nd annual Philadelphia Philles’ Gay Day after homosexuals and homosexual advocates began to incite a riot by pulling down the Christian’s Gospel banner, which read, “HOMOSEXUALITY IS SIN, CHRIST CAN SET YOU FREE.

  19. There is no reason to be ugly about this guys. All I am saying is that by spewing forth uninformed views of the Christian religion, you create a hostile environment for Christians to live in.

    It’s funny to be that the liberal left claims they want tolerance for all, but by doing so they are intolerant to Christians. And that’s not to imply I know anyone here’s political agenda, just making a point.

  20. Eric,

    Thanks for posting those links. Basically, they prove that Christians cannot be complete a**holes (driving around with pictures of aborted fetuses on a truck, or trying to hang around gay pride parades to convince gays they’re sinners) without people getting mad at them.

    If you think that’s persecution, my friend, your standards are so low as to be meaningless. For instance, what do you think would happe if some gays tried to attend evangelical events with signs that said “Christians are evil”. Do you think they would be treated any better than how those Christians were treated in those articles? I doubt it.

  21. One last note to Eric…

    In those last couple articles where there was an abuse of power from the police and school officials, the legal system stepped in and corrected the wrong. Does that convince you that Christians aren’t persecuted?

  22. Reminds me of this quote:

    My ancestors were Puritans from England. They arrived here in 1648 in the hope of finding greater restrictions than were permissible under English law at that time.

  23. Well to be completely honest I can’t prove to you that Christian events are protested everyday, but they are.

    Secondly, regardless of the tactics, freedom of speech is for everyone, not just pro-choice or pro-gay people. Is that not correct? What I’m asking is, why is it that Christians cannot be afforded the same equal protection that non-Christians are?

    Regardless of how you feel about a picture of an aborted fetus, do you not agree that the person in question has the right to display it?

    I think you are trying to cloud the issues a bit. It’s not how you feel about the issue, it’s whether or not the act is against the law. The same law that protects you, should protect the Christian.

  24. Secondly, regardless of the tactics, freedom of speech is for everyone, not just pro-choice or pro-gay people. Is that not correct? What I’m asking is, why is it that Christians cannot be afforded the same equal protection that non-Christians are?

    Regardless of how you feel about a picture of an aborted fetus, do you not agree that the person in question has the right to display it?

    I am almost positive that billboards and trucks with pictures of aborted fetuses etc. are indeed against the law. Contrary to popular conception, freedom of speech does not mean that you can say anything or show anything any time to any one. There are standards of decency that are applied, and I am 99% sure that these would apply here.

    The problem is that the police officers in the stories you mention got emotional, screwed up, and didn’t proceed according to the law. Hence the law stepped in and rectified the situation. What they should have done was gone to a judge and gotten a warrant, or whatever the correct procedure was.

    You can disagree with me that those images in those contexts were legal, but without a lawyer neither one of us knows for sure.

  25. “In those last couple articles where there was an abuse of power from the police and school officials, the legal system stepped in and corrected the wrong. Does that convince you that Christians aren’t persecuted? “

    The end result is good, but the very fact that the act took place is a valid example of persecution. Look at Mathew Sheppard. The homosexual who was killed because of his sexual choice. (and let me be the first to say that was horrible in every extreme of the word) But his killers were brought to justice. Does that mean he wasn’t persecuted afterall simply because justice was done in the end?

    What’s wrong with responsibility? If I posted on my blog that homosexual’s are ignorant people who are not worth the time of day…what kind of message am I sending? Who is tolerating who?

  26. Okay I’ll give a little in regards to the picture, as I’m sure it really just boils down to whatever town you might happen to be in at the time.

    But the very fact that incidents took place is persecution correct?

  27. Answers in Genesis?  You’d be better off looking for answers in the Epics of Gilgamesh, since a large chunk of Genesis was ripped right out of the Epics.

  28. But the very fact that incidents took place is persecution correct?

    Eric, I know you are unlikely to be swayed by this argument, but in the case of the officers pulling the truck or the guy with the sandwich board off the road, I doubt they cared one way or the other that the guys were Christian, Jewish, or martian. They just reacted emotionally to a highly upsetting picture and did what they thought was their duty in removing it. Sure they should have gone through proper channels.

    However, my point stands that it was the image they were reacting to more than anything else. Anybody of any belief system could have done the same thing and gotten the same reaction. So no, you cannot say that those instances are persectution.

    But I am bowing out now as I have actual work to do.

  29. Answers in Genesis?  You’d be better off looking for answers in the Epics of Gilgamesh, since a large chunk of Genesis was ripped right out of the Epics.

    Actually my friend, the Epics as well as other fables have been proven to be written after the Genesis text. So chances are, they were ripped straight from the creation account.

    As a matter of fact, there is not one text that is similar to the Bible in anyway that has been proven to be written before any of the Biblical texts.

    The myth that the Bible was “ripped” from other stories of the time is just completely false and unprovable. It is provable however, that the stories of Mithra and the Odyssy etc.. have been directly ripped from the Bible.

    But that fact has never gotten a lot of press because it tends to take away some of the more popular arguments used against Christianity.

  30. However, my point stands that it was the image they were reacting to more than anything else. Anybody of any belief system could have done the same thing and gotten the same reaction. So no, you cannot say that those instances are persectution.

    I would bet dimes to nickels you wouldn’t have that opinion if the images dipicted something that promoted homosexual, pro-choice, or anything of that nature.

    I also notice you completely ignored all of the other examples I cited, even after I gave in that the gross pictures could be construed either way.

    Why is it so easy to give press to persecuted homosexuals (persecution is wrong to anyone) but not to Christians? What is it that people are afraid to admit?

  31. I’d have to agree with ZB that it was the image.  People drive around all the time with Christian bumper stickers, anti-abortion bumper stickers, and so on.  Peaceful anti-abortion protests happen all the time, with no more than the expected amount of rancor having more to do with law and choice than religion.

    Both presidential candidates are avowed Christians (no speculation please on their “inner hearts!)  There are churches everywhere.  None of this seems to be a problem.

    Likewise one can put a Darwin Fish on his car and usually have no problem. Atheism is apparently OK as long as it isn’t explicit, but try putting a sticker on your new car that says, “There is no God” and see what reaction you get.  Or worse, a pentagram in your yard.  How about an atheist symbol at your desk?  The office could get pretty chilly, though there are Jesus thingies everywhere.

    Poor, poor persecuted Christians.

  32. “All I am saying is that by spewing forth uninformed views of the Christian religion, you create a hostile environment for Christians to live in.”

    Excuse me, I am simply pointing out the idiosyncrasies that Ken Ham himself displays and my humor of them. Not once did I say “all Christians are evil,” I did say that people like him deserve to live on the moon, but that is because their ideas and propeganda are so outlandish I find it astounding they even have followers.

    Now is that good, or bad, or does it really matter? I don’t really think so, instead of tossing around insults we all should be working together to solve problems that matter, but some people are just petty.

    I’d like to thank Les for posting this (honestly I don’t think I’m up to par with his fine blogging), and everyone who commented. I appreciate it very much! (By the way I often comment using my real name, Shaye. Setsuna is a nom de plume if you will.)

  33. Okay, but I wonder how much press a Christian blog would receive if it were to openly be hostile towards homosexuality. Point to ponder. We would probably at least see it on CBS News.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.