Ken Ham is being sued…by his fellow creationists

| 38 Comments | 1 TrackBack

What a delightful and well deserved development! The Australian sister organization to Ken Ham's Answers in Genesis is hammering him with a nasty lawsuit.

The Brisbane-based Creation Ministries International has filed a lawsuit in Queensland's Supreme Court against Mr Ham and his Kentucky-based Answers in Genesis ministry seeking damages and accusing him of deceptive conduct in his dealings with the Australian organisation.

The suit focuses on a dispute over the Australian organisation's production of a creationist magazine, sold in the US to more than 35,000 subscribers, and has led to revelations about the three-year battle between the two ministries.

A 40-page report, written by Mr Briese and obtained by The Australian, reveals a bitter power struggle across the Pacific that began with a challenge to the power Mr Ham allegedly wielded over the ministries.

I honestly don't care who wins. The ideal conclusion will be that of the Kilkenny cats: mutual self-destruction.

1 TrackBack

It appears that some young earth creationists take Genesis very literally, but are perhaps a bit less literal in their understanding of 1 Corinthians 6:1-7. The Australian Creation Ministries International is suing the American Answers in Genesis over... Read More

38 Comments

I hope the Aussies win, big time. I think they are less of a hazard down under…

Ken Ham is being sued…by his fellow creationists

There is a God.

And he has a sense of humor.

Witchcraft and necrophilia, and other un-natural lusts (sodomy and pederasty I suppose), with an extra helping of greed and lies.

Sounds like creationism to me.

[snigger]

Ah well, seeing as we inflicted Ham on the US, it was the least we could do …

Let’s try that again …

*snigger*

Well, since we inflicted Ham on the US, it seemed the least we could do …

Creationist Smackdown!

Ken “The Ham” Ham versus Kanga “The Roo” Roo in a winner-take-all fight to the death.

(Resurrection fight scheduled for three days later.)

Tickets on sale now at all TicketMaster locations. Void where prohibited. Void when you need to.

Posted by Gary Hurd on June 3, 2007 7:50 PM (e)

Witchcraft and necrophilia, and other un-natural lusts (sodomy and pederasty I suppose), with an extra helping of greed and lies.

Sounds like creationism to me.

Oh come on…you’re giving Witchcraft and necrophilia a bad name, and elevating creationism to the level of buggery and child molestation seems a little bold.

The two gangs have been slinging accusations at each other for over 2 years now. I have followed this with a morbid glee since it started.

David, Yes and no. Religious fundamentalism has a bigger hold over a greater proportion of the population of the U.S. than in Australia. But we have our own religious fundamentalists as well.

Bad enough you can walk through town at night and have to put up with those pamphlet distributing and bible-preaching fundies. But we have an idiot prime minister (and sadly, an opposition leader also) who’s, more and more, being open about supporting the more “strict” Christian groups. It’s as if every month, we’re looking more and more like a watered down USA. Thank you, but NO.

We don’t want them either. They may be less of a hazard to YOU, but they’re going to make our lives miserable.

(And please, no jokes about convict beginnings. I was born in Australia of parents escaping war. I’m of the first generation of my family to be born here.)

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO . … .this is just Tooooooooooo delicious . …

But if everything that happens is by the will of God, then why did god smite Ham with ye thundering lawsuit? Oh the cognitive dissonance!

I suggest we all pray for a miracle, that the law suit turns into dinosaur and eats him.

Be sure to work through the trackback via Henry’s Web to Creation Ministries International (team Australia) and look at what they’re up against. AiG is pulling the same sleazeball con games on their fellow creationists that they pull on evolutionists. This is a GREAT example to show true believers who won’t listen to what evolutionists tell them about AiG. Maybe they’ll hear the truth about AiG when it’s coming from other creationists.

This is a GREAT example to show true believers who won’t listen to what evolutionists tell them about AiG. Maybe they’ll hear the truth about AiG when it’s coming from other creationists.

I very much doubt it.

But we have an idiot prime minister (and sadly, an opposition leader also) who’s, more and more, being open about supporting the more “strict” Christian groups.

I’ve met Kevin Rudd (the Australian opposition leader for the non-Australians) at a small gathering of students at The University of Western Australian. He expressed to us a strong belief in the divine but an equally strong belief in the separation of church and state.

Poor persecuted Ken Ham! I can’t help noting how interesting it is that the media will likely ignore this story so they can continue to cover the imaginary split within the secular community over how “aggressive” to be in how we talk about religious delusion.

I don’t see any sign that this dispute has anything to do with differences in opinion over religious doctrine. It’s just about power and money. Nor do the creationists’ techniques seem any different from those in any other battle for power and money. If anything, this is a sign that there’s a perceived growing market for creationism, worth fighting to control.

“He expressed to us a strong belief in the divine but an equally strong belief in the separation of church and state.”

Sounds like a politician. ;)

This reminds me of Fred Phelps/WBC’s picketing of Jerry Falwell’s funeral.

They’re all just in this for the money - nothing more than con artists.

wow how does it feel to know that even though you guys want so badly to deny it you are in the bible.2nd peter ch 3 verse 3-5.It is sad to me that you are so caught up in your own pride you can not even look at the possibility that you may have been lied to,and continue to be.Darwin himself admitted that the hardest thing against his theory is that there are no missing link fossils, wow no lizards growing wing nubs, no fish growing leg nubs, there should be millions of years worth of these fossils.Where are they?of this you willingly are ignorant of,as the bible passage above says in the last days there will come scoffers(that is you)walking after their own lusts(that is what you are doing)of the creation they willingly are ignorant of(you are being dumb on purpose to preserve your selfish pride,why?)

why is that all these jeebus cranks can’t seem to write in anything other than stream-of-consciousness mode?

Re “ stream-of-consciousness”

Don’t you mean stream-of-unconsciousness? ;)

no lizards growing wing nubs, no fish growing leg nubs

It’s a pity we can’t get people to do drawings of how they perceive transitional species, but there seem to be some weird ideas out there.

Re “It’s a pity we can’t get people to do drawings of how they perceive transitional species, but there seem to be some weird ideas out there.”

Yeah, probably look like something out of a horror movie - lots of half of this part, half of that part.

When what the theory actually says, if I’m not mistaken, is that while it’s alive, a transitional species is simply (guess what?) just another species.

As for leg nubs on fish - well, I’m no biologist, but I think those are called fins.

Henry

hmmm so i guess all the fish that still have fins are still in transition. or are you suggesting a young earth?maybe it just takes a really long time and those fins never really had a designed purpose.peace out

hmmm so i guess all the fish that still have fins are still in transition.

“HOW COME THERE’S STILL PYGMIES AND DWARVES!!!”

sorry, somebody had to do it.

hmmm so i guess all the fish that still have fins are still in transition.

In transition from what to what?

What do you think is meant by a transitional form? What would a transitional form between, say, a dinosaur and a bird look like?

Re “hmmm so i guess all the fish that still have fins are still in transition.”

If they* eventually have descendants significantly different from themselves, they’re transitional between their ancestors and their descendants, yes. (*=or perhaps their close relatives.)

Henry

It’s too bad so many people are deceived. My heart goes out to them. I’ll be praying for you guys.

God Bless.

Too bad:

It’s too bad so many people are deceived. My heart goes out to them. I’ll be praying for you guys.

God Bless.

Those IDers and YECers can use all the help you can give them

Transitional species? Look around you. EVERY species can be thought of as a transitional one. Evolution has happened and is happening. It’s as much a fact of nature as gravity is or electricity.

As for the transition between fish and land animals: Tiktaalik. The existence of such a form was predicted by scientists to be in rocks of a certain age. Lo and behold they found what evolution predicted.

I think we all need to read our Bibles, and start to act the way it says to.” As we forgive others, is how we will be forgiven”. Also the golden rule, “ do unto others etc”. Grow up, stop with the stupid comments.

I think we all need to read our Bibles, and start to act the way it says to.” As we forgive others, is how we will be forgiven”. Also the golden rule, “ do unto others etc”. Grow up, stop with the stupid comments.

Vlinfield:

I think we all need to read our Bibles, and start to act the way it says to.” As we forgive others, is how we will be forgiven”.

It also says “Thou shalt not bear false witness”, a simple, easy to understand rule that seems to give the likes of Ham and the rest of the ID movement leadership significant trouble.

Is this confirmed rumor or is it just pure gossip? I have also heard that in the animal kingdom the animals can only mate with their kind. You know like a dog and dog, cat and cat. So I must ask if a lizard and bird can’t mate and product offspring today than how in the world could a lizard evolued into a bird? They are two different species with different bodies and different bones and different lungs. Evolution isn’t possiable to have happenned. I will say it again two differents species couldn’t have evolued. God created all living things as they are. Creation is the only thing that makes sense.

Rachel,

For the first part, http://www.christianfaithandreason.[…]lawsuit.html .

For the rest: You have a strawman argument, since the theory of evolution doesn’t say what you think it says. Look around the site and you’ll find plenty of information to set you straight.

If you actually read a biology textbook, rather than repeat creationist lies that were forcefed to you, you would realize that hybridization is not the primary means of speciation. Furthermore, what idiotic non-logic are you following if you think that birds evolved from lizards because a bird and a lizard mated together? That’s like saying that the only way you could be descended from your grandfather is if you had mated with your grandfather in the first place.

And if you actually read even a children’s book on paleontology, you would have known that birds are descended from dinosaurs, not lizards.

Finally, evolution does indeed occur, or can you explain why bacteria develop antibiotic resistance if they are not evolving?

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by PZ Myers published on June 3, 2007 7:25 PM.

Best Behe takedown *ever* was the previous entry in this blog.

Of cilia and silliness (more on Behe) is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Categories

Archives

Author Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.361

Site Meter