Mark
Posted on 05/26/2007 4:48:47 PM PDT by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
real science is not on the side of evolution. It is still only a theory.
My guess is they were all infants so it wasn't a big deal.
I do not know what you believe, but I can pretty much know what you beleive if you answer the following question:
When does human life begin and when is it entitled to life?
You may laugh until you pass out sir!
” You are the perfect example of the problem we have with kids coming out of public schools:
You can write something and they can’t read it...”
You’re the one who wrote that natural science museums are ‘fiction,’ but the wold depicted in The Flintstones was ‘real.’
What do think a theory is?
Does a theory grow up to be a law, or does increasing evidence "prove" a theory? Is a theory just a guess? An hypothesis? (Answer: none of the above.)
Read the definitions of scientific terms on my FR home page and maybe your comments will be more informed in the future.
This sounds like a pretty dumb idea to me.
Public school, can't even hit spell check. LOL!
It’s an ambiguous question. I personally believe life begins at conception and that’s an interest the state can take a role in from that point. They are entitled to life from the point of conception.
Though I can see how a person can rationally look at the situation and come to a different conclusion - saying that life, and the entitlement to life, begins upon birth.
It’s ambiguous and a person can come to either conclusion rationally. The more dogged advocates on either side are driven by emotion, and can’t clearly see the point the other side is trying to make.
Mark
“Public school, can’t even hit spell check. LOL!”
World.
Typographical error. You picked on a finger slipping because responding to the point - that you believe that the WORLD represented by the Flintstones is real... but that Natural Science museums are all all fiction. I guess it’s even embarrassing to you.
My parents couldn’t afford to send me to private school. Maybe you went to one, but you obviously learned nothing there of either science or tact.
Flintstones... Meet the Flintstones... They’re the modern stone-age YEC family....
real science is not on the side of evolution. It is still only a theory.
So is gravity. Maybe someone on this thread can point zwerni towards the comprehensive definition of terms that some helpful person used to post on crevo threads?
Public school Evo comeback. Yawn...
The question is direct, and so should be the answer; there is no ambiguity. And how can one rationalize not giving the right to life to a baby?
From your first comment:
Juat in case nobody posted it.
From post your #12:
Your right, those Evo's are pretty emotional:
From your post #43:
...I can pretty much know what you beleive if you answer the following question:
Now, what was that you were saying about public schools?
It’s ambiguous enough that people can come to either conclusion rationally. If you simply can’t see that, you illustrate my point.
and I thought I was a cynical realist ! ha. Good points.
Read post 53. Goodbye (if you can).
Good open minded tolerant viewpoint you have there!
cute write up too.
thank God for America.
I am heartened by the many voices of reason here.
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.