Answers in Genesis hosts a version of the image above. Is there any plausible reading of this in which AiG isn't threatening to blow you away?
Good that Ken Ham can take time away from his busy schedule of getting busted for tax evasion feuding with the international branch of his group to threaten anyone who wanders into his little corner of the interweb.
Update: As my excellent commenters remind me, Ken Ham and Kent Hovind (similar as they may seem) are not the same person. I'm sure there's an interesting post in this about how we remember names, since I tend to mix up people with the same initials. Sorry for any confusion.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Crazy Ken Ham has learned about the Atheist Convention in Melbourne, and he has written his confused, garbled version of what it's all about. He's also done his typical cowardly routine of complaining about the convention and also, by the way, about me, but refusing to mention any of us by name,…
This week, the creationist Ken Ham and his organization, Answers in Genesis, are practicing the Big Lie. They have spent tens of millions of dollars to create a glossy simulacrum of a museum, a slick imitation of a scientific enterprise veneered over long disproved religious fables, and they are…
A while back, I had a guest post here by Amy Peters; in it, she described taking her son to the zoo and being awed and choking up at the similarities between us and chimpanzees — it's a nice moment of transcendance, when a person sees a deeper connection.
One of the creationist dim-bulbs at Answers…
Here at SB, we use Google analytics for getting info about how many people are reading our blogs, and how they get here. I also have a SiteMeter monitor on GM/BM. One thing that I get a kick out of is taking a look at my hits, and seeing what kinds of interesting connections come up. Sometimes it'…
It never ceases to amaze me how the holier than thou types nearly always turn out to be the exact opposite :) There has to be some good grad/post grad thesis possibilities in explaining why this is so LOL
Ham got busted, too? Or are you confusing him with Kent Hovind?
Images like this lead one to wonder how much longer it will be before some nutcase packs heat into a school because of some imaginary message from a favorite divine messenger.
But it'll all be okay according to someone's calculus, just as long as the body count doesn't add up to an integer greater than all those assembled 20th Century atheist lefties!
Josh,
First you make all kinds of false claims about the recent detainee bill, and now you falsely accuse Ham of tax evasion?
What's going on?
Even if you accept this statement as prima facie factual, exactly what does this have to do with biological evolution?
Or are you just another marionette conservative with your strings being pulled by Faux News?
Dave, when did you show any of what I said about the detainee bill to be false?
Looks pretty much like photos posted by the man who shot women ay Dawson College last month. (The site has been removed.) In his case, it was presented by authorities as evidence of psychopathy.
"I'm sure there's an interesting post in this about how we remember names, since I tend to mix up people with the same initials. Sorry for any confusion."
So, that's why I get you mixed up with Jason.
And that's quite a nice collection of trolls you got 'round these parts.
I'm amazed everyone doesn't mix us up. As for the trolls, my plan is to use them to train the ultimate robotroll. Or possibly to breed them and produce a perfect biotroll. The problem is that I doubt I'd have enough females for a breeding experiment.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/feedback/2006/1006.asp
I wandered onto and read the above page, and my brain nearly imploded. The intellectual chasm separating any working scientist from a person who could take seriously that "argument" is vast.
How is it possible to ever bridge?
Josh, these are your 2 statements, the first from your original post and the second from a post in the comments.
and
Your claims are dependent on the Combat Status Review Tribunal doing something that it can't do legally (classify a citizen as an alien). It's a giant "what if?".
Your use of the word "can" in the first quote, as in "can be detained indefinitely..." seems to be along the lines of "the sun can explode at any time and destroy the earth".
Most of your readers, however, are going to read "can" as: "they can do it because the bill authorizes it".
It doesn't.
You can read the bill for yourself at www.thomas.gov. Search on bill number s.3930. You'll see that there is plenty of "legal process", including defense counsel for the accused.
My use of the word "science" in my first post wasn't referring to chemistry or biology, but the use of fact and reason.
Dave: The bill removes safeguards. Our system of government operates on checks and balances. Remove those checks and balances and people can do whatever they want. I also cited a longer analysis that supported my claim, an analysis you didn't respond to. There are legal arguments that could be made to justify classifying a citizen as an enemy combatant (perhaps if the person's citizenship were unclear). That person has no recourse to challenge the legal argument or a factual assertion about his/her citizenship.
They could do that before, they can't now. The government can now do things they couldn't get away with before. I stand by what I said.