Incest is a touchy subject for Ken Ham

Ken Ham was motivated to respond to YouTuber because, apparently, her message was inconsistent.

Our social media team recently asked me to respond to a young lady who has a YouTube channel that featured a video criticizing young-earth creationists and our (in her view) ridiculous beliefs. Now, we see many (many) such videos (there are whole channels dedicated to mocking us!) and don’t always respond, but I decided to respond to this one to point out the inconsistency in her thinking.

See if you can catch her inconsistency in the clip at the beginning of my response:

What horrible, outrageous thing did Gutsick Gibbon say? Ham pulls out a very short excerpt, about 20 seconds long, that is the basis for his 4½ minute complaint. Here’s all she is given a chance to say.

Young earth creationists are religious folk who typically come from evangelical backgrounds…basically anyone who believes that the Earth was created in more or less present state by god…approximately 6000 years ago. If you never heard of this before, you might be saying “oh my god, what about the inbreeding?”

That’s it. That’s all Answers in Genesis can tolerate putting on their website. That first bit is totally accurate; Ken Ham might have been literally quoted saying something similar, that he is an evangelical Christian who believes that the world was created 6000 years ago by his god.

But then she says “oh my god,” which he bleeps out. He’s going to repeat that even shorter clip multiple times.

There is no inconsistency. She correctly defines Ham’s own religious belief, and happens to use a common English phrase. Ham’s objection is that, he claims, evolution and materialism are religious beliefs, too, which is irrelevant. If I were to point out that a PB&J sandwich that he is holding is a sandwich, it doesn’t refute my statement to say that my taco is also a sandwich — because Gutsick Gibbon isn’t making a case here that science is not a religion (it isn’t, but again, she’s not saying that.)

What really irks Ken Ham is that mention of the inbreeding problem. This has long been a point of irritation for him; in both the creation “museum” and fake boat gift shops, he sells stuff bragging about the fact that Adam & Eve’s kids had sex with each other, and that it wasn’t a problem because they were perfect genetic beings. He doesn’t like incest mentioned because he thinks he has an irrefutable answer to it. Never mind that he also likes to claim that they were heterozygous at every locus and that Noah’s family carried every possible allelic variant, or that what he’s arguing for is a kind of moral relativism, where sex with your brother or sister is OK if you’re not going to propagate defective children (I’ve always wanted to ask him if it’s fine to have sex with a sibling if you use contraceptives, then?)

What is inconsistent is that he then uses this offense against his faith to rant about how atheists don’t have any morality and they believe they’re just animals and animals can do anything they want. She’s ridiculous, says the man who thinks that having a silly theme park makes him qualified to judge other’s lives.

He also doesn’t link to Gutsick Gibbon’s YouTube channel, where his followers might be able to discover that she had more to say than the only 20 seconds Ken Ham was brave enough to include.