Darwin Evolving Into A Tricky Exhibit

rbochan writes "The new Darwin Exhibit at the American Museum of Natural History has 'failed to find a corporate sponsor in the United States because American companies are anxious not to take sides in the heated debate between scientists and fundamentalist Christians over the theory of evolution' according to articles at The Sydney Morning Herald, The Telegraph, and The Register. The $US3 million needed for the exhibit was met by private charitable donations."

Comments

Here's the ticket

[Chickenofbristol55]

'failed to find a corporate sponsor in the United States because American companies are anxious not to take sides in the heated debate between scientists and fundamentalist Christians over the theory of evolution'

I think Darwin's theory needs to evolve to survive in its ever changing environment.

Darwin Exhibit huh

[Nom du Keyboard]

Darwin Exhibit, huh. Does it include the evolution of DRM on audio CD's, and the roadkill *coughSonycough* along the way?

Making Evolution palatable to Fundamentalist Chris

[Nom du Keyboard]

$sys$Evolution.

Now only the geeks will learn about it.

BLASPHEMY!!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't you just love intelligent design, such flawless logic!!! Reminds me of this ever more relevant excert from one of the great movies of all time:

BEDEVERE:
        Tell me. What do you do with witches?
CROWD:
        Burn! Burn them up! Burn!...
BEDEVERE:
        And what do you burn apart from witches?
VILLAGER #1:
        More witches!
VILLAGER #2:
        Wood!
BEDEVERE:
        So, why do witches burn?
        [pause]
VILLAGER #3:
        B--... 'cause they're made of... wood?
BEDEVERE:
        Good! Heh heh.
CROWD:
        Oh, yeah. Oh.
BEDEVERE:
        So, how do we tell whether she is made of wood?
VILLAGER #1:
        Build a bridge out of her.
BEDEVERE:
        Ah, but can you not also make bridges out of stone?
RANDOM:
        Oh, yeah. True. Uhh...
BEDEVERE:
        Does wood sink in water?
VILLAGER #1:
        No. No.
VILLAGER #2:
        No, it floats! It floats!
VILLAGER #1:
        Throw her into the pond!
CROWD:
        The pond! Throw her into the pond!

BEDEVERE:
        What also floats in water?
VILLAGER #1:
        Bread!
VILLAGER #2:
        Apples!

VILLAGER #3:
        Uh, very small rocks!
VILLAGER #1:
        Cider!
VILLAGER #2:
        Uh, gra-- gravy!

VILLAGER #1:
        Cherries!
VILLAGER #2:
        Mud!
VILLAGER #3:
        Uh, churches! Churches!

VILLAGER #2:
        Lead! Lead!
ARTHUR:
        A duck!
BEDEVERE:
        Exactly. So, logically...

VILLAGER #1:
        If... she... weighs... the same as a duck,... she's made of wood.
BEDEVERE:
        And therefore?
CROWD:
        A witch! A witch!...

Tongue-in-cheek:

[daniil]

Name any society that has survived more than 4000 years ever.

The Illuminati.

Re:You're in the minority.

[IPFreely]

Even if you'd deal with a company that helped fund such an exhibit, it is quite plausible that they'd lose many times that gain if there were a boycott by the religious factions.

Now there's an Idea...

Since the Pharma industry is based heavily on biology and bio-chemistry and in turn on theories of evolution, maybe we could start a campaign to equate medical drug use with support of evolution. Hit the zealots where they live (literally) by accusing them of supporting, by act, the theory of evolution if they take any medical drugs. Suggest if they really do not support evolution, they should forgo their medicine.

Then sit and watch the fallout. Some will bow to self preservation, continue using their medicine and dissapear from public view. Others might actually stop using their drugs. Either way, they are less likely to be a public problem.

I'm only suggesting this to the most vocal public critics. Hit them where they live, their public image. Alas, the probable effect is that lots of little old ladies would take it too literally and stop taking their own medicine in support. That would be a bad situation, even if it was of their own making.