Jackson Wheat

February 19, 2015

Ken Ham vs. Charles Darwin
A creationist attacking evolution is like hitting a mountain with a short stick; the
creationist will fail whether or not he or she wants to admit it. The creationist can keep banging
the stick against the mountain and proclaiming that the mountain is giving way, but this is just a
lie meant to keep the people who neither understand nor want to understand evolution happy.
Ken Hams desperate attempt to keep the Bible relevant in a time of science is truly pitiable, and
it is indicative of his complete lack of science. Now do not get me wrong, the Bible is a religious
text with no relation to knowledge, while science is the process by which we learn new things
about the universe or multiverse. That is why Mr. Hams attempts to disprove evolution while
simultaneously not doing any experiments are so laughable. Disproving an entire scientific
field with word games and waving a boring book around is tantamount to telling children to not
trust reality.
The first few paragraphs of Ken Ham Declares Darwin Was Wrong Day, which is a
joke within itself, are Mr. Ham kicking and moaning about the newly instated Darwin Day on
February 12. He is whining because even though Christians have Easter and Christmas,
secularists should not be allowed to have a holiday. Apparently Mr. Ham has never heard of this
little thing called the First Amendment of the United States Constitution that guarantees the
freedom of religion. Even though Darwin Day is a day to observe and feel awed by the power of
evolution on the cosmic and organic scales, Mr. Ham thinks that it is devoted to promote an
anti-God religion. The evolutionary worldview is an attempt to explain the universe and life
without God. Its a religion of naturalism and atheism. Sadly, many Christians buy into this
religion and simply squeeze God into the gaps somewhere. Yeah, sounds about right; evolution
completely does away with any notion of a god or gods, right? No, evolution makes no address
nor even mentions any gods, and the process of evolution is just the genetic change from one
species of organisms to another. Mr. Ham needs to understand what evolution is before he tries
to disprove what it even is.
Also, for the millionth time, atheism is not a religion; it is the lack of a religion.
Creationists have been told this over and over and over, and yet they can never seem to get the
idea through their heads! It is such a difficult concept? Atheism is a philosophic viewpoint, not
a religion. If atheism were a religion then it would have broken into parts and tried to kill itself
by now. Let us take a childish example of disproving this notion of atheism-being-a-religion
wrong since creationism is so childish: imagine people selling things. Christians are selling
Yahweh, Muslims are selling Allah, and Hindus are selling Vishnu, but atheists are not selling
anything. Because atheists are not buying from the religions, that does not mean they are selling
anything! They are just refusing to buy from the religions. Saying atheism is a religion is the
same as saying bald is a hair color. Next, I can understand Mr. Hams frustration with the God
of the gaps idea; I do not like it either. My reason is different from his. I do not like the idea
because gods are unnecessary to science, and scientists have a pretty good understanding of
evolution without the interference of any deities. His reason is probably that the idea does not
glorify his god.
Back to Mr. Hams article: the article says, The Charles Darwin Day statement from the
Delaware governor calls evolution the foundation of modern biology, an essential tool in
understanding the development of life on earth. But, in reality, biological evolution goes

directly against what we know from studying observational science, but what the article means
is, Evolution is not in the Bible; therefore, evolution is false. That hazardously brain-injuring
ideology demands to be debunked. To begin, evolution is the foundation of biology; everything
from zoology to botany to physiology to comparative anatomy to embryology to biochemistry to
paleontology to archaeology and beyond can only be explained in light of evolution. Evolution
is the unifying theory of physics for biology, and that is how scientists know evolution is true.
It is currently the only explanation that can account for everything in biology, and the crosspollination, to use Neil deGrasse Tysons word, of cosmology and physics (such as the creation
of the chemicals necessary for life) with geology and biology only confirm the truth of the
undeniable fact of evolution. Second, has Mr. Ham ever done research on evolution
experiments? The answer to that question is almost certainly no because observational science
has confirmed repeatedly that organisms, such as bacterias and flies, evolve in laboratories. A
simple online search will provide a list of observed evolution tests: the long-term E. coli
experiment, radiotrophic fungi, nylon-eating bacteria, and the peppered moth to name a few.
Most creationists will actually attest to evolution, but they call it variation.
But Ken Hams support of his previous statement is this statement: The Law of
Biogenesis states that life only comes from other life; life never arises from non-life. There are
no known exceptions to this law. This is another demonstrably fallacious assertion by
creationists who attempt to disprove what they do not understand. Mr. Hams logic is, It has
never been observed; therefore, it cannot happen, and that is just ridiculous. That logic is
disproved every time humans learn something new about the universe or multiverse. No one had
previously known that the universe was expanding; there were no known exceptions to that.
Today we know for a fact that the universe is expanding. No one had ever seen evidence of
organisms changing and not being able to reproduce with each other; there were no known
exceptions. Today we know for a fact that animals can and do change until populations of
previously similar organisms cannot reproduce with each other. Also, there is no law of
biogenesis; biogenesis is just an idea to explain organisms being born from other organisms. The
only places that I ever see the law of biogenesis is on creationist websites. Mr. Ham then
declares that the law of biogenesis confirms what Genesis says about Yahweh creating the
universe, which is ridiculous. I could just as easily say the law of biogenesis proves that Allah
created the universe.
Mr. Hams next statement makes me wish that I could drink something strong to erase my
memories of the past few minutes: There is no known mechanism that can change one kind of
animal into a totally different kind. Yes, different species can form within a kindbut that is not
biological evolution. Such changes only reflect the incredible amount of information in the genes
of each kind that results in considerable variability. Yes, populations of organisms biologically
change into species that can no longer mate with each other after many generations, but that is
not evolution. Whahowwhy? Why do I do this to myself? I could be outside jumping on
my trampoline or swimming in my pool, or the hot tub, but instead I am inside on my computer
breaking apart these ridiculous attempts at arguments against established science. I am not even
going to take time out of my day to type up arguments against the rest of Mr. Hams page. If you
have even half a brain then you can do it yourself. The page on Answers in Genesis is called
Ken Ham Declares Darwin Was Wrong Day.