i’m on to you, dr. zaius

Ken Ham has got a podcast!… You have to listen to this! You have to! He’s asking for money to get the message of Creationism into America’s prisons. (Actually, it’s not that interesting, so I suppose you don’t “have to” listen to it. I just got a bit swept up in the excitement of hearing his warm, commanding voice.) It’s more of a thirty-second ad spot than what I’d consider a real “podcast,” but my guess is that it’s just an early foray into the medium. In time, if there’s money in it, I’m sure he’ll have a daily creationism program available for download… For those of you unfamiliar with Mr. Ham, he’s the Australian ex-patriot behind the evangelical anti-science group, Answers in Genesis. He’s also the author of books like “Dinosaurs in Eden,” and the man behind the Creationism Museum being built right now in Kentucky, just miles from the home of my parents.

Some of you wrote in yesterday to question why it was that I seemed so pissed about Ham’s museum, as it is, after all, a private enterprise, and he doesn’t appear to be taking any of our tax dollars. Well, it’s because I suspect, once it’s built, the Creation Museum, like most museums, will see school groups as their primary source of income. It’s not really being discussed now, but my feeling is that Ham will probably start appealing to schools, perhaps offering discounted programs that other secular non-profit enterprises in the region can’t match… the same way that the Church of Scientology is presently offering to provide “educational” materials on health to financially strapped inner-city school districts. It’s a slippery slope and I think we need to recognize that fact and start the debate now, before the entity is created.

If you would like to support the work of Mr. Ham, there are ample opportunities on his site. If I were you, I’d buy one of the limited edition posters like the one right here… I love the way the early morning sunlight is glistening off the back of the wooly mammoth as it approaches the ark. That was one of my favorite scenes in the Bible and I’d just love to have it here in my home. Not only is it beautiful though, it’s an investment. (The site says that it’s a “limited edition,” but there’s no mention of how many the edition is limited to.) And, for just $1,500 you can get a copy “on canvas.” (The $1,000 version is on paper.)

I’ve been obsessed with Ken Ham for the past few days. I hesitate to tell you this, because I’m afraid that word might get back to him, but I’m about to come forward with conclusive evidence that he is in fact Dr. Zaius, the orangutan elder from “Planet of the Apes.” (Am I the only one that finds the resemblance uncanny? I’ve asked a few people now, and no one seems to see it but me.)

Getting back to the question of whether or not dinosaurs existed during Biblical times… Let’s say that I can put aside all the evidence to the contrary and allow myself to believe that the world is only ten thousand years old (instead of several billion). And, let’s say that I can accept the idea that, even though there’s no evidence to support it, dinosaurs and men coexisted on the earth at the same time. Let’s say all of that is true… How then could I accept the word of a book that makes no mention of the ravenous pterodactyls that must have been circling the hill on which Jesus was crucified? How could I accept the word of a book that, while going into great detail over many other things, never even mentions that there were upright-walking lizard creatures (T. rexes) with teeth the size of the tablets containing the Ten Commandments?

The apostles mention cows, pigs, doves, serpents, goats, sheep and any number of other animals, but yet not any of the creatures that modern researchers claim couldn’t have been there…. If you bought a book about the history of domestic companion animals in the United States and there were no mention of dogs, you’d probably think that the rest of the book was full of shit too, right? How observant could the apostles have been if they didn’t see these gigantic beasts? You’ve seen Jurassic Park, right? They’re fucking huge… and they tend to kind of be pests, with their flesh eating and all.

Don’t you discount every other observation the authors of the Bible made when you insist that they lived among, but were apparently oblivious to, giant carnivorous reptiles? Can these people like Ken Ham really not see that they might be doing irreparable harm to Christianity? I know that a lot of Americans apparently believe this stuff, but is this really a gamble that you want to take? Do you want to pin the future of your religion to a preposterous notion like this?

Well, once again I’ve taken up all my blogging time with this nonsense when I should have been writing about other stuff, like the fact that 11 of the 13 most corrupt members of Congress are Republicans, the fact that FEMA has inexplicably put Mike “Brownie” Brown back on the payroll, and the most recent sign of the Apocalypse.

And, in conclusion, I have absolutely no idea what it means that Ken Ham is Dr. Zaius. I suspect it has something to do with his wanting to hide the evidence of evolution from future generations. Maybe the Monkey Power Trio was rignt and Planet of the Apes was real, and Dr. Zaius is here now laying the groundwork… I’m tired.

This entry was posted in Observations. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.

45 Comments

  1. Doug Skinner
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 1:22 am | Permalink

    You can always argue that one of the obscure animal words in ancient Hebrew means “pterosaur”: see http://www.rae.org/pteroets.html for an ingenious article that claims (among other things) that Moses fought off pterodactyls in Exodus.

  2. rocky
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 8:37 am | Permalink

    Mark,

    Never underestimate the stupidity of the American public.
    I think that’s the Republican platform for 2008.

  3. dorothy
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 9:11 am | Permalink

    it’s so embarassing that the school districts in pa (my state) are involved in an attempt to teach intelligent design. wtf? i also can’t believe that two friends of mine support this pan fried stupidity. one is chair of the language dept. at a local college and the other teaches greek at an episcopal seminary. both have phd.s and seem to be intelligent but swallow that crap whole. you can’t reason with them–they just deflect cold reasoning with circular logic. it’s depressing to say the least. how can they have gotten thru school without developing some sort of critical thinking???

  4. Teddy Glass
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 10:48 am | Permalink

    It has occurred to me as well, Doug, that it could be argued that it was just a matter of interpretation, however, that doesn’t change the fact that their sizes and other attributes aren’t made mention of. Yes, what we’ve been assuming was “goat” may have in fact been “pterosaur”, or what we taken as “sertpent” all these years could have been “T-rex”, but wouldn’t there be other clues? Instead of slithering down the tree to seduce Eve, for instance, wouldn’t the serpent have “torn through the forest, uprooting trees” or something like that?

  5. Shanster
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 10:51 am | Permalink

    Critical thinking like accepting whatever the majority of scientists say without voicing any objections?

  6. Teddy Glass
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 10:55 am | Permalink

    Shanster, I’m just curious – what kind of research have you done to prove or disprove gravity? Don’t tell me that you’re just taking the word of “experts.”

  7. Teddy Glass
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 10:58 am | Permalink

    I believe there are colonies of monkey people living inside the hollow earth, and I can provide materials for the public schools as early as next week. Can you disprove my theory, Shanster?

  8. Shanster
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 11:02 am | Permalink

    I’ve tested gravity, and so far it has proven true every time. Give me a few minutes to get my hollow-earth-monkey-people-detector fired up.

  9. Posted September 28, 2005 at 11:05 am | Permalink

    The pics alone are proof of evolution.

    He’s not an ape, just a misunderstood Mennonite… with mental illness.

  10. Shanster
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 11:15 am | Permalink

    The measurable gravity on the earth is 9.8 m/ss. If the earth were hollow, it would be lower. No hollow earth.

  11. Posted September 28, 2005 at 11:43 am | Permalink

    Shanster, you forget that the monkeys inside the earth have advanced gravity-creating technology which they employ to throw off the readings on our equipment.

  12. Doug Skinner
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 12:15 pm | Permalink

    Teddy — Uprooted trees would certainly make Goertzen’s argument stronger. Maybe he can find another ambiguous word and read that into it. If that fails, there’s always the Bible Code.

    He also predicts that griffin fossils will be found, which makes me wonder how far this evangelical cryptozoology will go. Can Biblical Bigfoot be far behind?

  13. Posted September 28, 2005 at 12:25 pm | Permalink

    Don’t forget the hollow earth monkeys are quite dense. Hense their nickname: leadbottoms.

  14. Teddy Glass
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 12:43 pm | Permalink

    I think the only way to be sure is to dig up the entire Earth, and observe for ourselves whether or not there is anything at the center. Only then can this contentious matter be layed to rest. To do otherwise would be irresponsible, like believing in evolution without actually having SEEN a species evolve. That’s what I call “junk science.”

  15. Jessica
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 1:01 pm | Permalink

    How’s this for logic?

    (It comes from something called The Officail News Wire.)

    It Is Unconstitutional To Teach Evolution As Unquestioned Truth

    By denying God, we establish no-God, which is Atheism, in violation of the Constitution

    by William McGinnis

    ALEXANDRIA, VA — (OfficialWire) — 09/27/05 — By Teaching Evolution As Unquestioned Truth, We Officially Deny That God Created Humans; And Thus We Establish Atheism, In Effect, As Our State Religion.

    The Theory Of Evolution is, itself, a very powerful religious statement: namely, that God did not create human beings. And if God did not create human beings, then He could not possibly have created the Universe, because human beings are a part of the Universe. Then it becomes very easy to believe that He probably didn’t do anything else of importance, and that He probably doesn’t even really exist. This is pure Atheism! If we are not created by God, then there might as well be no God, for all the difference He makes…

    http://news.baou.com/main.php?action=recent&rid=20539

  16. Shanster
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 1:38 pm | Permalink

    Teddy-
    I agree. Let’s dig up the entire earth, starting with a nice little area in Alaska. If we accidentally come acrosss some oil, we’ll just have to use it.

    Jessica-
    Interesting argument, but evolution doesn’t necessarily deny God, at least it shouldn’t. Theistic Evolutionist IDers (as opposed to young earth IDers) would say that evolution reveals the awesome creative power of God.

  17. Posted September 28, 2005 at 2:04 pm | Permalink

    Since I’ve already sidetracked one thread today with sci-fi film trivia, I thought I’d mention that it’s been reported in the news recently that A n unusual strain of Dog Influenza is beginning to infect the nation’s canine population, which, as some of you may recall, was precisely what took place in the “Planet of the Apes” scenario, killing off all pets, and so humans began using primates as replacements, etc, etc.

    Life imitates art! Huzzah!

  18. dorothy
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 4:10 pm | Permalink

    my god is a powerful god who set evolution in motion. how sad to believe in a god who has to build things on the spot and is unable to begin a universe with human beings arising naturally without supernatural intervention.

  19. Posted September 28, 2005 at 4:57 pm | Permalink

    Mark

    The resemeblance of Ken Ham to Dr. Zauis is quite remarkable. However, I believe you have overlooked the real issue here. Unintelligent design is clearly a kludged up theory. It has been adapted from older texts that have been passed down over countless generations through who knows how many different language translations. Do you remember the phone call game as a kid where one person whispers a message to the person next to them and they pass it along around a circle and by the time it comes back to the originator it has become completely distorted from it original meaning. Well imagine exptrapolating that over many generations and you have unintelligent design. As a result you have a theory that upon cursory examination is as full of holes as swiss cheese.

    Clearly what is needed here is a fresh theory that has been developed specifically with the intent of explaning the origin of life on earth. For this the ideal theory lies in pastafarianism.
    This theory does not have all the holes and contradictions of unintelligent design, because it was specifically developed as a modern explanation for the origin of life without all the legacy baggage of thousands of years of oral handing down and translation. Consider it. I think you will find it compelling. Long live the flying spaghetti monster!

  20. be OH bE
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 4:59 pm | Permalink

    ramen to that, brother!

  21. Posted September 28, 2005 at 5:06 pm | Permalink

    The Dr. Zaius Connection
    Mark Maynard has an explosive post on the true identity of Ken Ham, one of the major proponents of unintelligent design. I think you will find his investigation very enlightening. We are definitely talking Pulitzer Prize work here!

  22. Posted September 28, 2005 at 5:13 pm | Permalink

    I forgot mention, I have been in touch with Cam Getto and he will working on getting the teaching of Pastfarianism into the Ypsi schools.

  23. Posted September 28, 2005 at 5:16 pm | Permalink

    Yes, Pastafarianism even has its own porn. Don’t ask how I know.

  24. john galt
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 7:05 pm | Permalink

    I used to work with a fervent creationist (odd because he had a science degree).. Anyways he kept bringing in this audiobook thing titled “Don’t make a monkey out of me” You should get a copy Mark.

  25. john galt
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 7:06 pm | Permalink

    I am so pleased to hear from others touched by his noodly appendage.

  26. mark
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 8:34 pm | Permalink

    I hadn’t made the dog influenza connection, Brett. That is indeed troubling… If I weren’t all ready to start watching “America’s Next Top Model,” I’d deffinitely be using my blog to get the word out and warn people.

  27. mark
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 8:42 pm | Permalink

    Do they make surgical masks for dogs? I just tried to put one of mine of Freeda, and it didn’t even cover half her snout.

  28. Jim
    Posted September 29, 2005 at 10:21 am | Permalink

    Darnit. Now I’m going to spend the whole day with “Dr. Zaius” running a loop in my head to the tune of “Help me, Amadeus.”
    http://theforbidden-zone.com/video/simpsons_pota.mpg

  29. Jim
    Posted September 29, 2005 at 10:44 am | Permalink

    Arg. That should of course be “Rock Me, Amadeus,” as performed by the great Falco.

  30. Posted September 29, 2005 at 11:24 am | Permalink

    mark, like most of the emergency preparedness items we may start needing in america, we’ll have to import our dog face masks from israel.

  31. Posted September 29, 2005 at 1:29 pm | Permalink

    Doug skinner,

    way up there someplace in the comments you asked “Can Biblical Bigfoot be far behind?”

    Which, as on ordained Subgenius minister, I felt obliged to point out the fact that in our cosmology the Yeti are actually the basic equivalents to “Adam and Eve”, and when one particular yeti mated with a human being, this was the equivalent to “The Fall from Eden”. All modern Subgenii are those existing humans which share blood ancestry with the yeti through that original abominable act.

    Although the popularity has waned over the years a bit, I think any legal approval of Creationism in schools will probably bring a lot of Subgenii out of the woodwork, as we had an obsessively intricate alternative origin theory back when the ‘Flying Spaghetti Monster’ was still in diapers.

  32. john galt
    Posted September 29, 2005 at 7:36 pm | Permalink

    Adam and Eve were a project by an advanced race which genetically manipulated early hominids to create a sentient being, the rise of self-awareness led to the proverbial expulsion from the garden of Eden. Eden represents a lack of sentience where man was unaware of morality or mortality (wouldn’t existing wholly on instict, witout regret or forethought be paradise). In a way this is creationism, though much different from the common form. Thus the “Gods” did create man from dust(non-sentient) and used his genetic material to create a mate. Unfortunatly the “Gods” were not perfect and many of the negative traits or man we see today were allowed to run rampant across the earth (an Analogy exists in the myth of Pandora’s Box). The other animals were left alone (with the possible exception of dolphins) and continued on a slow evolutionary progression. Question: If we were to advance as much as a society to achieve similar results, would it be our duty to spread sentience?

  33. Doug Skinner
    Posted September 29, 2005 at 10:17 pm | Permalink

    Brett — I’m glad to hear the Subgenius Church is still active. I was, by the way, in the audience on that fateful night in San Francisco when Dobbs was assassinated. He was quite a man.

    Weren’t the Subgenius Bigfoot theories partially inspired by Szukalski, who drew many elaborate pictures of Yeti-human hybrids? He too was quite a man.

    I haven’t yet heard of any evangelical groups promoting Bigfoot; but I suspect it may happen.

  34. Posted September 30, 2005 at 7:37 am | Permalink

    doug, I actually wasn’t too familiar with Szukalski until you brought him up last night (he coined the term ‘Yetisynsy’, meaning humany-yeti spawn, which the subgenii use as well). I looked him up last night and there is this appreciation site as well as one essay by him on the yeti business. And yes, the Subgenii were certainly influenced by him, except that they reversed the meaning (people with yeti blood are the good guys in their worldview).

    I haven’t been involved (or sending in love offerings) since the late 1990’s, about the time Ivan Stang (high priest of the church) relocated to Cleveland (near which I lived, but moved to michigan before I could attend a local devival and meet him). Anyway, I generally warmed up to the religion because of the UFOlogy elements, and thus never delved into the Yeti business much. Thanks for the tip, though- Szukalski is one interesting fellow, to say the least.

  35. be OH bE
    Posted September 30, 2005 at 12:33 pm | Permalink

    File this next to Brett’s sci-fi prophecy from earlier in the thread.

    “Chimps are portrayed as the super-ape and gorillas are the big brutes in the forest,” said Richard Carroll, a primate expert and director of the Africa program at the World Wildlife Fund in Washington, D.C.

    Can you see all the pieces coming together? I’m sad that Chalton didn’t live long enough to witness this.

  36. be OH bE
    Posted September 30, 2005 at 12:34 pm | Permalink

    That’s Charlton, of course.

  37. john galt
    Posted September 30, 2005 at 9:11 pm | Permalink

    from Sitchin’s site

    DID ADAM HAVE THREE PARENTS?

    News of advances in artificial human reproduction

  38. Doug Skinner
    Posted September 30, 2005 at 11:12 pm | Permalink

    Montmorillonite has also been suggested as the key ingredient in the “blood” of St. Januarius (San Gennaro), which has been liquefying and solidifying in Naples for the past 600 years. It sounds like great stuff.

  39. mark
    Posted October 1, 2005 at 10:27 am | Permalink

    It can only stay solidified for so long, and then it needs to rest for a while.

  40. john galt
    Posted October 3, 2005 at 6:51 pm | Permalink

    or the blood could have been mixed with a weak solvent.. They have to wait several minutes after moving the phial for the liquefication.. Does blood solidify in a sealed environment or just clump up until disturbed?

  41. Doug Skinner
    Posted October 3, 2005 at 11:48 pm | Permalink

    Actually, the interesting part is that the liquefaction is so inconsistent. Sometimes the “blood” is alrady liquid when they go fetch it; sometimes it stays liquid for months; sometimes it won’t liquefy; sometimes it liquefies partially; sometimes it boils; etc. There seems to be no correlation between temperature and handling and the behavior of the stuff.

    The church in Naples won’t let the vial be broken to test the contents; many chemists have come up with possible mixtures that could have been made in the 14th c. (when the “miracle” was first reported).

    There’s a huge literature on this business in Italian; nobody is sure what’s in that little bottle.

  42. Posted October 4, 2005 at 8:01 am | Permalink

    Based upon these unusual properties, my first guess would be that the blood vial actually contains “magic shell”.

  43. Doug Skinner
    Posted October 5, 2005 at 5:32 pm | Permalink

    Apparently “montmorillonite shell” did poorly in market surveys.

  44. mark
    Posted October 5, 2005 at 8:28 pm | Permalink

    I usually cover my ice cream in Mesoarchean Shale.

    Crunchy and delicious!

  45. Posted October 26, 2005 at 5:10 am | Permalink

    I don’t want to be compared with monkeys and chimpanzies. Please! can’t we discuss something else in here?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Connect

Sidetrack ad Aubree’s ad BUY LOCAL... or shop at Amazon through this link Banner Initiative John Maggie