Mode of the Debate: Targeting Children

I watched the video and there seems little doubt that the creationist movement is blatantly out to capture the hearts and minds of children from a very early age.Indoctrination is the name of the game.
That is pretty terrifying.I don't think that fighting propoganda with propoganda is the right response however.
If you simply tell young children that evolution is true because scientists say so that really is no better than the creationist tactic.
However the arguments as to why evolution is true are probably too complex for the very young.Ideally children need to be taught that different people believe different things. That there are good reasons for believing in things and bad reasons for believing in things. That you should always question why something is true.
That any belief derived from a book/person/organisation simply telling you something is true is almost always going to be a bad reason to believe.However, again, most of this is probably beyond the comprehension of small children.So in summary I don't know what the answer is.
Sorry to be so long-windedly unhelpful.

When he showed those 'grandparent' slides I could not help but notice that Ken himself has a bit of the simian look about him......My apologies for lowering the tone of the discussion.

OK I will ask. What is your story in relation to having your heart and mind captured?As a little kid I was absolutely fascinated with dinosaurs. Knew all the names. Had a decent grasp on which dinosaurs had lived in which period and knew the theory as to why they had gone extinct.At the same time I was still convinced that Loch Ness contained the last living dinosaur so I was as prone to wishful thinking as any other 6 year old.

A precocious little smart-ass at that! I guess my point (as much as I have one) is that depite the fact that dinosaurs caught my imagination as a child and that I happened to be exposed to scientific findings on dino related issues rather than creationist ones, I cannot claim that at 6 years old this had any rational basis.Dinosaurs were just cool.If I had initially been presented with two points of view on dinosaurs - one where they had been extinct for millions of years and one where they had been frollicking with cave children not too long ago - I think it quite possible I would have chosen the latter on the basis of it's appeal.Once exposed to scientific thinking on dinos I agree that even at a young age you would start to see many YEC claims for what they are.BUT it is that first 'appeal' that the creationists in the video are aiming for.
How do we counter that?

The most shockingly hedonistic out of control sustained behaviour I have ever seen has been from those with socially stifled upbringings.Once they get a taste of freedom the metaphorical floodgates just open.

My pessimistic side tells me that too many individuals will be scarred with ignorance for life by this terrible phenomenon.My optimistic side says that this approach is doomed to failure. That the human spirit will ultimately rebel against such shackles.

Never meant to imply any trauma. Just the suggestion that if presented with two opposing points of view children are more likely to choose on the basis of 'appeal' rather than rationality. Flinstones and comics are one thing. Adults all around will tell you that these things are not 'real'.
Ken Ham lecturing at the front of a hall in the role of teacher however is a figure of authority and 'knowledge'. I am inclined to agree. The human spirit is naturally rebellious. Especially in the face of blatant bullshit
However even if it does not win out as a tactic in the long term there are bound to be some individual casualties of ignoarnce and that in itself is quite depressing.

Very true. But the point is that they do not have to accept it solely on that basis and that should be made clear.Creationists would say 'believe that which is is in the bible'.No scientist would say 'believe that which is in Origin of the Species' (for example)