Slashdot Mirror
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.
Queue anti-religious /. comments...... NOW.
;)
--
"Please, shut up. Just when I think you can't say anything more stupid, you speak again." -Archie Bunker.
Your sig sounds like every conversation I've ever had with a creationist, alright
I know it sounds harsh, but I am really tired or religious people. They have caused more pain and suffering in this world under the idea of uniting it than any scientific advancement has, including nuclear bombs.
"Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."
What kind of altered state do you have to get yourself wrapped up in to believe this stuff? This counts as a serious mental illness as far as I'm concerned. It's like someone took all the spaced out nutiness in the bible seriously and then put it in one place. Which, well, is exactly what they did.
Hmmm, y'know, with a population of whacked out nut jobs who'll believe anything you tell them no matter how insane, you could conquer the world.
Deleted
At the bottom of the
How appropriate that this building is located in the middle of the Bible Thumping white Christian South where the average IQ is lower than the number of children they produce.
How can you deal with people who actually believe that there is an invisible man who lives in the sky who watches over everything that you do and, although he is omnipotent and good, is so insecure that he demands that you devote your life to him but will not tell you any of this directly, instead relying a select group of others to spread the word.
That just makes no fucking sense and it is impossible to engage in a rational conversation with anyone who really believes that because if you can reconcile all of those inconsistencies then you can justify just about anything. No matter how fucking ridicules it is.
I'm not saying there is not a God. There very well may be, there's no way we can ever know, but I can garun-fucking-tee you that if God does exist, he/she/it is nothing like the crap that religious nut bags (of all faiths) are trying to sell you.
mean while you are demanding that your view is the right one by ignoring all the data they claim in order to reinforce your contorted view of reality.
I'm not saying they are right or wrong. But if you sit back a look, you will see you are attempting to do the same stuff. The reality we know now relies on the exact same types of stuff. The difference it your convince you are right and they are wrong.
Because everyone has virtually identical DNA and they could never get a full set of teeth to identify a body...
You'd better start with modern science text books. The amount of unscientific crap in there that has long since been shown to be false will keep you busy for years.
You've failed to prove any type of relationship between the existence of one museum and the American education system. Furthermore, you've not mentioned what education system you're even talking about. There is no national education system. There are state-run colleges and there are city-run elementary and high school education systems and there are privately run versions of both. What were you even talking about?
If I were to use your "logic", the fact that you made such a statement indicting the "American education system" says to me that the French are not very intelligent. But I am actually capable of critical thought and I understand that one dumb Frenchman does not mean that the entire country is full of morons. Yes, you are a moron. No, that does not mean all of France is filled with morons. This is my last reply to you because you've failed to say anything even remotely intelligent.
Do us all a favor and don't post your thoughts on the Internet ever again. Thanks!
..the dogmatic and presumptuous comments made in response to this article that both mock and belittle those with faith are ridiculous. The idea that one is ignorant or somehow "mis-led" because he or she does not completely accept science's explanation of the natural universe, is one of the most arrogant and foolish thoughts ever conceived. "Professing to be wise, they became fools" - Romans 1:22
>I am also an atheist, and while not refusing to recite the pledge, i do leave the god part out
A stupid atheist, but that goes without saying.
There's a lot written about the pledge and the "under god" addition. I'm not going to get into that.
However, the point of the "under god" (and references to "god" in many US documents) is there to define all people as being on an equal level. It isn't necessarily the Christian or Jewish God, although it can easily be interpreted that way.
The point is that it brings everyone together under one superior...no one is better than anyone else as we all came from the same place.
Except athiests. They think they are somehow exempt and superior to the rest of us because they don't subscribe to the concept of something higher.
The arrogance of your post just reinforces that fact.
Shed your silly athemism and start believing in something bigger and more important than yourself. The world would be a much better place.
And don't say "I believe in science and rationality". That's so lame. Trying to substitute science for religion is pure folly.
Since everyone is into evidentiary proof, could someone please prove to me the joy, peace, and enlightenment an overwhelming atheist society can bring, by providing me with an example of such. A few widespread cultural atheist examples that I can think of are Hitler's Germany, Communist Russia, and Communist China. Am I missing something?
And to your assumption that everything is some web that hangs in the balance of something. True, while something work off of the discoveries of others, the absence of that previous discovery doesn't mean the later one would never have happened. It mean it would have been approached differently and possibly happened differently. but it doesn't mean it would never have existed. It is pretty obvious to most that you do have beliefs. And those beliefs are rooted into something you cannot prove. I don't think you can disprove them either, OMG your using science as a religion. Because we know that everything in science is provable or disprovable. And you are making statements that can be neither while at the same time praising science.
What does this mean? It probably mean your talking out your ass to fulfill some deep seeded need.
Really, so a bunch of what I consider to be misguided people created a museum that supports their views. As a Buddhist, I am cool with that. I also do not honestly think that anyone who goes there will have their minds or opinions changed regarding their beliefs. People will either go to mock, disprove, or to believe it. However, if one wants to promote the interchange of ideas, one *needs* places like this so that if people ask what are the alternatives to say evolution or what have you, you can steer them to the other place where the alternatives are espoused.
My point is this, let people decide for themselves--if the want to believe that the universe was created by God/a god/gods/whatever LET THEM! This debate is pointless. I am as about as unlikely to be shaken from my belief in karma as any Christian is to be shaken from their faith in God--its theoretically possible, but it takes effort!
However I think a lot more good would have been done by devoting that $27mil. to charitable works--but that is another rant.
Behold! Uh, what was I going to say?
Yes, but we are not there yet. Macro evo is not yet a slam-dunk and pretending like it is risks giving science's reputation a black-eye.
Table-ized A.I.
but given the nature of entropy the only real alternative is ...
You mean the only "known" alternative. There may be possibilities we haven't considered yet. Theory X does not get an automatic pass just because it has no competitors so far.
there is no division and no reason to believe that there is some arbitary barrier between the two.
Then what keeps *other* change factors from doing the same thing? Radiation, weathering, entropy, etc. all change things. If change is change, then perhaps there is a path from small changes due to those listed and larger changes. Can any small change lead to any big change? If mere change is all that is needed, then you need further limiting factors. (Or some other change factor that we haven't discovered yet because it moves to slow in our timeframe.)
And none of this addresses the real point which is: gods are silly
Whose point was that? I am not really comparing origin theories, but merely pointing out that some pro-evo people are making sloppy claims. Whether other theory proponents do the same or not is mostly irrelavent to that. Creationists being careless is not a free pass for evo's to do the same. Do you get to rape because your neighbor rapes?
Note that we humans may someday be creators of life. Thus, it is not an entirely dismissable idea. Monsanto is an "intelligent fiddler" (Perhaps semi-intelligent).
Table-ized A.I.