Slashdot Mirror
Creationism Museum Opening in Kentucky
Noel Linback writes "A new creationism-espousing museum is opening in the state of Kentucky. According to a New York Times article the museum depicts humans and dinosaurs living together in traditional 'diorama' style exhibit. 'Whether you are willing to grant the premises of this museum almost becomes irrelevant as you are drawn into its mixture of spectacle and narrative. Its 60,000 square feet of exhibits are often stunningly designed by Patrick Marsh, who, like the entire museum staff, declares adherence to the ministry's views; he evidently also knows the lure of secular sensations, since he designed the Jaws and King Kong attractions at Universal Studios in Florida. For the skeptic the wonder is at a strange universe shaped by elaborate arguments, strong convictions and intermittent invocations of scientific principle. For the believer, it seems, this museum provides a kind of relief: Finally the world is being shown as it really is, without the distortions of secularism and natural selection. '"
Just remember: not everyone who partakes in Christianity (big C or little c) believes the world was created 4,000 years ago. Some of us actually believe in evolution. (Well, us non-fundies anyway.)
Right, but you still need to believe in the Big Sky Daddy -- just as ridiculous.
Rich.
libguestfs - tools for accessing and modifying virtual machine disk images
I don't see any problem with this museum, at least not worthy of /. main page. I can probably expect a lot of -1 Trolls on this post, but my +1 Insightful view on it is this:
They basically take evolutionism, replace big bang with God orderly putting everything in place, selection of species and some bacteria turning into apes with orderly creating everything. There you have it, creationism. It's not all that different and neither of them can be proven wrong. You can't prove God does (not) exist and did all that work over billions of years nor can you prove that the big bang was (not) a big explosion. The main questions you're going to remain with is: where does God come from? or where did that mass of stuff exploding come from?
I say, let's peacefully co-exist, I don't care whether you teach it or not in schools, but don't teach creationism nor evolutionism as an exact science and don't teach creationism nor evolutionism as the only true religion. I see a lot of atheists that hang on to evolution and the big bang theory as a religion, something that has to be and is true, no matter what other people think or say. Why? Because you feel the need to be religious about something? What if I come up with a scientific theory that better fits the bill? You're going to massively change then? Or am I going to be incorrect.
Nobody said that the world was made in 7 24h days. Just think about it, let's say the Bible is the book of God and it specified God created everything in 7 days. Before God created our planet and our sun etc., there were no 24 hour days, there was nothing, how would you (or God) then calculate 24 hour days. What if God resided on Mars or Jupiter on that occasion? Would you still say that God's day was 24 hours? The only religion that teaches that as far as I know is catholicism and maybe some other offspring religions in Christendom. Heck, talk to a Jehovah's Witness or a Mormon (they're easy to come by, they even come to you every so often (I don't want to offend anyone, just a joke)), they'll tell you that those 'days' are unspecified in length, could be millions of years.
I hate that people keep putting their personal religion to the front as a fact that can have no objection, there are thousands of believes on any type of subject, I have my own, open your own museum if you want, but don't teach my kids your view on how we got here as a fact. Unless you have a camera or scientific undeniable proof that it happened that way (as in exact, not a theory) I probably will think my own way about it.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Creationists love science. We object to lies. In particular, the one that tells our children that even though nobody has ever observed it (observation = science) life came about on its own. Your evolutionist religion takes more faith to believe in than mine! Science is only science when someone can perform an experiment and observe results that coincide with their hypothesis. This experiment must be able to be repeated by other scientists. Evolution is not scientific as none of it has EVER been observed (other than changes in a particular kind of animal over time, which is adaptation, not evolution), it is a matter of faith. Creation takes faith too, but at least we don't make up lies (gill slits, geologic column, "missing links") to support our faith and erase the line between theory and fact. We definitely don't use your tax dollars to support our faith either!
In short, evolution is NOT science, it is a feeble theory surviving on tax dollars made up and supported by people who want to justify their wicked lifestyles. Christians hate LIES, we love science.
Have you thought about believing in Creation without. Have you considered that the Bible does not really support creationism, not any more than slavery?
No data, no cry
The only thing that has ever been observed is minor changes within a kind of animal over time: adaptation. I agree that zebras, horses and donkeys all most likely had a common ancestor, but they can all interbreed as well: same kind of animal. No real evidence has ever been discovered (or much less reproduced) that one kind of animal can bring forth an animal of a different kind: i.e. a fish giving birth to a frog. The idea that a complicated organism can "evolve" one part at a time is just idiotic, no matter how many people believe it. Everybody used to think that the earth was flat and that everything revolved around the sun. The bible clearly contradicted both of these theories and later science caught up with the bible. Same thing with sanitation.
Evolution is based on the "geologic column". Do some reading and see where the geologic column came from. You might also want to read how the fossils and rock layers are dated (spoiler: they are used to date each other... circular reasoning).
By the way, would you mind going on record by defining the evolution that is supposedly as true as gravity or the speed of light? I agree with the observable fact that kinds of animals change over time (like the zebra, horse, donkey thing above). I think it is ludicrous for people to actually believe that this observable fact some how correlates to proof that a single cell organism can evolve into a complex being like a human though. This is especially true when you look into what bones from the "missing links" were used to reconstruct them. In some cases it is like a jawbone and a tooth that they build the rest off of.
i hate to break it to you, but god is as real as the tooth fairy ok. if he isn't STRIKE ME DOWN!!!! i'm still typing so looks like i'm right and your wrong, thanks for playing
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
I hope he believes enough to regrow that leg.
Pandering to the lowest common denominator would be less frequent if more people were prime numbers.
I have seen many abortive attempts here at defending creationism, which generally end up adopting the same invalid arguments as do evolutionists, thus posing the question rather than answering it. Thank you for cutting to the heart of the argument. It is here that the debate must be carried out if it is going to be effective.
As an earlier post here notes, the essential tenet of evolutionism, spontaneous life from nothing, or taking it a step further, spontaneous something from nothing, is also unfalsifiable. This leaves us at an impasse by this standard of judgment. If both ID and naturalism are at their very core unfalsifiable, then one is required to choose one or the other as a premise, a premise that cannot be disproven, for all that follows thereafter. As an internally consistent model which explains the observed universe may be developed from either premise, one is left with a choice which cannot be based upon any objective standard but only upon one's personal aversions.
Mir tut es leid, Menschen daß Einfältigfehlersuchenbaumfolgendenaffen sind.