Creation Ministries International

From RationalWiki
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Notable Insanity: red link = bad)
m (to the right, to the right)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
[[File:CMIlogo.gif|thumb|CMI's Logo. It is designed to show the Earth in periods of light and darkness, to symbolize a literal, six-day creation.<ref>[http://creation.com/about-us Whatever.] See "Our Logo"</ref>]]
 
{{Creationnav}}
 
{{Creationnav}}
 
'''Creation Ministries International''' (CMI), formerly known as '''Answers in Genesis - Australia''' and '''Creation Science Foundation''', is the estranged and scientifically fraudulent cousin of [[Ken Ham]]'s infamous [[Answers in Genesis]].  
 
'''Creation Ministries International''' (CMI), formerly known as '''Answers in Genesis - Australia''' and '''Creation Science Foundation''', is the estranged and scientifically fraudulent cousin of [[Ken Ham]]'s infamous [[Answers in Genesis]].  
 
==History==
 
==History==
 
Creation Ministries International began life as the Creation Science Foundation, in 1979, when Ham quit his job as a [[public school]] science teacher to begin speaking on creationism. In 1986 Ham left Australia to teach at the [[Institute for Creation Research]]; by 1987 his absence was causing leadership problems, and in February he handed control over to [[Andrew Snelling]]. In 1993, after 7 years in the US, Ham decided to start, with the assistance of CSF, the Creation Science Ministry, which later became AiG-US. By 1995 the CSF had become the Australian arm of AiG. They initially shared board members, but AiG-Australia suffered a hilariously acrimonious schism from its now much larger partner in 2005 culminating in accusations of witchcraft and hurt feelings all round.<ref>[http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/lord-of-the-ring/story-e6frg6z6-1111113678452 ''Lord of the ring''] - The Australian, June 05, 2007</ref>  They changed their name to Creation Ministries International as a result.
 
Creation Ministries International began life as the Creation Science Foundation, in 1979, when Ham quit his job as a [[public school]] science teacher to begin speaking on creationism. In 1986 Ham left Australia to teach at the [[Institute for Creation Research]]; by 1987 his absence was causing leadership problems, and in February he handed control over to [[Andrew Snelling]]. In 1993, after 7 years in the US, Ham decided to start, with the assistance of CSF, the Creation Science Ministry, which later became AiG-US. By 1995 the CSF had become the Australian arm of AiG. They initially shared board members, but AiG-Australia suffered a hilariously acrimonious schism from its now much larger partner in 2005 culminating in accusations of witchcraft and hurt feelings all round.<ref>[http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/lord-of-the-ring/story-e6frg6z6-1111113678452 ''Lord of the ring''] - The Australian, June 05, 2007</ref>  They changed their name to Creation Ministries International as a result.
[[File:CMIlogo.gif|thumb|left|CMI's Logo. It is designed to show the Earth in periods of light and darkness, to symbolize a literal, six-day creation.<ref>[http://creation.com/about-us Whatever.] See "Our Logo"</ref>]]
+
 
 
Much like AiG, CMI is an ardent promoter of [[Young earth creationism|young Earth creationist]] claptrap. However, CMI attempts to take a rather more "scholarly" tone than does AiG, if that term can possibly be applied to any creationist organization; it uses the [[presuppositionalism|presuppositionalist]] style of argument, which along with the [[Pseudoscience|scholarly veneer]] may help to explain why CMI doesn't have its own ignorance museum, complete with saddled Triceratops.   
 
Much like AiG, CMI is an ardent promoter of [[Young earth creationism|young Earth creationist]] claptrap. However, CMI attempts to take a rather more "scholarly" tone than does AiG, if that term can possibly be applied to any creationist organization; it uses the [[presuppositionalism|presuppositionalist]] style of argument, which along with the [[Pseudoscience|scholarly veneer]] may help to explain why CMI doesn't have its own ignorance museum, complete with saddled Triceratops.   
  

Revision as of 00:29, 26 February 2012

CMI's Logo. It is designed to show the Earth in periods of light and darkness, to symbolize a literal, six-day creation.[1]
Goddidit!

Creationism

Icon creationism.svg
Key claims
Science
Random articles

Truth fish transparent.png

Creation Ministries International (CMI), formerly known as Answers in Genesis - Australia and Creation Science Foundation, is the estranged and scientifically fraudulent cousin of Ken Ham's infamous Answers in Genesis.

Contents

History

Creation Ministries International began life as the Creation Science Foundation, in 1979, when Ham quit his job as a public school science teacher to begin speaking on creationism. In 1986 Ham left Australia to teach at the Institute for Creation Research; by 1987 his absence was causing leadership problems, and in February he handed control over to Andrew Snelling. In 1993, after 7 years in the US, Ham decided to start, with the assistance of CSF, the Creation Science Ministry, which later became AiG-US. By 1995 the CSF had become the Australian arm of AiG. They initially shared board members, but AiG-Australia suffered a hilariously acrimonious schism from its now much larger partner in 2005 culminating in accusations of witchcraft and hurt feelings all round.[1] They changed their name to Creation Ministries International as a result.

Much like AiG, CMI is an ardent promoter of young Earth creationist claptrap. However, CMI attempts to take a rather more "scholarly" tone than does AiG, if that term can possibly be applied to any creationist organization; it uses the presuppositionalist style of argument, which along with the scholarly veneer may help to explain why CMI doesn't have its own ignorance museum, complete with saddled Triceratops.

On the other hand, CMI publishes Alien Intrusion, UFOs and the Evolution Connection,[2] the author of which was featured on Coast to Coast AM. The description of the interviews says that "aliens are actually fallen angels who are not extraterrestrial in nature, but rather interdimensional. ... He noted that some people had been able to stop alien abductions from taking place ... by invoking the name of Christ. He suggested that this lends credence to the idea that the aliens are demonic in nature, and thus susceptible to invocations that run counter to them."[3]

Notable Insanity

They have an article titled 'Why do atheists hate god?'[4]; as you can guess from the title, it's the same clichéd tripe that atheists hate 'God' that's been parroted and refuted a thousand times. That alone would make it plenty stupid enough, but they manage to up the insanity to eleven with this little nugget about Aldous Huxley:

Aldous Huxley (1894–1963), the brother of the atheistic evolutionist Sir Julian Huxley, advocated a drug-fuelled utopia.

Yeah, remember reading Brave New World in high school English class? Turns out that it wasn't an obvious satire of 'utopias' and the ideals that formed them -- he was actually advocating this form of government.

They then trot out a very thinly-veiled quote mine and some commentary:

"I had motive for not wanting the world to have a meaning … the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation, sexual and political.” Like Huxley, some people don’t like God because they don’t like moral constraints—you can make up your own rules, or have none at all, if God does not exist. They hate God and Christians because they are actually not confident that God does not exist and seeing Christians may remind them that they are ‘suppressing the truth’ (Romans 1:18).

That should speak for itself.

Response

A while back, one of our very own editors wrote to the author of Why do atheists hate god?, and surprisingly got a response:

Thanks for commenting. You are correct that Aldous Huxley did not advocate the society he described in Brave New World. It was a parody on utopian ideas, such as in HG Wells’ Men Like Gods. I did not mention Brave New World in my editorial and my comments did not relate to that. My comment relates to his much later novel Island, which inspired the psychedelic/hippie culture of the 1960s. Perhaps my use of the word “utopia” gave rise to this misunderstanding. Kind regards, Don Batten

This may explain some of what the piece was blathering about, but it's still stupid in a large number of ways -- chiefly:

  1. Why didn't he mention which work he was referring to?
  2. It's pretty fucking obvious Huxley wasn't an atheist -- he was a mysticist, for godsake.
  3. "[...] which inspired the psychedelic/hippie culture of the 1960s" -- really? Huxley inspired all those damned hippies?
  4. The quote he gave to justify what he said about Huxley seems very, very likely to have been quote-mined, especially given that it was in a work written in 1937, while Island was written in 1962.

Not to mention the obvious idiocy of the 'atheists hate god' PRATT.

See also

External links

Footnotes

  1. Lord of the ring - The Australian, June 05, 2007
  2. http://www.alienintrusion.com/main.html
  3. http://www.coasttocoastam.com/shows/2005/02/17
  4. Atheist god hate
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Tools
support