Creation Museum Marries Adam, Eve and Dinosaurs

ABC News ^ | May 25, 2007 | Staff

[Sleeping Beauty]

Some Scientists Worry That Sophisticated Center Will Distort Children's Views of Science

According to an ABC News poll, 60 percent of Americans believe God created the world in six days. In Petersburg, Ky., this weekend, a creation museum is opening that depicts a story far from what you may have learned in science class.

Exhibits at almost every natural history museum teach that dinosaurs are millions of years old, and that they died out long before human beings existed. But at the Creation Museum, they say God created dinosaurs and humans at the same time.

The Creation Museum, designed by the same man behind some of the attractions at Universal Studios in Florida, is a $27 million, high-tech sensory experience with animatronic dinosaurs and a movie theater with seats that shake.

The museum is intended to convince visitors that evolution is wrong and that the biblical story of life on earth from Adam and Eve to Noah's ark is scientifically verifiable.

The museum depicts Adam living with animals, including a dinosaur.

Ken Ham, the president of Answers in Genesis, the group that is funding the museum, says that only "secular scientists" would maintain that the first humans never lived with dinosaurs.

"[Scientists] can say that, but what's their evidence?" Ham says, insisting that "All land animals were made on day six."

Mainstream scientists worry that because the museum is so technically sophisticated, it could be effective in giving children a distorted view of science.

"That they'll show up in classrooms and say, 'Gee, Mrs. Brown, I went to this spiffy museum last summer and they say that everything you're teaching me is a lie,'" said Eugenie Scott, the executive director of the National Center for Science Education.

Ham believes that's what should happen.

"And I say, great. Amen. That's what this place is all about," he said. "It's meant to challenge people."

The stakes are high. The museum argues that evolution jeopardizes people's belief in the Bible and leads to social ills like pornography and abortion.

"In an evolutionary world view, why should you have things like absolute morality? Why would it be wrong to kill someone?" said Jason Lisle, of Answers in Genesis. "I'm not saying that evolutionists aren't moral. I'm saying they have no reason to be moral."

[more at the link]

[Coyoteman]

"Sorry, your argument doesn't hold water; it just won't wash."

Cman, you're all wet!

I was going to add that to the string, but I figured three puns in a row might be too much!

[ahayes]

The mountains were very likely nowhere near as high as they are today. In fact, most of the mountains were most likely created after the Flood, as the water was receding.

You know the movement of tectonic plates is responsible for volcanoes and earthquakes? Earthquakes come about from plates moving very short distances, 30 feet max that we've seen (thank goodness). Any type of catastrophe causing sudden orogeny of thousands of feet would result in massive earthquakes and volcanic eruptions. The result would be a global extinction similar in magnitude to the disaster that wiped out almost all life at the end of the Permian--a global flood would look like nothing in comparison. Floating about in a boat wouldn't save you, and things wouldn't be getting better for, oh, about half a million years.

[b_sharp]

"I was going to add that to the string, but I figured three puns in a row might be too much!"

HOH, HOH, HOH, very funny.

[Theophilus]

...After all, you are clearly different from your father, as your father was different from his.

Not to sound clintonesque but but what do you mean by "as"? Do you mean "as" as "like" or do you mean "as" as different to the same degree? If you are using "as" with the latter definition, then I don't agree. It is not clear that I am more or less different from my father than we was from his. I guess you could try to quantify the differences by using DNA but even then I suspect that you would find varying degrees of difference for each set of individuals. I believe that one might be more like their great great great great grandfather than they are like their father. It's reasonable to believe that ancestry has more of a web structure than a dendridic structure. The same individual could be your ancestor on multiple branches in multiple generations. I wonder if every single organsim in history, excluding twins and other multiples, has absolutely unique DNA. We'll never know because we don't have all the data.

[Marie2]

“Ask him if he believes the earth is 6,000 years old.”
(referring to my Physics major son)

Yes, he does, as does at least one of his classmates.

It may sound funny that “only” one of his classmates does, but he does not know the opinion of most of his classmates on the issue.

[LiteKeeper]

Please discuss that with Dr John Baumgardner. He is the one that developed the model, not me.

[ahayes]

Such minor details have been pointed out to him.

[ColdWater]

“My conclusion is that the Flood was one facet of a larger global-scale tectonic cataclysm. A key aspect of this catastrophe was the rapid sinking, in conveyor belt fashion, of the pre-Flood ocean tectonic plates into the earth’s interior. The energy required for the process was derived from the earth’s gravity acting on the excess weight of these cold ocean plates relative to the hotter and less dense mantle rock into which they slid.”

Nothing in the bible about the enormous heating of the earth and oceans by the hot mantle rocks that were raised up and exposed.

[LiteKeeper]

There are a lot of things that are not in the Bible. But that doesn’t negate their validity. The description of the third day of Creation Week is an apparent example of isostasy. Just because the particulars are not listed in the Bible doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen.

[ahayes]

Does the bible leave out the part where Noah and his family get steamed to death?

[ahayes]

Sigh for the proper nouns.

bible = Bible

[ColdWater]

There are a lot of things that are not in the Bible. But that doesn’t negate their validity.

Like evolution?

[ColdWater]

Just because the particulars are not listed in the Bible doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen.

That is what I have been saying. So God created man in his image via evolution.

[THEUPMAN]

So God created man in his image via evolution.

---

What god?

Not the God of the Bible.

So now the question is ... what happens when the body dies?
Whats next ... or is this all there is?
Whats the point?

I think a lot of the discussion misses the vital point.
Was there original sin?
Does man need a Saviour?
The whole Bible hinges on this.

Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin;
and so death passed upon all men,
for that all have sinned: 13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if
through the offence of one
many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. 16 And not as it was by
one that sinned,
so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. 17 For if by
one man’s offence death reigned by one;
much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life
by one, Jesus Christ.)
18 Therefore as by the offence of one
judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one
the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. 19 For as by one man’s disobedience
many were made sinners, so by
the obedience of one
shall many be made righteous.

The basic theme of redemption relies on the first man.
If there was no literal “first” man then there is no original sin ... no need for a Saviour ... the whole thing is bunk.

So ... is Christianity a “moral” guide?
Or is it the way to eternal life .. the door?

[ColdWater]

Was there original sin? Does man need a Saviour? The whole Bible hinges on this.

Only the NT.

[THEUPMAN]

Only the NT.

---

Genesis 3 is the NT .... who knew.
So really your answer to my question is Christianity is bunk?
Do you pray to your gods?
what does your faith tell you will happen when your flesh drops dead?
..... and don’t get me wrong here, I’m really interested.

There are so many people who have no idea what they believe and couldn’t care less what happens next, I find it fascinating when someone does.

[fortheDeclaration]

All dating by Evolutionists is made to fit their own evolutionary paradigm."

Yes, we are all very evil people determined to make sure you never get to Heaven.

Following a paradigm is a normal way of thinking.

It is natural that both schools would start from a certain world-view and interpet the data accordingly.

I would certainly say that the theory of Evolution is evil since it is built on the lie of rejecting what God has said to be true.

[fortheDeclaration]

Really?

It is the evolutionists who are short on predictions.

When will be the next 'jump' be in the species to create a newer and greater species?

Now, why should Creationists predict future events for something that happened thousands of years ago?

Creationists and Evolutionists work with the same scientific data and come to the same conclusion on how things works now (operational science).

The disagreement is over the beginnings, not the present.

We are not looking for any more global floods (Gen.9).

If that happens, then the Creationists were wrong.

Either, 'In the Beginning God'

Or

In the Beginning Nothing'

Take your pick on what sounds more ratonal.

[fortheDeclaration]

One would think Snelling could have gone to a more recent source if dating methods are as bad as he would like you to think. Instead he digs up some confusing results from a paper in 1976. I guess that was the best he had to work with, and besides, that makes it safer since few people can pull up the original source and see what they say.

More ad hominem.

The facts are that the dating is based on assumptions of a certain level of C14 and if that level was in fact smaller than thought, it would give an appearance of it being older.

[fortheDeclaration]

Since you seem to trying to overwhelm me with posts, I will say that Evolution is faith based, not fact based.

Now, you have to bring in another Universe view to explain the one we are in.

The view that something cannot come from nothing is thus, a fact.

Creationists start with God and never deny it.

We try to understand what He created, not invent notions that 'this could have happened this way or that' and than ignore the fact that getting life from non-life is impossible, which you evolutionists well know.

So either God is impossible or Evolution is.

All science that is true science deals with what can be observed and tested.

There is no way that any Evolution view of history can be tested, it is all conjecture and hypothetical, based on a religious paradigm that rejects a Creator God.