http://freethinker.co.uk/2016/07/07/secularists-are-today-targeting-ken-hams-ark-encounter/
Quote
Today, July 7, sees the official opening of creationist Ken Ham’s wacky Ark Encounter in Williamsburg, Kentucky â€" and a protest by a group called the Tri-State Freethinkers, which is raising funds for the billboard pictured above.
The group said on its website:
Join us to protest the grand opening of the Ark Encounter! Their mission is anti-science, the Noah’s Ark story is immoral, and they maintain discriminatory hiring practices while receiving up to $18 M in state tax incentives. We are making a stand for science, equal rights and the separation of church and state. Join us at the protest to show your support!
Ark Encounter employees, according to Ham’s hiring guidelines, must oppose abortion, euthanasia, gay rights, and trans rights.
Among those who will be present at the opening are David Silverman, President of American Atheists and Dan Barker, Co-President of the Freedom from Religion Foundation, which is advising public schools in more than 1,000 school districts against visiting the religious theme park.
According to FFRF’s website:
The Ark Encounter is a Christian ministry run by the creationist Ken Ham, who also built the notorious Creation Museum. Ham has been clear about the proselytising nature of this park from the beginning. In a recent letter entitled, ‘Our Real Motive for Building Ark Encounter,’ he states it plainly: ‘Our motive is to do the King’s business until He comes. And that means preaching the gospel and defending the faith, so that we can reach as many souls as we can.’
FFRF is already receiving inquiries from concerned parents that overzealous teachers or principals may mistakenly believe it appropriate to schedule school outings to the Ark Encounter, as has happened with the Creation Museum.
In order to allay such concerns and to remind public schools of their constitutional obligations, it is sending a memo to every school district in Kentucky, Tennessee, Indiana, West Virginia and Ohio.
FFRF said:
Ham is free to erect monuments to the Bible, but public schools are not permitted to expose the children in their charge to religious myths and proselytising. So, public schools cannot organise trips for students to either the Creation Museum or the Ark Park. Doing so would violate the students’ rights of conscience and the US Constitution.
FFRF Co-Presidents Dan Barker and Annie Laurie Gaylor said in the memo:
Public schools may not advance or promote religion. The obligation to remain neutral on religion includes not teaching creationism, intelligent design, or any of their creatively named religious offspring to public school students. Taking public school students to a site whose self-professed goal is to convert children to a particular religion and undermine what is taught in public school science and history classrooms would be inappropriate.
And that any such field trip might be deemed ‘voluntary’ (ie, students may opt out of the trip) is irrelevant.
Courts have summarily rejected arguments that voluntariness excuses a constitutional violation.
FFRF is also enclosing with the memo its “Top 10†brochure, which explains the most common state-church violations in public schools and why schools must avoid them. In the past two years, FFRF has addressed more than 1,300 violations in public schools and offers this constitutional guide with the hope to see fewer violations in coming years.
(http://freethinker.co.uk/images/uploads/2016/07/park-630x193.jpg)
I wonder if King's Island is expecting any drop in revenues...
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on July 07, 2016, 09:40:44 AM
I wonder if King's Island is expecting any drop in revenues...
Last I heard Ham was charging like $40 a ticket. Apparently he is going after church groups or other discount strategies to get people in the park. Even with an 18 million tax break, it will take a bunch of visitors to pay off. I have already seen some critique of his ship in terms of design. It started out controversial and will remain so.
"..it started out stupid and will remain so."
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on July 07, 2016, 10:04:27 AM
"..it started out stupid and will remain so."
Lol. As far as I'm concerned this is dead proof of how gullible the religious are.
$18,000,000 in tax incentives. Makes me sick.
when religion dies we should keep it in remembrance of how stupid people spend money.
I've been watching the live streams via the Friendly Atheist facebook. It would be pretty funny if it wasn't so sad.
I really wish Kentucky would stop funding this bullshit with tax dollars...
Ham's discussion on animals is laughable as he tries in vain to hide from the fact that all animals that exist today, have had to been on the mythical Ark! LOL
HAM QUOTE: "The biblical concept of created “kind†probably most closely corresponds to the family level in current taxonomy. A good rule of thumb is that if two things can breed together, then they are of the same created kind. It is a bit more complicated, but this is a good quick measure of a “kind.â€
One can see how this fool tries in vain to acquiesce out of the predicament of not only the kinds of animals, but how many were on the Ark to begin with.
Why hasn't this pseudo-christian fool told the masses that there were 8 PAIRS OF EACH "KIND" PLACED UPON NOAH'S ARK? HUH?
"Take with you seven pairs of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and one pair of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate," (Gensis 7:2)
The simple math states that 7 pairs = 14, plus 1 pair = 2. 14+2=16 OF EACH "KIND". Now, thus far, there’re 1.2 million different species on earth, then x 16 pairs = 19.2 million "kinds" that had to be on Noah’s Ark!
http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001127
Furthermore, Noah and gang were on the waters in the Great Flood with 19.2 MILLION animal species for 371 days (Genesis 8:15â€"19). It is so hard to accept that pseudo-christians can still believe in this myth as they want to be taken seriously! We laugh at their expense and ignorance.
Quote from: 21CIconoclast on July 10, 2016, 04:11:06 PM
Ham's discussion on animals is laughable as he tries in vain to hide from the fact that all animals that exist today, have had to been on the mythical Ark! LOL
HAM QUOTE: "The biblical concept of created “kind†probably most closely corresponds to the family level in current taxonomy. A good rule of thumb is that if two things can breed together, then they are of the same created kind. It is a bit more complicated, but this is a good quick measure of a “kind.â€
One can see how this fool tries in vain to acquiesce out of the predicament of not only the kinds of animals, but how many were on the Ark to begin with.
Why hasn't this pseudo-christian fool told the masses that there were 8 PAIRS OF EACH "KIND" PLACED UPON NOAH'S ARK? HUH?
"Take with you seven pairs of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and one pair of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate," (Gensis 7:2)
The simple math states that 7 pairs = 14, plus 1 pair = 2. 14+2=16 OF EACH "KIND". Now, thus far, there’re 1.2 million different species on earth, then x 16 pairs = 19.2 million "kinds" that had to be on Noah’s Ark!
http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001127
Furthermore, Noah and gang were on the waters in the Great Flood with 19.2 MILLION animal species for 371 days (Genesis 8:15â€"19). It is so hard to accept that pseudo-christians can still believe in this myth as they want to be taken seriously! We laugh at their expense and ignorance.
We can all agree that the Noah's Ark thing is bullshit at best, but this is the second time I've seen the "16 of each kind of animal" thing on the forums. It would either be 14 OR 2, not 16. Unclean animals are not the same species as the clean ones.
7 pairs of clean animals and one pair of unclean animals do total up to 16 animals, but it's a pointless summing.
It should be (14 x nC*) + (2 x nU*) = total animals on the ark. And I suck at math, so somebody will be along to fix that.
*nC = Clean animals types.
*nU = Unclean animals types.
FinalSomnia,
"Take with you seven pairs of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and one pair of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate," (Gensis 7:2)
The key word in this verse is "and," where there're 7 pairs of clean animals for sacrificing, AND one pair for propagation, totaling 14 and 2 = 16 of each kind.
Since there're 1.2 million "animal kinds" on planet earth, then 16 x 1.2 million = 19.2 million animals that had to be on the Ark.
Bottom line? Ken Ham's Ark isn't big enough and he is lying about it being a true representation.
It's a tax free scam. I bet that Ham guy doesn't even believe that crap. Any revenue from this farce is going straight to his pocket. Overhead is covered by tithing anyways.
I posted this before but it is too important to ignore. The whole story is just rehashed mythology from thousands of years earlier. Somebody should ask this guy if he knows anything at all about Sumerian/Babylonian mythology. If you want to know the origins of the flood, Noah and the ark, the animals etc. you just have to look into the Babylonian "Epic of Gilgamesh" from 2,500 B.C. Also the same story is in the 'Deluge of Ziusudra' with Atram-Hasis as Noah and in the fable of 'Diodorus and the Flood of Deucalion'. It's all there, the flood, the measurements of the ark, the animals, Noah (Atram), even the dove. A first grader can see that this fable is a primitive copy of the original stories.
But then again his creation museum has Dinosaurs with saddles exhibited. So nothing surprising about the ark either. The guy is either a certified nutcase or a smart con artist.
Quote from: 21CIconoclast on July 11, 2016, 10:57:47 AM
FinalSomnia,
"Take with you seven pairs of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and one pair of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate," (Gensis 7:2)
The key word in this verse is "and," where there're 7 pairs of clean animals for sacrificing, AND one pair for propagation, totaling 14 and 2 = 16 of each kind.
Since there're 1.2 million "animal kinds" on planet earth, then 16 x 1.2 million = 19.2 million animals that had to be on the Ark.
Bottom line? Ken Ham's Ark isn't big enough and he is lying about it being a true representation.
I had to look that up but it seems there are over 8 million species of animals on our planet. Did Noah take any termites on board??
The number of insect species is greater than 8 million by quite a bit.
What a waste of money, energy, time, man power...etc. Are there any interactive stuff in it or is it just built for going around and looking at it?
reasonist,
Well, if one is to try and use logic in this discussion (*cough*), he had to include 16 pairs of termites, otherwise, they wouldn't exist today. Not to worry about the termites attacking the Ark because he had to sacrifice 14 of them to Yahweh god, remember? Therefore while the waters dried up, he had to save a pair of them so they could propagate in an incestuous manner over time.
When a mosquito bit Noah, why didn't he take the initiative of swatting the rest of them so they would be so annoying today? Damn.
I just LOVE the graphic at the bottom of the OP. Good stuff.
God can do the Rapture, right? Why couldn't he just wag his wienie at Earth and make all the humans go into LEO?
You know, creationist twats often forget that plants are alive, and they can drown. A global flood would have killed off the entire population of trees and soil-bound plants on this planet, quickly rendering Earth a dead world as animals coming off the Ark would have nothing to eat but each other. They, too, would have to be on the Ark, and they can't walk to Noah and furthermore couldn't walk back to their original homes. Did the animals bring seed bags with them as they came and went? How did they keep the damn pigeons out of the corn?
Anyway, if a global flood happened, there would be a worldwide disruption in dendrochronological columns somewhere around 2000 BCE, where new post-flood trees do not have any rings in common with old pre-flood trees. This is exactly what we don't find. Indeed, we have fully anchored spans a little over 11,000 years, which, by the way, covers the entire period of the YEC fantasy. Yes, apparently there were trees a thousand or more years before God created heaven and Earth. Not only that, there are probable trees that have lived through the flood (when they shouldn't have), the bristlecone pine specimens Amen (5,065 years old), Prometheus (4,844 years old when felled in 1964), and Methuselah (4,847 years old). Clonal trees get even older â€" Pando is somewhere between 80,000-1 million years old.
Hakurei Reimu,
But, but, but, Yahweh god's creation in only approximately 6000 years ago. In Luke 3:23-38, it goes from the mythical Jesus back to Adam, a period of approximately 4000 years. Subsequent to the bible character Jesus until present day is approximately 2000 years. This totals out that everything created by Yahweh is only approximately 6000 years old! Facetiously, you need to add these biblical axioms to your equations *cough.*
This is what pseudo-christians have to believe, and what is abuse, is that their children are indoctrinated with this kind of crap and have so say about it!
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on July 11, 2016, 08:27:34 PM
You know, creationist twats often forget that plants are alive, and they can drown. A global flood would have killed off the entire population of trees and soil-bound plants on this planet, quickly rendering Earth a dead world as animals coming off the Ark would have nothing to eat but each other. They, too, would have to be on the Ark, and they can't walk to Noah and furthermore couldn't walk back to their original homes. Did the animals bring seed bags with them as they came and went? How did they keep the damn pigeons out of the corn?
Anyway, if a global flood happened, there would be a worldwide disruption in dendrochronological columns somewhere around 2000 BCE, where new post-flood trees do not have any rings in common with old pre-flood trees. This is exactly what we don't find. Indeed, we have fully anchored spans a little over 11,000 years, which, by the way, covers the entire period of the YEC fantasy. Yes, apparently there were trees a thousand or more years before God created heaven and Earth. Not only that, there are probable trees that have lived through the flood (when they shouldn't have), the bristlecone pine specimens Amen (5,065 years old), Prometheus (4,844 years old when felled in 1964), and Methuselah (4,847 years old). Clonal trees get even older â€" Pando is somewhere between 80,000-1 million years old.
Well, the waters were there before God created anything. Maybe there were trees there too. Maybe God came from the tree, and we've been worshiping the wrong creator this whole time. Or the Bible is full of crap and people are stupid for believing in it.
I don't feel like re-reading the story of the flood, at the moment, but didn't Noah build it with only the help of his three sons? So four guys in ancient Mesopotamia, built that enormous fucking boat all by themselves, with the tools available at the time. :liar:
And you know I can't resist posting this poem again:
“The Waterâ€
Solomon Zorn
Noah's ark was far too small,
Never could have held them all.
Far-off species would have needed
Shelter till the flood receded.
One thing I would like to know:
Where did all the water go?
Rain for forty days and nights,
Thirty-thousand feet in height,
Water rose around the earth,
Flooded its entire girth,
Killing everything that grows.
Where did all the water go?
Such a total saturation,
Flooding all of God's creation,
Would have killed the vegetation,
Changed the ocean's salination.
Fossil records do not show:
Where did all the water go?
Long before the dawn of sight,
Water has refracted light.
Spectrum could not first appear,
As the flooding disappeared.
Misty rainbows always glowed.
Where did all the water go?
Noah's story seems unlikely.
Doesn't it seem much more likely,
There was never such a deluge,
Nor an ark to give them refuge?
One thing they can never show:
Where did all the water go?
This from a Christian blogger:
https://thimblerigsark.wordpress.com/2016/07/19/my-review-of-ken-hams-ark-encounter-theme-park/
(Long article. Please read it)
TL;DR
QuoteThe Creation Museum and the Ark Encounter both seem to suffer from the same problem that plagues most of the Christian films I review. They want to be evangelistic, but their impact outside of the faithful appears to be negligible.
Incidentally, I freely admit that I could be wrong about this. There could be scores of people who have come to faith as a result of their experiences with the Creation Museum, and there could be scores who will because of the Ark Encounter. If so, and if someone would like to provide evidence that I’m wrong about the evangelistic impact of the Creation Museum on skeptics, then I’ll gladly retract this point and have my positives outweigh my negatives.
4. The Cost
While I admire the tenacity, determination, and heart for evangelization of the people behind the Ark Encounter, I’ve also struggled with the fact that they are doing an Ark Encounter at all. Such a huge sum of money for building a theme park? My struggle finally came to a head one morning last May when I opened Twitter and found an AiG Tweet touting the benefits of building a Noah’s Ark theme park right next to a Tweet from J.K. Rowling’s charity Lumos, talking about their push to raise money to help orphans.
Seeing the two money-raising efforts side-by-side took my breath away. On the one hand, as a Christian, I respect AiG’s effort to share the Christian faith. On the other hand, as a Christian, I’m horrified that believers have struggled and fought and spent years raising an enormous amount of money to build a for-profit theme park replica of Noah’s Ark.
And it warps a part of my brain that it’s been done in the name of Christian ministry.
At this stage in the project it may be a tired argument (although I wouldn’t call it a stupid argument, as some have), but I can’t help but think what else could have been done with that money that might have had even more of an impact, if not on propagating the Creationist viewpoint, at least in sharing the Gospel and demonstrating a valuable apologetic, by meeting the physical needs of the poor and sick.
My final thought on the Ark Encounter: would I recommend a visit?
Christian or not, the ark itself is magnificent and is really something to be seen. But considering the cost of a ticket, there needs to be more going on to make it worth the expense, especially if you’re bringing a family. Once the park gets the zip lines up and running, once they get a few more (hopefully entertaining) displays in the ark, once they get a few more animals in the petting zoo, I’d say give it a go.
This is true, even if you’re not a Christian, or if you are a Christian but not a young-earth Creationist. Just be prepared to talk to your kids about what they will see, and to talk about why they will be seeing it. It can lead to some really interesting conversations about different belief systems, and different ways of interpreting Scripture. And yes, Bill Nye, it can even lead to discussions about science.
At least it did with my kids!
â€"
And if you do decide to go, and you agree with me on the charity/cost issues, then do the job that AiG should be doing and donate a matching amount to the tickets you purchased to a worthy charity of your own choice, preferably one that works in Kentucky.
Bottom line- religion and common sense do not live in the same room. A hundred million+ dollars in the hands of a truly charitable man could do wonders in terms of lives improved and things accomplished world wide. This leaves me no doubt that Ham is nothing but a huckster selling ice to Eskimos.
Compare this to a guy like Elon Musk with a real vision for sustainable futures. Well color me atheist, ese. :2thumbs:
Give $90,000,000 to help with one of the millions of problems in the world...or use it to try to convince people that you're right. Tough call. Sure, the first one would make a tangible difference in the world and help alleviate the consistently dropping reputation of Christians, but let's face it, Christians love being hated and "persecuted." In the end, nothing is more important than being right.
Quote from: Blackleaf on July 21, 2016, 02:00:25 PM
Give $90,000,000 to help with one of the millions of problems in the world...or use it to try to convince people that you're right. Tough call. Sure, the first one would make a tangible difference in the world and help alleviate the consistently dropping reputation of Christians, but let's face it, Christians love being hated and "persecuted." In the end, nothing is more important than being right.
Kentucky ranks among the top states in sucking up Federal assistance money. $90 million would go a ways in making the state less parasitic.
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on July 11, 2016, 08:27:34 PM
You know, creationist twats often forget that plants are alive, and they can drown. A global flood would have killed off the entire population of trees and soil-bound plants on this planet, quickly rendering Earth a dead world as animals coming off the Ark would have nothing to eat but each other. They, too, would have to be on the Ark, and they can't walk to Noah and furthermore couldn't walk back to their original homes. Did the animals bring seed bags with them as they came and went? How did they keep the damn pigeons out of the corn?
Anyway, if a global flood happened, there would be a worldwide disruption in dendrochronological columns somewhere around 2000 BCE, where new post-flood trees do not have any rings in common with old pre-flood trees. This is exactly what we don't find. Indeed, we have fully anchored spans a little over 11,000 years, which, by the way, covers the entire period of the YEC fantasy. Yes, apparently there were trees a thousand or more years before God created heaven and Earth. Not only that, there are probable trees that have lived through the flood (when they shouldn't have), the bristlecone pine specimens Amen (5,065 years old), Prometheus (4,844 years old when felled in 1964), and Methuselah (4,847 years old). Clonal trees get even older â€" Pando is somewhere between 80,000-1 million years old.
Just remember, applying logic to any of this will just have a creationist say back to you "God did it", so in they would say god made the flood, god then made all the trees and plant life grow back. no matter what logic and reason you have, they can't process it when 'a wizard did it' is there thought pattern.
(http://wxix.images.worldnow.com/images/10904904_G.jpg)
This is a picture from the Ark's interior. that bedroom? Give me a break. They have never been inside a real ship, unless it was a luxury cruise liner. Cabins of necessity would be confined simply because of the room needed elsewhere. Other pictures are just as silly. I predicted awhile ago that a lot of internal bracing would be needed for a ship that size.
(http://wxix.images.worldnow.com/images/10904905_G.jpg)
Viola. Several thousand animals ought to fit in there just fine. the design is closer to the accommodations of a cruise ship than a ship to haul and maintain animals.
More pics:
http://www.wave3.com/story/32362858/inside-look-at-the-ark-encounter
It's not about truth, it's about reinforcement. Believers have routinely ignored the fatal flaws in their beliefs no matter what those beliefs are. Cafeteria Christians are particularly in need of any flotsam or jetsam that will help them hang on to the idea that they're not complete idiots.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on July 22, 2016, 08:14:40 AM
It's not about truth, it's about reinforcement. Believers have routinely ignored the fatal flaws in their beliefs no matter what those beliefs are. Cafeteria Christians are particularly in need of any flotsam or jetsam that will help them hang on to the idea that they're not complete idiots.
Yes. critical thinking not wanted or needed here. Every time I see people queued up for stuff like Ham's ark, the sound of sheep baaing in a pasture comes back from my past.
Quote from: stromboli on July 22, 2016, 08:53:36 AM
Yes. critical thinking not wanted or needed here. Every time I see people queued up for stuff like Ham's ark, the sound of sheep baaing in a pasture comes back from my past.
My cousins rant about "atheistic science" on the Internet.
(http://rationalia.com/z/090822couple-fighting.gif)
(http://rationalia.com/z/traylersmiley.gif)
(http://rationalia.com/z/cranky.gif)
Lol. I live in a mobile home and my gay neighbor occasionally refers to me as a redneck. I point out to him he lives in one as well. Conversation over. Just waiting for the earthquake that will wipe it out. Hopefully I'll get to see a Mormon temple or two go down with it.
Fools and their money are being parted by con artists like Ham and his ilk. I guess that's why God made so many fools...
Quote from: Unbeliever on July 22, 2016, 06:11:25 PM
Fools and their money are being parted by con artists like Ham and his ilk. I guess that's why God made so many fools...
Well, he could hardly create smart people. We've demonstrated ourselves to be smarter than him on many occasions, like that whole science thing that blows his Bronze Age 'knowledge' of the world out of the water.
I'm awaiting the wood root from the untreated wood to spread.
Quote from: Munch on July 22, 2016, 08:30:18 PM
I'm awaiting the wood root from the untreated wood to spread.
You got right to the rot of the matter there.
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on July 22, 2016, 07:32:04 PM
Well, he could hardly create smart people. We've demonstrated ourselves to be smarter than him on many occasions, like that whole science thing that blows his Bronze Age 'knowledge' of the world out of the water.
Neil Tyson pointed out that our DNA is 99% identical to chimps. That one percent difference enables us to send the Hubble telescope into deep space, create poetry and compose symphonies, master quantum physics and design architecture. And that despite the fact we use only 10% of our cranial capacity. He also states that the odds of other life in the universe, is a high probability. Now imagine there is intelligent life out there that is even only 1% ahead of us. A two year old could win the Nobel price in physics, vast knowledge would be innate in infants, questions we have from the origins of life, dark matter etc. would all be common knowledge, harmonious co-operation and peaceful co-existence would be a given. All made possible by 1% difference in the DNA!
While here on Earth we kill people for thousands of years mostly because of an invisible and imaginary friend in the sky. Some of us decapitate or blow up innocent brothers and sisters of the same species in the name of a deity and we fight wars for resources, power and money. Sad really that we can't jump over a couple of steps in our evolution and advance at least that 1%. Wishful thinking on my part...
I just realized. They could have built another NASCAR venue with that money. Loads more money into the pockets of billionaire developers. Loads more hydrocarbon in the atmosphere. After the ark tanks, might become the centerpiece for the track. Premium stands on the side of the ark, lots of room for restaurants inside. Sound like a win/win to me.
Have you noticed that "Ark Encounter" has almost completely fallen off the radar? I spend time following topics on the internet and the media, and it has not received any press since the first few days of opening. Ken Ham has demonstrated in the past that he wants very much to be in the news and highly visible. Interesting. I think this might be telling, that the ship might be sinking this soon.
Quote from: stromboli on August 14, 2016, 10:22:54 AM
Have you noticed that "Ark Encounter" has almost completely fallen off the radar? I spend time following topics on the internet and the media, and it has not received any press since the first few days of opening. Ken Ham has demonstrated in the past that he wants very much to be in the news and highly visible. Interesting. I think this might be telling, that the ship might be sinking this soon.
Nah, God will destroy it with fire, like he promised.
And then Ken will blame atheists arsonists.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on August 14, 2016, 11:11:46 AM
Nah, God will destroy it with fire, like he promised.
And then Ken will blame atheists arsonists.
Assuming nobody gets killed, it would be kind of humorous seeing nothing but the steel framework left afterward. Highly ironic.
Quote from: stromboli on August 14, 2016, 12:19:31 PM
Assuming nobody gets killed, it would be kind of humorous seeing nothing but the steel framework left afterward. Highly ironic.
How about just "one person"? (http://rationalia.com/z/begging.gif)
Quote from: stromboli on July 26, 2016, 01:53:27 PM
I just realized. They could have built another NASCAR venue with that money. Loads more money into the pockets of billionaire developers. Loads more hydrocarbon in the atmosphere. After the ark tanks, might become the centerpiece for the track. Premium stands on the side of the ark, lots of room for restaurants inside. Sound like a win/win to me.
Probably not. It cost more than $150 million to build Kentucky speedway in 2000. Daytona speedway spent a quarter billion on upgrades to their facility last year. It would be at least $250 million to build one today. To date Ham has only raised about $100 million for the Ark Park. Interestingly enough Bill Nye is partially responsible for Ham getting the park opened. Bond sales were too low until his debate with Ham. The debate boosted the bond sales enough for Ham to hit his financing goals.
Plus a new track in Kentucky would probably be as much a financial bust as the Ark Park. That part of the country is what NASCAR calls saturated as far as races go already. If you want to build a new NASCAR track you need to build it in the Northwest.
Quote from: PopeyesPappy on August 14, 2016, 01:01:49 PMInterestingly enough Bill Nye is partially responsible for Ham getting the park opened. Bond sales were too low until his debate with Ham. The debate boosted the bond sales enough for Ham to hit his financing goals.
This is why he agreed to the debate. As several well-known atheists have stated, in one fashion or another, "It would look great on his resume, not so good on mine."
Reasonist ... ever see the movie, Baby Geniuses? ;-)
The flood is a Point Refuted A Thousand Times. But there is still potential for fun.
A few pages later is a just as absurd story, but a lot more overlooked. If someone says the flood story must be literal, than this second story must be literal.
The Tower of Babel. How high was it that God was actually worried and had to scatter the languages? How large was the workforce, and where did it come from considering the world's population was 8 people just a few generations earlier? And since those 8 people were still alive (given the long lifespans) shouldn't they have said "uh, that's a bad idea" to those building the tower? And where are the remains of this tower?
I'm looking forward to Ham's Tower Encounter next.
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on August 28, 2016, 02:31:56 PM
The flood is a Point Refuted A Thousand Times. But there is still potential for fun.
A few pages later is a just as absurd story, but a lot more overlooked. If someone says the flood story must be literal, than this second story must be literal.
The Tower of Babel. How high was it that God was actually worried and had to scatter the languages? How large was the workforce, and where did it come from considering the world's population was 8 people just a few generations earlier? And since those 8 people were still alive (given the long lifespans) shouldn't they have said "uh, that's a bad idea" to those building the tower? And where are the remains of this tower?
I'm looking forward to Ham's Tower Encounter next.
Lol. No doubt there is a bible belt state waiting with bated breath to offer tax incentives for that very thing.
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on August 28, 2016, 02:31:56 PM
The flood is a Point Refuted A Thousand Times. But there is still potential for fun.
A few pages later is a just as absurd story, but a lot more overlooked. If someone says the flood story must be literal, than this second story must be literal.
The Tower of Babel. How high was it that God was actually worried and had to scatter the languages? How large was the workforce, and where did it come from considering the world's population was 8 people just a few generations earlier? And since those 8 people were still alive (given the long lifespans) shouldn't they have said "uh, that's a bad idea" to those building the tower? And where are the remains of this tower?
I'm looking forward to Ham's Tower Encounter next.
And why didn't he destroy the world again when we created COBOL?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s11YMIIgjFg&feature=youtu.be
UPDATE!!!! Ark Encounter video taken today showing huge crowds.
Or not........
Should be praying harder.
Quote from: stromboli on August 28, 2016, 09:40:31 PM
[spoiler]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s11YMIIgjFg&feature=youtu.be[/spoiler]
UPDATE!!!! Ark Encounter video taken today showing huge crowds.
Or not........
All that unused parking space. Such waste.
Yes indeed. Think of the potential developments that could have made money for the state, versus Ham's wet dream of an "actual" ark to satisfy his inflated ego. Apparently his creation museum is not doing well either.
At this point I feel a little bad for the employees. At some point they aren't going to get paid for work they've already done.
Quote from: PopeyesPappy on August 29, 2016, 09:30:22 AM
At this point I feel a little bad for the employees. At some point they aren't going to get paid for work they've already done.
And I bet the contractors are still owned money.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on August 28, 2016, 06:26:33 PM
And why didn't he destroy the world again when we created COBOL?
Yes, FORTRAN is the one true code ;-)
Quote from: Baruch on August 29, 2016, 06:54:48 PM
Yes, FORTRAN is the one true code ;-)
I C what you did there.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on August 29, 2016, 07:29:08 PM
I C what you did there.
I had a boss once, who was a real man. When he was in college, they programmed a patch panel for each run, by replugging the patch cables in a new pattern. Before my time, but more manly than girly assembler.
Quote from: Baruch on August 29, 2016, 07:43:32 PM
I had a boss once, who was a real man. When he was in college, they programmed a patch panel for each run, by replugging the patch cables in a new pattern. Before my time, but more manly than girly assembler.
Grace Hopper developed that system during WWII. They were calculating ballistics tables for battleship guns. There came a day when their results didn't make any sense, way off. They checked their "code", no problems. So they started checking the physical plant. (There's a picture somewhere of her troops standing inside the "computer" shifting wires.) The problem was finally found, a moth stuck between two contacts. Hopper took the insect and taped it into their log book with the notation "Problem found, bug in computer." That log book is now in the Smithsonian, the evidence of the first recorded computer bug.
Ten years from now Ham's ark will be a brothel stuffed full of Furries. Made to order, you might say.
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on August 28, 2016, 02:31:56 PM
The flood is a Point Refuted A Thousand Times. But there is still potential for fun.
A few pages later is a just as absurd story, but a lot more overlooked. If someone says the flood story must be literal, than this second story must be literal.
The Tower of Babel. How high was it that God was actually worried and had to scatter the languages? How large was the workforce, and where did it come from considering the world's population was 8 people just a few generations earlier? And since those 8 people were still alive (given the long lifespans) shouldn't they have said "uh, that's a bad idea" to those building the tower? And where are the remains of this tower?
I'm looking forward to Ham's Tower Encounter next.
Can I ask you a serious question? Are you saying that it is absolutely impossible for a global flood to have taken place?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: alexxmedeiros on October 14, 2016, 12:26:46 AM
Can I ask you a serious question? Are you saying that it is absolutely impossible for a global flood to have taken place?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You have a mechanism where it could happen? Cause nobody else has one.
Quote from: alexxmedeiros on October 14, 2016, 12:26:46 AM
Can I ask you a serious question? Are you saying that it is absolutely impossible for a global flood to have taken place?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yeah, I've been know to say that.
Quote from: alexxmedeiros on October 14, 2016, 12:26:46 AMCan I ask you a serious question? Are you saying that it is absolutely impossible for a global flood to have taken place?
After the continents formed then yes. And within the last billion years certainly yes.
Before the first stable continents formed it was possible, but that was over 3 billion years ago.
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on October 14, 2016, 10:12:57 AM
After the continents formed then yes. And within the last billion years certainly yes.
Before the first stable continents formed it was possible, but that was over 3 billion years ago.
Seriously? How can you possibly say there wasn't 30,000 feet of water over the whole Earth at some point and it all drained away to create the Grand Canyon and not leave any other traces in the geologic record!
BTW, who did Noah's grandchildren breed with? Checkmate, athiest!
Quote from: alexxmedeiros on October 14, 2016, 12:26:46 AM
Can I ask you a serious question? Are you saying that it is absolutely impossible for a global flood to have taken place?
If by global flood you mean the flood narrative described Genesis chapters 6â€"9 then yes the event described in Genesis is absolutely impossible. The Genesis flood narrative was borrowed from Mesopotamian mythology.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on October 14, 2016, 06:11:17 AM
You have a mechanism where it could happen? Cause nobody else has one.
So it's absolutely impossible?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 14, 2016, 09:56:39 AM
Yeah, I've been know to say that.
Ok how do you know that?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on October 14, 2016, 10:12:57 AM
After the continents formed then yes. And within the last billion years certainly yes.
Before the first stable continents formed it was possible, but that was over 3 billion years ago.
Ok so, right now you're giving me your evidence. Do you use your reasoning to decide what this evidence proves?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: PopeyesPappy on October 14, 2016, 10:24:09 AM
If by global flood you mean the flood narrative described Genesis chapters 6â€"9 then yes the event described in Genesis is absolutely impossible. The Genesis flood narrative was borrowed from Mesopotamian mythology.
Ok how do you know that?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: alexxmedeiros on October 14, 2016, 11:13:50 AM
So it's absolutely impossible?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Wrong way 'round. You need to show that it was possible. Otherwise, it's just the same old goatherder bullshit.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on October 14, 2016, 11:19:36 AM
Wrong way 'round. You need to show that it was possible. Otherwise, it's just the same old goatherder bullshit.
I believe in a lot of crazy things because God has revealed them to me to be true. I've not witnessed them and A lot of the time I'm not sure about how they exactly happened but I do know for certain that they did happen.
You can not say that it did not happen for certain. Therefore you can not know that it didn't happen.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: alexxmedeiros on October 14, 2016, 01:33:30 PM
I believe in a lot of crazy things because God has revealed them to me to be true. I've not witnessed them and A lot of the time I'm not sure about how they exactly happened but I do know for certain that they did happen.
You can not say that it did not happen for certain. Therefore you can not know that it didn't happen.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So how did the flood happen?
Quote from: TrueStory on October 14, 2016, 02:04:16 PM
So how did the flood happen?
How did it happen? I don't know. Did it happen? Absolutely. I don't have to know how God made a cow to know that he DID make a cow. I don't have to know how the flood happened in order to know that it did happen.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: alexxmedeiros on October 14, 2016, 02:20:01 PM
How did it happen? I don't know. Did it happen? Absolutely. I don't have to know how God made a cow to know that he DID make a cow. I don't have to know how the flood happened in order to know that it did happen.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
lol at least you admit you have no idea, i'm not sure how that translates into confidence that something happens though.
Quote from: alexxmedeiros on October 14, 2016, 01:33:30 PM
I believe in a lot of crazy things because God has revealed them to me to be true. I've not witnessed them and A lot of the time I'm not sure about how they exactly happened but I do know for certain that they did happen.
You can not say that it did not happen for certain. Therefore you can not know that it didn't happen.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Prove it.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on October 14, 2016, 02:29:29 PM
Prove it.
You just did. Your asking me for proof. Proof presupposes truth. You can't have truth without God.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: TrueStory on October 14, 2016, 02:26:30 PM
lol at least you admit you have no idea, i'm not sure how that translates into confidence that something happens though.
My confidence is that God said it. God said the flood happened, it happened.
What's so hard about that? You call God a liar.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: alexxmedeiros on October 14, 2016, 02:46:36 PM
You just did. Your asking me for proof. Proof presupposes truth. You can't have truth without God.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Still with the quibbles. You can prove any god or gods exist, so your argument has no basis.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on October 14, 2016, 03:07:38 PM
Still with the quibbles. You can prove any god or gods exist, so your argument has no basis.
Are you certain? Could you be wrong?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Plonk.
Quote from: alexxmedeiros on October 14, 2016, 01:33:30 PMI believe in a lot of crazy things because God has revealed them to me to be true. I've not witnessed them and A lot of the time I'm not sure about how they exactly happened but I do know for certain that they did happen.
You can not say that it did not happen for certain. Therefore you can not know that it didn't happen.
I can say there is a complete lack of evidence for a global flood within the last billion years, but you will not accept that. A global flood of that description would leave behind lots of evidence of itself, even if it demolishes all evidence of anything that came before it.
We have a pretty rich geological record. There is plenty of evidence in it for what came before right now.
I can say there is no evidence for such a flood and plenty against, and we have never found the unfinished Tower of Babel.
Rational answers need not apply.
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on October 14, 2016, 03:24:51 PM
I can say there is a complete lack of evidence for a global flood within the last billion years, but you will not accept that. A global flood of that description would leave behind lots of evidence of itself, even if it demolishes all evidence of anything that came before it.
We have a pretty rich geological record. There is plenty of evidence in it for what came before right now.
I can say there is no evidence for such a flood and plenty against, and we have never found the unfinished Tower of Babel.
Evidence assumes truth. What is truth? How do you get truth in your world view?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: alexxmedeiros on October 14, 2016, 02:47:23 PM
My confidence is that God said it. God said the flood happened, it happened.
What's so hard about that? You call God a liar.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I will call your god a liar. And you are simply a gullible fish. You seem to think that if you believe it it is true. Since you don't believe in facts, there really is nothing to discuss. You are brainless and hopeless.
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 14, 2016, 03:44:09 PM
I will call your god a liar. And you are simply a gullible fish. You seem to think that if you believe it it is true. Since you don't believe in facts, there really is nothing to discuss. You are brainless and hopeless.
God says it therefore it is true.
Not "I believe it therefore it's true."
But you can't know anything so how do you know that I am brainless and hopeless?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: alexxmedeiros on October 14, 2016, 03:47:30 PM
God says it therefore it is true.
Not "I believe it therefore it's true."
But you can't know anything so how do you know that I am brainless and hopeless?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You are brainless by your statements and continuous question. What is truth?
Quote from: alexxmedeiros on October 14, 2016, 03:34:08 PM
Evidence assumes truth. What is truth? How do you get truth in your world view?
What do you mean by "evidence assumes truth"?
Do you doubt the information provided by your senses?
Alexx, how often do you crap and fart?
Equal opportunity butt-stabber.
Quote from: Hijiri Byakuren on October 14, 2016, 04:05:12 PM
Alexx, how often do you crap and fart?
Equal opportunity butt-stabber.
First you have to define "crap" and "fart", and then you have to define "often". Those are all knowledge terms and you can't have knowledge without truth and you can't have truth without his version of god.
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on October 14, 2016, 04:13:07 PM
First you have to define "crap" and "fart", and then you have to define "often". Those are all knowledge terms and you can't have knowledge without truth and you can't have truth without his version of god.
Without his version of god revealing it to you.
I'm beginning to think our Alexx is off his meds again.
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 14, 2016, 03:55:30 PM
You are brainless by your statements and continuous question. What is truth?
"You ARE" is an absolute statement. You gave up absolutes a long time ago....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on October 14, 2016, 04:03:57 PM
What do you mean by "evidence assumes truth"?
Do you doubt the information provided by your senses?
Evidence must be true. If you have never murdered anyone there can be no evidence that you have.
You have no reason to trust your senses, do you?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on October 14, 2016, 04:13:07 PM
First you have to define "crap" and "fart", and then you have to define "often". Those are all knowledge terms and you can't have knowledge without truth and you can't have truth without his version of god.
You did a decent job there glad you're understanding some of my position.
It's not my version of God, it's the one and only God.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: alexxmedeiros on October 14, 2016, 04:42:04 PM
Evidence must be true. If you have never murdered anyone there can be no evidence that you have.
You have no reason to trust your senses, do you?
If you are not a person who regularly doubts the information of his senses, then you have no reason to ask how I know something is true.
Quote from: alexxmedeiros on October 14, 2016, 04:43:16 PM
You did a decent job there glad you're understanding some of my position.
It's not my version of God, it's the one and only God.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There are many versions of God. Yours is #2136 on the list of ones I've been accused of defying.
Equal opportunity butt-stabber.
Quote from: alexxmedeiros on October 14, 2016, 04:41:05 PM
"You ARE" is an absolute statement. You gave up absolutes a long time ago....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Answer the question.
Quote from: alexxmedeiros on October 14, 2016, 04:43:16 PM
You did a decent job there glad you're understanding some of my position.
It's not my version of God, it's the one and only God.
Odin's beard! :bashcomp:
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on October 14, 2016, 04:45:43 PM
If you are not a person who regularly doubts the information of his senses, then you have no reason to ask how I know something is true.
What I am saying is that you have no basis to trust your reasoning and senses, so you have no basis to determine whether something is true or false.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on October 14, 2016, 04:45:43 PM
If you are not a person who regularly doubts the information of his senses, then you have no reason to ask how I know something is true.
What I am saying is that you have no basis to trust your reasoning and senses, so you have no basis to determine whether something is true or false.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 14, 2016, 05:11:52 PM
Answer the question.
Truth is that which corresponds to reality. You can not know which reality is the right one nor can you trust that your reasoning and senses are valid. You can not have truth, just preference. Atheism fails every time.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: alexxmedeiros on October 14, 2016, 07:01:26 PM
What I am saying is that you have no basis to trust your reasoning and senses, so you have no basis to determine whether something is true or false.
So what you're saying is...
If you believe in an all-powerful being capable of fooling your senses, then you have reason to trust your senses
But..
If you don't believe in an all-powerful being capable of fooling your senses, then you have no reason to trust your senses.
This is supposed to make sense?
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on October 14, 2016, 07:21:47 PM
So what you're saying is...
If you believe in an all-powerful being capable of fooling your senses, then you have reason to trust your senses
But..
If you don't believe in an all-powerful being capable of fooling your senses, then you have no reason to trust your senses.
This is supposed to make sense?
No I'm saying thatI have justification for trusting my senses, you don't.
Tell me this, could you be wrong about everything you claim to know?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Your justification for believing your senses is that you believe in a being capable of fooling your senses.
You say that unless one believes in a being capable of fooling the senses, then one has no reason to trust the senses.
No, I cannot be wrong about everything I know because I know I exist. If I am wrong about that, then who is wrong about that?
Quote from: alexxmedeiros on October 14, 2016, 04:42:04 PM
Evidence must be true. If you have never murdered anyone there can be no evidence that you have.
You have no reason to trust your senses, do you?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I murdered people thru my taxes and other support of government ... but there is no blood on my hands ... better than M&Ms.
Quote from: PopeyesPappy on October 14, 2016, 10:24:09 AM
If by global flood you mean the flood narrative described Genesis chapters 6â€"9 then yes the event described in Genesis is absolutely impossible. The Genesis flood narrative was borrowed from Mesopotamian mythology.
I like the Sumerian original better.
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on October 14, 2016, 03:24:51 PM
I can say there is a complete lack of evidence for a global flood within the last billion years, but you will not accept that. A global flood of that description would leave behind lots of evidence of itself, even if it demolishes all evidence of anything that came before it.
We have a pretty rich geological record. There is plenty of evidence in it for what came before right now.
I can say there is no evidence for such a flood and plenty against, and we have never found the unfinished Tower of Babel.
There is an unfinished ziggurat in Elam ... but that wasn't the first of its kind. The legend probably refers to the break up of human society around Gobekle Tepe in S Turkey (where the oldest stone monuments were found, way earlier than the Pyramids). The legend of Nimrod probably goes back to that time as well (the people didn't farm yet, they only hunted and gathered). It is a historical development, that after the first tribe did X ... that in the future there would be tribe Y, Z etc ... and the tribes don't speak the same language. Tribes in New Guinea demonstrate this. One valley over, the language is unintelligible. The idea of the gods being jealous of man etc ... goes back to the Sumerian myths. In Sumeria, the humans were the slaves of the gods, but the overworked humans kept making noise at night, and kept the gods from getting a good sleep. That is why the gods wanted to drown us, to drown out the noise, and get a good nights sleep, so they wouldn't be so cranky. But one god didn't think that was right ...
Quote from: alexxmedeiros on October 14, 2016, 06:59:13 PM
What I am saying is that you have no basis to trust your reasoning and senses, so you have no basis to determine whether something is true or false.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That is epistemological nihilism. If you aren't Nietzsche, you can't take that position, it is already taken ;-)
Quote from: Baruch on October 14, 2016, 08:17:53 PM
There is an unfinished ziggurat in Elam ... but that wasn't the first of its kind. The legend probably refers to the break up of human society around Gobekle Tepe in S Turkey (where the oldest stone monuments were found, way earlier than the Pyramids). The legend of Nimrod probably goes back to that time as well (the people didn't farm yet, they only hunted and gathered). It is a historical development, that after the first tribe did X ... that in the future there would be tribe Y, Z etc ... and the tribes don't speak the same language. Tribes in New Guinea demonstrate this. One valley over, the language is unintelligible. The idea of the gods being jealous of man etc ... goes back to the Sumerian myths. In Sumeria, the humans were the slaves of the gods, but the overworked humans kept making noise at night, and kept the gods from getting a good sleep. That is why the gods wanted to drown us, to drown out the noise, and get a good nights sleep, so they wouldn't be so cranky. But one god didn't think that was right ...
If creationists insist on a literal Flood, they have to insist on a literal Tower.
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on October 14, 2016, 08:26:54 PM
If creationists insist on a literal Flood, they have to insist on a literal Tower.
The original Janga ;-) Always falls down eventually, therefore ... G-d!
A peculiarity of this site is that I find myself wanting to argue trivia with people I almost altogether agree with. I'll try to watch out for that.
Quote from: Cavebear on October 15, 2016, 08:21:16 AM
A peculiarity of this site is that I find myself wanting to argue trivia with people I almost altogether agree with. I'll try to watch out for that.
Lots of people here will happily strain at gnats and swallow camels.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on October 15, 2016, 09:03:14 AM
Lots of people here will happily strain at gnats and swallow camels.
Dromedary or Bactrian? The Bactrian goes down hard!
Quote from: Baruch on October 15, 2016, 12:05:09 PM
Dromedary or Bactrian? The Bactrian goes down hard!
But you like it hard, no?
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on October 15, 2016, 12:07:35 PM
But you like it hard, no?
If your profession is sword swallower ... don't hiccup!
Quote from: Baruch on October 15, 2016, 01:04:10 PM
If your profession is sword swallower ... don't hiccup!
Some people will swallow anything. That's where the legend of ELEVEN comes from.
That's where ALL Legends come in. From Adam to Gilgamesh to Heracul to Thor.