Creation Museum Reports Strong First Month Attendance

Christianpost.com ^ | July 1, 2007 | Doug Huntington

[balch3]

The controversial $27 million Creation Museum located just outside Cincinnati has made a fairly strong start, boasting 40,000 visitors since its opening on Memorial Day.

Patrons enter the Special Effects Theater for a film presentation at the $27 million Creation Museum, which depicts a literal six-day account of creation. In its first month, 40,000 people made their way to the museum.

Counting the 9,000 visitors that pre-visited the museum, which depicts a literal six-day interpretation of creation from the Bible, the founding ministry Answers in Genesis (AiG) is well on its yearly goal of 250,000 guests, already meeting one-fifth of the total target.

Organizers are excited about the faster than expected pace, and hope the turnout continues on its current trend.

“We’re very thankful that so many people are coming out,” explained Ken Ham, co-founder of AiG, in a statement. “The feedback we’ve been getting is very positive. I’m grateful to observe that people are seeing that solid science backs the Bible.”

The museum, located in Petersburg, Ky., sparked much discussion in the past months when word got out that a Genesis-themed exhibit was going to be built. Evolution is derided at the 60,000-square-foot facility, packed with high-tech exhibits designed by an acclaimed theme-park artist, animatronic dinosaurs and a huge wooden ark. In this literal biblical version of history, dinosaurs appeared on the same day God created other land animals.

The museum also contains fossils, hung in large glass cases in a room visitors spill into after taking a tour of Old Testament history.

Both non-Christians and Christians who are against a literal interpretation of the Bible on life origins planned protests and spoke out against the anti-evolution display, worried that their children would be affected. The controversy garnered the new exhibit a large amount of media coverage. Ham even thanked the protesters after its opening for helping advertise the building as well as forcing it into its current location.

“[W]e were going to build a 30,000-square-foot building [somewhere else],” explained Ham in the Cincinnati Enquirer. “[But so many protests went on], the Lord directed us to this piece of property, right on a major freeway at a major interchange. And we decided to build a far bigger building (nearly 60,000 square feet), and a far bigger vision and a far bigger impact around the world – and I just want to thank, sincerely, the local secular humanist group.”

People who have visited the museum have expressed how impressed with how well done it was. Others were happy that there was finally a science exhibit that matched their worldview of creation.

“I’ve been a Christian for many years,” said motivational speaker Zig Ziglar in a statement, “but this museum has strengthened my faith.”

AiG workers have also reported a large increase of internet traffic going into their ministry’s website as a result of the multi-million dollar construction. On its best day, the website drew over 95,000 visitors (about 300,000 “page views”), according to members.

The museum has been booked solid every Saturday this summer for tours and has reached its capacity on a number of days.

Ministry heads expect the attendance to remain fairly high since the school year is approaching, which will bring in many more from homeschool and Christian field trips to the site.

[LiteKeeper]

This thread is just the same as all the others: neither side is convincing the other...and the evolutionists among us are throwing the same old canards. What a waste of time and space!

[NucSubs]

I didn’t say anything about going. Go. Enjoy. I’m not trying to limit your right to go to the museum.

This is FREEREPUBLIC and I have an opinion, and a long track record of getting along well here and just because you disagree with my opinion on this point doesn’t mean I’m trying to stop you from going to the museum.

Go. Have fun. Really. I hope you like it.

In my opinion, though, it is pretty pathetic. And I get to say that here. I really do. Sorry about that.

Veritas. Amen. That is my view entirely.

Pathetic. Bogus. Sad. As sucinct as possible. Excellent.

But it's a free country. And I actually prefer they have there own spot for communal dissemination of their beliefs rather than pushing this onto the rest of us.

[NucSubs]

Young Earth Creationism is a pathetic fantasy.

That being said, I work in engineering with some brilliant fellow Christians who are unfortunately snared in this lie.

The point? The two most "hard-core" YECs are among the best minds I know when it comes to their jobs - which are very technical and and require fluency in electrical engineering, physics, and a slew of other areas.

This fantasy may be harmful in some ways but as an Ex-Navy Nuc who knew a whole lot of people like this it does not necessarily mean they are total incompetents or idiots.

[NucSubs]

I’d like to see a list of them.

Seriously.

[GunRunner]

Is there a chance that they feign belief in creationism to keep up appearances? Maybe they are trying to stay in good standing with their evangelical in-laws or something.

I'm sure they are good at what they do, but would you honestly want them working in other scientific fields where the age of the cosmos is important? How do they justify a young Earth while working with elements that have provably been around for millions of years?

Like Kirkwood pointed out earlier, if someone believes the universe is only 6,000 years old, how do they explain stars that are millions of light years away? They obviously wouldn't cut it in the field of astronomy.

[NucSubs]

They are true believers.

The one guy I have in mind in particular is a man of great technical understanding.

I'm just saying.

[gracesdad]

“How can we see light from so far away if we can only see 6000 light years into the past?”

Hey, well, the answer’s either in the Bible or that stuff’s all just a lie by atheist scientists.

[DoingTheFrenchMistake]

What a hoot... Early in the museum, the visitor is given advice on the proper mind frame to have for your visit: “Don’t think, just listen and believe”. Here is a link to Fun at the Creation Museum

http://crazytalk.typepad.com/bluegrassroots/2007/06/fun_at_the_crea.html

[rickdylan]

It doesn’t threaten my beliefs, but I do worry about America’s youth competing in the international world of science and technology when they’ve been taught to believe ridiculousness that says dinosaurs and humans lived together.

You might want to try doing google searches on 'dinosaurs' and 'petroglyphs'. Apparently it's more than just Christians who don't buy into the 65 million year thing with dinosaurs and, apparently also, there are obvious and recognizable images of known dinosaur types on canyon walls in many North American sites, ancient American Indian artwork.

You might also want to do google searches on 'tyrannosaur' and 'soft tissue' and take a look at some of the images of the raw meat they've found in dinosaur bones recently, e.g.

For that to be 65 million years old as the evolutionists are trying to claim, it would have to have never rained in Montana or the Dakotas for the last 65 million years.

[GunRunner]

I don't see where any scientist has changed their timelines based on the soft tissue discovery, unless they are trying to push Young Earth Creationism.

Let's see creationism explain the Cambrian explosion and the KT boundary without using "flood geology".

[ahayes]

Pop quiz:

1. How were those samples prepared?
2. What was the scale of those photographs?

[rickdylan]

Hint: They were prepared in a hell of a lot less than 65 million years.

[Bogtrotter52]

I am sure that if I were to open a museum or theme park based on the TV show Hee-Haw it would likely do equally as well.

[DocRock]

"Pop quiz:

1. How were those samples prepared?
2. What was the scale of those photographs?"

It is all in the peer reviewed article.

LINK

[ahayes]

I know, I’ve read the article. I was wondering if rickdylan knew this critical information and perhaps could explain why the scale bars were edited out of those photographs.

[ahayes]

Oh, so you don’t know? How can you claim that these samples are evidence of what you say if you don’t know how they were prepared?