The Creation Museum
EmailIf you’re passing through the Cincinnati area, and are so inclined, the new Creation Museum opens Monday, down the road in Petersburg, Kentucky. "Prepare to Believe," says the logo on its WEBSITE. "This center will equip Christians to better evangelize the lost with a sense of urgency, through a combination of exhibits, research and educational presentations that uphold the inerrancy of the Bible." The museum sets up a classic clash between the worlds of faith and science. You can read our story on it HERE. A backgrounder from the museum says, "The highly visual experience demonstrates that facts cannot speak for themselves because creation researchers and evolutionists study the same sets of evidence, including fossils, animals, stars, etc. before making an interpretation. Visitors learn that astronomy, geology, physics, biology and anthropology verify scriptural authority when one objectively studies the data." (The full text is HERE.) The American Association for the Advancement of Science says it’s concerned. It’s put out an op-ed piece from its CEO, Alan Leshner, arguing that science and religion need not conflict, but also may do a disservice when they try. "If students are to thrive in our science and technology-based world, they can’t pick and choose which scientific facts they want to accept," he writes. "In a free country, private facilities have a right to interpret Genesis or any other way of looking at the world, in any way they choose. But religious displays should not be mislabeled as science." The AAAS, which publishes the journal SCIENCE, has more HERE. It’s a complicated matter. Or, depending on your point of view, a very simple one. I’m fascinated by the comments people have been posting in reponse to our story. Here’s to a peaceful weekend.
TechBytes (02.10.12) 
Steve Jobs' FBI File: Bomb Threat? 
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
iT IS ABOUT TIME i THINK THIS IS GREAT HEY OVER 60% OF AMERICANS BELIEVE IN GOD. WHY NOT REAL SCIENTSTS why can’t they BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION. Get REAL !
Posted by: JULIE | May 25, 2007, 7:27 pm 7:27 pm
It is about time i think this is great! Hey over 60% of AMERICANS believe in GOD. Why not real scientists why can’t they believe in creationism? Get REAL!
Posted by: JULIE | May 25, 2007, 7:35 pm 7:35 pm
People are so easily fooled into thinking that something that looks like science IS science. Snake oil salesman are still at it…only they wrap themselves up in “religious” garb. Anyone who knows anything about linguistics realizes that literal interpretation of anything is just impossible…somebody is interpreting the Bible their way to come up with creationism. I’m a scientist and a Christian. I don’t rule out an “intelligent designer” but am still waiting for real proof…more than some words that have been translated & retranslated over a couple thousand years.
Posted by: Tony PhD | May 25, 2007, 8:15 pm 8:15 pm
Who is to say that God did not use “Evolution” to make man?
Posted by: Lewis | May 25, 2007, 8:19 pm 8:19 pm
Re Tony’s comment about “some words that have been translated & retranslated over a couple thousand years.” I’ve heard comments like these from time to time. As a linguist, I am mystified why translating a text into multiple languages is considered a problem. Can someone enlighten me? Is it because there have been distinct translations into a single language (like multiple translations into English)? Since the translations are (with a few interesting exceptions) more or less synonymous, that doesn’t seem problematical to me either; but maybe people expect there to be only one “correct” translation?
Posted by: Michael Maxwell | May 25, 2007, 10:37 pm 10:37 pm
Real scientists can and do believe in God.
Real scientists do not believe in creationism because it is directly contradicted by the evidence. I’ve been asking creationists to answer the same basic questions for over a decade. They remain incapable of even handling the simplest.
Creationists cannot explain fossil sorting.
Creationists cannot explain why we have a back better designed for a quadraped.
Creationists cannot explain obvious evolutionary transitions, like pandas, archaeopteryx, acanthostega, diarthognathus, etc. etc. etc.
The lies perpetrated by AIG (the money behind the creation museum) are well documented. It’s a joke.
Posted by: Michael Suttkus, II | May 26, 2007, 12:53 am 12:53 am
I was so excited to hear about this museum. God’s Word is truth, and more people need to be aware that there is way more scientific evidence to support Creation than there is to support evolution, which uses circular reasoning and false assumptions to support its theory.
To the above commenters who think that the Bible is not clear about Creation, you obviously have never read even the first sentence of the Bible if you believe that! It is very clear and specific.
See how the evolutionists argue? They assume things about the Bible, and they have never read it.
Posted by: Amy H | May 26, 2007, 12:58 am 12:58 am
Please see books on convergence of Science and Spirituality
Gaurav
Posted by: Gaurav Silwal | May 26, 2007, 3:40 am 3:40 am
those who dont believe in God or the bible will find out soon.We all have to leave here some day.It will be a shame to burn forever.
Posted by: durmott mullings | May 26, 2007, 9:21 am 9:21 am
Thanks for printing “It will be a shame to burn forever” Such outrageous blarney creates new unbelievers.
Posted by: Jeff Douthwaite | May 26, 2007, 11:31 am 11:31 am
Oh, evolutionists argue? Funny, I thought 2000 years of European Religious violence was due to Christians arguing about what the Bible is supposedly so clear about.
You do know that taking the Bible literally is the heresy of Bibliolatry, right? You could be stoned for it back in the middle ages. You see, the Catholic church, you know, the ones who put the Bible together to begin with, they know that the Bible is the word of men about God, not the word of God about men. As such, it’s fallible.
Sorry, but that’s the history of your own religion. Biblical literalism didn’t really rise until the 1700′s where it was roundly condemned by authorities from all mainstream churches, Catholic and Protestant.
It’s a modern abberation in Christianity, not a part of what it means to be Christian.
I have read the Bible. It’s quite clear about the Earth being created in six days. It’s also quite clear about the Earth being flat and held up by pillars.
I have read the Bible. I am Christian. I am not a Bibliolater.
I also have great respect for evidence and facts.
Fact: dolphins and icthyosaurs are never found in the same fossil layers.
Fact: creationists cannot even attempt to explain this.
Fact: This is barely the surface of the evidence creationists must flee from.
Here’s an article I wrote a while back on the problems fossil sorting poses for creationism. Do let me know when a creationist, any creationist, actually manages to address some of these issues:
http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Fossil_Sorting
Posted by: Michael Suttkus, II | May 26, 2007, 12:01 pm 12:01 pm
Well, Ned, so much for a peaceful weekend. That pebble you threw into the pond has not only ripples, but killer waves.
Posted by: Andy | May 26, 2007, 1:41 pm 1:41 pm
So say both are true. God Created man in his image. Man evolved from monkeys. So wouldn’t this make God a monkey?
Posted by: Ken | May 26, 2007, 11:23 pm 11:23 pm
Please report on the electric car and why america isn’t forcing to use it since it is here and it works.
Posted by: Ken 2 | May 26, 2007, 11:28 pm 11:28 pm
It seems to me that true faith can never conflict with true science and, of course, true science can never conflict with true faith; otherwise one or more principles of either is simply not true.
It also seems to me that false faith or false science will never bring forth the desired expectation which, presumably, is to determine the truth of something.
A lack of understanding in either area can be a great stumbling block if one assumes something is not true because one does not understand it.
Posted by: kevyn | May 27, 2007, 1:10 am 1:10 am
You Americans can continue blithly on your merry way while the rest of world reaps what you throw away.
Posted by: neil | May 27, 2007, 11:47 am 11:47 am
may God bless you all there is the creator and there are the one that are studying the creation the second mentioned is find it out the complex way of creation science are those who are to undo what our creator build this is more like the fish can live without watermay God continuen blessing you all.
Posted by: ruben | May 27, 2007, 2:18 pm 2:18 pm
When religious dogma is mixed with pop science, creationism results. Until such dogma can be independently verified under the scientific method, they are religious tenets and cannot claim to be scientific fact.
Posted by: chuck | May 27, 2007, 5:08 pm 5:08 pm
Think about this; Jews, Muslims and Christians, the people of the “Book,” believe that a god, created the universe, made us in his image, gave us dominion over this cute little third planet from this sun, in this lovely galaxy, and then, in just one example of his many personal explicit crimes, he purposely drowned everyone, except for the a few of the “just” that could fit in Noah’s boat. The god they believe in, from their own “book,” is a self-confessed homicidal mass murderer!
That is not what’s so alarming. More alarming is that, not only do these deluded people believe this nonsense, they actually worship the homicidal mass murderer that did this atrocity and countless others. They actually venerate him, and look forward to spending eternity “in his loving embrace.”
Unfortunately, it gets even worse. All three religions believe their “Messiah” is going to come and deal with their enemies and save them…the humorous side of this is that each of the three “religions,” and their literally thousands of sub-religions and cults, believe the other two religions, and their respective plethora of cults, are whom their “Messiah” is going to save them from…
The older I get the more I think John Lennon had it right in the 60′s when he wrote…
“Imagine there’s no Heaven
It’s easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky…
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace…
You may say that I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope someday you’ll join us
And the world will live as one.”
Posted by: Roger | May 27, 2007, 6:27 pm 6:27 pm
I am so excited about the Creation Museum. Finally, people will be given the truth about creation and science. God made the universe in six literal days. Why not believe it? Nothing is impossible for God. He could have done it in six seconds if He so desired. So many christian scientists have proved that the earth is a young planet(roughly 6500 years) and most people still want to believe an old earth THEORY that is untrue and unproven. Jesus Christ created us, saves us, sustains us, and is coming back to get us soon. God bless.
Posted by: Jonathan Harralson | May 27, 2007, 8:30 pm 8:30 pm
Jesus was very intelligent. He’d be mortified that these ideas like creationism were being put forward in his name! If he were to show up again, I don’t believe for one minute that he’d be siding with the fatties in overalls in their cornfields. He’d be over with the rest of us, discussing things intelligently, laughing and having a fine old time.
Of course, being Jesus, he wouldn’t exclude anyone. So the creationists *would* be invited over for lunch….
Posted by: C. Haviland | May 28, 2007, 8:43 am 8:43 am
I think a couple of you who think evolution is not fact need a bout of MRSA…you know, the staph bacteria that has EVOLVED to be immune to antibiotics. Of course evolution is factual science. Its happening in our midst every day. Oh, and I guess all you bible literalists keep kosher too (its an abomination to eat shellfish you know…Deuteronomy…look it up). Its easy to champion the ‘convenient’ parts isn’t it
Posted by: Scott | May 28, 2007, 1:07 pm 1:07 pm
RE: Translations.
The problem with translations is that there is often no direct equivalent. Whomever is translating has to make choices in what words to use. For instance the difference between ‘coffin’ and ‘casket’ is subtle, but very meaningful. And one runs into trouble where the meaning is everything. You could translate “The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.” to “The wine is good, but the meat is bad.” There was also a time when the translators did everything by hand and many many errors were introduced. In some case they were not allowed to fix the errors because it was the “will of God” to have it changed. So, did Moses part the Sea of Red, or the Sea of Reed?
Posted by: Tony | June 5, 2007, 11:31 am 11:31 am
This museum has put it all together, now lets stop brain washing kids and return to critical thinking to the science class.
As a retired science educater and former evolutionist, the facts of The Burgess shale discoveries, have caused many scientists to discover evolutions total lack of emperical evidence and support integrity into the mix by leaving this fallacy. The fact that no fossil links have been found also kills this notion.
Lets be honest, why do the continued press headlines keep saying,,”missing link discovered” over the last fifty years? If discovered, there would be no need to say these words, it would have been settled long ago.
Posted by: Fred | June 5, 2007, 11:28 pm 11:28 pm
The Burgess shale has convinced nobody that there is any problems with evolution. It’s actually strong support for evolution and common descent.
as for “missing” links:
Amphicyon links dogs and bears. Ambulocetus links whales with terrestrial forms, diarthognathus links mammals with reptiles (as do about a hundred other fossil species, it’s one of the best documented fossil transitions), acanthostega links fish and amphibians, some Burgess shale species (I forget the name right off) links vertebrates and invertebrates nicely. Want more? We have literally millions. Diadactes links amphibians and reptiles. Archaeopteryx links birds and dinosaurs. The thecodonts link dinosaurs with reptiles.
The really fun one is humans and apes. Creationists insist there are no missing links. Ever fossil is either “obviously” an ape or “obviously” human. Unfortunately for them, they can’t tell which fossils are “obviously” which.
Look at the chart on this page:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/compare.html
The creationist can’t tell which fossils are “obviously” which. They all maintain it’s obvious, but they obviously don’t have a clue. If it was so obvious, wouldn’t they agree?
The only thing obvious is that the fossils are mixtures, between human and ape.
Want more transitions? Here are a few hundred:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html
It’s hardly complete, though. We find more every day. The “gaps” get smaller all the time.
It won’t bother creationists, though. They will continue to pretend we’ve never found a “missing” link. Science will march on, though, finding what they pretend doesn’t exist every day.
I’m still waiting for even one explanation of creationist fossil sorting. How did flowering plants make it to the top of the fossil record again? Any creationist want to answer this one? We’ve only been asking it for 200 years, let us know when you’re ready to work on it…
Posted by: Michael Suttkus, II | June 6, 2007, 8:31 am 8:31 am
Read the great American theolgian Paul Tillich. He has some great writing on the fact that science and faith are two separate rhelms of knowing and to properly “do” either it is best not to try and resolve them with repsect to each other. I also like the rhetoric of 2004 Nobel Peace Prize Winner, Wangari Maathai, a scientist and a Christian who says “God gave us five senses and a brain. What ever we can figure out with those should not be left to matters of faith.” Please, America, let us not make this a political issue this year.
Posted by: Wil | February 20, 2008, 12:55 am 12:55 am