Stranger Fruit

Poor Ken Ham

Posted by John Lynch on December 29, 2006
(7)
More »

Back in March, I noted that creationism was a profitable business … at least for Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis who had a salary of $121,764 for 2004. Now Jim Lippard is reporting that Ham has taken a pay-cut and only made $60,000 in 2005. Poor, poor Ken … must be rough surviving in a state
where the median household income is $37,270.

Update (12/30): Jim left this comment which is worth putting up front-and-center:

Actually, as I’ve now pointed out at my blog and in comments at Pharyngula, I made an embarrassing mistake by failing to notice a technical reason for the apparent (and unfortunately not real) decline in AiG revenue–they filed only a six-month Form 990 for 2005, rather than a full-year report. To get an approximation of their 2005 numbers, multiply the numbers from that report by two.

That yields a 2005 salary for Ken Ham of $120,000, rather than $60,000–that’s only very slightly lower than his 2004 salary of $121,764, and puts him far, far above the median household income in Kentucky.

Jim has publicly corrected an “embarrassing mistake” …. how often have we seen a creationist do that?

(7)
More »

Comments

  1. #1 Jim Lippard
    December 30, 2006

    Actually, as I’ve now pointed out at my blog and in comments at Pharyngula, I made an embarrassing mistake by failing to notice a technical reason for the apparent (and unfortunately not real) decline in AiG revenue–they filed only a six-month Form 990 for 2005, rather than a full-year report. To get an approximation of their 2005 numbers, multiply the numbers from that report by two.

    That yields a 2005 salary for Ken Ham of $120,000, rather than $60,000–that’s only very slightly lower than his 2004 salary of $121,764, and puts him far, far above the median household income in Kentucky.

  2. #2 Zeno
    December 30, 2006

    While I’m sorry to hear that AiG’s financial problems turned out to be more apparent than real on second examination, Ham has been working extremely hard to raise money for AiG — as opposed to the creation museum. The museum has been soaking up huge amounts of money and Ham says in his fundraising letters that it’s diverted money that might otherwise go to AiG.

    I know it could be an fundraising ploy, of course, but Ham is a Christian, so he wouldn’t lie or exaggerate, would he?

    P.S.: A hat tip to Jim for his full and prompt correction of his misapprehension. Of course, we evolutionists are fallible. Creationists never make mistakes. Gosh, no.

  3. #3 ScaryFacts
    December 30, 2006

    As a Christian I find Ham and his ilk morally disgusting.

    To “panhandle for Jesus” then take a salary far above making a living is reprehensible. It speaks worlds about his motives–I wonder how many of AiG’s donors are aware of his salary?

  4. #4 mark
    December 31, 2006

    P.S.: A hat tip to Jim for his full and prompt correction of his misapprehension. Of course, we evolutionists are fallible. Creationists never make mistakes. Gosh, no.

    It’s not just that you’re fallible and that Creationists never make mistakes. Ken Ham has explained

    It’s [referring to a report on Pleistocene faunal diversity that he apparently did not actually read] a good example of the fact that evolutionary ideas change all the time. They are reinterpreting their ideas as they look at the evidence.

    Those damn evilutionists! They’re behaving like scientists!

  5. #5 JohnnieCanuck
    December 31, 2006

    Now that’s scary. Ken Ham can describe the power and the strength of the scientific method and still be ignorant enough to think that it is a criticism.

    Wishful thinking is a very powerful tool. People far more intelligent than Ham have deluded themselves because of it.

  6. #6 mark
    December 31, 2006

    Oh, and in the same Wing Nut Daily article Ham explains that scientific research is fruitless. Anyway, it’s all in the Bible (see here).

  7. #7 Mike
    March 27, 2007

    Friends,

    What’s so wrong about a 120k salary? That’s penuts compared to others. For a guy who tours the world giving lecture after lecture, I think he should have more (I wouldn’t do what he does for such a small amount of money!!) I just think there’s some jealousy floating around…