Ken Ham poses with dinosaur models in his unfinished $25 million Answers in Genesis museum.
Posted on 05/23/2005 3:29:06 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
Ken Ham has spent 11 years working on a museum that poses the big question - when and how did life begin? Ham hopes to soon offer an answer to that question in his still-unfinished Creation Museum in northern Kentucky.
The $25 million monument to creationism offers Ham's view that God created the world in six, 24-hour days on a planet just 6,000 years old. The largest museum of its kind in the world, it hopes to draw 600,000 people from the Midwest and beyond in its first year.
Ham, 53, isn't bothered that his literal interpretation of the Bible runs counter to accepted scientific theory, which says Earth and its life forms evolved over billions of years.
Ham said the museum is a way of reaching more people along with the Answers in Genesis Web site, which claims to get 10 million page views per month and his "Answers ... with Ken Ham" radio show, carried by more than 725 stations worldwide.
"People will get saved here," Ham said of the museum. "It's going to fire people up. If nothing else, it's going to get them to question their own position of what they believe."
Ham is ready for a fight over his beliefs - based on a literal interpretation of the book of Genesis, the first book of the Old Testament.
"It's a foundational battle," said Ham, a native of Australia who still speaks with an accent. "You've got to get people believing the right history - and believing that you can trust the Bible."
Among Ham's beliefs are that the Earth is about 6,000 years old, a figure arrived at by tracing the biblical genealogies, and not 4.5 billion years, as mainstream scientists say; the Grand Canyon was formed not by erosion over millions of years, but by floodwaters in a matter of days or weeks and that dinosaurs and man once coexisted, and dozens of the creatures - including Tyrannosaurus Rex - were passengers on the ark built by Noah, who was a real man, not a myth.
Although the Creation Museum's full opening is still two years away, already a buzz is building.
"When that museum is finished, it's going to be Cincinnati's No. 1 tourist attraction," says the Rev. Jerry Falwell, nationally known Baptist evangelist and chancellor of Liberty University in Lynchburg, Va. "It's going to be a mini-Disney World."
Respected groups such as the National Science Board, the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the National Science Teachers Association strongly support the theory of evolution. John Marburger, the Bush administration's science adviser, has said, "Evolution is a cornerstone of modern biology."
Many mainstream scientists worry that creationist theology masquerading as science will have an adverse effect on the public's science literacy.
"It's a giant step backward in science education," says Carolyn Chambers, chair of the biology department at Xavier University, which is operated by the Jesuit order of the Catholic church.
Glenn Storrs, curator of vertebrate paleontology for the Cincinnati Museum Center, leads dinosaur excavations in Montana each summer. He said the theory of dinosaurs and man coexisting is a "non-issue."
"And so, I believe, is the age of the Earth," Storrs said. "It's very clear the Earth is much older than 6,000 years."
The Rev. Mendle Adams, pastor of St. Peter's United Church of Christ in Pleasant Ridge, takes issue with Ham's views - and the man himself.
"He takes extraordinary liberties with Scripture and theology to prove his point," Adams said. "The bottom line is, he is anti-gay, and he uses that card all the time."
Ham says homosexual behavior is a sin. But he adds that he's careful to condemn the behavior, not the person.
Even detractors concede that Ham has appeal.
Ian Plimer, chair of geology at the University of Melbourne, became aware of Ham in the late 1980s, when Ham's creationist ministry in Australia was just a few years old.
"He is promoting the religion and science of 350 years ago," says Plimer. "He's a far better communicator than most mainstream scientists."
Despite his communication skills, Ham admits he doesn't always make a good first impression. But, that doesn't stop him from trying to spread his beliefs.
"He'd be speaking 20 hours a day if his body would let him," said Mike Zovath, vice president of museum operations.
Ham's wife of 32 years agrees. "He finds it difficult talking about things apart from the ministry," Mally Ham says. "He doesn't shut off."
Ham said he has no choice but to speak out about what he believes.
"The Lord gave me a fire in my bones," Ham says. "The Lord has put this burden in my heart: 'You've got to get this information out.'"
I have been informed by the likes of the subect of this posted article that I am a Sinnah for "Not Be LeiveIng GoD's WooiooorD!!" simply because I disagree with their 24-hour creation-day interpretation.
Imposing that belief (with condemning judgement) on those who believe otherwise is, IMHO, sinful.
And building a $25 Million museum on such a flimsy and egocentric foundation is, IMO, the pinnacle of hubris.
So did I -- but I got corrupted and wound up as a physical chemist... LOL!!
BTW, I just found my childhood copy of the little book that straightened me out on the concept of time as the fourth dimension: Gamow's One, Two, Three -- Infinity.
hmmm...you seem to have some sensitivity with Christians disagreeing with the timeline. I'm really not sure how someone could impose that belief on you. Are you really forced to believe it?
Condeming judgement...I guess that attitude "could" be sinful depending on the basis. I will disagree with many legalistic Christians about things. They may stick their nose up in the air about stuff I do (in other words give me the condeming judgement look) but do I think it sinful. nah.
Finally, you cant tolerate someone giving you greif about your timeline issue yet you go ahead and tear down their beliefs as flimsy and egocentric. I dont get it...
I'm not sure if your opinion is humble...your statement kinda comes across as prideful. oh well, maybe you can clarify a little more. later...
Creationism is to biology as astrology is to astronomy. It's in Euclid.
Nice. Sort of like using three polarized sun glasses to demonstrate quantum mechanics.
You bite after the microwaving, not before.
oh well, maybe you can clarify a little more. later...
Sounds good. It's after midnight here, and I'm too bushed to be rational. Later...and good night!
So now we got politicians (D) said "I'll do it in exceptional circumstances" and politicians (R) say "OK.". Did I miss anything?
Well, don't look out your window or back door either. Evolution is there also!
Examples, please.
I don't believe the FC has any interest in such a thing. The statement, "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth," does not address or imply such a practice either. For you to find it in there is indicative of your ability to "find" other things that are not present, hence your inability to serve in the interest of science.
Wow. Ran the experiment just now.
186,000 miles per second...it's not just a good idea, it's the law!
"How can the unenlightened, ignorant, religious, superstitious masses so intent on the destruction of science verify this proposition?"
Well, you could reproduce Michelson's original experiment that measured the speed of light.
You evo's never cease to amaze me.
PH slams Ken Ham by posting a link to Hovind trying to smear Ham by association.
I post a long list of Evofraud in response.
You focus on the one pair of links on Archaeopteryx that initially suspects a hoax and then dismisses it after a Creation Scientist is allowed to examine the fossils.
First you claim creationists are trying to have it both ways, despite the fact that the intent of what I posted was clear.
Then when I point out how clear it is. You just keep harping on Archaeopteryx. You'll never address all the fraud that I posted. You'll never admit that PH was wrong in his attempted slam of Ken Ham.
Archaeopteryx has some characteristics that resemble a dinosour. But it's not considered ancestral even by evo's to any modern birds. And there seems to be a great dispute about whether it can truly be linked to the theropods. Instead it's just another species. An evolutionary dead end thought to have descended from yet another unknown common ancestor.
The skeleton you posted is oversimplified in that there are a lot of variety in bird skeletons. Ostriches and Emu's don't have enlarged sternums like the picture you posted. And as you admitted, the Archaeopteryx skeleton you posted was missing the sternum completely, yet the bird had one, just not as large as most common birds today.
So the Lord made a lot of variety in the beginning. The Duckbill platypus is a mosaic of features also. Designers mix styles every once and a while. There are other true birds that do resemble modern birds in their entirety found in the same layer's as Archaeopteryx which were apparently living at the same time as Archaeopteryx. Once again evo's have found a leaf with out any supporting branch.
Excellent point. And that damage has left us in a situation where public schools still talk about foreign religions which they must do to discuss culture differences. But they can't examine their own Christian culture for fear of being accused of "establishing religion".
It is a most insidious and unbalanced scenario. Christianity is attacked from both sides and not given voice to defend itself.
I'll accept, by faith, that what science textbooks tell us about the speed of light, especially since it is subject to regular testing. What I will not accept by faith is what science textbooks purport to know about the history of the universe.
"I'll accept, by faith, that what science textbooks tell us about the speed of light, especially since it is subject to regular testing. What I will not accept by faith is what science textbooks purport to know about the history of the universe."
Look out into the night sky.
You are seeing the history of the universe. Light is a speed limit--and, thus, a time machine.
LOL!!! You were on a roll last night.
Good to see you. :-)
On the surface of things, perhaps.
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.