Creation Museum Visitor's Guide
(→Dinosaurs and humanity?) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | The '''Creation Museum''' is a travesty created by creationist Ken Hamm in order to propound the idea that the earth is only a few thousand years old, and that the | + | The '''Creation Museum''' is a travesty created by creationist Ken Hamm in order to propound the idea that the earth is only a few thousand years old, and that the Biblical stories of Eden and the Flood are not just "history" but "science". |
It was strategically located so that a large number of Americans live within a day's drive of its appalling magnetic center. | It was strategically located so that a large number of Americans live within a day's drive of its appalling magnetic center. | ||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
== Tilting at windmills == | == Tilting at windmills == | ||
| − | The Spanish writer Cervantes described, in his famous ''Don Quixote''<ref>Pronounced "Don Kee-Hote-Ey".</ref>, a Spanish would-be knight who tilted ("jousted") against windmills, imagining them to be larger-than-life enemies. To quote another author<ref>One of the contributors to the wiki also known as "William Shakespeare".</ref>, these small skirmishes were "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." Quixote's struggle against an imagined enemy, in fact, | + | The Spanish writer Cervantes described, in his famous ''Don Quixote''<ref>Pronounced "Don Kee-Hote-Ey".</ref>, a Spanish would-be knight who tilted ("jousted") against windmills, imagining them to be larger-than-life enemies. To quote another author<ref>One of the contributors to the wiki also known as "William Shakespeare".</ref>, these small skirmishes were "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." Quixote's struggle against an imagined enemy, in fact, much resembles the current "attack" on science posed by institutions like "Answers in Genesis", and the Creation Museum: perceiving harmless science to be a deadly threat to faith, many men and women have spent far too much time striking out at evolution, never imagining that the creationism/evolution "controversy" is actually based on misconceptions about the nature of science, coupled with a healthy dose of willful blindness and cognitive dissonance. The construct of "Evolution" - so imposing and deadly in the minds of many - is in fact no more harmful to religion than Quixote's windmills were to him. |
| − | This Visitor's Guide will allow you to separate the spin from the truth, so you can understand what the "controversy" is ''really'' about. Along the way, you will learn the truth about | + | This Visitor's Guide will allow you to separate the spin from the truth, so you can understand what the "controversy" is ''really'' about. Along the way, you will learn the truth about evolutionary biology, and its ramifications in the world. A preview: they are not so frightening, but they are vitally important to understand. |
== Science and religions: eternally opposed? == | == Science and religions: eternally opposed? == | ||
[[Science]] is a method of determining things we can know with ever-increasing certainty about the world around us. Science's successes have led to the reduction in debilitating illnesses, awesome feats such as putting a mermaid on the moon, and modern weather forecasting. | [[Science]] is a method of determining things we can know with ever-increasing certainty about the world around us. Science's successes have led to the reduction in debilitating illnesses, awesome feats such as putting a mermaid on the moon, and modern weather forecasting. | ||
| − | [[Religion]]s are systematic | + | [[Religion]]s are systematic revelations about what we can't know about the world we live in. Inasmuch as they don't contradict what science has shown to be facts, they can enlighten us about many eternal questions that will probably always lie beyond our ability to finally answer. |
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
== The theory of evolution: what does it not say? == | == The theory of evolution: what does it not say? == | ||
| Line 31: | Line 35: | ||
| − | + | So, you see, science is just common sense and a little trust in God's honesty, and once you've got that, it's easy to see that the evidence all points to dinosaurs being millions of years older than us, and humans never having walked with ''Tyrannosaurus rex'' except in the movies. | |
=== Common descent === | === Common descent === | ||
Revision as of 10:32, 5 May 2008
The Creation Museum is a travesty created by creationist Ken Hamm in order to propound the idea that the earth is only a few thousand years old, and that the Biblical stories of Eden and the Flood are not just "history" but "science".
It was strategically located so that a large number of Americans live within a day's drive of its appalling magnetic center.
Contents |
Tilting at windmills
The Spanish writer Cervantes described, in his famous Don Quixote[1], a Spanish would-be knight who tilted ("jousted") against windmills, imagining them to be larger-than-life enemies. To quote another author[2], these small skirmishes were "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." Quixote's struggle against an imagined enemy, in fact, much resembles the current "attack" on science posed by institutions like "Answers in Genesis", and the Creation Museum: perceiving harmless science to be a deadly threat to faith, many men and women have spent far too much time striking out at evolution, never imagining that the creationism/evolution "controversy" is actually based on misconceptions about the nature of science, coupled with a healthy dose of willful blindness and cognitive dissonance. The construct of "Evolution" - so imposing and deadly in the minds of many - is in fact no more harmful to religion than Quixote's windmills were to him.
This Visitor's Guide will allow you to separate the spin from the truth, so you can understand what the "controversy" is really about. Along the way, you will learn the truth about evolutionary biology, and its ramifications in the world. A preview: they are not so frightening, but they are vitally important to understand.
Science and religions: eternally opposed?
Science is a method of determining things we can know with ever-increasing certainty about the world around us. Science's successes have led to the reduction in debilitating illnesses, awesome feats such as putting a mermaid on the moon, and modern weather forecasting.
Religions are systematic revelations about what we can't know about the world we live in. Inasmuch as they don't contradict what science has shown to be facts, they can enlighten us about many eternal questions that will probably always lie beyond our ability to finally answer.
The theory of evolution: what does it not say?
Men and women of principle often object to the theory of evolution on the grounds that, in their minds, it implies consequences that are simply intellectually unforgivable. In the 2008 presidential season, former candidate Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) wrote an impassioned letter to the New York Times, explaining his objections to the theory, and saying, "I am wary of any theory that seeks to undermine man’s essential dignity and unique and intended place in the cosmos." People like Senator Brownback think that, if mankind was not "specially created," but is rather the result of a unique and eons-long process, which exhibits the cardinal sin of "materialism," humanity is somehow deprived of its grandeur.
To scientists, this seems a little ridiculous. Everyone likes the underdog, the little engine that could. Evolution's a little like that. Life starts, somehow, on a poisonous and inhospitable planet, and over billions of years, through cooperation, competition, hard work and diligence, it arrives at all the wondrous forms we see today, remaking the world to suit as it went. Evolution says we got here the hard way, didn't bilk off our Father, but rather made our own way in life until we got to the point where He could tell us how proud He was, and we'd be able to understand.
The theory of evolution: what does it say?
TMT seems good here...
- Talk about how it's falsifiable, and the best science.
- Explain the macro/micro distinction-without-a-difference.
- Explain how puncuated equilibria/etc. aren't really the big deals that other make them out to be.
Dinosaurs and humanity?
- Missed by millions of years, explain carbon dating, fossil strata, etc.
- Strata
So, you see, science is just common sense and a little trust in God's honesty, and once you've got that, it's easy to see that the evidence all points to dinosaurs being millions of years older than us, and humans never having walked with Tyrannosaurus rex except in the movies.
Common descent
- Explain how it actually works.
DNA and evolution
- Explain how DNA testing, and tracing, backs up evolution.
Specific argument rebuttals
A clue: Mt. St. Helens
"A clue:Mount St. Helens" is the name of a panel in the Creation Museum that uses Mount St. Helens to present arguments for a global flood.
Item number two on the panel reads "when 11 years old, a new lava dome dates greater than 350,000 years old by potassium-argon (K-Ar) dating.", in 1997 Steve Austin collected samples known to be 11 years old from the dome of Mt. Saint Helens and submitted them to a radiometric dating lab which told them the samples were 340,000 - 2,800,000 years old. This would appear at first to be a serious challenge to radiometric dating but in truth is entirely ficticious.
To start with, the dating method Austin used, K-Ar, was entirely misapplied. K-Ar dating is not accurate on recently formed materials, it takes many thousand years for the isotope abundance to build up to measurable levels. Austin also had the dating performed by a lab whose equipment was not accurate enough to analyze samples less then two million years in age, at the time of dating a footnote on their website read "We cannot analyze samples expected to be younger than 2 M.Y.". When a 11 year old sample was dated using a method that is not accurate under a few thousand years by a lab that admitted their equipment would only work on samples greater then 2 million years in age, it should be no surprise that the samples were inaccurately dated.[3] For more discussion see the article on this subject by Kevin R. Henke, Ph.D. here.
References and notes
- ↑ Pronounced "Don Kee-Hote-Ey".
- ↑ One of the contributors to the wiki also known as "William Shakespeare".
- ↑ Young-Earth Creationist 'Dating' of a Mt. St. Helens Dacite: The Failure of Austin and Swenson to Recognize Obviously Ancient Minerals