Oh WOW! what a crazy rant.
All he does is attack Bill Nye and talks about planes coming together at random
And… then, he pulls out the, “….if you treat people like animals….” crap.
Ken also claims there are two types of science – arggggg….
What do you think is the stupidest thing he says.
Polaris Financial Planning LLC, is a “fee-only” registered investment advisor and does not receive money from anyone other than the paying clients.
Polaris Financial Planning is committed to supporting the growing secular movement in the United States and donates at least 10% of all revenue to support this cause.
Close preview
Close preview
Close preview
Close preview
Close preview
Close preview
Close preview
Close preview
Close preview
Close preview
Close preview
Close preview
Close preview
Close preview
Close preview
Close preview
Close preview
Close preview
Close preview
The stupidest thing he says is: Hi this is Ken Ham…
Anyone who is proud enough to stand up and say Bill Nye is not “the science guy” is clearly declaring their stupidity by putting their name – and face – to it.
Also love his criticism of Bill not being a scientist. That BSc Bill has and his ex-professor Carl Sagan would seem to disagree with that statement.
Tell me one way how evolution can be proven; but you cant can you bill nye is not the science
guy because he is just like you bitches he knows there is a huge hole in evolution and the big bang
but there are no holes in the Bible’s history of the world maybe you should read the bible
then you might not be as lost as the rest of the human race
Viruses mutate. That is evolution.
In Genesis, God creates light and separates light from darkness, and day from night, on the first day. Yet he didn’t make the light producing objects (the sun and the stars) until the fourth day. That is absurd.
Point No 1 and the only point. I will not have my tax dollars used to teach unproven religious dogma.
When people support deist beliefs, some people of other beliefs will usually be offended and have rage rants like this.
Blah blah blah, anyone who believes, blah blah blah, is stupid. Blah blah blah, even though they have their own reasons to believe something, blah blah, they are still dumb because their belief differs from mine.
Blah blah.
4:05 – “Isn’t it interesting that Christians are not frightened to teach their children about evolution?”
Um Joe, creationism teaches that God did everything alone and there’s no point in questioning it…. That’s very narrow view of something and while I’ve read and explained Genesis to my children, I let them know that it’s one groups opinion on how things came into existence, and that there are many more other creation myths as well.
Bill Nye also never said don’t teach your children about God he just said don’t force creationism down their throats because it stops kids curiosity about the world around them. Curiosity is what encourages learning and intelligence and basically he’s saying if you want your children to grow up and think critically about things in life don’t spoon feed them creationism to the exclusion of other possibilities.
Yeah….I grew up in a christian family and most of my family took their children out of science classrooms when evolution was being taught. That is fear of knowledge (or “differing opinions”, if you ignore scientific facts). I no longer associate myself with any particular “god” anymore because of Christianity’s fear of science and knowledge that would give children the opportunity to choose for themselves what to believe.
Also, his comment about not being able to tell how old dinosaurs bones are is total bollocks. We have carbon dating for this specific reason. However, assuming that people (like Ken Ham) ignore this, then let the children think for themselves and create a way of determining how old the dinosaur bones are.
Nicole, thanks for sharing your story. Please come back and comment more. I do have a small correction…carbon dating is not used to date dinosaur bones. Carbon dating is only effective for 50,000 years, at most. However, there are several different types of dating. They are used on the rock layers that are above and below the fossils.
” they are still dumb because their belief differs from mine”
im not defending what was said in this video but let’s be honest… athiests say the same exact thing.
Do they? Do they same the same exact thing? Can we get one of those, “are you this age” buttons for this site?
What is more relevant is what the courts have said: In the Dover School district case, the lawyers for the creationist/ID team admitted that when they use the word science, they mean science as it was defined in the 14th and 15th century. They mean science as in: alchemy, palm reading and astrology are science.
(Sorry, just going from memory here, but I’m pretty sure this is what came out in court.)
I will let George Carlin shoot this idiot down in flames….
OMG he’s another one of those,”if I didn’t have this here holy book, I’d be rapin fawns!” He said, “who determines right and wrong? You do. Who determines good and bad? You do. What is marriage? Whatever you want to make it to be.” When Dave Silverman was a guest on Stewart or Cobert, he asked the audience to come up with more commandments? Dave did this because it is easy for one to come up with new “life laws”. Yes Mr. Ham for brains, we have been capable of making decisions that nurture others and we have been capable of making decisions that hinder others for millennia without and with your fairytale books. Why don’t these people ever ask themselves, are we better off than we were ???? years ago? Of coarse, most people reading this think to themselves, are we worse off than we were ???? years ago? Ya damned right meat head, I decide. Your book is flawed and grotesque.
Ken Ham and Rupert Murdoch make me ashamed to call myself an Aussie.
Dude, it’s cool man. They’re our problem now, but we’ve got this.
While you’re doing the whole apology thing, doesn’t the world deserve one for Mel Gibson too?
An engineer uses science to solve problems. An engineer is a scientist.
I love how comments were disabled for the video their scientists made. Once again, proof that they want to preach and not have an educated conversation.
I like how Ken Ham says at 2:22 “Creationists are teaching children that they are special.” I think we can all agree that creationists are very special.
Owww, the comments on that youtube video are closed. Anyway, if an aeroplane was build by a Christian, I guess you would have to pray to get it off the ground.
Holy crap, that was such a profoundly stupid video/rant! A world run by evangelicals would be a terrifying world indeed!
Its already happened. We call it the Dark Ages.
What a nut. If I didn’t know better I would think this is a parody, but, unfortunately, he’s serious. Even more unfortunately he has money and people who believe him to help spread his idiocy.
I am wondering why people are saying that Ken Han was “ranting” in his video response. And what about his right to respond to something he sees as “crap”. You claim that anyone who does not follow along with whatever “blah blah blah” that is spoken is wrong or stupid etc…. I say you need to re-evaluate what public discourse is all about. There are those in this society who do not agree with how science is taught, and will not keep quiet. If you disapprove of my retort try seeing the video “No Intelligence Required” and see the position of those who decide what “science” really is.. you might be surprised how science is manipulated to follow the “norm”, jump out of step and you are out. How is that “freedom” and willingness to embrace new things? or even to possibly think that maybe Ken Ham is correct.
Ken Ham has every right to respond to anything he wishes to, he’s clearly exercising this right and he isn’t being censored. As much as his video is being ridiculed and people call for its deletion, this will not happen. As for “public discourse” the comment section is disabled as is the rating system as to not face “public” opposition to their “retort”. As for not agreeing “how” science is taught, I’m not sure what you mean, if you’re talking about specific teaching methods I can sympathize. However IF you are speaking about the contents of said science classes, this is where we have a problem. I have seen “No Intelligence Required” and it is mostly propaganda, comments and interviews taken out of context interspersed with holocaust and war footage, in an attempt to pin Darwin or others for these tragedies. I’m starting to think you don’t have a firm grasp on what “science” is, at it’s core it is a system for organizing knowledge using testable explanations. “Science” is not exclusionary in the least bit, it welcomes all “theories” and “truths” regardless of where they may lead or what they imply. The only restrictions it places on that which seeks to be taught in a classroom or be hailed as “truth” is its submission to testing and peer review. Every new theory is figuratively thrown against the wall, it is taken apart and re-examined a hundred times over by thousands of experts. This process often is lengthy depending on its claims, and often takes years and years. Creationism has been looked at in depth and it’s claims and theories refuted by some of the most basic studies.
I do not decide what “science” is and neither do you or the “concerned populace”, this is rigorously studied and determined by the scientific community through harsh testing and examinations. Every theory taught in schools has gone through this and come out the other side, science is always willing to embrace new ideas and theories, but after they have been consistently proven wrong or not “factually based” there comes a time when one tends to stop listening. At what point do we tell the parent that demands “Flat Earth Theory” be taught in schools, to just sit down and shut up?
I apologize for my English if I made too many mistakes, it is not my first language.
The point is that public discourse should be about the presenting different ideas, and allowing the supporting evidence to decide which is correct. The scientific position has a great deal of supporting evidence, while the creationist side has literally none.
Saying that evolution would be more convincing with even more evidence does not invalidate the theory, and it definitely does not imply another theory. I may as well say that humans originally arrived on spaceships, or that we were carved from the wood of a magic tree.
Nobody would argue that those viewpoints should be taught in school, or be given an equal treatment in public discourse, yet they have just as much supporting evidence as the idea that the entire world was created in a week, and humans in a day.
The Catholic church itself agrees.
http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=18503
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/19/science/sciencespecial2/19evolution.html?_r=1&ex=1295326800&en=62dc61ea5d27e73d&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
Ken Ham is correct? About what? Name anything this moron says that can be proven with independently verifiable evidence. Not only is he a raving lunatic, he’s a liar.
Personally I have always said, if shown undeniable evidence about something, I will have to change my opinion, no matter what it was before then. That’s how science works. When new and better information is discovered, science adjusts its position to conform to it.
What would it take for Ken Ham to change his position? I suspect nothing would do it because this is how he makes his living. Everything he is or ever hopes to be is tied to preaching myths and lies. What would it take for you to change your position? Be honest at least to yourself.
Trying to pick the stupidest thing he says is like trying to find the greenest M&M in the package. To choose one at random, at 1:17, “What has evolution got to do with engineering?”
Well, this: http://www.ted.com/talks/robert_full_on_engineering_and_evolution.html
Or this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ex4O5z_ig2g
Or this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5l7vG_8C9gc
Ken Ham may need to repent of his use of all engineering that makes use of evolutionary science. Or, he may just need to STFU.
Ken Ham suffers from a common malady of many devout religious people. The science of evolution seems to threaten their belief because they look at it in binary terms. That is, if evolution is true, then god cannot exist; and if god exists, evolution must be false. The third alternative that they either refuse to consider or just completely escapes them, is that both can be true. These people seem to conceptualize only in binary terms…black or white, bad or good, and are nuance averse. It seems to me to be a mechanism to simplify a very complex world, setting up a grid they can superimpose on life so everything fits into neat little boxes, and where little effort is required to understand a world rife with paradoxes. It’s lazy thinking, and intellectually dishonest.
This guy actually runs a factory where he makes stupid children. It’s called The Creation Museum.
You lose all credibility when you disable comments in your youtube video. Shows you arent willing to take criticism.
Your comment has been reported as inappropriate by the Christian community. Please repent now and be saved from eternal torment.Thanks – Ken
“Comments are disabled for this video.”
The first indication that the video’s position is so weak, that it can’t withstand a debate.
While i respect your belief and opinion there is just so many things wrong with what you said that a comment section is inadequate to provide counterpoints for them all.
You know, nothing irritates me more than people like this guy and his Muslim counterparts trying to destroy the procedure that is science. For hundreds of years the religious have been out to eradicate science. I hope people in the USA understand that science has landed robots on mars, given us the ipod, cellphones, computers, internet, etc. and it is important that the religious are not allowed to alter or destroy the procedure of science.
“Creationists, of course, are very happy to tech their children about evolution”. That’s just plain dumb. Then there’s whole “if evolution were true, I mean, it’d be so obvious to the kids that it’s true, but it’s not.”
I’m a neurobiologist, and I’ve never heard of historical science vs observational science. As a matter of fact, I don’t see how “beliefs about the past” relates to science; that is if he’s referring to religious beliefs being “historical science”
If a vidiot spews too many idiotic statements as if they are fact, it overwhelms a reasonable person and we become moved to cursing and ad hominem statements because it’s obvious that no amount of reason will begin to persuade that vidiot into seeing your side in an open minded way.
Anyway…
It’s a pretty dumb thing to say, that Nye was a mechanical engineer and so not a scientist. Lol-wut!? Perhaps this Ham fellow doesn’t know that in legitimate Universities, they require a very broad understanding of a variety of discipline’s in science to get a degree. And that it’s a guarantee that if Nye has an engineering degree, then he is very competent with physics, which deals with the natural world.
Also “Historical Science”… lol-wut?!? You, sir Ham of Creation, are entitled to your opinion of facts, but you are not entitled to false versions of factual evidence. You may propose your explanation of the facts, just as anybody else can, but your passion for your own belief does not make it equal to others.
“Some people theorized that the earth was flat, and they were wrong. Some people thought the earth was a sphere, and they were wrong. If you think they were equals because they were both wrong, then you are more wrong than both of them.” — Isaac Asimov
Evolution in your engineering? its more common then you may think.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_algorithm
He said “Christians are not afraid to teach evolution”. Except you don’t teach them evolution. You teach them some shoddy knock off from a church pamphlet. What are the chances this idiot would go on live television against Bill and debate science. He bring his “the world is 6000 years old and we lived with dinosaurs”. I would love to see Bill tear this idiot down.
if u define Science use it whole description science(from Latin scientia, meaning “knowledge”) is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe.
Genetic engineer here. Building you corn that would have actually lived through the 15 days of 100+ degree weather we had in June there Ken.
What a fucking quack.
“Comments and Ratings have been disabled on this video.”
That sure keeps the door open for discussing true scientific ideas doesn’t it Mr. Ham?
Do a search for boeing and evolution – boeing themselves talk about evolution and they apply it to their own business – small changes can make a big difference
Oohh please someone shut this tard up.. Creation is wrong for children because its teaching them to believe fairy tales.. You are telling kids they dont have to believe what they see is what they get, your just sugar coating life for them.. Its wrong because its bullshit, and obviously kids will believe anythign you tell htem.. YOu are just teaching them BULLSHIT!!!
Not only this guy is a fucking, braindead moron (I’ve first seen him in Religulous – although not a big fan of BIll Maher, the movie’s absolutely worth watching), but he’s a total coward too – have you noticed that every time these mindless zealots post something they ALWAYS disable comments & the possibility to rate the video.. hopeless.
Dislike
What a fucking brain dead fucktard cock…. Ken Ham is an embarrassment to the human race. Another Christian who doesn’t know what the fuck he is talking about..
Apparently Ken Hamm isn’t familiar with carbon dating. We don’t need pictures with fossils to determine what time period they came from…
Teach your children to think critically…until they question Christianity
Actually Evolution is used in engineering. Example: The latest bullet-train in japan was designed using an artificial evolutionary process. The computer created variation and the design that had the best attributes “passed on its genes”.
god particle. look it up
then look up something called akasa or the etheric principle.
religion is merly a remnant of sacred knowledge or the highest science there is.
you think that all this is it? if there were more to exsistance, a spiritual realm of being if you will. would it not have it’s own set princiables of science as well? think a little on this before you so blindly judge something that someone else is saying or that person themselves. because you have so obviously brainwashed your self into believing what you think is true. have an open mind. sure he says some things and makes some dumb points. but that doesnt mean you get to yell and spill your beliefs on people that don’t want to hear it. As if saying blah blah blah god made us and i don’t accept science will change someone with a differnt out looks opinion. To where someone with an open mind might say… well gee everything in the universe can have science applied to it. so is it not more probable that god(s) would have had to use science in the creation of everything? the anwser is yes, either way you look at it, it is undenyable. you simply don’t just wish things into exsistance. it would require the proper knowledge and know how. simular to how we can clone animals. 100 or so years ago we barly had cars…. as time goes on people will see that religion, magic, science, all these things are just one thing.
OMG, thanks for the laughs. I so hope you were writing that as performance art… …satire… …right?
Ken is so wrong on so many levels, it’s hard to even get started.
His thesis, namely Bill Nye doesn’t understand science, is not supported by anything Ham says.
Nye’s concern that evolution is not embraced by the general populace is like unto earlier scientists concern that the spherical earth theory was not embraced. It is not borne of misunderstanding, but of understanding.
I won’t say that Ken Ham doesn’t understand science. I suspect he does.
But Ham’s creationist views are a rejection of science.
“Science means knowledge.” http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/science
Science is only defined as knowledge as an archaic definition. As in, one that isn’t used anymore. Science comes from sceintia which also means knowledge in Latin. So, unless we start speaking Latin again, or we go back to using definitions of words from hundreds of years ago, his statement is wrong.
If we do start using archaic words, we’ll be all hugger-mugger (in a state of confusion or dismay; an archaic word).
http://listverse.com/2011/10/21/20-great-archaic-words/