In the beginning . . . Adam walked with dinosaurs [Creationist Park]

Telegraph.co.uk ^ | 02 January 2005 | James Langton

[PatrickHenry]

With its towering dinosaurs and a model of the Grand Canyon, America's newest tourist attraction might look like the ideal destination for fans of the film Jurassic Park.

The new multi-million-dollar Museum of Creation, which will open this spring in Kentucky, will, however, be aimed not at film buffs, but at the growing ranks of fundamentalist Christians in the United States.

It aims to promote the view that man was created in his present shape by God, as the Bible states, rather than by a Darwinian process of evolution, as scientists insist.

The centrepiece of the museum is a series of huge model dinosaurs, built by the former head of design at Universal Studios, which are portrayed as existing alongside man, contrary to received scientific opinion that they lived millions of years apart.

Other exhibits include images of Adam and Eve, a model of Noah's Ark and a planetarium demonstrating how God made the Earth in six days.

The museum, which has cost a mighty $25 million (£13 million) will be the world's first significant natural history collection devoted to creationist theory. It has been set up by Ken Ham, an Australian evangelist, who runs Answers in Genesis, one of America's most prominent creationist organisations. He said that his aim was to use tourism, and the theme park's striking exhibits, to convert more people to the view that the world and its creatures, including dinosaurs, were created by God 6,000 years ago.

"We want people to be confronted by the dinosaurs," said Mr Ham. "It's going to be a first class experience. Visitors are going to be hit by the professionalism of this place. It is not going to be done in an amateurish way. We are making a statement."

The museum's main building was completed recently, and work on the entrance exhibit starts this week. The first phase of the museum, which lies on a 47-acre site 10 miles from Cincinatti on the border of Kentucky and Ohio, will open in the spring.

Market research companies hired by the museum are predicting at least 300,000 visitors in the first year, who will pay $10 (£5.80) each.

Among the projects still to be finished is a reconstruction of the Grand Canyon, purportedly formed by the swirling waters of the Great Flood – where visitors will "gape" at the bones of dinosaurs that "hint of a terrible catastrophe", according to the museum's publicity.

Mr Ham is particularly proud of a planned reconstruction of the interior of Noah's Ark. "You will hear the water lapping, feel the Ark rocking and perhaps even hear people outside screaming," he said.

More controversial exhibits deal with diseases and famine, which are portrayed not as random disasters, but as the result of mankind's sin. Mr Ham's Answers in Genesis movement blames the 1999 massacre at Columbine High School in Colorado, in which two teenagers killed 12 classmates and a teacher before killing themselves, on evolutionist teaching, claiming that the perpetrators believed in Darwin's survival of the fittest.

Other exhibits in the museum will blame homosexuals for Aids. In a "Bible Authority Room" visitors are warned: "Everyone who rejects his history – including six-day creation and Noah's flood – is `wilfully' ignorant.''

Elsewhere, animated figures will be used to recreate the Garden of Eden, while in another room, visitors will see a tyrannosaurus rex pursuing Adam and Eve after their fall from grace. "That's the real terror that Adam's sin unleashed," visitors will be warned.

A display showing ancient Babylon will deal with the Tower of Babel and "unravel the origin of so-called races'', while the final section will show the life of Christ, as an animated angel proclaims the coming of the Saviour and a 3D depiction of the crucifixion.

In keeping with modern museum trends, there will also be a cafe with a terrace to "breathe in the fresh air of God's creation'', and a shop "crammed'' with creationist souvenirs, including T-shirts and books such as A is for Adam and Dinky Dinosaur: Creation Days.

The museum's opening will reinforce the burgeoning creationist movement and evangelical Christianity in the US, which gained further strength with the re-election of President Bush in November.

Followers of creationism have been pushing for their theories to be reintegrated into American schoolroom teaching ever since the celebrated 1925 "Scopes Monkey Trial", when US courts upheld the right of a teacher to use textbooks that included evolutionary theory.

In 1987, the US Supreme Court reinforced that position by banning the teaching of creationism in public schools on the grounds of laws that separate state and Church.

Since then, however, many schools – particularly in America's religious Deep South – have got around the ban by teaching the theory of "intelligent design", which claims that evolutionary ideas alone still leave large gaps in understanding.

"Since President Bush's re-election we have been getting more membership applications than we can handle,'' said Mr Ham, who expects not just the devout, but also the curious, to flock through the turnstiles. "The evolutionary elite will be getting a wake-up call."

[js1138]

God gives believers a 128 bit encryption scheme, whereas non-believers are limited to a 64 bit scheme.

I'm speechless.

[Lucky Dog]

… Gravity is subject to the identical criticism [that it is both a theory and a fact] … physicists regard gravity as both a fact and a theory.

You are in error, sir:

“Gravity” is an observed effect or phenomenon that masses appear to be attracted to each other with the strength of that attraction varying as a function of distance. Newton’s and/or Einstein’s theories attempted to mathematically predict results of this effect, or fact, as well as explain how it acted in Einstein’s case. No one of whom I am aware confuses the fact or phenomenon of “gravity” with a theory of how or why it works. [Neither Newton’s nor Einstein’s theories is called “gravity” or even the “the theory of gravity” by scientists or the lay public… the absolute closest I could find was a reference to “Newton’s Theory of Universal Gravitation” in some lay literature… Einstein’s is the “Theory of Relativity.”] Therefore, your assertion that “gravity” is considered both a fact and theory is a mistaken opinion.

The main reason why the semantic argument is important is because so many laymen regard the word "theory" as being analogous to "wild-assed-guess", which is not the case for scientific theories.

I agree. However, perhaps the layman gets the opinion somewhat honestly.

Thus there is no sharp line between speculation, hypothesis, theory, principle, and fact, but only a difference along a sliding scale, in the degree of probability of the idea. - H. J. Muller

With pronouncements from sceintists such as the above floating about, it might be easy to see why laymen might regard "'theory' as being analogous to 'wild-assed-guess'."

[D Edmund Joaquin]

Best you learn about the house of pressed figs

[BikerNYC]

You are in error, sir:

Nope. You are. You admit yourself that gravity is both a fact and a theory. The remark was made that gravity was "subject" to the same criticism, that it is, as is evolution, both fact and theory.

Your assertion that Newton's Theory of Universal Gravitation and Einstein's Theory of General Relativity are not really theories of gravity because of the name the author's put on their papers is completely ludicrous. They are, most assuredly, theories of gravity.

[D Edmund Joaquin]

What "cult" do I belong to, O seer of denominations? You are very reluctant to reveal yours. Mine's bible based, there's a clue. Also I see you are backing off your claims of Hebrew knowledge -- that's a shame, it was so funny to watch you stumble along

[bondserv]

I'm speechless.

Are you marveling at my apropos analogy, or is it that you didn't realize this idea is presented in the Bible?

1Cr 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.

[D Edmund Joaquin]

but it is clear to us scientists.

You need to get your story straight. Now you're a scientist? Goodness, Hebrew, Science, post all day, you're an enfant terrible!

[bondserv]

Also I see you are backing off your claims of Hebrew knowledge -- that's a shame, it was so funny to watch you stumble along

I thought it was just that he ran out of "shubi-snacks". shubi-dubi-du! :-)

[D Edmund Joaquin]

He went on google and got the Aleph-Beis but as a real Hebrew scholar pointed out to him, he didn't get to the all encompassing Aleph to Tav

[Dataman]

I believe the mechanism of gravity is theoretical but its effects are both observed and measurable.

Unfortunately for materialists, evolution is a theory with no observations of any aspect of the imagined mechanism and no measurability or repeatability whatsoever.

[D Edmund Joaquin]

or the Ark was real.

Is the Ark real, Shubi- doubitous?

[tx_eggman]

You wrote:

If they really understood Christian theology, they would know God's Grace does not work that way. It matters not if you believe science or not, you are only saved through belief in Jesus Christ.

God doesn't care if you think yom is 24 hrs or the Ark was real. He doesn't care if you think evolution was created by Him , either. He only cares about one thing.

Is this a change in thinking from when you also wrote:

God used evolution to create all life. Those that do not believe in evolution, do not believe in God.

and

Creationuts and heretics will never escape the wrath of God, no matter how much they try to hide from me.

If so, glad to see you're coming around ... ain't grace wonderful?

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith–and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God– not by works, so that no one can boast. Ephesians 2:8-9

[D Edmund Joaquin]

James 1:8

A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.

[bondserv]

How do you know Genesis isn't encoded, and how do you know the interpretation of Genesis doesn't need to conform to observed reality?

Allow me another analogy that may help you to understand. If you watched Sixth Sense, you are familiar with how at the end Bruce Willis was a dead person. The Director was careful to make Bruce appear to be alive and functioning as a living person, however after reviewing the movie one realizes that the interactions with the living characters didn't happen. Because of the way he conducted himself we considered him alive.

If the movie ended without them revealing Bruce was dead, most people would have been non the wiser. Becoming a believer gives a person that same "Ohhh!", "WOW!", "Cool"... response to reality. I was blind and now I see.

[Thatcherite]

… Gravity is subject to the identical criticism [that it is both a theory and a fact] … physicists regard gravity as both a fact and a theory.

You are in error, sir:

“Gravity” is an observed effect or phenomenon that masses appear to be attracted to each other with the strength of that attraction varying as a function of distance. Newton’s and/or Einstein’s theories attempted to mathematically predict results of this effect, or fact, as well as explain how it acted in Einstein’s case. No one of whom I am aware confuses the fact or phenomenon of “gravity” with a theory of how or why it works. [Neither Newton’s nor Einstein’s theories is called “gravity” or even the “the theory of gravity” by scientists or the lay public… the absolute closest I could find was a reference to “Newton’s Theory of Universal Gravitation” in some lay literature… Einstein’s is the “Theory of Relativity.”] Therefore, your assertion that “gravity” is considered both a fact and theory is a mistaken opinion.

Bad luck, you contradicted something that I didn't say. Read my posts more carefully. I said a theory of gravity had only recently been proposed, not by Newton.

[Lucky Dog]

… Your assertion that Newton's Theory of Universal Gravitation and Einstein's Theory of General Relativity are not really theories of gravity because of the name the author's put on their papers is completely ludicrous.

You, as opposed to “Thatcherite,” (as he has not yet replied) are in error on this one, sir. I did not say that either Newton’s or Einstein’s was not a theory that predicted how gravity worked or even why… quite the contrary.

I wrote in my previous post “Gravity” is an observed effect or phenomenon. When anyone, scientist or layman, speaks of “gravity,” the reference is to this observed phenomenon and not to the theory of how it works or mathematically predicts it results.

The same observation apparently cannot be made for when one speaks of “evolution.” As has been asserted numerous times on this thread, “‘evolution’ is both a fact and a theory.” Perhaps, it is better stated as “Thatcherite” put it in an earlier post speaking of “evolution,” one word meaning two different things. The difference is a critical semantic one as “gravity” is not single word meaning two different things.

Therefore, your assertion that “gravity” is considered both a fact and theory with the implication that the word or reference is the same as a reference to “evolution” remains a mistaken opinion.

… You admit yourself that gravity is both a fact and a theory.

I am sorry. A careful review of my post reveals that I said: “Gravity” is an observed effect or phenomenon. From exactly where in this statement do you deduce that I admit that gravity is both a fact and a theory?

[Dataman]

A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.

What about a triple-personalitied one?

[tx_eggman]

D Ed, you wrote:

You need to get your story straight. Now you're a scientist? Goodness, Hebrew, Science, post all day, you're an enfant terrible!

You missed a more complete list I posted earlier, along to Shub's response to it:

I happen to be a minister and am being ordained in a mostly black church

I have been to France several times.

I worked in Haiti for awhile setting up a faith based health program.

Don't you think it is impressive that I could name the verse you cited in Hebrew?

My Dr. specialty is Biblical counseling.

There are many Christian scientists (scientists who are Christians), like myself

I just happen to be quite good at reading and understanding Hebrew

I am a minister. If you want to debate theology or what Genesis said, I have been studying that just as long as biology.

Vietnam Combat Veteran U.S. Navy Officer

Dr. of Practical Ministry

I have been studying Genesis in Hebrew for about 20 years.

I am a minister and Bible scholar.

I am an excellent driver.

I had a Pauline experience coming back from a Hebrew seminar. Just as God revealed to me the meaning of rakia, 3 crosses appeared on the side of the road. I had driven 85 miles past my exit.

My Son was a National Merit Finalist

After Nam, I ran a big farm, then worked for USDA once ...

I run a homeless ministry in the inner city.

I taught biology at the college level.

I can show them how to kill with one finger.

All my statements are true. There is a lot more to my resume.

Creationuts and heretics will never escape the wrath of God, no matter how much they try to hide from me.

You can add that my son is now in law school and married to a nursing professor, who actually understands biology unlike creationuts.

Also, in the past I ran a 4 million dollar company.(It included the farm).

And his simply marvelous reply:

I know you are not going to read this eggman, but all the others will want to know what a formidable foe I am to the dark forces of evil embodied in the Hamites and the Morrisites who are corrupting God's Word with their satanic money grubbing conartistry.

Amazing, simply amazing

[D Edmund Joaquin]

Thank you Eggy, now saved for future reference. I don't know about you, but I'm certainly impressed, maybe as much as a figcake