Answers in Genesis Responds to Our Writeup About Their Women’s Conference May 19, 2013

Answers in Genesis Responds to Our Writeup About Their Women’s Conference

It looks like Ken Ham and Dr. Georgia Purdom found out that I sent atheists to their “Answers for Women” conference. (We know this because they don’t link to the site and their comments are closed…)

Purdom doesn’t want to respond to the claims Louise and Kate made in their post, probably because it’s hard to defend slides like this:

But she felt the writeup consisted of unfair attacks on Creationists:

I have decided not to go through their post point by point and expose error because that would take an enormous amount of time. Much of what they said consisted of ad hominem attacks or arguments that lack substance relevant to the topic and therefore do not warrant a response.

There are no ad hominem attacks (or known errors) in the piece. All Kate and Louise did was say how the Creation Museum was definitively and scientifically wrong.

The only correction we’ve had to make to the article — one we made as soon as we found out about it — was updating the number of people who work at the Museum who have PhDs from secular universities. We said two. The number’s actually higher.

Ken Ham, who refuses to link to this site so his readers can judge the writeup for themselves and didn’t even notice that we fixed our comment about the PhDs several days ago, is also trying to make a mountain out of a molehill:

… after the conference, an “interesting” blog appeared on a well-trafficked atheist blog. Two women, both atheists, had attended the conference in an “undercover” manner — with an obvious agenda. Now, at the beginning of their commentary, these women expressed that they were “jumpy” and afraid when they arrived at the Creation Museum. Why? What exactly were they afraid of? I’ll get to that in a moment.

… it was actually quite humorous to read what these two women wrote about how scared they were — they portrayed their visit almost as if they were undercover agents in a communist country hoping they wouldn’t be discovered for fear of some horrible reprisal.  It was just ridiculous stuff to read.

No one was worried about getting kicked out. And while Kate and Louise didn’t announce their atheism out loud, they weren’t hiding it either.

Ham went on as if he’d never even read the post (which is very likely):

They made fun of the attire of attendees at the conference, indicating that they had to wear skirts and couldn’t wear shorts.

Lies. The only mention of clothes came when Kate said she went to the hotel lobby in shorts, felt out of place when she realized the other conference attendees at the hotel were wearing long skirts, and went back to change her clothes. She wanted to blend in; she wasn’t making fun of them.

Actually, I believe these atheists were “scared” because they felt the guilt of why there were really there at the conference.

I believe [the atheists came to the conference] because they know we have such powerful message. Plus Satan wants to do all he can to try to undermine us.

Oh yeah. Sure. Totally. You got us there.

I asked Louise if she wanted to respond to the “substantive” points Ham and Purdom made and she wrote this:

Ham incorrectly stated why we were scared to be there. It wasn’t because we were “undercover” or we felt “guilty.” It was because they had a bomb-sniffing dog and security everywhere. Really, if Ken Ham doesn’t feel safe walking unescorted around his museum, why should we?

I challenge Ken Ham (who was not present at this event) to accurately describe or write about the event. Despite his assumption that our blog post was partially written before entering the museum/conference, it was not. Yes, we entered with expectations; some were exceeded, some were met, and several fell short. (For example, I expected every conversation with attendees to reference how great God is and was surprised to find that not to be the case.)

The misinformation, demonization, and outright disdain they showed toward anyone who isn’t a “Creationist” or “Christian” came shining through at the conference. Ken Ham may say, “Why are they so worried about us?” I would flip the question back to him. We were only two females who respectfully attended a conference and wrote about it. Atheists and “Nones” comprise less than 30% of the population while the majority of Americans call themselves “Christians” and nearly half the country believes in Creationism.

So why are you so worried about us?

I can answer that.

It’s because atheists know how to refute Creationist propaganda. When we showcase their soundbytes and materials through our scientifically-minded filters, they come out looking like ignorant fools who cling to their Bible in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. They’re afraid that carefully sheltered, home-schooled children are going to find our critiques of them. They’re afraid those kids will start asking tough questions. They’re afraid the kids will start to doubt their displays. The only solution they’ve come up with is pretending to play the victim when we point out how wrong and silly it all is.

"The way republican politics are going these days, that means the winner is worse than ..."

It’s Moving Day for the Friendly ..."
"It would have been more convincing if he used then rather than than."

It’s Moving Day for the Friendly ..."

Browse Our Archives

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
error: Content is protected !!