Ken Ham - GUTTER Christianity?

All are welcome to this forum, which is for debating the teaching of creationism or intelligent design in schools. This forum can be boisterous, and you should not participate if easily offended.

Moderator: Moderators

Ken Ham - GUTTER Christianity?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Fri Feb 07, 2014 11:46 pm

https://www.facebook.com/Piltdown.Superman
"Reposting after correction. All is not well in the Evolution Bunker (I deleted the previous video.)"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjKhuEp0 ... e=youtu.be

Followed by:
https://www.facebook.com/aigkenham
"It's been a heavy day on my Facebook. Many opponents of what we stand for have made comments, and we have let most of them stay, and many of you have done your best to answer them. I appreciate you witnessing to them—I’m so overwhelmed from emails, media requests etc. And Sunday through Tuesday I will be speaking to thousands of adults and young people in the Dominican Republic—and I’m worn out before I get there!
So —I thought we all needed some humor. Now understand, I’m NOT in any way doing this to attack or demean anyone—but it’s someone’s perspective and it did give me a good laugh.
Here is a very humorous, fictional, 4-minute analysis with English subtitles pasted over a movie about Hitler with voices speaking German: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjKhuEp074U.
The reference to Eugenie is an allusion to Dr. Eugenie Scott, atheist and former direction of the evolutionist National Center for Science Education, whose main reason for existence is to fight creationist teachings and prevent them from getting into schools. And the reference to Michael Zimmerman is the atheist who started ‘Evolution Sunday’ to get churches signed up to teach evolution to the church around Darwin’s birthday.
This video was put together by Bob Sorenson, who runs the “Question Evolution Project” on Facebook and the http://www.PiltdownSuperman.com website. “Question Evolution Day” is the 3rd annual event (Feb 12) he’s organized".

Yes, Ken Ham likes the 'humour' of Cowboy Bob Sorensen (though he does not know how to spell his surname).


SO GUESS WHICH SIDE WON ON TUESDAY NIGHT?

The anti young Earth creationist side. Sorensen and co would be crowing instead of talking about Hitler if Ham had won or if Nye had lost.

The YECs are playing the 'Hitler card' and claiming it's just a bit of harmless fun. If Ham found the video funny he sure has an odd sense of humour.

Best not to overreact though I suggest - since their own behaviour is probably the best refutation of their endless attacks upon science and their desperate attempts to replace it with fundamentalist religion and barmy pseudo-science.

YECs living in America, SOME fanatical atheists/haters of religion, and neo-Nazis appear to have a fair amount in common I think. They love lying, bigotry and painting those who disagree with them as evil, degenerate or deranged.

Well, that's my PERSONAL take on this.


PS Here is a much BETTER video: http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/video/f ... t=12996612
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8915
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Ken Ham - GUTTER Christianity?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sat Feb 08, 2014 3:18 pm

Most YECs who have commented have acknowledged that Ken Ham did not win the debate - by not saying that he DID. Even Sorensen on 6 and 7 Feb. Though he and others have sought to claim or imply that Nye behaved badly eg by using 'bad' logic, not understanding properly what Ken Ham and others believe, 'playing the man' or ignoring questions raised by Ham.

I have watched Sorensen's video again. While I am not saying it was offensive I certainly did not find it remotely amusing (had it been about the creationist 'bunker' that still would not have amused me). It is the sort of thing Sorensen comes out with every week.

It used weird 'humour' to attack Bill Nye (possibly Michael Zimmerman and Eugenie Scott too), claim he 'lost' the debate, claim that following the debate evolutionists (and Hitler was one of those ranting and intolerant evolutionists apparently) are even more in a 'bunker' than previously, suggest that evolution scientists and their supporters are liars and trolls, and blow the trumpet for his own The Question Evolution Project - along with his anti-Darwin events due next week and various YEC websites.

But I was staggered that Ken Ham should latch onto this mendacious, partly Bible thumping, drivel and disseminate it on Facebook. I know the man is totally disrespectful of 'secularists' despite his politeness to Nye recently, but I cannot see how pushing an anti-Nye and anti-'evolutionist' attack video can possibly help his cause. It smacks of desperation and diversionary tactics - apparently needed because he knows that the outcome of the debate was a significant setback for him, Answers in Genesis, and Creation Museum. I fear he really found the video "very humorous" even though it lied about Nye (he did acknowledge that the video was 'fictional').

I assume Sorensen planned the video some time ago, to publicise himself and stop his activities around 12 February being overshadowed by the debate. Either the text - saying that Nye lost and the Fuhrer is angry (even though his own post-debate blogs don't quite say that Nye lost and certainly don't claim that Ham won) - was written before the debate. Or it was written after the debate, and Sorensen is lying (again).
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8915
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Ken Ham - GUTTER Christianity?

Postby cathy » Sat Feb 08, 2014 7:05 pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?=WjKhuEp074U
Ashley looks like the creationists have just discovered and used the Hitler rants parodies. They are not being original. That film clip has now been used for lots of things. My daughter sent me this one when she started uni, Hitler goes to Vet School year one, which went viral at her place apparently
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uccnF869JA8

There is also Hitler fails IB maths, (found when I was trying to persuade second child to stay in her existing school for sixth form and do IB rather than going elsewhere - which failed)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWMBKZgbO6U

There is also Hitler Vet school year two, Hitler fails various exams (quite funny with refs to working in McDonalds etc). Hitler starts various courses. Hitler does I want to be a millionaire, Hitler rants about Miley Cirus, orders the killing of Justin Bieber, Hitler finds out there is no Santa and so on and on. All using that particular film clip. There are hundreds of them, the creationist one being not in the least funny because it there is no humour it is merely vindictive.

In short Ken Hams supporters have hooked into a popular film clip to subtitle and put their own spin on it. Sad really as a lot of the Hitler rants have been quite funny.
cathy
 
Posts: 3665
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:51 pm
Location: Redditch

Re: Ken Ham - GUTTER Christianity?

Postby Brian Jordan » Sat Feb 08, 2014 9:00 pm

Jokes are one thing, but using Hitler to make a point is pure Godwin.
"PPSIMMONS is an amorphous mass of stupid" - Rationalwiki
User avatar
Brian Jordan
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 4216
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Ken Ham - GUTTER Christianity?

Postby cathy » Sun Feb 09, 2014 9:01 am

Hmm I'm not quite sure Piltdown superman has got the idea of the Hitler rants. They're usually funny, in joke type things - not making a point just having a rant. HIs are quite nasty and trying to score political points. NOT like any of the others I've seen. Hitler gets his A level results, which our students were watching a couple of years ago when it came out even seem to carry adverts for things like studentbeans. Nobody else has used it to seem to suggest their opponents are Nazis or wrong.

But that doesn't seem to be PIltdowns worse however. Here Ashley and Brian - for a really offensive 'Piltdown pillock misunderstands the comic nature of the Hitler rant parodies' try this one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1TvbeqmLp8

Contains all the old nasty lies - Heakels embryos justify abortion, evolution used to justify racism etc. And BCSE gets a mention in line two! Libel perhaps? I'm not sure I like being linked to racism after all - especially as evolution really does make racism nonsense. New species superficial differences and no real master race as beneficial traits are beneficial in specific circumstances only. Hence skin colour is only beneficial if in right place - dark where its sunny, pale where it's not. No real issues there for racists to grasp unless they deliberately misunderstand as per Piltdown man. Who seems to hate as much as any KKK, EDL, BNP member. In fact given that most racist rants seem to be based on cultural and belief differences ..... Maybe creationists fit the bill better?

I guess Ashley is less surprised than me having engaged with his nastiness. But I can see why even Ken didn't link to that one.
cathy
 
Posts: 3665
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:51 pm
Location: Redditch

Re: Ken Ham - GUTTER Christianity?

Postby Brian Jordan » Sun Feb 09, 2014 10:59 am

Extremely badly done. My download was very jerky but most of the time it gave the impression that Hitler was a screaming raging creationist. Inconsistencies suggest that that was not at all the intention, but that's how it appeared. Shot in the foot?
"PPSIMMONS is an amorphous mass of stupid" - Rationalwiki
User avatar
Brian Jordan
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 4216
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Ken Ham - GUTTER Christianity?

Postby cathy » Sun Feb 09, 2014 11:43 am

Ashley what's the relevance of the Shakira/Rhiananna video? No objections to anyone watching it in their own space but not really my bag of beans and therefore chose not to. Shall I post the David Beckham in his, or minus his, underpants for balance as my preferential video? And if I do will it be removed (as per the RD website).

I'm not a prude and have been known to dress and wiggle about Shakira style at parties and clubs in the past, and present when persuaded it'll be more fun than a nice cup of tea and an episode of Silent Witness. But never when I've wanted to be taken seriously. And on this site women do seem to be taken seriously. Time and place and all that sort of thing. No objection to porn on the top shelf for example, huge objections to page three on the newspaper stands!!!!

This site has never has never had any whiff of sexism at all about it, unlike RD which was riddled with it and probably still is. And this is nothing really to complain about in the great scheme of things, a gross over reaction on my part (tho working at the constant eating disordered, self harming teens end of the Rhianna/Shakira music vid industry am a little jaundiced about the presentation of female singers) but why is it there with no semi clothed singing males to balance it out?

Please answer and let me know if the forum goes down the lets live in the 1970s RD route. Anyway have to go now, mumsnet are organising a contact O2 to embarrass them about their links to the sexist Sun at 12pm. Along with the girl guides and various other feminists keen to show a more active role for women and girls in society :evil: And later on I'll maybe find some sexy males on you tube to redress the balance? Tho I would be reluctant to do that and demean the nice males on this forum! So please no more.
cathy
 
Posts: 3665
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:51 pm
Location: Redditch

Re: Ken Ham - GUTTER Christianity?

Postby Brian Jordan » Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:01 pm

That's the thing about porn - it comes in numerous varieties and is strictly for personal consumption. Just like religion, in fact. :twisted:
"PPSIMMONS is an amorphous mass of stupid" - Rationalwiki
User avatar
Brian Jordan
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 4216
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Bob Sorensen - GUTTER Christianity

Postby a_haworthroberts » Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:55 am

cathy wrote:Hmm I'm not quite sure Piltdown superman has got the idea of the Hitler rants. They're usually funny, in joke type things - not making a point just having a rant. HIs are quite nasty and trying to score political points. NOT like any of the others I've seen. Hitler gets his A level results, which our students were watching a couple of years ago when it came out even seem to carry adverts for things like studentbeans. Nobody else has used it to seem to suggest their opponents are Nazis or wrong.

But that doesn't seem to be PIltdowns worse however. Here Ashley and Brian - for a really offensive 'Piltdown pillock misunderstands the comic nature of the Hitler rant parodies' try this one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1TvbeqmLp8

Contains all the old nasty lies - Heakels embryos justify abortion, evolution used to justify racism etc. And BCSE gets a mention in line two! Libel perhaps? I'm not sure I like being linked to racism after all - especially as evolution really does make racism nonsense. New species superficial differences and no real master race as beneficial traits are beneficial in specific circumstances only. Hence skin colour is only beneficial if in right place - dark where its sunny, pale where it's not. No real issues there for racists to grasp unless they deliberately misunderstand as per Piltdown man. Who seems to hate as much as any KKK, EDL, BNP member. In fact given that most racist rants seem to be based on cultural and belief differences ..... Maybe creationists fit the bill better?

I guess Ashley is less surprised than me having engaged with his nastiness. But I can see why even Ken didn't link to that one.



"Comments are disabled for this video."

On Cathy's second post, has Sorensen said something about that Shakira-Rihanna video as well?

EDIT: I now see why Cathy is talking about Shakira! That ABC video I linked to - or THOUGHT I linked to - was one that went 'behind the scenes' at the Creation Museum just before the big debate. The same video has been discussed at Ham's Facebook page also. It looks like naughty ABC News may have altered what you get at the link or else altered the link for the pre-debate film - Ham on Nye has apparently become Rihanna 'on' Shakira.

On 7 Feb Ham wrote on his page:
"This NIGHTLINE segment with Dan Harris is one of the best secular media reports dealing with the recent debate with Bill Nye and me--and the Creation Museum & creation/evolution issue in our modern culture, I've seen.
http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/video/b ... e-22404825"

This is a little embarrassing. I DID come across the Shakira video in the early hours of Sunday morning on 4 Music. AFTER my post linking to ABC News here at 11.46 pm Friday night.

Honest.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8915
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Ken Ham - GUTTER Christianity?

Postby cathy » Mon Feb 10, 2014 7:10 pm

Yep Ashley that was it. Your link went straight to Shakira and Rhianna masking musical mediocrity with a bit of faux lesbianism. Ok if porn, bit sexist if supposed to be musical talent. And racist as well given that when the airbrushers removed bits of hip and thigh they also seemed to have removed the fact Rhianna is black.

Did seem out of character for you. Glad its sorted.
cathy
 
Posts: 3665
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:51 pm
Location: Redditch


Return to Free For All

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests