A trip to the creation museum

**cigaretteman** · 06-08-2007, 10:11 PM

http://arstechnica.com/articles/cult...ion-museum.ars

**william** · 06-08-2007, 10:52 PM

How can you not believe in evolution after reading that stuff?

**jdoggivjc** · 06-09-2007, 12:51 AM

Well, the quality of that article is good enough to show up in a Sunday section of the Rag. Completely unobjective. The tone would be similar if Dr. James Dobson went into an Evolution museum (or if Wesley went into a global warming museum

) If we're not allowed to quote FoxNews on this site, it should go the other way as well...

**KP44** · 06-09-2007, 08:19 AM

This article is written from an incredibly biased perspective...honestly, how silly is the idea that you and I came from monkeys? Is that really a viable explanation of how we got here? Which takes more faith...the belief there is a Creator or that we morphed into being from the likes of a single organism via a monkey among others?

**brianhos** · 06-09-2007, 08:48 AM

Originally Posted by KP44

This article is written from an incredibly biased perspective...honestly, how silly is the idea that you and I came from monkeys? Is that really a viable explanation of how we got here? Which takes more faith...the belief there is a Creator or that we morphed into being from the likes of a single organism via a monkey among others?

Not that silly actually. We did not come from monkeys but evolved from the same descendants.

**everyyard** · 06-09-2007, 08:49 AM

that museum is just plain silly. I am all about people having their faith and whatever but that is just utter blindness to the evidence that is out there. Whether you believe chimps and man evolved from a common ancestor or not there is nothing out there to support the earth being only 6000 years old or that man could ever have coexisted with dinosaurs. You have to have anti-faith in our ability to carbon date objects and also how do you explain the fact that we are seeing stars far enough away that their light would not even have arrived here on earth in 6000 years. It really makes me laugh. I mean if there is one indisputable truth it is physics and the speed of light is not an opinion.

**CyinCo** · 06-09-2007, 09:03 AM

Yes, brilliant. The earth is actually only 6000 years old. But the lord, in all his wisdom, wanted it to look older an like it had been around before man was put there, so he created a fake fossil record millions and millions of years old with evidence the the planet is actually 4.5 Billion years old. Why? Just because the lord must have been bored. You know, he didn't have playstation like we do. So that is what he did with his free time before creating man 6000 years ago is spend time creating all this fake history. Think of it as a hobby. Oh, yeah. And dinosaurs were on Noah's Ark. Forget the fact that if you actually kept two of EVERY species on the planent that in order to repopulate those species, some serious incestual things would need to take place.

So here is how I sum this up. Creationism sounds Crazy. Evolution is a scientific theory with a whole lot of evidence to back it.

How could we evolve? Simple, it takes millions of years of adaptation.

How could the earth be 6000 years old? I have no fricken idea.

**ornryactor** · 06-09-2007, 09:25 AM

Originally Posted by CyinCo

Yes, brilliant. The earth is actually only 6000 years old. But the lord, in all his wisdom, wanted it to look older an like it had been around before man was put there, so he created a fake fossil record millions and millions of years old with evidence the the planet is actually 4.5 Billion years old. Why? Just because the lord must have been bored. You know, he didn't have playstation like we do. So that is what he did with his free time before creating man 6000 years ago is spend time creating all this fake history. Think of it as a hobby. Oh, yeah. And dinosaurs were on Noah's Ark. Forget the fact that if you actually kept two of EVERY species on the planent that in order to repopulate those species, some series incestual things would need to take place.

So here is how I sum this up. Creationism sounds Crazy. Evolution is a scientific theory with a whole lot of evidence to back it.

How could we evolve? Simple, it takes millions of years of adaptation.

How could the earth be 6000 years old? I have no fricken idea.

Oh dear. I think you really need to read this thread top to bottom:

http://www.cyclonefanatic.com/forum/...-gonzalez.html

**everyyard** · 06-09-2007, 11:03 AM

People that doubt evolution need to look no further than antibiotic resistance which is modern day microevolution of bacteria changing their ability to protect themselves from drugs that would have killed them a few generations back. If there is no evolution then I guess it is God's will the bacteria become resistant or it is a conscious choice made by the bacteria. A million years is a very long time and I don't doubt that very slowly over that time man evolved from a common ancestor of other primates. I doubt the handful of skulls that have been found that are neither modern man nor ape are just treasures placed here by god to throw us of track and prove who the true believers are.

**brianhos** · 06-09-2007, 11:30 AM

Originally Posted by everyyard

People that doubt evolution need to look no further than antibiotic resistance which is modern day microevolution of bacteria changing their ability to protect themselves from drugs that would have killed them a few generations back. If there is no evolution then I guess it is God's will the bacteria become resistant or it is a conscious choice made by the bacteria. A million years is a very long time and I don't doubt that very slowly over that time man evolved from a common ancestor of other primates. I doubt the handful of skulls that have been found that are neither modern man nor ape are just treasures placed here by god to throw us of track and prove who the true believers are.

God is smiting us with antibiotic resistantant bacteria because of Gay Marriage and Hawkeye athletics. I read it on the intraweb so it must be true!

**Cyclone62** · 06-09-2007, 11:31 AM

That was one of the funniest things I have ever read. The poisonous frogs quip was priceless.

I thought it was because of the lack of poisonous mites in their diet, but there you go.

And jdogg, I think his biggest qualm with the museum was the way it changed everything we know about fossil records to fit with it's propoganda. Dinosaurs were all vegetarians? Right, let's discount their razor sharp teeth for tearing flesh. That, and that fossil records show dinosaurs existed many millenia before the first humanoid skulls? How does that go along with dinosaurs and man coexisting?

**brianhos** · 06-09-2007, 11:33 AM

Originally Posted by Cyclone62

How does that go along with dinosaurs and man coexisting?

God, much like Mark Furman is planting false evidence to throw us off track.

**jdoggivjc** · 06-09-2007, 12:11 PM

Originally Posted by everyyard

People that doubt evolution need to look no further than antibiotic resistance which is modern day microevolution of bacteria changing their ability to protect themselves from drugs that would have killed them a few generations back. If there is no evolution then I guess it is God's will the bacteria become resistant or it is a conscious choice made by the bacteria. A million years is a very long time and I don't doubt that very slowly over that time man evolved from a common ancestor of other primates. I doubt the handful of skulls that have been found that are neither modern man nor ape are just treasures placed here by god to throw us of track and prove who the true believers are.

microevolution, what you are explaining, is a scientific fact (and it's why I think the museum is "quacky," even though I believe in Creationism). macroevolution, which is what is being discussed in this thread, is only a theory and is no more provable than Creationism. The reason why I don't like the museum is not because I don't believe in Creationism, but because it discounts microevolution.

**brianhos** · 06-09-2007, 12:28 PM

Originally Posted by jdoggivjc

microevolution, what you are explaining, is a scientific fact (and it's why I think the museum is "quacky," even though I believe in Creationism). macroevolution, which is what is being discussed in this thread, is only a theory and is no more provable than Creationism. The reason why I don't like the museum is not because I don't believe in Creationism, but because it discounts microevolution.

So wait, what? You believe in micro evolution but not macro? We are talking about these changes over billions of years. Many many micro changes compounded together make 1 big change.

**AirWalke** · 06-09-2007, 12:30 PM

Is it too hard to believe for creationists, considering God's immense scale, that a year to Him could be millenia to us?

I've heard creationists argue that dinosaur fossils were placed there by God as a test, so it seemed odd to me that this museum is actually suggesting dinosaurs and humans lived at the same time.

As a christian, I fully believe in evolution. Just because something is tainted with scientific reasoning doesn't mean it can't be applied to faith. Rather than being insulted that we all descended from single celled organisms, I believe it should be something to be in awe at. To me, it proves that God exists, because how can you create life where there is none?