Infallible

 

Ken Ham and his thralls obviously need a lesson in history.

The origins of science and the scientific method long predate Christianity and include many non-Christian influences.

See "History of scientific method" at Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_scientific_method

His comments are deeply ironic in two respects. 

1) He rejects the principles of his "God's science" and proudly proclaims it.

"By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record. Of primary importance is the fact that evidence is always subject to interpretation by fallible people who do not possess all information." - Answers in Genesis' Statement of Faith, https://barryhisblog.blogspot.com/p/aig-statement-of-faith.html

Clearly, Ken Ham is the only person who is infallible.

2) He asks for "observational science" using observations that are repeatable in the here and now, yet rejects it when provided because of 1).

Here is proof, using simple, repeatable, direct observations, that the universe is far older than Ken's infallible knowledge telling him that it it is young.

The Age of the Universe and SN1987A. 
https://chem.tufts.edu/science/astronomy/sn1987a.html

URL: https://barryhisblog.blogspot.com/p/infallible.html