Digg Townhall now online!
Check out the latest Digg Townhall, where Kevin and Jay answered the top questions from the Digg Community!
'B.C. stands for Biblically Correct': Scary Museum Tour
dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.c… — The tour begins in the Denver Museum of Nature and Science beneath the skeleton of a Tyrannosaurus Rex. These home-schooled Christian kids are being told by guides that the museum's evolution and dinosaur exhibits have it wrong.
tomboy501- 105 diggs
- digg it
- mali1, on 03/27/2008, -3/+4God, please protect us from these people.
kthxbye. - angusm, on 03/27/2008, -3/+4God: "Honestly. These people embarrass Me too. The worst part is that I have to let these jackasses into Heaven. You only have to put up with them for seventy years or so, but I have them hanging around the place for all eternity. If I didn't have Darwin and Feynman to hang out with, I think I'd go insane."
- tehbored, on 03/27/2008, -3/+6Oh this is just sick. I mean being a creationist idiot is one thing, but indoctrinating children with your idiocy, that's just sickening.
- EatingPie, on 03/27/2008, -3/+5These guys are Young Earth Creationists. They are actually a fringe within Creationism. They believe that the earth is something like 5000 years old, which is not a widely held belief even among Creationists.
Also the Bible never says nary a word about dinosaurs. Not one. These guys claim that "Adam & Eve walked with dinosaurs," and in doing so they misrepresent the Bible itself. (This is beside the fact that trying to use the Bible as a science book is a misuse anyway.)
Not a legitimate source of science. Not a legitimate source of the Bible. They just lose all around.
-Pie - jumbalia, on 03/28/2008, -2/+6My favorite part was when the tour guide mocked the circular reasoning of evolution.
The bible is truth because it says so in the bible is truth because it says so in the bible is.... - julianwan, on 03/28/2008, -1/+2Where can I find people like this? Do I need to leave Los Angeles, my college, my club life, and happiness behind?
- chrisc3, on 03/28/2008, -3/+4My only question to evolutionists is this. If we evolved from nothingness, the notion of feelings/morality/judgment don't really mean anything do they?
Isn't death the reason why we are here? Evolution promotes death (because it helps improve the "species", whereas the bible mentions that man brought death into the world (complete opposites)
Ultimately, an evolutionist chooses to believe (and it is a belief) that all the matter in the universe either always existed or created itself.
All you digg atheists out there HATE the idea that there is something called "sin" and rules.
2 Peter 3:3 says "Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts"- aprestia, on 03/28/2008, -2/+4We didn't evolve from nothingness. We evolved from matter that has always existed. And you're right, feelings and morality don't "mean" anything. Feelings are chemical reactions in our bodies, and morality is an artificial construct. Personally, I'm quite content with that - everyone needs meaning in their lives, but I think the more pleasurable aspects of living are meaning enough for most people. Judgment, however, is a product of evolution - those creatures with the best judgment of how to survive, did survive.
And I can't even understand your convoluted notion of death enough to refute it. All I can say is evolution does not promote death, it promotes survival. I appreciate your desire to make an intelligent argument to promote your case, but I don't actually think you have a very solid understanding of science and evolution, making it difficult for you to really refute it.- chrisc3, on 03/28/2008, -3/+3You're right. I dont understand science. Lets see the irony in that. The first law of thermodynamics is often called the Law of Conservation of Energy. This law suggests that energy can be transferred from one system to another in many forms. Also, it can not be created or destroyed.....but this matter is eternal you speak of...
Not only that, but Time and Space somehow popped into existence at the same time. Because all 3 (time, space, matter) must be created simultaneously....- GT35R, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1It did not 'pop' in existence. The question you are asking are such low level physics question that it blows my mind that you think you figuered out something that others have been thinking about. Matter did not really pop in existennce the way you describe. Part of the big bang theory's explaination for the universes origin is that it is a result of rapid expantion of high dense matter at one point?
Whats your explanation for the formation of the universe? Genesis 1?
- GT35R, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1It did not 'pop' in existence. The question you are asking are such low level physics question that it blows my mind that you think you figuered out something that others have been thinking about. Matter did not really pop in existennce the way you describe. Part of the big bang theory's explaination for the universes origin is that it is a result of rapid expantion of high dense matter at one point?
- MisteryMeat, on 03/28/2008, -2/+3If you must believe that everything has a maker then who created God?
- JimmySpaza, on 03/28/2008, -3/+2Everything that begins to exist has a maker. God has always existed. Ergo, God needs no maker. It's one of those faith things. Most of the time, God gives us scientifically-verifiable reasons to believe in Him. Sometimes, however, there are aspects of His existence which are entirely supernatural and scientifically unverifiable. This always-existing thing is one of them.
- MisteryMeat, on 03/28/2008, -1/+4Scientifically verifiable reasons? Such as? Everything you think you know about God comes from a book full of inaccuracies and contradictions.
- JimmySpaza, on 03/29/2008, -2/+1What inaccuracies and contradictions?
I know all the supposed problems with the Bible. Been there, done that. You are incorrect. But, please, try your best. Go ahead. - ElWizardo, on 03/30/2008, -0/+3As long as you are aware they are there. Whether you gloss over them or ignore them is your business.
- JimmySpaza, on 03/29/2008, -2/+1What inaccuracies and contradictions?
- chrisc3, on 03/28/2008, -3/+3You're right. I dont understand science. Lets see the irony in that. The first law of thermodynamics is often called the Law of Conservation of Energy. This law suggests that energy can be transferred from one system to another in many forms. Also, it can not be created or destroyed.....but this matter is eternal you speak of...
- Terr01, on 03/28/2008, -3/+1"My only question to evolutionists is this. If we evolved from nothingness, the notion of feelings/morality/judgment don't really mean anything do they?"
You might as well say that "eating food doesn't mean anything" by that logic. Human emotion is developed, and serves a *pragmatic* purpose. The human ability to propogate culture is also arguably a pragmatic adaptation. You make the classic mistake of thinking that just because something isn't supernatural it can't be normatively good.
One of the driving phenomenons behind evolution is natural selection. That doesn't require death, it just requires *not making copies*, i.e. reproduction.
If anything, death promotes evolution, not the other way around.
Look at it this way: Who would be the more awesome God? The one who makes a thousand robots by hand, none of which that ever realy change even a billion generations later...
...Or a God who designs a system that causes robots to be generated and self-improve themselves to survive over time?
I ilke God example number two.The first case doesn't seem too creative or clever.- JimmySpaza, on 03/28/2008, -3/+2#2 seems more creative and clever. What would be even more interesting is how every species evolves but only to a certain extent. Fish never become non-fish such as amphibians, for example. Thus, the appearance of more complex life forms over time, such as humans, could only be explained by an actual creation event by God.
So, God drops in various life forms over 4 billion years and let's them develop on their own. What's the problem?- Terr01, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1The complete lack of scientific evidence for it? The bizarre coincidence that any "newly dropped" creatures are genetically so similar to older ones and newer ones? The incessant wiffle-waffling among proponents of what *exactly* constitutes a "type"? The fact that every time someone finds (to use your example) a half-fish-half-amphibian creature they simply say "oops, guess there were actually *three* mystical kinds"...
- JimmySpaza, on 03/28/2008, -3/+2#2 seems more creative and clever. What would be even more interesting is how every species evolves but only to a certain extent. Fish never become non-fish such as amphibians, for example. Thus, the appearance of more complex life forms over time, such as humans, could only be explained by an actual creation event by God.
- EatingPie, on 03/28/2008, -0/+2I believe chrisc3's comment about morality is badly worded, and has been misinterpreted. (Though maybe *I'm* the one misinterpreting! :-) That said, here goes...)
Morality is how we express human value -- call men "sir" and women "ma'am," don't steal, don't kill, etc., because that person is valuable. However, in *atheistic* evolution, there is no explanation for individual human value. We are made up of elements, similar to say rocks and trees, so what makes us *inherently more valuable* than rocks and trees? And yet we act as though humans are truly more valuable.... "I took an axe and cut down that tree" vs. "I took an axe and cut down that woman" are two wildly different statements. We value the human far more than the tree.
Okay, that's a nutshell. Francis A. Schaffer refers to this as "The Moral Necessity" for the existence of God -- one of three logical arguments that point to the existence of the Infinite Personal God.
Let me note that I specified *atheistic* evolution. Terr01 gives THE compelling argument for *theistic* evolution. It's actually logical that, in a dynamic system -- the Earth, Atmosphere, Radiation, etc. continuously changes -- an Infinite Personal God would create a beings that are also dynamic... that can adapt to those changes. Otherwise we'd be looking at a cruel, uncaring God: "The world will eventually enter an ice aga, but you guys can only survive in Tropical climates... tough crap."
-Pie
- aprestia, on 03/28/2008, -2/+4We didn't evolve from nothingness. We evolved from matter that has always existed. And you're right, feelings and morality don't "mean" anything. Feelings are chemical reactions in our bodies, and morality is an artificial construct. Personally, I'm quite content with that - everyone needs meaning in their lives, but I think the more pleasurable aspects of living are meaning enough for most people. Judgment, however, is a product of evolution - those creatures with the best judgment of how to survive, did survive.
- julianwan, on 03/28/2008, -2/+3i think if god is a very real and tangible identity, we weren't "fearfully and wonderfully made" to be ignorant, babbling, mediocre intellects.
- JimmySpaza, on 03/28/2008, -3/+2The fearfully and wonderfully made thing is the ability to create a complex life form like human beings (along with the ability to reproduce, mutate, evolve) from dirt or from nothingness.
- BaxterK, on 03/28/2008, -2/+3Genesis Chapter 11 Verse 10: And so Adam climbed on top of the tense Tenontosaur, the large beast's tough skin quivered under Adam's naked buttocks. "It is good that I can sit here naked like this and not feel shame." A Peteinosaurus soars overhead as it chases a peppered moth. "I am hungry for a bit of fruit, I must see what Eve has gathered" Adam gives a slight squeeze to the Tenontosaur, urging it forward. "It has not been so easy to findeth food these days, what with the Tyrannosaurus Rex eating off of all the fruit trees near our condo."
- aprestia, on 03/28/2008, -2/+2(with all appropriate irony intended:) Jesus Christ. You know I've never got religion and I don't really care if people believe weird things, or even necessarily that they teach this "theory" to children who's parents request it - but to take them to a science museum and not accurately explain what the SCIENTISTS say as well - it boggles the mind. Not to mention they don't really seem to be very good tour guides - or very good with kids.
Oh well. At least when we all evolve into higher lifeforms these people won't be joining us. - hello2usir, on 03/28/2008, -2/+2I'm at least glad that the reporter appears to be taking the side of reason.
- ElWizardo, on 03/30/2008, -0/+3How come creationists never address the 20,000 year old cave art from around the world, that shows daily life of early man hunting recognizable animals but no dinosaurs. You would think if they came across allosaurus or a Sleestack they would have put it on the wall.
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is