This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Lawrence Krauss blasphemes Our Lord

Lawrence Krauss blasphemes Our Lord - Comments

iur's Avatar Comment 1 by iur

First. Ken Ham his an Asshole... that Blasphemes inteligence.

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 10:41:00 UTC | #426764

RichardofYork's Avatar Comment 2 by RichardofYork

Ken Ham shouldnt even be in the same sentence as Lawrence Krauss , let alone be writing about his blasphemous nature.

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 10:47:00 UTC | #426765

Ygern's Avatar Comment 3 by Ygern

This is more of a whine than an article. It amounts to:

Dr Krauss doesn't think much of Creation Science, he is dismissive of my museum and he actually cracks a joke at the expense of the myth I believe in.... waaah!

Enough intelligent people have spent time checking out his Creation museum and every claim about science & history in it contains has been thoroughly exposed for the nonsense it is; the fact that Krauss wasted 22 whole minutes of his life going into it is a tribute to his patience and endurance.

As a matter of fact Krauss' AAI 2009 talk was inspiring and eloquent and educational. Ham could have learned something from it but he was too busy looking for a single line in an hour long talk to be offended about. However it seems that cosmologists are finally recognised to be just as subversive and dangerous as evolutionary biologists by the Creationist crowd and can expect to see more protests and opposition.

He doesn't bother to actually say what exactly he thinks is wrong with any of the physics in the talk (of course not) and even though he links only to the truncated clip of the "blasphemy", it still doesn't obscure the fact that Krauss was saying something both interesting and intelligent and rather uplifting.

Ham should stick to crayons and colouring-in books, they're more his level.

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 10:54:00 UTC | #426766

jel's Avatar Comment 5 by jel

what a pathetic piece, "you don't respect my beliefs", whinge, whine, moan. why the fuck should should anyone respect such stupid nonsense? religions and religious beliefs are dumb but creationists really take the biscuit. 22 minutes in that place was 22 minutes of a life wasted.

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:08:00 UTC | #426770

Tyler Durden's Avatar Comment 4 by Tyler Durden

...it was obvious Krauss wasn’t the least bit interested in researching the content of the museum (as one would expect from a real scientist and well-known anti-creationist commentator), but only visited presumably to tell people he has seen the Creation Museum and thus could comment on it...
Well Ken, if you can't be bothered to research the content for your "museum", don't expect a world-renowned expert in the field of science to bother reading your propaganda, fairy tales and outright lies.

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:08:00 UTC | #426769

Jangocat's Avatar Comment 6 by Jangocat

Creation museum is an oxymoron. Anyone with the slightest bit of common sense understands this. There were NO dinosaurs in the time of man. That is an indisputable fact verified through fossil records. As soon as you see an exhibit like that you know the whole museum is a farce. The gall of these superstitious fools to question a real scientist, they are pathetic cowards too afraid to accept the reality of mortality...

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:08:00 UTC | #426771

Paul42's Avatar Comment 7 by Paul42

Ken Ham is a fuckin idiot.

Nuff said...

Love.

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:10:00 UTC | #426773

Rawhard Dickins's Avatar Comment 8 by Rawhard Dickins

Keep up the good work!

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:16:00 UTC | #426774

rod-the-farmer's Avatar Comment 9 by rod-the-farmer

I guess Krauss saying you don't need jeebus to understand where you come from is blasphemy.

Woe is me. I am way beyond that point. I must be headed straight for....uhh....the grave.

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:25:00 UTC | #426775

keddaw's Avatar Comment 10 by keddaw

I love this article, it fully explains the anti-science message some people are putting out there in the name of religion. It isn't just biology that goes against 'The Word Of God' it is astrophysics, cosmology, geology, geography, chemistry and just about anything that dares to date anything since before creation (i.e. around the time the Sumerians and Indians were discovering agriculture and the Chinese were inventing ceramics - the creation of the universe must have come as something of a shock to them.)

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:26:00 UTC | #426776

helen sotiriadis's Avatar Comment 12 by helen sotiriadis

how ham can get so many tears through hermetically shut eyes, i'll never know.

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:30:00 UTC | #426778

blakjack's Avatar Comment 11 by blakjack

Mr.Krauss would have done better simply to ignore this absurd museum, a non-reaction that implies contempt.

Jack

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:30:00 UTC | #426777

submoron's Avatar Comment 13 by submoron

"He took a whole 22 minutes to walk through the museum"

Maybe Krauss felt nausea at what he saw, that's why he averted his eyes! Nice coincidence; Krauss's "Atom" just arrived in the post!

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:32:00 UTC | #426779

aussieatheist_111's Avatar Comment 14 by aussieatheist_111

Hahaha...loved it when Ham listed all the words Lawrence Krauss ascribed to the museum..."unreason"..."rubbish" etc. etc.

So true!

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:36:00 UTC | #426781

Logicel's Avatar Comment 15 by Logicel

"He took a whole 22 minutes to walk through the museum"
_____

Why so long? Maybe Krauss had a bad case of constipation and spent 21 minutes in the rest room?

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:41:00 UTC | #426783

Aztek's Avatar Comment 16 by Aztek

Before even reading the text my first two reactions to the headline were:

Great!! (After reading "Lawrence Krauss blasphemes Our Lord")

and:

*laughter*!! (After reading "by Ken Ham")

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:42:00 UTC | #426784

Logicel's Avatar Comment 17 by Logicel

Ham attempts to use accusations of blasphemy like a bludgeon like it was used not too long ago, but the fool does not seem to realize that his bludgeon has turned into marshmallow and has no effect in controlling his opponents. Instead, his lame and hollow protestations becomes a nice, hard stick for us to whack him over his head because he obviously would love to interfere with free speech. Unfortunately, his bleating blasphemy in the face of criticism does continue to herd his sheeple.

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:44:00 UTC | #426785

mmurray's Avatar Comment 18 by mmurray

around the time the Sumerians and Indians were discovering agriculture and the Chinese were inventing ceramics - the creation of the universe must have come as something of a shock to them


Very much so as recent Sumerian artifacts reveal

http://www.theonion.com/content/news/sumerians_look_on_in_confusion_as

Michael

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:53:00 UTC | #426786

cafeeine's Avatar Comment 19 by cafeeine

I didn't actually go to the AiG site to read this, as I really don't care about Ham's opinion. However I did notice the URL he gives, where Krauss' name is conspicuously absent. An attempt to refrain from bolstering his google rank?

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:55:00 UTC | #426787

PaulJ's Avatar Comment 20 by PaulJ

The 48-second YouTube clip that Ham posts on his site is from the superb talk Krauss gave at the AAI 2009 convention: "A Universe From Nothing" — well worth watching again.

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 12:01:00 UTC | #426789

God fearing Atheist's Avatar Comment 21 by God fearing Atheist

Pity dog didn't give Ken Ham a sense of humour. Moron.

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 12:06:00 UTC | #426792

critica's Avatar Comment 22 by critica

Imagine, deciding the world is 10000 years old is an idiotic viewpoint *before* seeing the Creation Museum. Of course, after you see it....

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 12:17:00 UTC | #426796

geru's Avatar Comment 23 by geru

Surprisingly there's no comment section in Ham's blog...

..or not, since engaging a conversation is pretty much the complete opposite of what the Creationist Movement stands for.

Sure, I'll accept that Krauss is blaspheming Jesus, but It's kind of hard to pay attention to such a misdemeanor as Ken Ham represents a movement that's principles are a blasphemy against the whole humankind.

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 12:21:00 UTC | #426797

Ygern's Avatar Comment 24 by Ygern

@ cafeeine

The video clip that Ham links to appears to have been posted by someone who has nothing to do with AiG, quite the contrary, it seems to have been posted by a fan of Krauss who heard the whole talk and thought that the segment was worth repeating:
"Every atom in your body came from a star that exploded. And the atoms in your left hand probably came from a different star than your right hand. It really is the most poetic thing I know about physics.

You are all stardust."


I'm not sure that Ham even knows about the entire talk, and he probably doesn't wouldn't want to.

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 12:23:00 UTC | #426798

cafeeine's Avatar Comment 25 by cafeeine

@Ygern
I agree with you on the video, I was however referring to the name of Ham's blog post, where he studiously refrains from mentioning Krauss by name, like was done here on RD.net

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 12:37:00 UTC | #426800

God fearing Atheist's Avatar Comment 26 by God fearing Atheist

Just wondering how many people read every report, book, or paper they come across from start to finish? I suspect most are so busy they read the abstract/introduction, form an opinion, and only read the most relevant 5%. So why would Krauss read every label and watch every video in the Creation "Museum"? Then Ham only links to the 48 sec segment of a 1 hour talk - "Pot, kettle, black".

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 12:50:00 UTC | #426803

Ygern's Avatar Comment 27 by Ygern

@cafeeine

I think I was misunderstanding you. You're talking about Ham's article title? Ham does mention Krauss by name several times in the body of the article. But I would guess that it has less to do with trying to avoid giving publicity to Krauss as opposed to knowing the limits of his (Ham's) audience. Most Creation museum fans wouldn't have an inkling who Krauss is so he is better described in the rather tortuous manner of that man who debated me on TV, you know, on O'Reilly.... The purpose of his rant is not to actually challenge anything substantive that Krauss talks about, but to complain that an evil atheist is mocking their god.

Of course if Ham had watched the entire talk he would notice that Lawrence Krauss pokes fun at everyone including Richard Dawkins, physicists, biologists, string theory and the very atheist audience he is talking to.

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 13:49:00 UTC | #426813

BroughtyBoy's Avatar Comment 28 by BroughtyBoy

How`s about the Creation Museum Olympics then? Lawrence Krauss posted a respectable 22 minutes but I suspect my old legs might just rush me through it in about quarter of an hour - and that`s allowing for a crippling hangover. Surely someone out there can aspire to beat that? Alternatively, prizes can be awarded for endurance, but it`s not a competition I`d like to enter.

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 13:51:00 UTC | #426815

Aquaria's Avatar Comment 29 by Aquaria

since before creation (i.e. around the time the Sumerians and Indians were discovering agriculture and the Chinese were inventing ceramics

You're being too kind. Agriculture is at last 4000 years older than the Genesis creation myth, and ceramics about 13-14,000.

The Creation Museum thinks that their skybully created the earth at (roughly) the same time that prehistoric Mexico figures out maize cultivation, China/southeast Asia figures out rice cultivation, fishing hooks and gardening, and Sumer comes up with the wheel for transportation.

For the record, wine is older than Ken Ham's earth.

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 14:12:00 UTC | #426818

LWS's Avatar Comment 30 by LWS

Krauss lasted for 22 minutes in that place, wow. I wonder if when he got back to some privacy if he rolled over laughing hysterically after all what else could a sane person do on seeing the comedy calamity of Creationism displayed in 3D?

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 14:16:00 UTC | #426820