Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Natural History, Bible-style

By Jane Lampman, Christian Science Monitor. Posted May 26, 2007.


A new creation "science" museum puts dinosaurs in the garden with Adam and Eve. Some 700 scientists have deplored its inaccurate exhibits, warning that students who accept them are "unlikely to succeed in science courses."

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Nobel Laureate Slams the Bible, Calls It "A Catalogue of Cruelties"
Mario de Queiroz

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
As Foreclosure Nightmares Increase, Will More Homeowners Pay Off Their Bankers in Violence?
Scott Thill

DrugReporter:
Lies About Marijuana Drive People to a Much More Harmful Drug -- Booze
Steve Fox

Environment:
Why Max Baucus' 'No' Vote on the Climate Bill May Really Help Its Passage
Jeff Mcmahon

Food:
Despite Censorship By Beef Magnate, Michael Pollan Spreads Message About the Real Price of Cheap Food

Health and Wellness:
Do We Really Want to Enshrine Insurance Monopoly into Law? This and 5 Other Complaints About the Health Bill
John Nichols

Immigration:
NYC Marathon Raises Question of Who Is American Enough?
James E. Johnson, Jr.

Media and Technology:
How Biased Media Can Brainwash You
Melinda Burns

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
4 Ways the Stupak Amendment Deprives Women of Access to Abortion
Jessica Arons

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Fetus-Shaped Potatoes? Going Undercover Inside the Weird World of Right-Wing Abortion Foes
Ann Neumann

Rights and Liberties:
"My Kids Want to Hide Their Identity; They're Scared Someone Will Attack Us": U.S. Muslims Being Targeted
Jaisal Noor

Sex and Relationships:
Instant Sex: Has the Digital Age Destroyed Relationships or Made Them Better?
Vanessa Richmond

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Why Natural Gas Is Not a Clean Energy Panacea
Stan Cox

World:
With Unemployment at 40 Percent, Afghan Teens Enlist in Army, Police
Lal Aqa Sherin

More stories by Jane Lampman

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

For natural history museums, the awesome dinosaur is a star attraction for drawing wide-eyed children and their families. It's surprising, though, to be welcomed at the gate of the Creation Museum in northern Kentucky by two stegosauruses. After all, this brand-new museum is designed to disprove evolution, including the millions of years that science says dinosaurs walked the earth.

For Bible-defending "creationists," God created Earth and all its creatures between 6,000 and 10,000 years ago. But they know a drawing card when they see one, and this museum has more than its share of animatronic (moving, teeth-baring, roaring) specimens. In fact, dinosaurs play a big role in this "biblical history": They live not 65 million years ago, but with humans -- in the Garden of Eden and on Noah's Ark.

"Dinosaurs are one of the icons of evolution, but we believe they lived at the same time as people," says Ken Ham, founder of Answers in Genesis (AiG), the fundamentalist Christian ministry that built the facility. "The Bible talks about dragons. We believe dragon legends had a basis in truth."

The $27 million museum set on 50 acres opens on Memorial Day, and AiG hopes for 250,000 visitors a year. Mr. Ham, a former science teacher in Australia, is direct about the museum's purpose: to restore the Bible to its "rightful authority" in society.

For many scientists, however, it's distressing. Some 700 scientists at educational institutions in Kentucky, Ohio, and Indiana have signed a statement deploring the "scientifically inaccurate" exhibits and warning that students who accept them are "unlikely to succeed in science courses."

Erroneous, with 'great flash and dash'

Eugenie Scott, director of the National Center for Science Education, says, "This is freedom of speech, but it's unfortunate the public is going to be exposed to erroneous science presented with great flash and dash ... in an authoritative way. This is going to be detrimental to science literacy."

No doubt, AiG knew how to create an appealing experience, choosing a designer of amusement parks who created the Jaws and King Kong exhibits at Florida's Universal Studios. In a special-effects theater, the seats shake and visitors are sprinkled with water. There's a lush Garden of Eden, a partial re-creation of Noah's Ark, a slice of the Grand Canyon, lots of videos on plasma TVs, and a planetarium for exploring the universe. At Noah's Cafe, kids can saddle up on a triceratops.

Yet the main mission isn't entertainment; it's presenting a particular "biblical worldview" in which Genesis stands as literal history and true science.

"Genesis gives an account of the history of all basic entities ... from the One who knows everything," Ham says. "If you don't know everything, there could always be evidence that will lead to wrong conclusions."

And wrong conclusions is what AiG claims is behind evolution. Dividing science into "observational science" and "historical science," its theme is that the latter is simply interpretation based on one's presuppositions. In one exhibit, for instance, two paleontologists (a creationist and an evolutionist) are digging up a dinosaur skeleton, but they have two different interpretations -- one from a perspective of thousands of years and the other, millions of years.

"Fossils don't have labels," Ham says. "You have different interpretations because you have different starting points -- one starts with God's Word, one with human reason."

Dismissing the observational/historical dichotomy, Dr. Scott says "it's nonsense ... Nobody really thinks astronomy, geology, and evolutionary biology ... go about testing their explanations in a way substantially different from other sciences."

Young-earth creationists believe the fossil record was entirely laid down during the "universal flood" of Noah's day. This view has taken hold just since 1961, when two fundamentalists, Henry Morris and John Whitcomb, wrote "The Genesis Flood" (though the idea of "flood geology" had originated earlier among Seventh-Day Adventists).

"The evidence for geological ages became so overwhelming in the early 19th century that even evangelical Christians embraced it and changed their understandings of Genesis to accommodate it," says Ron Numbers, a science historian at the University of Wisconsin. But after the 1961 book, fundamentalists began gravitating to that position, which in 1970 was renamed creation science.

"If you take away the hundreds of millions of years the paleontological record gives to evolutionists, you've knocked out the biggest bulk of evidence for evolution," Dr. Numbers says. "They're trying to fit the scientific evidence into that model and for a period tried to market it as scientific to get it into the public schools." The US Supreme Court said it has a religious basis and couldn't be taught in science classrooms.

Evolution problematic for many

"We're not an activist group regarding school battles or getting materials into public schools," says Mark Looy, AiG's communications director. AiG does produce a glossy magazine, books, a radio show, and at least two DVDs a month for distribution to churches, Christian schools, and home-schooling families. Ham and staff are on the go giving talks at some 350 gatherings a year. In response to requests, Mr. Looy says, they ship 48,000 items annually.

One paperback, "Evolution Exposed: Your Answer Book for the Classroom," instructs students how to respectfully but insistently counter evolutionary concepts.

The museum poses such difficulty for scientists, perhaps, because evolution is problematic for many. Polls consistently find that close to half of all Americans reject it.

"People find it unbiblical and implausible. You are talking about human ancestry, which people are very sensitive about," Numbers posits. Plus some scientists "have gone overboard" in claiming evolution proves there is no God, even though "millions have harmonized it with their religious beliefs."

In a bid to clarify this, the American Association for the Advancement of Science has published "The Evolution Dialogues," which explores evolution and Christianity's response. It discusses those who see science and religion as compatible but dealing with different spheres, and others working out a theology that takes evolution into account.

The museum scorns such an approach. One exhibit shows a pastor preaching it's OK not to believe in a literal Genesis. Then it depicts "the consequences" in one family: A young boy looks at porn on the Internet while his sister calls Planned Parenthood.

No one has a handle on the scope of creationism's influence, says Numbers, author of "The Creationists." "Intelligent design" (which disputes aspects of evolution but accepts that the universe is billions of years old) has been more in the news recently. But AiG, simply one group in the creationism fold, is clearly doing well. The museum has 8,500 charter members, Looy says, and is all paid for -- by donations averaging $100.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: religion, science, creation science

Jane Lampman is a staff writer at the Christian Science Monitor.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
QUESTION: Worldwide, how many human skeletons were found near dinosaur remains?
Posted by: HughScott on May 26, 2007 2:09 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Enough said.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A good tool for refuting creationist's attempts to discredit evolution
Posted by: jwc on May 26, 2007 3:33 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For anyone interested, here is a website that lists and responds to hundreds of claims creationists have made in an attempt to disprove evolution, complete with references and recommendations for further reading.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dino-Myths
Posted by: jim_altman on May 26, 2007 5:19 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can't see the qualitative difference between a creation theme park and any Disney theme park, a miniature golf course populated by tyrannosaurs and velociraptors, a Steven Spielberg Jurassic adventure, or the myriad versions of Arthur Conan Doyle's fictional Lost World. When I was a kid, I imagined dinosaurs (I guess they're really dino-birds) in all sorts of places. JRR Tolkein, who included a few dino-types in his works, argued the human need for mythology/fantasy/fairie to survive the intractable problems of reality. If so-called creationists need a theme park to subscribe to their myth, then so be it. Maybe, the fundies would be less irate and rattle fewer sabres if they had a few more dispensational theme parks. As far as passing science classes go, good math skills trump accurate paleontology almost every time. As for the state of science in our nation, discover how many leading scientists are former dungeon masters or own the complete DVD collection of classic Star Trek.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Dino-Myths Posted by: particle
» RE: Dino-Myths Posted by: jim_altman
» RE: Dino-Myths Posted by: particle
Jesus is the god of slaves.
Posted by: White middleclass male on May 26, 2007 5:45 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Have you ever seen a bumper sticker on a shitty car that says “My reward is in heaven” Maybe that train of thought keeps the other guy from trying to take what is mine.

Religion makes it easier for people like me, Bush and Clinton to accomplish things. Some people might not be willing to lie, cheat, steal or manipulate because the Magic Sky Monster will get angry.

What a pussy religion.
“It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man to get in to heaven”
“Render unto Caesar that with is Caesar's”
“Turn the other cheek [and grab your ankles bitch]”
Or the fact that the religious are guilt tripped into provided for the poor just enough to keep them complacent.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Jesus is the god of slaves. Posted by: helenwheels
Another exhibit of willful perversion of Christianity
Posted by: PandaBear on May 26, 2007 6:50 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I shouldn't really care when people choose to be willfully wrong, but it does bug me. I'm really starting to believe it should be illegal to impose religion on kids. In this, these people aren't even using correct Biblical interpretation, let alone scientific methods. They are inventing new mythology to explain their worldview, which is not based even on the Bible, but on a bizarre and simplistic and, well, stupid perversion of all things reasonable.

I, for one, am grateful for the abilities God gave me. To say that God's will cannot (or even does not) exist within a scientifically understandable world is to insult God, to place your own agenda ahead of that of the Divine.

And if you're non-religious, well, this is a no-brainer. But please, everyone, remember, it's kids being manipulated here.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In the end, most kids think for themselves
Posted by: bookwoman on May 26, 2007 6:58 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am one of those dummies who believes in God and am active in my church. I never had a name for what I believe about paleontology, but I have recently learned I am a believer in intelligent design. I see too many wonders on this planet and in life to believe that it was all an accident.

At any rate, I have found that children who are misled and lied to usually turn against the lies. There are too many sources of argument in the form of school others with differing viewpoints and the outside media for untruths to last forever. The children who are taught that Creationism is the only truth will start wondering why so many people don't agree. The warning for parents in this is that they start wondering what else you were wrong about.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Accident? Read the theory again. Posted by: LeaderofMen
» Know thyself Posted by: YogiBear
Defensive religion
Posted by: saphil@yahoo.com on May 26, 2007 7:00 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are a lot of people living the dialog, "Well if you don't believe the Bible and die and find out that you failed the test and the OT God is mad at you personally, what would you do."

Genesis creation is a borrowing from earlier Sumerian creation myth. Abraham lived in Sumer, so this makes sense. The Hebrew monotheism couldn't handle the Sumerian polytheism very well, but since the story was well known in Abraham's time, they just took (most of) the polytheistic language out of the text.

Most people crave and seek certainty. These creationist theme-park people seek it in blind assertion that the Bible is the literal truth. Science devotees rest in the certainty that "Science will solve all problems."

People who really "do" science are much more interested in the question than finding a definitive answer. Real theology is a science. Theologians must be very courageous, because they are likely to lose the certainty they felt as a child. The questions of real theology are scary things like, "What if the church doesn't have all the answers?" "What if time and language differences have brought us to a mistaken interpretation of the Bible?"

We are possessed of free will. We may use it wisely or not, and only time will tell whether the results are congruent with our intentions. Attacking the basis of another's argument only causes reactive defense and strengthens the person's hold on their belief. It is less exciting, but eroding their belief by neither upholding or denying it is more effective. This is similar to how my PDA taught me to print legibly, in less than a month, by not accepting my previous hand-writing.

People who go to theme parks are often on the lookout for another theme park. This is just a theme park. Hardly anybody wants to be preached at (or sold) all day, so they will probably block out the pushier stuff anyway. Maybe we would be better served presenting our own alternate views in a non-reactive way.

Science has the upper hand with plausible evidence. There is no need to say "The creationists are wrong, because..." Let them save face. Let them have fun with their dinos. We don't have to prove we are right, do we? "Majority rule" does not pertain. People who are moved by evidence will agree with the science fans (maybe), and people who are driven by certainty will ignore evidence that threatens their certainty.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Defensive religion Posted by: jimidee
So what kind of doctors do these people go to?
Posted by: WitchyNy on May 26, 2007 7:29 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is no possible way an M.D. today can get through medical school without understanding evolution.

So these folks can believe anything they want-but if they want modern medical treatment-they are practicing evolution.

THEY are the Dinosours-and if their kids are exposed to education-even in a 'Bible' college-the kids will learn that.

Anyway-let them have their 'Creation Museum'-the price of Free Speech-and after all---Sunshine is a natural disinfectant.

We have more important things to worry about-like the 93 Billion dollars the Democrats just gave Bush for the war.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Evolution evolves into politics Posted by: zipper696
» Actually... Posted by: doctorsquared
Wait
Posted by: Robba29 on May 26, 2007 7:43 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Early on, the guy says, "The Bible talks about dragons. The dragon legends, blah, blah, blah" Uh, legends? I thought the Bible was inerrant Truth! A legend, by its nature, incorporates the untruthful in order to highlight some person or action. So, were there dragons or not? Dinosaurs aren't dragons. Whatever.
On a side note--I'm having students do ancient civilization research reports, and two of my students are doing the ancient Israelites (Hebrews). The text book--and just about all the resources they have found-- is so disgustingly biased that the students (and they are christians) are so confused as to what are the archaelogical and historical facts and what is the mythical religious story. I had a long talk with them yesterday, pointing all these things out--even bringing up the whack jobs that believe the dinosaurs were planted here or that didin't exist (devil's trickery). Though they now lack confidence in supposed 'authorities' such as textbooks and religious websites (which is a good thing), they are at least aware of how belief can cloud perception of reality and deny physical evidence. They have experienced first hand the kind of mistreatment of history that religionists give to social, paleo, and archeological history. A couple more saved souls--my work is done (not really...oh well).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Wait: Robba29 Posted by: Basenjis
» RE: Wait: Robba29 Posted by: Robba29
TalkOrigins
Posted by: scullygrrrl on May 26, 2007 12:25 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is an amazing website that will give those of us who believe that the scientific method must be upheld, excellent information to counter I.D.'ers' and Creationists' pseudoscientific arguments.

Check out the letters. Some of them are absolutely hysterical, yet chilling in their ignorance. We are rapidly losing our scientific standing in the international community due to nonsense like this. We must fight and give no quarter. Our future and the future of our children is at stake.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Another approach to creation
Posted by: HughScott on May 26, 2007 12:34 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was raised by liberal Christian parents who considered evolution to be a scientific fact.

One reason was the influence of my late father, Ed Scott, a career geologist and high-level executive for Union Oil of California, now Unocal.

Dad had an opinion of Genesis that worked pretty well. I remember him saying that no one knew how really long the first “days” of creation were. So when evangelicals claim the Earth is only 6,000 to 10,000 years old, they are interpreting the Bible, not quoting it.

As for evolution, my father believed, as do I, that Homo sapiens share the same family tree with other primates -- on a specialized limb that sprang from the main trunk eons after the extinction of dinosaurs. When we got souls is a different matter, however.

Believing God to be a curious entity, Dad figured He watched with fascination the advancement of humans beings until the moment was right to give them spirituality, which occurred metaphorically in the biblical Garden of Eden.

A serious examination of my father’s religious beliefs will show they do not violate precepts in the Old Testament used by evangelicals to refute evolution. Thus, for reasons I don’t understand -– ignorance, perhaps, or stubbornness –- evangelicals have rejected a reasoned Christian approach to creation in favor of one that borders on the absurd.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Exactly what the fossil record has bequeathed to Evolution Theory
Posted by: ekipnrut on May 27, 2007 7:01 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
appears to be a matter of debate based on facts..or as importantly their absence.
If you take away the hundreds of millions of years the paleontological record gives to evolutionists, you've knocked out the biggest bulk of evidence for evolution," Dr. Numbers says. "They're trying to fit the scientific evidence into that model and for a period tried to market it as scientific to get it into the public schools." The US Supreme Court said it has a religious basis and couldn't be taught in science classrooms. However a formidable set of quotes of unarguable fact based qualification is available:
Not one change of species into another is on record ... we cannot prove that a single species has been changed."
(Charles Darwin, My Life & Letters)
Contrary to what most scientists write, the fossil record does not support the Darwinian theory of evolution because it is this theory (there are several) which we use to interpret the fossil record. By doing so we are guilty of circular reasoning if we then say the fossil record supports this theory."
(Ronald R. West, PhD (paleoecology and geology) (Assistant Professor of Paleobiology at Kansas State University), Paleoecology and uniformitarianism". Compass, vol. 45, May 1968, p. 216)
"The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution."
(Stephen J. Gould (Professor of Geology and Paleontology, Harvard University), 'Is a new and general theory of evolution emerging?' Paleobiology, vol 6(1), January 1980, pg 127)
For many more 'Ph.D'...hardly 'crackpot'...quotes concerning
the enormity of difficulty evolution theory has in conforming itself to the fossil record FACTS,and it IS the former that has to accomodate the latter, not the other way around;
Google as exact phrase 'fossil record quote collection' and select the following entry..AND only that one..the others lead to dead links....
[Fossil Record Quote Collection...from the IDEA Club
The IDEA Club Fossil Record Quote Collection. What category of quotes would you like to see? • General Quotes • Cambrian explosion, "origin of phyla", ...
www.bearfabrique.org/evorants/Fossil%20Record%20Quote %20Collection ___from%20the%20IDEA%20Club.htm ]
Attacking the Creatonists or the ID people by ridiculing the more preposterous 'reifications' of their theories does NOT in any way whatsoever establish evolution as a correct theory.
..........BTW...Google up the entire article AND check out
some of the AIG $$compensation$$ packages.. :O)
The Lippard Blog: Answers in Genesis schism: U.S. group goes solo Friday, March 03, 2006 Answers in Genesis schism: U.S. group goes solo
Answers in Genesis had been an international organization, with the U.S. branch under Ken Ham based in Kentucky, and an Australian branch under Carl Wieland in Queensland (which was formerly known as the Creation Science Foundation). Now the Australian group (along with ministries in Canada, New Zealand, and South Africa) has changed its name to Creation Ministries International, explaining in a recent brochure that the U.S. group did not want to be "subject to an international representative system of checks/balances/peer review involving all the other offices bearing the same 'brand name'."
..Two diametrically opposed falsifiable? theories vying as suitors for one set of facts....one more quote:
In China its O.K. to criticize Darwin but not the government, while in the United States its O.K. to criticize the government, but not Darwin."(Chinese Paleontologist Dr. Jun Yaun. Chen)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Wow Posted by: Robba29
Religion scares me.
Posted by: colin nicholas on May 27, 2007 10:49 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Religion scares me,and I'm not kidding.
9/11 was all about religion.
The terrorists were just as religious as GWBush and the neo cons. Once you believe in the supernatural anything goes.
Reason and logic are not nearly as important. Faith is all.
This is 2007 not 1007. Time to put aside childish notions before
we are all sacrificed for some god or other. I do think it will happen.
Christians can hardly confront Muslim extremism when their
own beliefs are just as bizaare.
We should be encouraging people to really start questioning
the veracity of religion and the occult. Because as far as we know there is no god up there.No allah.No one at all.
But as people are not willing to give up their pipe dreams
without a fight....we all one day may be blown to kingdom come on behalf of some make believe skygod. Amen.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's a great theme for an SNL skit
Posted by: zipper696 on May 27, 2007 11:39 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Quote:
"One exhibit shows a pastor preaching it's OK not to believe in a literal Genesis. Then it depicts "the consequences" in one family: A young boy looks at porn on the Internet while his sister calls Planned Parenthood"

ROTFLMAO.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Creation Science Museum - Situational Ethics
Posted by: cognitorex on May 27, 2007 12:06 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Creation Science Museum
Creation Science Get a Home With Unique Theosophy for Killing our own Species
(( from/with Blognonymous.com))

With majority approval certain states kill criminal offenders every year.
Our military at present is in the business of killing people most days.
If humans are held to be a scientifically evolved animal, then the rule not to kill would not be solely a God and Bible based edict. (He made us and He made the Rule; animals would not create the 'Do not kill' fiat on their own you see.)
So you make a museum that shows that dinosaurs (scientifically known to predate humans by millions of years) and humans were created co-terminously by the spiritual force that you base your entire existence on.
So. And ergo too. If carbon dating is valid God does not therefor exist.
Hence the moral edict to not kill is man made, (with exceptions for electrocutions, protecting oil supplies and blowing up abortion clinics) and has no valid authority.
Wait. This makes no sense.
You can ignorantly but morally kill people if the dinosaurs came first......but not if God made us and the dinosaurs at the same time ......but..with exceptions....you can kill some of the people .....some of the time....or...I am confused.
Labels: creation science, creationism, Kentucky, museum
craig johnson cognitorex

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wasted Energy
Posted by: gellero on May 27, 2007 6:20 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Who cares what they think and believe ?? Lots of people don't believe death is real either. Isn't that ridiculous? People even believe that if they wish hard enough ( aka 'pray' ) that an invisible supernatural force will intervene and grant them their wish. Gives me the willies.............but then again, I've got a vooddoo doll for my ex wife. But she's still OK...........damn!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I THOUGHT REAL PROGRESSIVES BELIEVED IN FREE SPEECH?
Posted by: poppop_schell on May 27, 2007 7:02 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You know IF one really believes in First Amendment free speech, one should at least allow even free speech that is in error. I have found, however, that all too many evolutional biologists (notice there also nonevolutional biologists) practice censorship whenever their theoretical projections and their soemtimes questionable resulting evidence is challenged.

I spent 30 years as a Business Professor in Universities. I have seen over and over again, evolutional biologists attempt to prohibit free speech and open debate both inside and outside the classroom. And most of these evolutionary biologists were the leading advocates on campus for free speech EXCEPT of course when their pet theories were being debated. Interesting?

That said, the current teachings of fundmanentalists Christianity that the world was created in six days (1000 years per day) is false. I don't blame any truly thinking person to reject this silliness given the scientific evidence in such great abundance.

First, the world was organized NOT created by God through His son Jesus Christ. LAW of SCIENCE: MATTER CANNOT BE CREATED OR DETROYED. God took already exisiting elements in the Universe and life forms on other "earths" and organized our earth and placed life forms on it according to His plans.

God had organizated millions of worlds in the past. There are miillions of world concurrent with our earth and He will organize millions of worlds in the future. Ever notice that our UNiverse is EXPANDING?

There is NO beginning or end to God. He simply took some life forms from "deceased" worlds and brought them to earth to "REPLENISH" the "earth" as remarked upon in Genesis.

The six days were actaully six periods of time which varied greatly in length often representing millions of years.

How do I KNOW this? Modern Revelation given in the Pearl of Great Price of the Mormon Church, Living Prohets and from earth and biological scientists at Brigham Young University.

Again, I don't blame atheits for rejecting this nonsensical teaching of fundamentalists Christians. But be sure in doing so, you don't also reject the Great Organizer of our Universe. Anyone can KNOW for sure that He exists. At least the REAL God, not that of fundmentalists Christains.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Faux professors and faux intellectuals Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» Divine majesty in science Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» RE: Divine majesty in science Posted by: poppop_schell
Numbers check
Posted by: chaoslegs on May 27, 2007 7:11 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sounds like a nutty place.

Anyway, on to the number check. Apparently this place cost $27 million. Yet at the end of the article they mention there are 8,500 charter members and average donation of $100. That sounds like $8.5 million to me. Obviously they had some deep pockets helping promote this agenda, but usually 'charter members' are the original donors that help get the thing built.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The next flood will flood this delusion
Posted by: dayahka on May 27, 2007 8:52 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not to worry! The next flood, which occurs as soon as Antartica and Greenland melt will wipe this "museum" from the planet.

The humanists and scientists are making a mountain out of a molehill...All our gigantic malls are just museums to the illusions of capitalism...This is just grand theatre...A little comedy. If you ignore them, they'd be hurt. Pay them no attention. As a previous writer said, this is just Mickey Mouse all over again. Let these people have a little fun. So what if it's hocus pokus, there's a lot of that all over the place.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

a waste of money---when there is so much need elsewhere
Posted by: zooeyhall on May 27, 2007 9:57 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How sad--$27 million spent on this baloney. Think of the food and medical care this could have given to people in the third world.

But I am sure that these True Believer Christians are convinced that Jesus would have approved.

What's next? A $35 million megaplex to prove that Santa Claus is real?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Goddamit
Posted by: Goddamit on May 28, 2007 11:55 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now this is the real Goddamit truth. Believe or I will ------- you and your family. Don't mess with me. My girlfriend is Mother Nature. Goddamit

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Rinaldi
Posted by: Rinaldi on May 28, 2007 12:36 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is offensive to the many people who have done serious research on the subject of earth history.

But of course creationists do not care if they are lying and that they give children/adults false information, as long as it brainwashes people who have no common sense to distinguish fact from fantasy.

Very sad and scary to have people ot this type of maliciousness, passing false information for truth, and trying to make people believe they are good and rightious.

My advice: when you see anybodoy coming near you with a bible: Don't walk, Run!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Inaccuracies that would dispel mindless belief
Posted by: Singer7 on May 28, 2007 9:10 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. There are two versions of the creation story - Genesis I and Genesis 2 and they contradict each other.
2. There are two versions of the ark story - two pairs of animals or seven of each kind, another contradiction.
3. According to the dimensions of the ark in cubits, it is 100 feet larger than the largest American wooden ship and it was unseaworthy. The ark, as given in the bible, simply could not have stayed afloat past a couple of good waves. It was not seaworthy.
4. Given its dimensions, ithe ark simply was not large enought to support the number of animals given in the bible, and their feed for a year.
5. There is no indication of a flood at the base of the Ararat mountains where the ark is said to be lodged.
6. It is said that after the great flood, after a time, the waters subsided and if so, where did that huge amount of water subside?
7. In the bible, Noah sends out a bird and the bird returns with a green leaf in it's beak. If the earth was under water for a year, what greenery would survive for the bird to bring back?
8. How did Noah acquire the animals of the new world and then neatly deposit them back afterward?
9. What kind of meat did Noah stock for the carnivores like lions, tigars, etc. for a year?
10. How could Noah and his three sons built a boat the size of the ark by themselves, considering that they were not ship builders to begin with.

Anyone having even a grain of intellect might challenge these stories and put them in the category they belong - mythology.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement