Ken ham's creationist science theories

[Acim]

Well, that was a fun debate. We could use this ad hom approach more often. Save us time.

From what I gather his point is that science can't rely on inference to accurately depict claims of past events. Whereas (his) religion can?

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Ad homs are inappropriate when there are facts ignored just to disrespect the person. Ken Ham has no facts. It is a fact he is contributing to the "stupid-ifying" of the country by making tons of money off of falsehoods. He can't even build an Ark without modern techniques and tools and can't fit all the live creatures on a boat. Remember? He wanted to put LIVE animals crammed up in that boat until he had to settle for fake ones. His museum, web site, and theme park betray his complete ignorance and willful stupidity. That's not an ad hom ... it's what's for dinner.

 

[Milton Platt]

Ken ham is a dude who developed a "scientific" theory based on creation...
It is undoubtedly the most vague, unreasonable, unproven and most of all very very misleading to people who actually think alike him...
But i say that coming from a non religious pov...
I was wondering about the religious pps...

Actually, he does not have a scientific theory which explains all of the evidence concerning the flora and fauna. In fact he does not have any theories at all, in the scientific sense of the word. He only has assertions.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I'm a theist and Ken Ham is a blasphemous turd. His "science" is abysmal. His theology is abysmal. His "logic" is abysmal. There is nothing sound in anything he says. That God hasn't struck down his blasphemous (or at least highly crass) Ark theme park is amazing. Sure, megachurches make lots of bucks off God too, but a ********************* theme park? Are you for REAL?

And not to mention the tax incentives and flabbergasting lack of laws and regulations concerning any of it.