Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

In the beginning . . . Adam walked with dinosaurs [Creationist Park]
Telegraph.co.uk ^ | 02 January 2005 | James Langton

Posted on 01/02/2005 12:20:11 PM PST by 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."


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; Philosophy; US: Kentucky
KEYWORDS: creationism; cretinism; crevolist; darwin; evolution; kenham; themepark
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 861-880881-900901-920 ... 941-959 next last
To: shubi
What is an allele and how does it work?

Context? Are you talking genetics? Or do you have a spelling problem?
881 posted on 01/07/2005 2:24:45 PM PST by safisoft (Give me Torah!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 879 | View Replies]

To: shubi
What is an allele and how does it work?

This line is beginning to remind me of PeeWee Herman saying "I know you are, but what am I"

882 posted on 01/07/2005 2:25:56 PM PST by tx_eggman ("All I need to know about Islam I learned on 09/11/01" - Crawdad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 879 | View Replies]

To: safisoft

You should shak li batachat and follow through with that imperative.


883 posted on 01/07/2005 2:26:59 PM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 870 | View Replies]

To: tx_eggman

Fee fie, Foe-fo fum, I smell the blood of a little shubidum


884 posted on 01/07/2005 2:27:54 PM PST by D Edmund Joaquin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 880 | View Replies]

To: shubi
You should shak li batachat and follow through with that imperative.

Now that was quite scholarly. I would suspect that one could be banned whether something is said in Hebrew or English. Thanks for confirming everything I have said.
885 posted on 01/07/2005 2:33:00 PM PST by safisoft (Give me Torah!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 883 | View Replies]

To: shubi
I included you in my post because I was only kidding around. I have never questioned your knowledge of Hebrew because I can't. I am relatively Hebrew illiterate (apart from knowing how to use Strong's Concordance).

No personal offense intended. I rather enjoy our tit for tat.

886 posted on 01/07/2005 2:33:56 PM PST by bondserv (Sincerity with God is the most powerful instigator for change! † [Check out my profile page])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 841 | View Replies]

To: shubi
we all know what you mean, Christian
887 posted on 01/07/2005 2:35:48 PM PST by D Edmund Joaquin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 883 | View Replies]

To: safisoft

no problem


888 posted on 01/07/2005 2:36:47 PM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 885 | View Replies]

To: shubi
no problem

Only because others afford you far more grace than you do them.
889 posted on 01/07/2005 2:37:56 PM PST by safisoft (Give me Torah!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 888 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

The display sounds like a hodgepodge of different things with no rhyme or reason holding them together.


890 posted on 01/07/2005 2:39:54 PM PST by Giant Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shubi
run shubi run


891 posted on 01/07/2005 2:43:14 PM PST by D Edmund Joaquin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 888 | View Replies]

To: shubi
Words can have more than one definition depending on context.

Wholeheartedly agree.

So you need to understand the context in which the fact of evolution and the Theory of Evolution are imbedded.

Agreed. However, in an academic debate, if one party exclusively controls the “terms” of the debate, that party will always win. If the opposition is making convincing points, the controller of the “terms” merely asserts a switch in context negating the opportunity for a fair exchange. It is such an effective tactic that politicians and lawyers try to use it frequently in political debates and court room situations.

You might be able to come up with " a semantically pure" definition for each meaning, but not for both at the same time. I doubt however that anything is sematically pure, if I understand you.

I must disagree with you here to a degree. Many sciences such chemistry, medicine and biology have resorted to the use of a “dead” language (Latin) and others, such as physics, have “invented” words such as “quark” and “neutrino” to achieve semantic purity and avoid confusion. Think about it, why do biologists will use the word “phylum” instead of “class?” Obviously, semantic purity is important and achievable.

Does it not seem incredibly illogical to insist upon a precise taxonomy to the point of using a dead language so as to avoid confusion in one situation (classifications) and not in another potentially more confusing?

Therefore, you want an impossibly high standard, which the Bible falls far more short of than science.

As noted above the standard is not impossibly high, just labor intensive.

Nonetheless, I do agree that the Bible falls well short of semantic purity for a number of reasons. First, and foremost, the Bible was written for theological, spiritual, philosophical and historical reasons rather than scientific communications. Second the Hebrew Scriptures were (obviously) in Hebrew, which until the invention of the modern state of Israel had no need to express semantically pure scientific concepts. Third, the New Testament which was in Greek had the capability to be semantically pure in many cases but this purity was lost in translation in many cases, e.g., English translation of the Greek words, agape, philos, and eros all come out as “love” losing the individual distinctions of purity, brotherhood and sex.

However, Biblical purity of semantics is an issue only if one wishes to try to harmonize theological and historical wording with modern science. Even in this instance, the semantics of the Bible are usually broad enough, or, vague enough, if you will, to accommodate more semantically pure language of our day when such is correct.
892 posted on 01/07/2005 2:44:12 PM PST by Lucky Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 831 | View Replies]

To: Central Scrutiniser
Noah's ark? I would love to hear about how the animals made it back to their homes without any food, since the flood washed everything else away. Or how the sloth swam across the ocean back to S. America. Or how the koala's made it without eucalylptus leaves, or any other number of common sense questions that usually get angrily answered "It was a miracle"
He obviously didn't take two termites either!
893 posted on 01/07/2005 2:52:13 PM PST by Your Nightmare
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: tx_eggman

Again...I appreciate your religion and respect your beliefs, but I don't think the bible is the literal word of God. I think it's a book written by some very good men with very good intentions. A book, that if followed, leads one in the right direction for life...And afterlife.


894 posted on 01/07/2005 3:00:44 PM PST by I Gig Gar (Is civil conversation too much to ask?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 844 | View Replies]

To: Lucky Dog

"Agreed. However, in an academic debate, if one party exclusively controls the “terms” of the debate, that party will always win."

Unfortunately, scientific definitions are quite precise. That is why you will always lose pitting the Bible against science.


895 posted on 01/07/2005 3:02:50 PM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 892 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts
You know very well "IF" in fact that you can read 'HEBREW' that the snake and or the serpent of Genesis is NOT a literal physical snake.

How so? I read hebrew and it is clearly, to me, a literal snake being described in Genesis 3- crawls on the ground, bites people's heals, etc.

896 posted on 01/07/2005 3:04:52 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 752 | View Replies]

To: Lucky Dog

"Even in this instance, the semantics of the Bible are usually broad enough, or, vague enough, if you will, to accommodate more semantically pure language of our day when such is correct."

Exactly the point of scientific theists, like myself.


897 posted on 01/07/2005 3:04:55 PM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 892 | View Replies]

To: bondserv

Sorry I jumped on you. God bless.


898 posted on 01/07/2005 3:07:24 PM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 886 | View Replies]

To: superskunk

"Does anyone have some insight on this?" - superskunk

Yeah. Here's one:

Reasons to Believe ***** Hugh Ross *****
http://www.reasons.org/index.shtml


899 posted on 01/07/2005 3:09:24 PM PST by Matchett-PI (Today's DemocRATS are either religious moral relativists, libertines or anarchists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

"How so? I read hebrew and it is clearly, to me, a literal snake being described in Genesis 3- crawls on the ground, bites people's heals, etc."


RIGHT!


900 posted on 01/07/2005 3:36:14 PM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 896 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 861-880881-900901-920 ... 941-959 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson