Tamaki Sato was confused by the dinosaur exhibit. The placards described the various dinosaurs as originating from different geological periods — the stegosaurus from the Upper Jurassic, the heterodontosaurus from the Lower Jurassic, the velociraptor from the Upper Cretaceous — yet in each case, the date of demise was the same: around 2348 B.C.
“I was just curious why,” said Dr. Sato, a professor of geology from Tokyo Gakugei University in Japan.
For paleontologists like Dr. Sato, layers of bedrock represent an accumulation over hundreds of millions of years, and the Lower Jurassic is much older than the Upper Cretaceous.
But here in the Creation Museum in northern Kentucky, Earth and the universe are just over 6,000 years old, created in six days by God. The museum preaches, “Same facts, different conclusions” and is unequivocal in viewing paleontological and geological data in light of a literal reading of the Bible.
The only problem with the above statement is that if the "same facts" lead to "different conclusions", then at least one of the conclusions is wrong.
Science does not "agree to disagree" they are looking for truth. And they will battle it out in scientific journals until one theory, having been tested and researched by many other scientists, emerges as the most valid. Then if new evidence is introduced which questions the validity of the theory, the whole process happens again.
That is how science works. So how is it possible that the so called "scientists" in the Creation Museum could come to such unscientific conclusions?
Near the entrance to the exhibits is an animatronic display that includes a girl feeding a carrot to a squirrel as two dinosaurs stand nearby, a stark departure from natural history museums that say the first humans lived 65 million years after the last dinosaurs.
“I’m speechless,” said Derek E.G. Briggs, director of the Peabody Museum of Natural History at Yale, who walked around with crossed arms and a grimace. “It’s rather scary.”
Dr. Mortenson and others at the museum say they look at the same rocks and fossils as the visiting scientists, but because of different starting assumptions they arrive at different answers. For example, they say the biblical flood set off huge turmoil inside the Earth that broke apart the continents and pushed them to their current locations, not that the continents have moved over a few billion years.
“Everyone has presuppositions what they will consider, what questions they will ask,” said Dr. Mortenson, who holds a doctorate in the history of geology from Coventry University in England. “The very first two rooms of our museum talk about this issue of starting points and assumptions. We will very strongly contest an evolutionist position that they are letting facts speak for themselves.”
The portions in bold are the underlying problem with how creationists approach "science" and how real scientists approach it.
Creationists are looking for evidence to back up their faith. And if they do not find it, they bend the perception of what they do find in a desperate attempt to make it fit what they WANT to believe.
By contrast scientists are looking for truth. They study the evidence and try to understand what it says without built in prejudice. They may start out accepting the prevailing theory, but if the evidence does not ultimately support it then the theory is challenged and eventually changed.
Science is filled with stories of new scientists looking at old bones found in the drawer of a museum and making new discoveries due to the fact that science had moved forward. New human ancestors have been discovered in this manner. Through further research and a better understanding the perception of dinosaurs has evolved from slow moving cold blooded giant reptiles into the fleet footed precursors of modern birds. In the same manner Evolution has been modified and re-modified a dozen or more times.
Science remains fluid, and responsive to new information and fresh eyes.
That is in stark contrast to the point of view stated by these creationist "scientists". How do they deal with information that disproves their assumptions? They refuse to accept it. How do they deal with people who argue with their point of view? They dismiss them as being a "pagan" or a "non-Christian". That is not how science functions.
Look personally I don't care what religion you believe in, or what you study in church. But parents bring their young children to this "museum" to learn about their version of "science". I am sorry but in my opinion that is a form of child abuse.
But what did the paleontologists think of the museum?
Many of the paleontologists thought the museum misrepresented and ridiculed them and their work and unfairly blamed them for the ills of society.
“I think they should rename the museum — not the Creation Museum, but the Confusion Museum,” said Lisa E. Park, a professor of paleontology at the University of Akron.
“Unfortunately, they do it knowingly,” Dr. Park said. “I was dismayed. As a Christian, I was dismayed.”
It never ceases to amaze me how the religious cults indoctrinate the young with this kind of garbage. They want to keep their flock stupid so as to continue to have a flock. That worked for hundreds of years, but unfortunately for the power-mongering control institutions calling themselves “religions”, the 21st century internet is a vast source of information to prove them wrong. Unless, of course, their only search on the internet is limited to Faux Noise and C4P.
ReplyDeleteOT, Gryphen, but I'd like to suggest you run a post on Sarah's involvement with the AIP. The current release of emails is stirring up interest in something that was overlooked during the campaign. And I think it would be useful to contrast her blatant lie with the truth. This was such a spoiled little girl lie, it really shows her for what she is.
ReplyDeleteOK, Grypen, for once I have to disagree with you just a little.
ReplyDeleteYour view of how real scientists operate is a bit idealistic I'm afraid. In fact, I've come to the conclusion that people have made a huge mistake in thinking that religion or the church was the problem in stopping the progress of science. Instead, it is human nature and the rigidity of institutions of power that stop science. It just so happens that in the recent past, religion was that sort of power.
Now, secular and so-called scientific institutions have that power, and they are behaving in many ways just like the church of old. They are ruining careers and ridiculing scientists who don't agree with the status quo, they use name calling instead of addressing the issues (just like Sarahpac people!) and they have this thing called "peer review" which has become a power corruption in itself. The way peer review works, is that unless your paper already agrees with what the peers accept your paper is considered crackpot. It has been said that Einstein's relativity theory would never pass peer review today.
Of course the 6-day creationist people who need to validate a scripture are not seeking objective truth, but neither are the materialist Darwinists. They too have a metaphysical position to uphold.
The only ones behaving rationally and talking about the scientific issues and thoser issues alone are the Intelligent Design people.
My husband and I watched Bill Maher's Religulous last week and he vists the Creation Museum. If you haven't watched that movie yet, you should. It is both funny and scary. Really eye-opening.
ReplyDeleteFolks, it's KENTUCKY. You have to actually travel around here and get a first hand look at the people who believe this BS. In a state where we still have snake-handling churches, what do you expect?
ReplyDeleteI have some wingnut hyperChristians in my own family, and there are a few in our neighborhood--it's like mental illness. They can barely even say hello without mentioning they're on their way to Bible study. Christian churches here in Lexington also distribute flyers in our public elementary school, which the school district got complaints about last year.
In addition, I know parents here who supported Bush and the Iraq War "because this is aMERica!", liked Sarah Palin "because she has kids!", and told their kids that America would be "destroyed" if a black man became president. Kentucky is definitely not the deepest educational pool!!
Good stuff Gryphen and what a time there is to be had if you can get one of these '6000 year old earthers' going on it. Some will just not relent on their silly beliefs and the twisting and turning in the wind they will go through is divine comedy at it's best.
ReplyDeleteWhat's really interesting though is that it's mostly Americans by far that subscribe to this kind of nonsense. What powerful force has been successful in keeping it going in the U.S. while other first world countries have moved on long ago? Is it perhaps the same kind of force which is so powerful in skewing U.S. politics?
So a really honest question: Are these southerners just stupid people or is it a matter of what they learned from their parents when they were at their most formative childhood years? I'm pretty sure the answer has got to be the latter.
Perhaps my new psych friend Casey will be able to comment on this? IMO it's a matter of the church being able to leash the tremendous power that can be used to manipulate children in order to keep the money rolling in.
How sad that such a museum would even exist in the 21st. century. Child abuse? No,it's a new unnamed form of mental illness which should be called religion.
All you need to know about Sarah Palin is that she agrees with the Creationists that Earth and the universe are only 6,000 years old.
ReplyDeleteThat automatically discredits EVERYTHING she says, does or thinks. Everything.
That "museum" is funny and sad and frightening all at the same time. People who believe this stuff are completely unable to deal with reality. And quite frankly, I think their lives should be put into receivership.
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree with onething that because science is done by humans it is often subject to agendas and assumptions, there are many scientists who manage to maintain a reasonable level of objectivity and follow the guidelines of scientific reasoning and multiple working hypotheses. Nothing human is completely objective, but to make a direct comparison between the agenda-based creationists and the flawed scientific community does an extreme disservice to the many thousands of scientists throughout our human history who focused on facts, data, and scientific method, even if it cost them greatly. Science is NOT about truth. It is about data and reasonable, verifiable interpretations of those facts. It is ALWAYS subject to modification based on new information. That CANNOT be said of the creationist/intelligent design crap.
ReplyDeleteGryphen - Please visit this site http://paralleldivergence.com/2007/04/28/creation-museum-madness/
ReplyDeleteand watch the youtube video halfway down the page. This is actually happening. These are the Evangelical Redneck Republicans who support your governor - and why she scares the crap out me all the way over here in Australia..
footnote: my father-in-law and Ken Ham's mother are in their 80's, have been friends for more than 50 years and speak on the phone every day. Every - day. I spend a good hour each fortnight undoing the garbage she puts in his head and discouraging him from wanting to contribute to her son's outrageous and costly cause.
Have a good look at this video clip. This is what a fair portion of American children are being exposed to instead of state curriculum.
lol@ SarahQ...how would I know the answer to that? I am just as baffled by it living in my remote northern town. We have a couple of employees are sure the "end times" are coming. One is a JW and one is a pentecostal. They often don't like what I have to say to them, but at least they are polite about it.
ReplyDeleteWe drew the line a while back, and they are not permitted to "preach" while at work.
Personally, I think it is indoctrination of the young. That doesn't explain the folks who grow up and become born again. I am sure they were taught the science all thier lives, but some are quite willing to toss that out the window now, and agree that the world is only 6000 years old.
Just wow,
ReplyDeleteNo, it just makes Sarah Palin a whackjob who is unfit for political office. These mofos also believe that oil is being made underground as we speak by god at the same rate at which it is being removed from the ground. The oil simply can't be any older than 6000 years of course. Governing anybody anywhere under those assumptions would just simply be dangerous and insane. And that's not even taking into account her beliefs in witchcraft!
Thanks Casey, you've answered my question I think. As for the born againers, did they not get the religion stuff forced down their throats when they were children? I think they had to be indoctrinated. Are any of the born againers intelligent people with IQ's of say over 120? That I would like to know but I'm suspecting that if they are then they received the indoctrination in their formative years which is just too powerful to escape. It's human nature Casey and that's why I thought a psycologist would be more outspoken on the question.
ReplyDelete@sarahQ...some of the folks I mentioned never went to church as children....some even when to prominent universtities....some even grew up in homes where religion was not looked at favourably...so I too, get confused by it.
ReplyDeleteI think personally, once one becomes involved with a church that has cult like attributes...the person in question takes the ideas on as gospel. In my experience these people are lacking something, and looking for an answer to their fears...and to their questions.
It seems to take the onus off of them to do their own thinking and they become parrots. The church becomes their family. I have had clients who live like this....and they have even hidden the fact that they see someone, because it feels blasphemous to seek help outside of the church.
For "real" christians out there....I hope you realize I do not mean you. I am talking about the type such as Palin. I have had a sneaking suspician in the last while, that Palin uses her theocracy to further her ambitions. Considering her resignation today....I will be watching to see how that turns out.
Laurie
womanwith saradinecan said,
ReplyDeleteOh, wait, what's up with not being able to copy and paste on this site?
Ok, I'll make do. How can science not be about truth just because it is about facts and reasonable interpretation of those facts? That is not incompatible with truth. Perhaps you really mean belief.
Yes, it should be subject to modification. In my opinion, the discoveries of the past few decades in biology require a big change in the interpretation of facts - but the Darwinists refuse against all evidence, and will continue to refuse until they finally look as ridiculous as the Catholic Church once did. That's what I'm saying - I look at it from a human nature standpoint, and this is what I see. Behaviors the same, different cloak.
You say creationist/intelligent design crap. See, the Other Side presents this as a kind of propaganda. They want you to dismiss intelligent design as being on a par with creationism so that you won't look into their arguments. Again, refusal to engage the actual arguments is the tip off that something is wrong.
I think that intelligent design is the most reasonable interpretation of facts, and it is not the same as creationism.
By the way, I just happen to be interested in alternative science, and I think that this problem is by no means confined to the evolution debate. Those who find evidence against Big Bang are also squelched, no matter their credentials or arguments.
onething, there is no "alternative science". The alternative to science is ignorance.
ReplyDelete"Alternative science" means ideas that aren't good enough to pass the muster of actual science