A Field Trip To the Creation Museum

Lillith writes "The anti-evolution Creation Museum opened last weekend and Ars took a field trip there and took lots of pictures. 'There were posters explaining just how coal could be formed in a few weeks as opposed to over millions of years, and how rapidly the biblical flood would cover the earth, drowning all but a handful of living creatures. The flood plays a big part in the museum's attempt to explain away what we see as millions of years of natural processes. There was also an explanation as to why, with only one progenitor family, it wasn't considered incest for Adam and Eve's children to marry each other.' (Myself, I liked the picture of the velociraptor grazing peacefully next to Eve, who is wearing some kind of dirndl, in the Garden of Eden.)" The reporter posted more photos from the museum on Flickr.

Comments

Factually inacurate

[Scrameustache]

Eve was naked until she ate from the tree of knowledge, at which point she made herself a skirt with leaves.

They fail at bible accuracy, in a frikkin bible museum!

Re:Factually inacurate

[allthingscode]

Nope, according to the bible, which we have to take to mean exactly what it says (we are creationists):

Gen 3:7 - Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=genesi s+3

Re:Factually inacurate

[inviolet]

The thing I never understood was that the fruit was meant to give 'knowledge of good and evil,' allowing them to choose between good and evil. Before eating the fruit, they were only capable of good, and yet were naked. After eating the fruit, they were still naked, but now they realised being naked was 'evil,' and so they must have been doing 'evil' while they were only capable of 'good.'

Before they ate the fruit, they were amoral. Hence, nothing they did was either 'good' or 'bad'... they simply reacted, and they, like the other animals, never noticed their own nakedness.

The best way to think of the forbidden fruit is that it made them conceptual. Prior to eating it, they lived as -- and conversed with -- the animals. Wake up, wander around, eat whatever is growing nearby, hang out, go to sleep. After eating the fruit, they acquired the power of choice, and hence became moral creatures. That's when they felt ashamed of their nakedness, per Christianity's delusion that its anti-sex opinions are universal. That's also when, by implication, they lost the ability to converse with animals.

Then, God observed that they were conceptual + immortal, which qualified them as deities. He therefore revoked their immortality and threw them out. They were forced to work the land for their food.

The whole story amusingly mirrors (in an abstract way) our own evolution.

Re:Factually inacurate

[Hydrophobia]

It actually comes down to being about free will. The whole point of the story is to point out that humans are not fighting against good and evil, but either choosing God's path or not choosing our own path. It was suppossed to be a choice, and God does not punish us for not choosing him, its that without him we make decisions that hurt each other and ourselves. That's the actual theology of it, for any of you who are interested.

Re:Factually inacurate

[Anonymous Coward]

Creationists are full of shit. You know that, I know that, and now they know that.

Note to mods: This needs to raised to +5 Informative. It's not flamebait or trolling but the simple truth. +5 please.

Re:Factually inacurate

[lawpoop]

I've read Genesis, thank you. Have you? I don't understand what you're trying to hint at.

So what about the second tree?

Gen 2:9 "And the LORD God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground--trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil."

Gen 2:16-17 "And the LORD God commanded the man, 'You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.'"

Ok, so we have two trees in the middle of the Garden. God tells the man, they will die as a direct result of eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, one of the two trees in the middle of the garden. So far, the second tree, the tree of life, is irrelevant.

Gen 3:1-6 "Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'? The woman said to the serpent, 'We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, 'You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.' 'You will not surely die,' the serpent said to the woman. 'For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.' When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it."

OK, now we have A&E eating from a tree in the middle of the Garden. It's not said directly that they ate from "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil", but we do have some clues. First, the serpent tells Eve if she eats from the tree they are talking about, they will "be like God, knowing good and evil." Okay, which tree gives knowledge of good and evil? Is it the Tree of Life, or the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil?

Then God finds out what happens and flips his lid.

Gen 3:17 "To Adam he said, "Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, 'You must not eat of it,'
'Cursed is the ground because of you;
through painful toil you will eat of it
all the days of your life.'"

Now God says that Adam ate from the tree which he commanded him not to. Which tree was that? In Gen 2:16, it says'you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil'. So we can conclude that Adam ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

Still, so far, the tree of life is irrelevant.

Then after God clothes them and kicks them out of the Garden, he says this:

( Gen. 3:22 ) "And the LORD God said, 'The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.' "

So God says that the man became like one of them ( Hey! Who are they, anyway? ), knowing the difference between good an evil. Was it because they ate from the Tree of Life, or the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil? We still might not be 100% certain at this point. But then, God clears it all up for us: "He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever." So God lets us know that Adam *hasn't* eaten from the Tree of Life. Furthermore, we know that he hasn't eaten from the Tree of Life, because if he had, he would be immortal. That's quite a bit different than what God said would happen about either trees in the center of the Garden. So Adam has only eaten from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

So what's the hint about the second tree? Nobody eats from it. It's clearly not the tree God forbid Adam from eating. And, let's say for the sake of ar

Re:Factually inacurate

[rho]

The Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit.

You're response is Biblically inacurate

[jason7655]

From the picture I've seen, there's no way to know if it was before or after she ate from the tree...so you can't really make that point. Also, She didn't make herself a skirt. 21 The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife, and clothed them.

Re:Full of Blasphemous Lies!

[Lockejaw]

Check your count.
Genesis 7:2-3

WTF

[scottennis]

I went to the flickr gallery and was stunned and fascinated (shocked and awed?) at the exhibit which "explained" where Cain got his wife and why it was okay for him to marry (and have sex, although the "S" word is never used) his sister.

For your edification I copied out the central "argument" for you to mock (er, I mean discuss.)

"The farther back in history one goes (back towards the Fall of Adam), the less of a problem mutation in the human population would be.
At the time of Adam and Eve's children, there would have been very few mutations in the human genome--thus close relatives could marry, and provided it was one man for one woman (the biblical doctrine of marriage), there was nothing wrong with close relatives marrying in early biblical history."

B.S. (Bedevere Science) all. (SIR BEDEVERE: And that, my liege, is how we know the earth to be banana-shaped. ARTHUR: This new learning amazes me, Sir Bedevere. Explain again how sheep's bladders may be employed to prevent earthquakes.)

Re:In 5.. 4.. 3.. 2..

[IdleTime]

Well, the furthest objects we can observe are some 13 billion light years away. Creationists think the world was created 6000 years ago. In order for that to be true, the speed of light must have been much higher in order to observe something so far away. This indicates, as creationists often claim, that the speed of light is changing, i.e slowing down. What speed does electrons in a PC move at?

Re:Problems

[jonatha]

It's, essentially, in the middle of no-where in Kentucky.

Happily for the founders, the Cincinnati International Airport is only about 5 miles off-center from nowhere...

Re:Faith is a poison upon mankind.

[eln]

He didn't say Christian, he said Christian Science. Christian Science really does discourage the use of most modern medicine, including blood transfusions. They believe illness can be cured by prayer and growing closer to God, and intervening with conventional medicine will counteract or contradict that process.

Re:Problems

[UbuntuDupe]

If schools start mandatory field trips to the museum, we can talk.

Actually, this creation museum is ALREADY receiving TAXPAYER funding. It's COMPLETELY outrageous. The state and local government give them FREE police and fire protection, EXEMPTED it from paying its fair share of taxes (due to some BS "non-profit" status), provides it with FREE road maintenance for the surrounding area, REGISTERED it in public directories, and granted it a FREE permit to use the land.

Oh, sorry, I was just looking to rationalize my pre-existing bias that the government forces me to pay for anything I'm opposed to.

Re:Faith is a poison upon mankind.

[Scrameustache]

That being said, I like how the TFA author tried to imply an association between Creationism and anti-Semitism. I quit reading right there. Your snark aside, he didn't make that up.
Opened in 2001, Dinosaur Adventure Land sprung from Hovind's Creation Science Evangelism ministry, which began to evolve in the late '80s. CSE sells videos and audiotapes of Hovind's lectures and his debates with evolutionary scientists, along with books on "Evolution and the New World Order." (At least one of them, Fourth Reich of the Rich, alleges a Jewish conspiracy to take over the world.)

Re:Faith is a poison upon mankind.

[ThrasherTT]

A "hypothesis" that cannot be proved wrong also cannot be proved correct, and therefore isn't a hypothesis. See Merriam-Webster, definition 2.

Re:Exclusiveness

[cerelib]

If I understood the article correctly, this museum was built by an Australian.

Re:Faith is a poison upon mankind.

[pkulak]

It's the Jehovah's Witnesses.

Re:In 5.. 4.. 3.. 2.. - 40 Days and 40 Nights

[rickett81]

"Not to mention the flood is not possible nor did it happen"

There are other references to a huge flood in relation to the biblical great flood. The epic of Gilgamesh references a great flood. Wikipedia has others http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flood_(mythology)

It rained for 40 days and 40 nights. 40 in the bible (and other arabic cultures) was used as an uncountable number. 'I cooked dozens of cookies' does not mean that I baked cookies in some unnamed multiple of 12, it means I cooked a lot of cookies. 'I drove a thousand miles to get here' does not mean that I drove 5,280,000 feet, it means that I drove a long way.

The number 40 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/40_(number) has interesting religious significance. It is mentioned many other times.

Re:Confused

[e4g4]

Indeed. Stephen Jay Gould wrote a fantastic essay called Nonoverlapping Magisteria on this subject. His point was that religion and science are essentially orthogonal domains of knowledge, and as such should stay the hell away from one other. Also interesting - Gould mentioned a statement issued by Pope John Paul II entitled Truth Cannot Contradict Truth, which confirmed the catholic church's official position on evolution - it does not conflict with theology.

Re:Some Quick Thoughts....

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's a biggie: God is supposed to be omnipotent and omnipresent. Everything is supposed to be a part of his divine plan. Everything.

That being the case, then Lucifer's revolt against God was planned. The fall was planned. We have a devil because God wanted one. Original sin was planned. All of the consequences humanity suffers because of that event were planned. Adam and Eve didn't fuck up. They were tempted, committed sin, and were punished all according to his plan.

The converse is that God had no knowledge of their imminent betrayal, and therefore is NOT infallible, and is capable of mistakes.

Lets not even get into the fact that Adam and Eve populating the earth is blantant incest. "Lets have kids! Now our kids will have kids! Hey I invented the Banjo Cletus! WOO!"

Re:Some Quick Thoughts....

[gtall]

Sure:

GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness.

GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day.

It only gets worse once you start to dig. Inconsistencies will yield several more. Most of these are technical, says one thing here, another thing there. There are host of philosophical contradictions too.

Gerry

Sadly, not just the USA

[CodeMunch]

I hate to advertise for this type of crackpot wannabe science but the USA isn't the only country with this ridiculous attempt at discrediting real science.

The Big Valley Creation Science Museum has recently opened in "Big Valley", Alberta, Canada - just a 3 hour drive from where I live. It has been built awfully darn close (1hr drive) to the REAL kind of museum you would expect to see in this area full of Dinosaur remains

I look forward to visiting BVCSM wearing my "Reality fish eating a Jesus fish" shirt.

You don't get it.

[spun]

You don't get it. It's very simple. You can not sense things outside your mind. Do you think you are seeing the real flag, the real wind? No, you are seeing what your mind has created out of sense impressions. Duh.

It's not about a senior figure. In Buddhism, one is accounted "senior" in any sense only because others all agree that your wisdom is valuable. There are plenty of other stories in Buddhism where the "senior figure" is shown to be a fool, and the cook or the janitor who no one noticed is shown to be wise.

Re:Some Quick Thoughts....

[General Fault]

I think one of the best examples given by that site is this:

GE 2:17 Adam was to die the very day that he ate the forbidden fruit.
GE 5:5 Adam lived 930 years.

Seems god may not keep his (it's?) word after all.

Re:Some Quick Thoughts....

[NayDizz]

For an interesting perspective, check out the Skeptic's Annotated Bible, of course it's biased, but it breaks down the absurdities, contradictions, and logical fallacies pretty thoroughly on a verse-by-verse basis. For added fun, check out the Quran and the Book of Mormon.

Re:The US is looking more and more like the taliba

[dc29A]

If so many US citizens are aware of this bullshit going on in their country, why is nothing done?

Only 53% of them believe evolution, that's why.

If that poll doesn't send shivers down your spine, I don't know what could. 53% don't care if their president doesn't believe in evolution. 53%. 53% are basically saying: scientific method = garbage. 53%.

66% believe that God created humans in the last 10,000 years. 66%. Unreal.

It's mind boggling.

Re:In 5.. 4.. 3.. 2..

[Anonymous Coward]

"What speed does electrons in a PC move at?"

The electron drift velocity in copper wire is less than 0.05 cm/sec.
They can be outrun by snails with ease.

Re:Faith is a poison upon mankind.

[ThrasherTT]

So you're saying that the evolutionary historical theory can't be called a hypothesis, right?

Where did you see me indicating that? The way that the hypothesis of evolution is stated, it is provable/disprovable. How exactly are we supposed to prove that "God made it rain for N days and N nights, flooding the world, then made most of that water disappear"? How do you find God's fingerprints on a rain storm, let alone one that was supposed to have occurred 5000 (or whatever the claim is) years ago? Explain to me how to create such an experiment.

If you take the "God made it so" part out of that statement, it is (hypothetically) provable/disprovable. For example, I can't prove/disprove that God made my son wake up this morning. But I can prove/disprove that my son did, in fact, wake up. In another sense, my son can't prove/disprove to me that God woke him up this morning.

For example, with bacteria, we can easily prove/disprove aspects of microevolution, and macroevolution ("evolutionary historical theory") just builds on top of microevolution. See MRSA (Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus) for a case study in microevolution...

fucking revisionists

[Scrameustache]

3) Haven't we figured out by now religion and science don't mix? Copernicus, Galileo, Da Vinci, and who knows who else?

Copernicus was a Roman Catholic who was encouraged by his bishop to spread his research about heliocentrism. Galileo ran into trouble because of remarks he made about the hope - politics was the problem, not science. I don't recall Da Vinci running into any problems re: science and religion

If I read one more "no christian ever persucuted anyone evar" post, it'll be the millionth too many.

Copernicus: http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast161/ Unit3/response.html
Leonardo: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4289204.stm

The churches stood in the way of science throughout their histories, that's a fact, and your attempted whitewashing of history won't change it.

Ecumenical Councils

[spun]

I thought what it means to be a Christian was settled by the various Ecumenical Councils. Specifically Councils one through seven. If you just follow the teachings of Christ but do not subscribe to the beliefs expressed in the first seven councils, the rest of Christianity considers you to be a heretic.

Re:Some Quick Thoughts....

[fredklein]

Well, it's real hard to argue Biblical things when you don't even know what it states. There was only one forbidden tree, not two.

  Genesis 2, verse 9:

9 And the LORD God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground--trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

and, lest you thinkthey are the same tree, GOD himself ('itself'?) refers to them seperately:

Genesis 3, 22-25:

22 And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever." 23 So the LORD God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken. 24 After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side [e] of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life.

You didn't do research,

Back at ya.

they have studied evolutionary teachings and have come up with scientific answers as to why evolution doesn't fully answer how the universe came into existence

"Evolution" has nothing to do with "how the universe came into existence".

Re:A Christian viewpoint

[Anonymous Coward]

The Christian God never claims there are no other gods...

The Bible does mention valueless gods of the nations (Psalm 96:5, 1 Corinthians 8:5-6), but it does claim there exists no other true God. These are some examples I found without looking very hard:

Deuteronomy 4:35:

Unto thee it was shewed, that thou mightest know that the LORD he is God; there is none else beside him.

2 Samuel 7:22:

Wherefore thou art great, O LORD God: for there is none like thee, neither is there any God beside thee, according to all that we have heard with our ears.

1 Kings 8:60:

That all the people of the earth may know that the LORD is God, and that there is none else.

1 Chronicles 17:20:

O LORD, there is none like thee, neither is there any God beside thee, according to all that we have heard with our ears.

Mark 12:32:

And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he.