Ken Ham's Creation Museum

quote:

---

Understaning the world and interpretation of evidence has a lot to do with one's backgound including education, upbringing, area/method of study, intelligence, access to research, ability to understand, willingness to observe all possibilities, et al. Without people like Ham and others all the people would have is what has been programmed into their thinking at school and the secularist museums.

---

So basically you think we need more museums run by people who lack education, don't do proper studies, can't be bothered to access research and aren't willing to even consider any possibilities that disagree with their own. The fact is that creationists typically come up very poorly compared to real scientists on all these measures.

quote:

---

I have studied fulfilled Biblical prophecy for over 50 years and see evidence of credibility in that record so with that corroborative evidence I tend to go with intelligent design and creationism for understanding the world. Most secularists are not aware of this corroborating evidence because they haven't studied it.

---

The reason why secularists haven't studied your examples is because you make them up. I dare say that many secularists know the real Bible better than you do. But that's because they actually read it properly.

quote:

---

I believe dinos and man co-existed and that catastrophic flood changed the properties of the atmosphere and the earth's surface enough to account for the disparity of radiometric dating and the Biblical record.

---

Yes you believe it. But you haven't got a plausible hypothesis as to how it happened or even could happen. You just won't do the research. Your only reason for believing it is that you don't like the other possibilities

quote:

---

If we all left it all up to the professionals we'd be a whole lot worse off than we are, physically, mentally, financially and politically. I'm into alternative wholistic health for me and my family after having nearly lost my life due to the ineptness of the professional medical community who pretty much reject any treatment which does not involve big $$$. The same goes with auto repair, religion, politics and just about every other profession. Imo, Ham's place has it's faults but so do the secularist museums.

---

I never said that everything should be left to the professionsals. I did point out that by your own criteria creationists (including Ham) score very poorly. Let us note that your list covers amateurs doing simple jobs (quite outside the the scope of this argument) - and many frauds. Would we be worse off without fakes and frauds iin the health fields ?

quote:

---

LOL!

---

Yes we should laugh at your little joke.

quote:

---

The Jews are back in Israel

---

Although their return doesn't really fit any of the prophecies - most of which refer to the Babylonian exile anyway.

quote:

---

the world is emerging into a cashless monetary system,

---

Which is NOT mentioned in the Bible, as you know. LOL indeed !
At least you gave up on the idea that UPC bar codes are the Mark of the Beast (somethign that you would have known to be untrue if you really had studied the Bible)

quote:

---

the weather is on the rampage, homosexuality is on the increase, Islam is emerging as the dominant global threat,, Biblical apostacy is the norm,

---

Are ANY of these in the Bible ?

quote:

---

travel is ever on the increase and at faster speed,

---

Nice try but that prophecy refers to times befor Jesus was even born. If you had really studied the Bible properly, including the historical context you would know about that.

quote:

---

the nations are being drawn into the Mid-East, , fires on the increase, knowledge on the increase, hatred of Christianity and Bible significant, Israel surrounded with hostile nations, et al et al et al.

---

Just more of the same.Thanks for proving me right.

quote:

---

Which of these profoundly proposed providential apocalyptic prophetic predictions, me friend, can you or have you and your secularist friends debunk/debunked lately? Hmmm?

---

I've debunked several on this group. I doubt that there are any on the list that I can't debunk. Maybe you'll be reduced to arguing that one significiant word choice in a translation means that the translator must buy your strained and twisted interpretation again. Regardless of the fact that even your preferred translations don't allow your reading and the Hebrew text even more clearly rules it out.

quote:

---

I have so presented my reasons for why I go with this hypothesis.

---

Not really.

quote:

---

I go with the corroborating evidence of the credibility of the Biblical record and apply that to what I've proposed in my arguments over the years in the forums

---

IN other words it's just an excuse invented to avoid admitting that the Bible is wrong. We know that the Bible ISN'T very credible as a record. We even know that judging the whole of the Bible as historically accurate or not is foolish since the Bible is a collection of works each of which should be assessed on their own merits.

quote:

---

Until it's empirically debunked or until I see something making more sense overall, factoring in the corroborating evidence, I hold to it, completely confident that it's the most plausible hypothesis scientifically and otherwise.

---

In other words you don't have ANY scientific basis at all. In fact it has been debunked by any reasonable standard because there is no scientific evidence it happened and no plausible scientific hypothesis as to how it could happen (it's on a par with "C14 diseases". Both of which you happen to know because you keep running away from any discussion. So your "confidence" is completely unfounded.So what you are really saying is the most important "evidence" is the fact that it's some bullshit made up to defend a belief Buzsaw happens to like. That pretty much guarantees it's true. To you. I think the rest of us can agree that that is not a rational "standard of evidence".

Again these are evidence that your preferred standard of evidence is "what Buzsaw wants to be true".For instance rather than actually compare UPC barcodes to the actual description of the Mark of the Beast - which would show you that they were different you just proclaimed that they were the same thing. ANd your sole basis was the fact that the guard bars resemble the code for '6' (but aren't the same and aren't read as '6's) and that there are 3 of them interspersed in the code (which means that there isn't even a real '666' in there). If you had known the Biblical description or actually checked it you would know that there is more to the Mark of the Beast than that. So in this case you didn't know the prophecy very well at all.Likewise your whole idea that the flood somehow upset carbon datgn is based solely on the fact that carbon dates contradict your belief. And that is enough to proclaim your explanation "scientifically sound" even though you have absolutley no idea of how it could have happened. It msut have happened because you want it to have happened. Therefore it must be scientifically sound - you don't think that actually need to know anything relevant to that conclusion to make the claim. Which is why you make false claims all the time. I don't realise that if you don't knwo what you are talking about you are very likely to be wrong. And that's a demonstration of real bias and a real closed mind.So I suggest that like you - rather than doing real research or gathering the knowledge needed to do so, Ken Ham just jumps to conclusions he likes. Regardless of whether they could be true. Thus his museum is a worthless collection of misinformation designed solely to bolster Ken Ham's erroneous beliefs.
Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.