Ken Ham only likes science when it can be used to bully and harass the LGBTQ community

Ken Ham only likes science when it can be used to bully and harass the LGBTQ community November 29, 2016
Image: Ken Ham / YouTube screen capture
Image: Ken Ham / YouTube screen capture

Ken Ham hates science. He claims he loves it but rejects most of it unless, of course, it agrees with him and his bible. This is rare, and usually, it goes just like it did today.

A new study from two professors at John Hopkins University — which is actually nothing but a collection of studies, viewed through the eyes of biased anti-LGBTQ researchers — suggests that gay and transgender individuals are not born that way, and claims that this claim is scientific.

Suddenly, Ham loves science. “It shouldn’t surprise those who believe Scripture that many popular opinions on LGBT issues aren’t supported by science. According to God’s Word, marriage is for one man and one woman for life (Genesis 2:22, 24), and we were created male and female (1:27),” Ham wrote in a blog post.

Nearly 700 Hopkins researchers, alumni, students, and staff voiced their concern over the extremely biased paper and asked the school to distance itself. The Human Rights Campaign also voiced their concern over the paper and the fact that Hopkins agreed to publish it.

Ham called this action “bullying” and “intolerant.”

“What happens when scientific findings clash with popular opinions? Academic bullying. At least that’s what happened to scientists whose comprehensive study of scientific literature contradicted the beliefs of the Human Rights Campaign (HRC),” he wrote.

How did HRC bully Hopkins? By saying they would lower the school’s ranking on the Healthcare Equality Index.

Ken Ham spreads misinformation about homosexuals to the degree that they take their own lives but saying you’ll lower an organization’s ranking, that’s the real bullying.

Ham continued:

“This kind of intimidation suppresses academic freedom. Powerful groups shouldn’t cow researchers into not publishing research findings that contradict popular ideas. After all, doesn’t science advance by scrutinizing research on both sides of a debate?”

Except the paper wasn’t actually research. The researcher didn’t do any of his own work and blatantly cherry-picked information from other researchers to come to his conclusion. His methods should be questioned and if they are bullshit, as they are, the journal and researcher should be held accountable. That’s how science works. Ham wouldn’t have a clue.

All of this and people still think we should treat Ham with respect?

No thank you.

 

"Tom Hughes --- Gee, you're clearly quite intelligent. I bet you're in Mensa. The MAJORITY ..."

Clarification on the now viral Wisconsin ..."
"Source in the Constitution?Again, you have not replied to my argument about any "except for" ..."

Donald Trump vowed to destroy the ..."
"Tom, I gave explicit instances when getting ID and registering to vote might be difficult. ..."

Clarification on the now viral Wisconsin ..."
"You do realise that the only person we've seen throw the word nazi around is ..."

The Danthropology blog is moving on

Browse Our Archives

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment