Posted on 01/14/2007 5:31:07 PM PST by Tim Long
PETERSBURG, Kentucky - Ken Ham's sprawling creation museum isn't even open yet, but an expansion is already underway in the state-of-the art lobby, where grunting dinosaurs and animatronic humans coexist in a Biblical paradise.
A crush of media attention and packed preview sessions have convinced Ham that nearly half a million people a year will come to Kentucky to see his Biblically correct version of history.
"I think we'll be surprised at how many people come," Ham said as he dodged dozens of designers working to finish exhibits in time for the May 28 opening.
The $27 million project, which also includes a planetarium, a special-effects theater, nature trails and a small lake, is privately funded by people who believe the Bible's first book, Genesis, is literally true.
For them, a museum showing Christian schoolchildren and skeptics alike how the earth, animals, dinosaurs and humans were created in a six-day period about 6,000 years ago -- not over millions of years, as evolutionary science says -- is long overdue.
While foreign media and science critics have mostly come to snigger at exhibits explaining how baby dinosaurs fit on Noah's Ark and Cain married his sister to people the earth, museum spokesman and vice-president Mark Looy said the coverage has done nothing but drum up more interest.
"Mocking publicity is free publicity," Looy said. Besides, U.S. media have been more respectful, mindful perhaps of a 2006 Gallup Poll showing almost half of Americans believe that humans did not evolve, but were created by God in their present form within the last 10,000 years.
Looy said supporters of the museum include evangelical Christians, Orthodox Jews and conservative Catholics, as well as the local Republican congressman, Geoff Davis (news, bio, voting record), and his family, who have toured the site.
FROM 'JAWS' TO EDEN
While the debate between creationists and mainstream scientists has bubbled up periodically in U.S. schools since before the Scopes "monkey trial" in nearby Tennessee 80 years ago, courts have repeatedly ruled that teaching religious theory in public schools is unconstitutional.
Ham, an Australian who moved to America 20 years ago, believes creationists could have presented a better case at the Scopes trail if they'd been better educated -- but he's not among those pushing for creation to be taught in school.
Rather than force skeptical teachers to debate creation, Ham wants kids to come to his museum, where impassioned experts can make their case that apparently ancient fossils and the Grand Canyon were created just a few thousand years ago in a great flood.
"It's not hitting them over the head with a Bible, it's just teaching that we can defend what it says," he said.
Ham, who also runs a Christian broadcasting and publishing venture, said the museum's Hollywood-quality exhibits set the project apart from the many quirky Creation museums sprinkled across America.
The museum's team of Christian designers include theme park art director Patrick Marsh, who designed the "Jaws" and "King Kong" attractions at Universal Studios in Florida, as well as dozens of young artists whose conviction drives their work.
"I think it shows (nonbelievers) the other side of things," said Carolyn Manto, 27, pausing in her work painting Ice Age figures for a display about caves in France.
"I don't think it's going to be forcing any viewpoint on them, but challenging them to think critically about their evolutionary views," said Manto, who studied classical sculpture before joining the museum.
Still, Looy is upfront about the museum's mission: to share the Gospel of Jesus Christ with nonbelievers.
"I think a lot of people are going to come out of curiosity ... and we're going to present the Gospel. This is going to be an evangelistic center," Looy said. A chaplain has been hired for museum-goers in need of spiritual guidance.
The museum's rural location near the border of Kentucky, Ohio and Indiana places it well within America's mostly conservative and Christian heartland. But the setting has another strategic purpose: two-thirds of Americans are within a day's drive of the site, and Cincinnati's international airport is minutes away.
The project has not been without opposition. Zoning battles with environmentalists and groups opposed to the museum's message have delayed construction and the museum's opening day has been delayed repeatedly.
The museum has hired extra security and explosives-sniffing dogs to counter anonymous threats of damage to the building. "We've had some opposition," Looy said.
None of us want to be allied with muslim fanatics. To avoid even the appearance one should always make sure to know which material is quoted - the common practice (which you tend to omit) to give a source for a quote helps here.
I'm confused.
What bubble of mine has been burst?
Darwin didn't convert, there was no deathbed conversion, etc.
It's a good thing I don't drink (anything) while I FReep.
Hope you have a good day.
let's disassemble this one statement at a time:
I am not allied with any muslim fanatics.
except fanatic islamic pamphleteers like Harun Yahya...
Except perhaps in your own warped fantasy's.
...and in your posting history of freely using (without citation, mind you) the writings of fanatic islamic pamphleteers like Harun Yahya...
And since we are in a WOT against islamic based terrorism, I wish 'your side' would stop making that sort of inference about me as a person.
then stop freely using (without citation, mind you) the writings of fanatic islamic pamphleteers like Harun Yahya.
when you bed down in public with fanatic islamic pamphleteers like Harun Yahya, don't squeal when your unnatural union gets pointed out.
Spot on my friend. :-)
Yes Prout- you've nailed it- it's well known that anyone that links to a site must be affiliated with whatever the site espouses outside of their articles- by golly- you're on to something there
Could it be that there was something said on the site that that wasn't affiliated with islam that the poster intended to highlight? Nah- couldn't be- there must be some secret connection with Islam there.
did you bother addressing the main points of his posts? Why no- no you didn't- per usual- you just attempted to make some convoluted connection as what? Some sort of refutation to the main points? Is that how debates go these days? Ignore the main points and instead attack the character?
I never said he did!
Breathes in air,
puts on pants one leg at a time,
likes the opposite sex,
loves his children,
his sun rises in the East,
been known to cry at funerals,
laugh at jokes,
throw up after eating bad food,
enjoy a sunset,
and hopes for a better future!
Shun people like this!!!
--EvoDude
Which is WHAT?
Speaks volumes about the Darwinists.
What I criticize is your manner of quoting sources. And by this manner you accidentally was lured into the waiting arms of Harun Yahya.
Look I said I thought David Pilbeam, a Harvard University paleoanthropologist, made the statements.
And David Pilbeam, a Harvard University paleoanthropologist, did make the statements that I thought were important.
So, you found this statements somewhere in the net, possibly. And you didn't check the source - and of course, you didn't refer to the source.
As I said above, that's not a very scientific way of quoting. That's the way lawyers quote: ignoring the context, just looking for the tidbits which please them. In a scientific discussion, you should only quote from texts you actually read.
Yeah- you'd think that after listening to various pro evo folks that their case is sewn up tight and incontrovetible for evolution, yet they are threatening someone who wants to erect something counter to their supposedly airtight ideology based beleif? You're right- it speaks volumes about those that do such things- makes you wonder just what it is that they fear.
639: He did quote from a text that he read- the part he listed was apropoe to his views- that does NOT mean anything else listed on the site he quoted from mirrors his views- as you say, do suggest that it does would be absurd- this is a non issue and nothing but yet another rabbit trail- the quote IS the point being discussed and NOT Haran's own personal life views- but rather Pilbeam's view- This conversation should really be focussing on what Pilbeam said, and why he might have said it- NOT on anythign else- as that would be nothing but a moot diversionary tactic to avoid discussing Pilbeam's opinion on the matter of evolution and or the lack of support for the belief of evolution.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.