Dinosaurs frolic with Adam and Eve at creationism museum

afp ^ | may 20, 2007 | Mira Oberman

[celmak]

PETERSBURG, United States (AFP) - Dinosaurs frolic with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden and an animatronic Noah directs work on his Ark in a multimillion dollar creationism museum set to open next week in Kentucky.

Designed by the creator of the King Kong and Jaws exhibits at the Universal Studios theme park, the stunning 60,000 square foot (5,400 square-metre) facility is built for a specific purpose: refuting evolution and expanding the flock of believers in a literal interpretation of the Bible.

"You'll get people into a place like this that you can't get into a church with a stick of dynamite," said founder Ken Ham from his office overlooking the museum's manicured grounds.

Polls consistently show that nearly half of Americans believe God created humans in their present form less than 10,000 years ago. Only about 13 percent believe God played no part in the origin of human life.

Ham does not blame evolution per se for society's ills. He believes that sin has been around since Adam and Eve took their fateful bite of apple about 5,700 years before Charles Darwin published "On the Origin of Species."

But he says the theory of evolution has been used to undermine the validity of the literal truth of the Bible, heralding a dangerous age of moral relativism which can be blamed for everything from racism to the Holocaust.

Located just outside of Cincinnati near the intersection of the states of Indiana, Kentucky and Ohio, nearly two thirds of the population of the United States lives within a 650-mile (1,050-kilometer) drive of the Creation Museum.

It is expected to draw at least 250,000 people a year when it opens on May 28.

[Nova]

You ignored my question about Carbon-14 Dating. So I'm guessing you don't care much for discussions on scientific subjects.

But do you have any opinion on why the dinosaurs died off? I doubt you believe in the popular theory about a catastrophe brought on by a large meteor impact, but do you have an alternate theory of why they died off in the past few thousand years while humans did not?

Or do you have complete contempt for all subjects scientific?

[ZULU]

Walt Disney Studio collborated as “science experts” with help from PETA.

[HitmanLV]

I did the name ‘The Alverez Hypothesis.’ Sounds cool!

[celmak]

Before you make fun of somebody else’s education, you should check your own out.Oooh, a Flinstone comeback! Do you subscribe to the looneytoones like the rest of the Lib Evo's on this thread?

[celmak]

You ignored my question about Carbon-14 Dating. So I'm guessing you don't care much for discussions on scientific subjects.

You ignored my data, so why bother?

[retMD]

yea... so what is wrong with my statement?

That your statement shows you are not familiar with what science means by the word "theory." From a quick search, here's a summary. Note the definition of "theory":

"Theory & Law A scientific theory or law represents a hypothesis (or group of related hypotheses) which has been confirmed through repeated testing, almost always conducted over a span of many years. Generally, a law uses a handful of fundamental concepts and equations to define the rules governing a set of phenomena. "

[Nova]

"You ignored my data, so why bother?"

I have no idea what that means. What data did I ignore?

[retMD]

Here's a more extensive definition: "A scientific theory or law represents an hypothesis, or a group of related hypotheses, which has been confirmed through repeated experimental tests. Theories in physics are often formulated in terms of a few concepts and equations, which are identified with "laws of nature," suggesting their universal applicability. Accepted scientific theories and laws become part of our understanding of the universe and the basis for exploring less well-understood areas of knowledge. Theories are not easily discarded; new discoveries are first assumed to fit into the existing theoretical framework. It is only when, after repeated experimental tests, the new phenomenon cannot be accommodated that scientists seriously question the theory and attempt to modify it. The validity that we attach to scientific theories as representing realities of the physical world is to be contrasted with the facile invalidation implied by the expression, "It's only a theory." For example, it is unlikely that a person will step off a tall building on the assumption that they will not fall, because "Gravity is only a theory." "

The point isn't stupidity, it's lack of knowledge about science. Learn more about science, and you may understand why creationism masquerading as science is disturbing.

[Coyoteman]

yea... so what is wrong with my statement?

Your statement was:

real science is not on the side of evolution. It is still only a theory.

Since you asked:

Your statement suggests that evolution is not "real science" but that it is only a "theory."

That shows gross ignorance of how science operates. There is no higher level of explanation in "real science" than "theory."

That is why I recommended the definitions on my FR homepage and quoted two of them to you in a previous post. You really should study those definitions.

Your statement, "It is still only a theory" presupposes that there is some higher level of explanation in science. Proof maybe? Wrong. Proof is for mathematics, good whiskey and photography, not science. No theory is ever proved. They can be disproved, but never proved.

The primary source of "It is still only a theory" is creationist websites, and they are not a good source of scientific data.

You asked, "so what is wrong with my statement?" Please cross check what I have written above on some of the science sites and in good dictionaries, and see for yourself.

[JSDude1]

you ever heard of the Glenn Rose, TX creation museaum and the dino prints that intersect real human foot-prints..

[Coyoteman]

you ever heard of the Glenn Rose, TX creation museaum and the dino prints that intersect real human foot-prints..

They are phonies.

[BobS]

What did Adam and Eve decide to do all day long there?

[celmak]

"I have no idea what that means. What data did I ignore?

You threw me when you answered post 115, I thought you were someone else.

As far as I know, Carbon-14 data is unreliable past 50,000 years. But this is not my area of expertise, Carbon-14 is more for archaeologists; I prefer biology. So since I answered your question, answer this:

Does "Lucy" fit in with the line of human evolution?

[gracesdad]

You’re the one who was making fun of other people’s education while misspelling half a dozen words yourself.

Any museum alleging that dinosaurs and men lived together on Earth is a joke.

[ASA Vet]

You may laugh until you pass out sir!

Actually the proper form of address would be Dr. Coyoteman.
Doc's also a masterful flute player, but I doubt you'll ever hear him.

[celmak]

Another good comeback, that's 2 in a ro-ro! LOL !!!

Goodnight, pleasant dreams ;)

[Reverend Bob]

Guess you forgot about that “rib-thing” then. :-)

[DiogenesTheDog]

"Book of Job speaks of the “behemoth” with “a tail like a cedar.” Sounds vaguely familiar."

The word "tail" is being used as a euphemism for phallus in this passage. "Stones" is in the original Hebrew the word for testicles, which is why in the Vulgate it's translated as "testiculorem". The word that is translated as "moveth" is chaphets which is used elsewhere to mean "pleasure" or "delight".The passage is a description of the power and virility of behemoth, which from the context is pretty clearly a hippopotamus. Not to mention the fact that the presence of a navel means that the creature being described is a placental mammal and thus not a dinosaur.

[padre35]

“But I doubt you will ever hear him”

So does that mean that he won’t be playing at the opening gala for the Creation Museum?

[IrishCatholic]

American Fundamentalism???
Oh, you mean Patriotism.
God and Country kind of stuff.
Only 120 years old? What happened in 1887 that brought all that about?