Ken Ham says Aliens will go to Hell

kedo1981 said:
Wow, aliens, All the pagans, Elvis, Einstein, most of the slutty women, once you get over the weather, Hell will be a hoot
Click to expand...
.
And a surprising number of "religious" people. The gnashing of teeth there will be truly hellish!
 
I expect the line of people pissed off at that miserable PR effort and yelling at the dude is quite long, with most of the world's intellectuals saying their piece! :p
 
kedo1981 said:
Wow, aliens, All the pagans, Elvis, Einstein, most of the slutty women, once you get over the weather, Hell will be a hoot
Click to expand...

Improve the PR and make it exclusive and we can charge for entry to hell just like they do for heaven.
 
Belz... said:
Maybe that's what we need for people to fund space travel.

Of course all it'll bring us is war, but hey... in SPACE !
Click to expand...

We can use genetically altered swine to crew the ships then we'll have PIGS IN SPACE!!.
 
GDon said:
Sure, but that is no more illogical than atheists saying that if Biblical God did exist, He'd be a homicidal maniac and they'd hate Him. Imagine though a headline from that: "Atheists claim they hate God!"
Click to expand...

Actually, there is nothing illogical in judging the behaviour of a character, per se. You can do it in illogical ways or not, but there is nothing illogical in reading, say, Crime And Punishment and judging Raskolnikov's behaviour and thoughts, as depicted in the book.

What makes Ham's delusions illogical is that they're based literally on a failure of logic, as in, an actual textbook fallacy. As are many of the apologetics, and generally theology, as is much of the larger genre of Fan Dumb rationalizations.

With dumb rationalizations like "god wouldn't create aliens, because then they wouldn't be saved" the problem is not as much even being based on a fairy tale. It's that it's a texbook appeal to consequences. "I don't like what that implies, therefore it's false." That's a fallacy. That's broken logic.

Though even in the aspect of using a fairy tale, yes, there would be a difference between judging a character while acknowledging it as fictive, and actually trying to override facts based on works of fiction. A guy arguing that the Big Bad Wolf in Little Red Riding Hood is bad is not committing any violation of logic just by that. A guy arguing that werewolves exist because clearly the LRRH story describes a talking wolf, is, however delusional.

Basically you don't just get to put unfounded counter-factual beliefs on the same shelf with, essentially, the lack of it, and pretend that hey, we're all equal, we all do that illogical stuff. No. No-no-no-no-no. They're not even remotely the same thing. There is a fundamental difference between being able to work with hypothetical situations -- which is a fundamental part of having a human brain -- and actually being unable to distinguish between them and reality.
 
Last edited:
All I know is I'll be going to the atheist section of hell, where they have air conditioning, because that's what I believe.
 
HansMustermann said:
With dumb rationalizations like "god wouldn't create aliens, because then they wouldn't be saved" the problem is not as much even being based on a fairy tale. It's that it's a texbook appeal to consequences. "I don't like what that implies, therefore it's false." That's a fallacy. That's broken logic.
Click to expand...

That's why it's a lot more useful to base conclusions on stuff we can all observe; real things, rather than things you "know" exist because you "feel" that it's right.
 
Brainache said:
Yes. Or maybe some Aliens coming here to convert us to their religion instead... "You can't get into Veebleplex unless you let Funglax into your blort..."
Click to expand...

I foresee a minor scuff breaking out. You know how competing religions treat each other.
 
Belz... said:
That's why it's a lot more useful to base conclusions on stuff we can all observe; real things, rather than things you "know" exist because you "feel" that it's right.
Click to expand...

Like, for example, the existence of aliens?

Is it just me, or does anyone else think that we should actually find some before settling on a conclusion about their theology?
 
Jimbo07 said:
Like, for example, the existence of aliens?

Is it just me, or does anyone else think that we should actually find some before settling on a conclusion about their theology?
Click to expand...

Don't be silly. This is Theology we're talking about, if we waited for evidence we'd never get anywhere...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom