[JSDude1]

Look I totally agree that while I know that the Bible is true,

to use real scientific evidence (which if the Biblical account is true should match up with the Biblical account; and does) is a MUST.

Ham might be a good evangelist, but is a poor scientist. I’ve been to his creation museum in KY, and got that it was basically an evangelism tool (which is important), but doesn’t have much hard science.

-JS.

[editor-surveyor]

If you want the hard science go here: http://www.setterfield.org/

.

[GunRunner]

I’ve been to his creation museum in KY, and got that it was basically an evangelism tool (which is important), but doesn’t have much hard science.

Then can you explain why Freepers on the anti-evolution side seem to ALL be throwing their weight behind Ken Ham?