Challenged by Creationists, Museums Answer Back

The New York Times ^ | 9/20/2005 | CORNELIA DEAN

[Right Wing Professor]

ITHACA, N.Y. - Lenore Durkee, a retired biology professor, was volunteering as a docent at the Museum of the Earth here when she was confronted by a group of seven or eight people, creationists eager to challenge the museum exhibitions on evolution.

They peppered Dr. Durkee with questions about everything from techniques for dating fossils to the second law of thermodynamics, their queries coming so thick and fast that she found it hard to reply.

After about 45 minutes, "I told them I needed to take a break," she recalled. "My mouth was dry."

That encounter and others like it provided the impetus for a training session here in August. Dr. Durkee and scores of other volunteers and staff members from the museum and elsewhere crowded into a meeting room to hear advice from the museum director, Warren D. Allmon, on ways to deal with visitors who reject settled precepts of science on religious grounds.

[Mark Felton]

" This is basic freshman chemistry - there's nothing magic"

I see. The origins of life are explained by basic Freshman Chemistry.

okay

Ask your biology teacher if he agrees with your above statement.

"Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe -- a spirit vastly superior to that of man." -- Albert Einstein

peace

[JohnnyZ]

there is a difference between a docent explaining museum exhibits and a college presentation.

Both give a presentation and then answer questions. Obviously they're different, because they're not the same -- but they have similarities that bear to the point of the discussion.

[Doctor Stochastic]

When I taught, I would point out to the creationists disrupters that they were keeping others who paid money for the class from getting their money's worth.

[Junior]

There are many scientists who are creationists.

Not in the biological sciences, though. A physicist commenting on evolution holds as much weight as you or I -- basically none.

But many here wouldn't consider them to be scientists.

Sure we would -- in their particular field of study.

So who gets to decide who qualifies as a scientist?

You're kidding, right?

[MineralMan]

"Don't know if you noticed, but there is a difference between a docent explaining museum exhibits and a college presentation."

Ain't that the truth. I was a docent for a short time in an art museum, of all places. They needed volunteers, so I volunteered.

My favorite visitor was this guy who spoke up during the tour, as we were viewing a Kandinsky and said, "All that modern crap is just junk. It's not art. Surely you don't believe it's art do you?"

All I could do was shake my head slowly and continue with the tour.

[JeffAtlanta]

In fact, he's asked hostile questions by reporters shouting at him all at once and it's called a "press conference".

And they are rightfully ridiculed for it on this site. Their behavior is seen as tacky and without class.

Regardless, a press conference is a venue for tough, grilling questions. A tour guide is there to present the exhibit and to answer basic questions. This is out of respect to the other members of the tour that just want to take in the exhibit and don't want to get sucked into an ideology debate with a bunch of seminar callers.

[DGray]

This is what the article is about, sir. Key points emphasized:

That encounter and others like it provided the impetus for a training session here in August.

[...}

Similar efforts are under way or planned around the country as science museums and other institutions struggle to contend with challenges to the theory of evolution that they say are growing common and sometimes aggressive.

If you think the article is about something else, please do let us know what that might be!

[Right Wing Professor]

Summers. One of the most popular biology blogs is run by a professor here at the University of Minnesota, and unfortunately, he's a far-left moonbat who relies on the same sort of insults, ad homneim comments and quote-mining that his creationist enemies use. He referred to Summers as a "twit", a "moron", and other far less kind words. Not surprisingly, he's an acolyte of Richard Lewontin.

You mean PZ Myers?

Yes, that's a shame. I like Pharyngula, but I did a search on Summers name, and I see what you mean.

UMM is a good 4-year school, but gosh, Morris is a small town. And I'm from Nebraska. :-)

[sheltonmac]

When I taught, I would point out to the creationists disrupters that they were keeping others who paid money for the class from getting their money's worth.

How exactly do creationists get their money's worth from publicly funded museums that only present one-sided explanations to their exhibits? Again, much of this debate would be eliminated if it wasn't for the forced public funding of education.

[MineralMan]

Docent: To your left is our exhibit of a succession of primate skeletons, beginning with a small, lemur-like creature, and ending with a human skeleton. It's easy to see the similarities between the skeletons.

Tour Member: But God created Man in his own image. This is a stupid exhibit.

Another Tour Member: Are you trying to tell us that we came from monkeys? I'll tell you...my grandmother wasn't a monkey.

Third Tour Member: What about the Second Law of Thermodynamics? That proves Evolution never happened.

Fourth Tour Member: In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth.......That's what I believe. It's in the Bible. Have you ever read it?

Docent: And now, moving along, you can see our exhibit of the variety of birds which inhabit our planet. Notice the common characteristics of these animals, and their differences.

[js1138]

How exactly do creationists get their money's worth from publicly funded museums that only present one-sided explanations to their exhibits?

You could start by paying attention to the answers. You might learn something.

[SeaLion]

"All that modern crap is just junk. It's not art. Surely you don't believe it's art do you?" All I could do was shake my head slowly and continue with the tour.

LOL!

And how many folks told you they had a 5-year-old kid that could do better? I used to get that one ALL the time!

[doc30]

Yes I am well aware of how much love the evolutionists has for the [Flying Spagetti] "Monster", gives one great insight into the mind of the evolutionists.

Yes, evolutionists are intelligent, and have a good, creative, sense of humor about ID and creationism. Creationists say God created the world. They have no evidence God did it so some people say the lying Spagetti Monster did it. I challenege you to prove them wrong. Hint: you can't.

[DGray]

LOL! Good one.

[From many - one.]

You seem to be unaware of how speciation works.

Why not bone up on it a bit before posting material so easily refuted?

[megatherium]

Who gets to decide what is and isn't "science"?

Uh, the scientists?

As so many on this forum are fond of pointing out, evolution has nothing to do with studying the origin of life, the universe and everything.

Really? Evolution is the study of the origin of life. Unless you are talking about the biochemical origins of life 3.8 billion years ago, instead of its subsequent development from a common ancestor to the species of today. That I will grant you is still quite mysterious, and I am not prepared to argue that it was not designed. (I believe God created life to create itself through evolution. I in particular believe that evolution is not incompatible with Christianity, either evangelical or Catholic.)

My larger point remains: science education, including biology and in particular evolution (the basis of modern biology), is critical to our national security. I do not want to live in a country where working poor or minorities have no access to education. This isn't socialism. It is necessary for our democracy. Now there are serious problems with our schools (discipline, shoddy curricula, poor teachers, etc.). The remedy is not to destroy public education. The remedy is to fix it. We have made some progress in No Child Left Behind, which has installed high-stakes testing to make sure that the education establishment doesn't waste too many of our tax dollars teaching the kids rainbow multiculturalism, or how to be creative. But of course there is a huge way to go.

[Coyoteman]

Okay, so scientists get to decide who qualifies as a scientist, and those scientists get to decide what qualifies as science. Why does that make them entitled to my tax dollars?

They have a good union?

[End Times Sentinel]

What I find amazing is that some darwinists have so little grasp of the topic that they confuse creationism (literal translation of Genisis) with inteligent design (living things possess characteristics that indicate an intelligent cause or agent).

Owl_Eagle

(If what I just wrote makes you sad or angry,

 it was probably sarcasm)

[Right Wing Professor]

Before they were domesticated, they were segregated by habitat, and I suppose you could say this was enough to make them separate species, that's just not how I (and most advocates of inteligent design) define it.

Problem is, no birder or hunter has any problem with the idea that Mallards and Pintails are separate species. Pintails all pretty much look the same (well, the male drakes in normal plumage do) and mallards all look the same, and mallards and pintails look very different. Any decent birder can tell them both from shoveler, and redheads, and canvasbacks, etc.. And we knew them as species long before evolution ever came along. 'Species' is a perfectly reasonable category for all of them. Yet under exceptional circumstances they all interbreed.

[MineralMan]

"Who gets to decide what is and isn't "science"?"

---

Who gets to decide what is and is not true Christianity?