More on Ark Park on opening day

First it amazes me that the flood carved the Grand Canyon out of hard rock yet left all that soft fertile topsoil in the great plains states.
Second why don't I see any replicas of monkeys or apes on the ark?

How much gopherwood would a gopher get
If a gopherwood gopherwood?

There are two worldviews, one based on the evidence, the other being a host of ad hoc, superficial excuses for avoiding that evidence.

I mean, what's the difference?

Glen Davidson

Gozer said: First it amazes me that the flood carved the Grand Canyon out of hard rock yet left all that soft fertile topsoil in the great plains states. Second why don't I see any replicas of monkeys or apes on the ark?

Gozer said: Second why don't I see any replicas of monkeys or apes on the ark?

Gozer said: How much gopherwood would a gopher get If a gopherwood gopherwood?

It seems the launch has a good wind behind it. how could anyone go by this hugh thing and not want to visit. the state should pay the AIG folks for the attraction. I bet heaps of politicians go there and get pictured.
Its pretty cool. i was always against these things but i was wrong.
the Australian guy was right. its a great public relations coup for someone that is oppressed by the establishment and silenced.
They were out maneuvered.
i know Canucks planning on going.
It will answer questions people have about genesis and all the stuff they hear like dino things.
It adds adds and stimulates conversation and this will stimulate interest in sciency subjects for those from demographics never that interested. All sides.
This reaches the hearts and minds of the people while others strike at the academic circles or legal circles etc.
A general invasion to bring equity and equally to a historic and still common convictions.
Its a answer to a attack going on against Christianity since the civil war I think.
It will force opponents to have to do a better intellectual job and not just say WE HAVE SETTLED THESE THINGS and you'all be silent.
The ship of truth is sailing while seeming like a landlocked ark.

Robert Byers said: how could anyone go by this hugh thing and not want to visit.

phhht said:

Robert Byers said: how could anyone go by this hugh thing and not want to visit.

You mean huge, not hugh, stupid.

Robert Byers said: It seems the launch has a good wind behind it.

"You mean huge, not hugh, stupid."
Are you sure that he didn't mean "really yuuuge, believe me"?

Just Bob said:

phhht said:

Robert Byers said: how could anyone go by this hugh thing and not want to visit.

You mean huge, not hugh, stupid.

And sentences begin with capitals, and when they're questions they end with question marks. Anyone can slip now and then, but totally disregarding the rules of spelling, grammar, punctuation, and capitalization shows disregard for the reader, undermines your credibility, and is irritating as hell.

Zetopan said: "You mean huge, not hugh, stupid." Are you sure that he didn't mean "really yuuuge, believe me"?

It will force opponents to have to do a better intellectual job and not just say WE HAVE SETTLED THESE THINGS and you’all be silent

1). Your side says this ALL THE TIME. Case in point the recent petition to stop some obscure debate somewhere as a thead on PT was made about.
2) You don't have freedom of expression if your expressions are censored by the state before large audiences!!
Its about origin conclusions being taught that bump into concepts under a title of religion. Teaching them as wrong or banning them as a option in subjects dedicated to truth IS TEACHING same religion id wrong.
We have been over this and i prevailed in reasoning. Pretty sure!

Robert Byers said: Teaching [religious origin myths] as wrong or banning them as a [sic] option in subjects dedicated to truth IS TEACHING same [some?] religion id [is?] wrong .

so booby does 2 plus 2 equal 5 lets debate your side avoids this ALL THE TIME what are you afraid of case in point flat earth lets debate your side say its flat but you refuse to debate what is you'all ascared of and of course you dont believe that the earth goes around the sun but you refuse to debate that either i wonder why see booby all the things you refuse to debate show that you are censoring a free discussion before large audiences its about conclusions of 5 and your reasoning is pretty wah wah wah

Robert Byers said: Teaching [religious origin myths] as wrong or banning them as a [sic] option in subjects dedicated to truth IS TEACHING same [some?] religion id [is?] wrong .

fnxtr said:

Robert Byers said: Teaching [religious origin myths] as wrong or banning them as a [sic] option in subjects dedicated to truth IS TEACHING same [some?] religion id [is?] wrong .

Come on now phhht, those keyboards get slippery when they're spittle-flecked.

phhht said:

fnxtr said:

Robert Byers said: Teaching [religious origin myths] as wrong or banning them as a [sic] option in subjects dedicated to truth IS TEACHING same [some?] religion id [is?] wrong .

Come on now phhht, those keyboards get slippery when they're spittle-flecked.

Mine is dry and clean, thank you. I want to be explicit about what I guess Robert Byers is trying, in all futility, to say.

fnxtr said:

phhht said:

fnxtr said:

Robert Byers said: Teaching [religious origin myths] as wrong or banning them as a [sic] option in subjects dedicated to truth IS TEACHING same [some?] religion id [is?] wrong .

Come on now phhht, those keyboards get slippery when they're spittle-flecked.

Mine is dry and clean, thank you. I want to be explicit about what I guess Robert Byers is trying, in all futility, to say.

I did mean his.

So easy to be misunderstood in print. Getting something across when the only clues are marks made on an artificial medium - that's one of the most difficult of arts.

The only reflection to be made is that Byers is so much worse at it. "Case in point the recent petition to stop some obscure debate somewhere as a thead on PT was made about". About what? No object follows. What in the name of Ghu does that even mean? It's not that it could be interpreted in several different ways - it's that it has no meaning at all.

One of the skills of writing fiction is to create words that mean something that isn't fiction. That is, to create something that is not actually itself, yet is itself, although it means something quite beyond itself. It's almost directly opposed to the first skill of writing non-fiction: creating a direct and unambiguous transfer of reality.

Is this a direct and unambiguous statement of reality?: "(Creationists') expressions are censored by the state before large audiences!!" No, it's a direct and unambiguous lie. Creationists can preach their doctrine before any size audience that they can pull. They can deny evolution up hill and down dale until the cows come home. They can, and do, produce voluminous media, take up space in halls, buy billboards, put ads on TV, build theme parks, shout it through bullhorns, run blogs, publish books, magazines, whatever. Nobody will stop them. Nobody censors them. The only restriction on them is that they don't get to do it on the taxpayer's dime - well, mostly not. They want that money, though, and scheme to get it, and sometimes succeed. Churches can use tax-free income to do it. Ken Ham got tax concessions. Kent Hovind falsified his taxation returns.

The line is only drawn at the public schools. Since it has been proven beyond any doubt whatsoever that creationism is NOT science, and IS a religious doctrine, it cannot be taught in public schools. That's all it is. And still Byers believes he's hard done by, and he comes here to whinge about it, demonstrating that his own claims are false. Here we are, on a blog specifically about evolution, and Byers can come here and say what he wants, and still his complaint is that he's being censored.

Patently ridiculous. But that's creationists for you.

What kind of a museum consists almost entirely of signs and posters? Why don't they have any real specimens of anything? Why don't they have any references from the scientific literature for any of their posters? Why do they make so many false statements and misrepresent science so badly? Are they just ignorant or actively dishonest? There is so much wrong that almost anyone would eventually realize that they were being lied to about everything. If you were going to take a school trip to this abomination, the assignment might be to find as many scientific inaccuracies as possible. The winner gets a free pass for the next time god decides to murder everyone just for being the way she created them. I know that if I paid money for a "museum" and all I got was posters and lies, I'd want my money back.

Many natural history museums have staff that actually conduct and publish scientific research. What scientific research have Creationist museums conducted? Not a bit. What have they published? Nothing more scientific than Jack Chick tracts. The Ark Park is religious proselytization, plain and simple, and tax dollars should not be spent on such projects.

mark said: Many natural history museums have staff that actually conduct and publish scientific research. What scientific research have Creationist museums conducted? Not a bit. What have they published? Nothing more scientific than Jack Chick tracts. The Ark Park is religious proselytization, plain and simple, and tax dollars should not be spent on such projects.

DS said: What kind of a museum consists almost entirely of signs and posters? Why don't they have any real specimens of anything? Why don't they have any references from the scientific literature for any of their posters? Why do they make so many false statements and misrepresent science so badly? Are they just ignorant or actively dishonest? There is so much wrong that almost anyone would eventually realize that they were being lied to about everything. If you were going to take a school trip to this abomination, the assignment might be to find as many scientific inaccuracies as possible. The winner gets a free pass for the next time god decides to murder everyone just for being the way she created them. I know that if I paid money for a "museum" and all I got was posters and lies, I'd want my money back.

Re "or at least a big boat."

Boner's Ark?

Are there any live animals on the fake ark? Any at all? I mean look, if the thing can't even float, at least could have one live animal. Maybe a dinosaur form the Flintstones show!

Or Barney?

In today's local newspaper:

NOAH'S ARK IS A BIG DEAL

Belief aside, pricey replica in Kentucky is something to see

by Josh Noel - Chicago Tribune

WILLIAMSBURG, Ky. -

I'd been on Noah's Ark all of 20 minutes when the question that hung over every step was finally put to me: "Do you believe?"

It came from a man with a thin beard named Travis, who wore a Captain America T-shirt and had an excitable look in his eye. He was touring the new, five-story Ark Encounter with his wife and daughters after driving three hours from central Indiana.

We stood on the ark's second floor, in front of a display about the Garden of Eden. Travis had just explained to one of his girls that some people believe the fabled garden still exists somewhere on the planet.

He spoke with such certainty that I interrupted, asking if I'd heard right. Travis said yes and then asked, right there, in front of his girls and Adam and Eve: Do I believe?

Travis meant the question in the big way and the little. Did I believe the story of Noah's Ark? That we are descended from an all-powerful, all-knowing and mighty God?

I offered the most honest answer I could: I don't quite believe. BUt I don't exactly not believe.

I was glad he'd asked, because I'd wonder the exact same thing about nearly everyone at the 510-foot-long, 51-foot-high, $100 million replica of Noah's Ark that opened in rolling Kentucy field in early July.

After spending the next several hours wandering around Ark Encounter, the takeaway was simple: You don't need to believe to enjoy it. A (supposed) life-sized replica of Noah's Ark is a rolling Kentucky field is an undeniable spectacle, and it must be seen to be believe, sort of in the way that Stonehenge, Easter Island or an Ikea must be seen to be believed.

Ark Encounter opened to great fanfare, curiosity and protest. (Memo to atheists: Why so angry?) It was built by Answers in Genesis, whic describes itself as an "apologietics ministry dedicated to enabling Christians to defend their faith and to proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ effectively." It also believes that Earth is 6,000 years old and that Adam and Eve co-existed with dinosaurs.

When Ark Encouter is just a life-size replica of that fable of 5-year-olds, it's fun. The first step inside immerses a vistor in the entire premise: Rows of bamboo cages emit chirps, squawks and murmurs from across the the animal kingdom, mixed with a low crash of waves that's so deep, the floor softly rumbles beneath your feet.

But at other turns, Ark Encoutner takes itself too seriously. Soon after that sense of being on an ark full of animals in a flooded world, we reach cages of life-size beasts. The first is a black bear beside the words, "How did Noah keep the polar bears cool?"

The answer: "Sketptics often mock the concept of the Ark and its animals, so they develop questions designed to make the Ark look foolish. However, when one thinks about the Ark from a biblical perspective, the skeptics' questions end up looking foolish."

Because "the various bears of the world belong to the same kind," there was no need for polar bears to be on the ark. All the world's bears are descended from the two bears that were on the ark. Of course!

Everyone is entitled to their beliefs. But, as a vistor, I have a difficlut time bankrolling such nonscience, especially considering the price: $40 per adult ($75 for two days), plus a surprise $10 parking fee that didn't seem all that Christian in the middle of a Kentucky field with endless parking.

The ark amounts to a hit-and-miss array of exhibits and experiences, sometimes with a surprise undercurrent of anger and darkness. The world's first 1,650 years are told mostly in poster board displays: the Garden of Eden ("God creates the perfect world"), humanity's fall from grace (Man's rebellion corrupts creation") and then some stuff about how humans are "corrupt" and "wicked" and "vile." Even children's books are in the corsshairs, with a display dedicated to the "deception" in such books: "Fairy tale ark stories often fucus on cute animals on a fun boat ride. But the Flood account is about the righteous and holy God judging an exceedingly sinful world with a cataclysmic Flood while showing mercy to Noah's famly and the animals." Take that, third-graders!

To these agnostic eyes, most stirring were the explanations of how the ark would have functioned. How did Nosah and crew feed all those animals? Dump all that animal waste? Ventilate the ship? Gather fresh water? Let in light? Ark Encounter gives us answers in poster and video form, and they involve intricate networks of systems that seem plausible enough.

On the fourth floor Noah and company relax in their rather plush living quarters. It's also where I spied uniformed Answers in Genesis security guards wearing guns on their hips. Guns? On Noah's Ark? Really?

"Yeah, well, that's the world we live in, " an usher said.

Just then, the announcement came that the ark would be closing soon. I'd been there for more than three hours. Forty days and 40 nights would have been a bit much, but I could have used at least an hour more.

SIDELINE:

If you go

Ark Encounter (www.arkencounter.com) is in Williamstown, Ky., about 40 miles south of Cincinnati. Tickets cost $40 for adults up to age 59, $31 for adults 60 and older, $28 for children 5-12 and free for children younger than 5. Note that the closest hotels have been selling out since Ark Encounter opened in July, so reservations are a good idea.

TWO PHOTOGRAPHS

First photo - The Ark from the side.

Caption - Ark Encounter is a 51-foot-high, $100 million reproduction of Noah's Ark, purporting the same size, located in a rolling field outside of Williamstown, Ky.

Second photo - Baby sauropods inside a cage with children looking in.

Caption - A cage onboard the ark contains a model dinosaur. The creators of Ark Encounter believe that dinosaurs and humans roamed the Earth at the same time.

(All typographical, grammatical, and spelling, errors are likely mine, unless discovered otherwise!)

WILLIAMSTOWN, Ky. (not Williamsburg, Ky.)

(Sorry, first of many mistakes, no doubt)

(All typographical, grammatical, and spelling, errors are likely mine, unless discovered otherwise!)

The Bible never uses the Hebrew word MIN ("kind") in speaking about humans.

I can see that the writer has had neither a scientific nor a religious training, in the sense of actually becoming acquainted with the standard scientific data or the standard readings of the text and doctrine. For the record, no Christian believes that we are descended from God. Only one person ever was, and that only in one sense. In another, he actually was God. Yes, I know that Luke calls Adam "son of God" at 3:38. This is interpreted as a rhetorical and metaphorical flourish. The Creeds all insist that Jesus was the only-begotten Son of God. We are creature, not Creator, in his image, but not his descendant.

AiG an "apologetics ministry"? Ministry? To whom does it minister? What does it minister? Care? Compassion? Charity? Aid? Not hardly. The products of AiG are for sale, not gift; the principal beneficiaries are Ken Ham and his family. Of course it takes itself seriously. It is serious. This is not some kind of spoof on what some people believe, like the Haunted Mansion in Disneyland. It's an assault on rationality itself. So was Monty Python, sometimes; but those blokes knew they were doing comedy. AiG and its ark park are in deadly earnest.

So why is the "undercurrent of anger and darkness" a surprise? The whole point of this exhibit is the belief that God was so angry with all other human beings that he killed everyone. Everyone. And not just snuffed them out in an instant. Drowned them in slowly rising water, watched them run, panic, struggle and drown. This is not dark? This is not angry? I don't often accuse creationists of integrity, but at least in this particular instance, AiG tells you what they really think, and it's nauseating.

It would appear that the writer is completely unaware of the Christian teaching of universal human depravity. Christians really do believe that all humans everywhere deserve only death and eternal torment, and that (barring extraordinary grace) this will be the judgement of a just God on any and all who do not believe that Jesus was God, and claim salvation solely on the ground of his atonement. This really should not come as a surprise to anyone who'd had any contact with Christian doctrine.

The only reasonable answer to a question like "Do you believe?" is "Believe what?"

"Memo to atheists: why so angry?" What, you don't get angry when you are deliberately and maliciously misrepresented? How about when you're slandered and insulted, your motivations traduced and your integrity denied? How about when you're told that you've taken a carefully considered and unpopular position solely out of self-indulgence and wickedness? That you are evil, not for anything you do, not even for what you believe, but for what you don't believe?

"(I)ntricate networks of systems that seem plausible enough". Plausible? Oh, c'mon! All this writer is demonstrating is that he has not the faintest idea about what was known or possible in 2400 BCE, nor about the limitations of the materials available. That's from a scientific or engineering point of view. From the Biblical one, that he doesn't understand what it means to add to scripture. Deuteronomy 23:13-14 gives state-of-the-art instructions for sanitation for its time. It describes what to do in detail. You think the instructions of Almighty God on the same subject on the Ark would be unworthy of record? Because here's the thing - it isn't mentioned in the scripture, and AiG is making all of that up. That's supposed to be a no-no.

Did the writer not observe the steel plates, bolts and trusses holding this structure together? Could he not say explicitly that the "beasts" are actually plaster and resin models? Above all, could he not reflect that the only purpose of this entire structure is to expound a religion, but that its proprietors are receiving tax benefits for doing so?

Ignorance like this is only excusable to a limited extent, and not when it amounts to the dissemination of disinformation. This article almost amounts to that. But slipshod and lazy journalism, the dearth of any research, and the neglect of any consideration of the issues - those are not excusable.

Somewhere we discussed school trips. Well, it has happened: Dan Phelps tells us that Bardstown High School in Kentucky has embarked on a FCA/Social Sciences ark encounter field trip, which began or took place yesterday. FCA is presumably Fellowship of Christian Athletes. Their connection to Social Sciences escapes me.

Gozer said: First it amazes me that the flood carved the Grand Canyon out of hard rock yet left all that soft fertile topsoil in the great plains states. Second why don't I see any replicas of monkeys or apes on the ark?