Pantagraph.com Weather forecast, local radar and more
NewsSunday, October 12, 2008 10:29 AM CDT
Comments Comments (37) | E-mail this page E-mail this page | Print this page Print this page | Enlarge type Enlarge type | Reduce type Reduce type | Search archives Search archives | RSS RSS feeds | Add to My Yahoo! Add to My Yahoo!
A year later, Creation Museum claiming big crowds
By Dylan T. Lovan
Associated Press
Advertisement

LOUISVILLE, Ky. -- The museum exhibits are taken from the Old Testament, but the special effects are pure Hollywood: a state-of-the-art planetarium, animatronics and a massive model of Noah’s Ark, all intended to explain the origins of the universe from a biblical viewpoint. | Audio slideshow

The Creation Museum, which teaches life’s beginnings through a literal interpretation of the Bible, is claiming attendance figures that would make it an unexpectedly strong draw less than a year and a half after it debuted. More than a half-million people have toured the Kentucky attraction since its May 2007 opening, museum officials said.

For creationists — Christians who believe the Bible’s first chapter of Genesis is the literal telling of the universe’s start — the museum is a godsend. Many have returned with family and friends, some from faraway states arguing it’s one of the few with a Christian worldview.

Many scientists say they fear damaging effects on science education when young people tour the museum and fail to square its lessons with what they’re learning in school. One display shows humans coexisting with dinosaurs — despite the two species being separated by 65 million years in most science texts.

“We’re depressed, I think,” said Dan Phelps, head of the Kentucky Paleontology Society, who toured the museum shortly after its opening. “There’s been such a push in recent years to improve science education, but stuff like this still hangs around.”

Phelps said he fears some teachers, shying away from the origins controversy, may choose to omit mentioning evolution studies in the classroom.

State education officials said they have seen no sign of students challenging science teachers in their classrooms based on conclusions drawn from visits to the Creation Museum.

“It’s not been a huge issue. In fact it’s almost a nonissue for public schools,” said Lisa Gross, a spokeswoman for the Kentucky Department of Education. “Teachers have been dealing with these things long before the Creation Museum came into being.”

The Creation Museum doesn’t draw nearly as many visitors as the nation’s top science museums, which boast larger facilities and government funding. The Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History in Washington attracted 5.8 million visitors in 2006; the Children’s Museum in Indianapolis brought in 1.2 million that year, according to a list compiled by Forbes magazine.

But for its size and budget — it took $27 million in private donations to build — the museum has been an overwhelming success, founder Ken Ham said.

The museum in rural northern Kentucky, a 30-minute drive south of Cincinnati, has drawn more than 550,000 visitors in 15½ months, by its own count.

Regular visitors pay $20 for admission, but about 10 percent were admitted for free over the last 15 months, museum officials said. Ham said it draws families, home-schooled children, Christian school groups and even many skeptics.

Inside, evolution is replaced with the Old Testament stories of Adam and Eve as the first humans and Noah rescuing the human race from a worldwide flood.

Ham feels the sleek presentation puts it on par with well-funded science museums. Patrick Marsh, who helped create exhibits at Universal Studios in Orlando, was brought in as the museum’s director of design.

“We made a decision quite a few years ago, that we wanted to do it first-class ... as good as you would see at museums or Disney World or Universal Studios,” Ham said. “It’s become an attraction in its own right, regardless of the message that we have here.”

One visitor, Bill Michaletz, drove his family from Wisconsin in May.

“I do believe in creation, that God created it all,” said Michaletz, who has five children. “I’m appreciative that there is a place to go for ourselves and our kids, to look at that view.”

Take a look
An exhibit depicting two archaeologists coming to very different conclusions while unearthing the same skeleton is seen in 2006 at The Creation Museum in Petersburg, Ky. (AP Photo/Ed Reinke, file)
Video
Most commented stories
Browse online archives
Recent issues:
Reader comments on this story - 37 total

Note: All views and opinions expressed in reader comments are solely those of the individual submitting the comment, and not those of the Pantagraph or its staff.

Woody wrote on Oct 15, 2008 12:05 PM:

" JosephU,
Let me recommend a good website for you to check out. Google "Answers in Creation". It does an excellent job of explaining things from a Christian POV. It shows that there is no conflict between Christianity and evolution (or science in general).

P.S. I do need to correct one possible misconception from my previous post. I mentioned the cosmic dust adding to the layers of the earth, and while that is technically true, it isn't the only factor, nor is it even the biggest factor. Other things, including erosion, plate tectonics, and even gravity, are actually much bigger factors in the layering of the earth.

But the fact remains that dinosaur remains are all far, far lower down than any human (or other mammal) remains. "

Woody wrote on Oct 15, 2008 10:05 AM:

" JosephU,
Regarding dinosaur and human remains. Nobody said they have to be buried together.

The earth has layers, like an onion. Ton's of cosmic dust falls on our planet every day. That is one of the reasons that the earth is actually larger now than it was ages ago, and one of the reasons we have those layers.

If humans and dinosaurs coexisted, their remains would be found in the same layer. They are not. All dinosaur remains come from layers that are much further down (and therefore older) than human remains.

Do you believe God would lie to us? I do not. That evidence would not be there if God did not intend for us to find it and to discover the truth for ourselves. "

Woody wrote on Oct 15, 2008 9:58 AM:

" JosephU,

The very passages that you quoted prove that the behemoth cannot be a dinosaur. The description does NOT fit a dinosaur at all. A dinosaur cannot eat grass, its tail will not sway like a cedar branch, it does not have a navel, it cannot lie under the lotus.

The description DOES fit a hippo very well, and other creatures like the elephant or mammoth a little less well. A hippo is both huge and fierce. It can lie under the lotus. No man would approach the hippo with a sword because its hide is so thick that even bullets cannot pierce it. And it has a navel!!!

The Bible was NOT intended to be a science book. God put things in simple terms for primitive people to understand. There is no inherent conflict between the Bible and real science. Sites like AiG are peddling nonsense. "

JosephU wrote on Oct 15, 2008 1:54 AM:

" joe76 wrote
"if dinosaurs and humans existed at the same time their would be fossilized evidence of human remains found with the many dinosaur bones that have been found"

(Partial quote)
"Think about It—Would You Want to Live with Dinosaurs?

Often, people believe that if human bones aren’t found with dinosaur bones, then they didn’t live at the same time. Actually, all we know for sure is that they weren’t buried together. It is very easy for creatures to live at the same time on earth, but never even cross paths. Have you ever seen a tiger or a panda in the wild? Just because animals are not found together does not mean they do not live in the same world at the same time."

For the full article, Google:
Why Don’t We Find Human & Dinosaur Fossils Together? "

JosephU wrote on Oct 15, 2008 1:51 AM:

" In regard to what Woody wrote:

Job 40 (KJV)
15 Behold now behemoth,
which I made with thee; ...
19 He is the chief of the ways of God:
he that made him
can make his sword to approach unto him.

"chief of the ways of God" ???
and
it takes his maker (God)
to be able to approach him with "his sword" ???

Certainly this creature is not a hippopotamus, elephant, or mammoth ...
the creature this awesome is a sauropod dinosaur.

For more dinosaur info, Google:
Dinosaurs and the Bible

For more science questions (and answers) see Job 38
e.g.
1 Then the LORD ...said:...
4 "Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation?...
6 On what were its footings set,
or who laid its cornerstone... "

Woody wrote on Oct 14, 2008 6:18 PM:

" cont:
c. Under the lotus plants he lies (verse 21)
A dinosaur could not lie under the lotus plants. Way too big.

But a hippo can! An elephant - maybe. A mammoth - no way to tell.


d. Can anyone capture him by the eyes, or trap him and pierce his nose? "
This could describe a dinosaur, but it also describes a hippo, which is one of the most dangerous animals in the world. Their hide is literally bulletproof. They cannot be tamed. Elephants can be tamed, but generally have to be raised by humans rather than captured. Mammoths - who knows?

e. Job lived thousands of years after Noah.
As big as the Ark was, it is unlikely that it could hold even one dinosaur, much less two. IF there were any dinosaurs during Noah's time, they would have perished in the flood and could not have been around during the time of Job.

Hippos, elephants and mammoths actually fit the description of the behemoth, but dinosaurs do not. The behemoth was not a dinosaur. "

Woody wrote on Oct 14, 2008 6:17 PM:

" Here are a few more reasons why the behemoth cannot be a dinosaur:

a. ...which feeds on grass like an ox. ...
Dinosaurs, even the herbivorous ones, could not feed on grass like an ox. Grass contains cellulose, which requires quite a bit of chewing, but dinosaurs were lizards. Like all lizards, their teeth and jaws that are only good for biting, not chewing. Herbivorous dinosaurs ate leaves and other plant matter that had little, if any cellulose.

What can eat grass like an ox? A hippo, an elephant or a mammoth.


b. His tail sways like a cedar;
The part of a cedar that sways are the small branches that have tufts of needles on them. Those do not resemble a dinosaur's tail at all. The tails of herbivorous dinosaurs were so big and so long that they dragged on the ground, they did not sway.

What has a tail that can sway like a cedar? A hippo, an elephant or a mammoth. Their tails look a lot like cedar branches. "

joe76 wrote on Oct 14, 2008 5:55 PM:

" First, JosephU you misunderstood Woody the first time. He asked if there was any "Scientific Evidence" why wasn't it on display. A display featuring humans and dinosaurs is not evidence. Secondly, neither is the Bible. Who or what Behemoth was is irrelevant. The theory of evolution is based on facts and evidence that has thoroughly been investigated by the scientific community for over 100 years. Each Scientist that tested the theory did so with the intention to disprove it. That is the point of the scientific method, and still it stands. Not because of some left wing scientific elitist conspiracy, but rather the strength in the evidence. The bible is based on faith in the writtings of Man millions of years after the fact. In order for you to argue against evolution you must do so with evidence that is verifiably observed within nature. Not a supernaturally mystical mythical link between a supernatural entity and humans. Lastly, if dinosaurs and humans existed at the same time their would be fossilized evidence of human remains found with the many dinosaur bones that have been found not to mention with the bones of other classes of life that has been discovered since. "

Woody wrote on Oct 14, 2008 1:20 PM:

" Joshua, I'm going by King James, and it clearly says "navel". So it could not be a dinosaur since they did not have navels. "

JosephU wrote on Oct 14, 2008 9:00 AM:

" Woody wrote:
1.) "you left out verse 16"
2.) "behemoth described here could easily be...Mammoths"

1.) Job 40:16

New International Version
What strength he has in his loins,
what power in the
muscles of his belly!

New American Standard Bible
"Behold now, his strength in his loins
And his power in the
muscles of his belly.

World English Bible
Look now, his strength is in his thighs.
His force is in the
muscles of his belly.

Young's Literal Translation
Lo, I pray thee, his power is in his loins,
And his strength in the
muscles of his belly.


2.) No,
Behemoth was not an elephant (nor a Mammoth)

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
"..."muscles" of his belly;
the weakest point of the elephant,
therefore it is not meant."

Behemoth,
who "ranks first among the works of God" (Job 40:19)
was a dinosaur.

For more info, Google:
Get Answers: Dinosaurs AiG "

Woody wrote on Oct 13, 2008 4:59 PM:

" JosephU wrote:
" "One display shows humans coexisting with dinosaurs"

Q. Who would believe such a thing?

A. Those who believe what God,
Your statement is misleading.

First of all, you left out verse 16
Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.

A dinosaur would NOT have a navel. Only mammals have navels.

Secondly plenty of people who believe in God and believe in the Bible do NOT believe that humans and dinosaurs ever coexisted. The behemoth described here could easily be any one of several other animals that we know humans have coexisted with. For example, Mammoths and humans coexisted, and a Mammoth would have a navel! "

The Original JD wrote on Oct 13, 2008 12:32 AM:

" The arguements for creationism has at their very foundation a supposition., the assumption that man is to complex to evolved on its own. This can only be weighed against an intelligently designed species to see if it has any veracity. Since there is no evidence anywhere of an species ever being designed, to assume man had to be is just that, an assumption. Not to mention that if man is to complex to have evolved on its own, then a designer must surely be too complex, thus requiring a designers also..and invalidating the monotheism idea. "

JosephU wrote on Oct 12, 2008 11:53 PM:

" "One display shows humans coexisting with dinosaurs"

Q. Who would believe such a thing?

A. Those who believe what God,
who was there,
has told us in the Bible
about dinosaurs (behemoth) and people:
they coexisted:

Job 40:15-24

15 "Look at the behemoth,
which I made along with you
and which feeds on grass like an ox. ...

17 His tail sways like a cedar;
the sinews of his thighs are close-knit. ...

19 He ranks first among the works of God, ...
24 Can anyone capture him by the eyes,
or trap him and pierce his nose? "

Meh wrote on Oct 12, 2008 11:52 AM:

" G. Larson, men define their gods in their own image. Creationists are simple minded, hence their god is equally simple minded. "

G. Larson wrote on Oct 12, 2008 9:33 AM:

" according to now-ancient Jewish texts, sabbatical cycles existed before the creation of Adam, and that those cycles – those years – were actual physical years. Since sabbatical cycles referred to in Shitat Sefer Temunah (a first century text) existed before Adam, they must be measured in Divine years, not human years. The Sefer Temunah states that the "world" (universe) is 42,000 years old. As stated, since these existed before Adam, the text is speaking of Divine years. According to midrashic sources, a Divine day is 1,000 earth-years long. A Divine year would therefore equal 365,250 earth years. So, the universe would be 42,000 x 365,250 earth-years old. That calculation comes out to 15.3 billion years, very close to current estimates for the Big Bang. And, people, this isn't "Western Science", this is the very source for Christianity. There does not for any reason have to be a conflict between science and Torah on the age of the universe. For those that believe the universe is approx. 6,000 HUMAN years old, somebody lied to you, and you were the sucker to believe it. The actual texts of the Torah make it clear, and there is no conflict with science. "

G. Larson wrote on Oct 12, 2008 9:13 AM:

" 'Any student of the Bible knows that it is full of allegory', well said, Woody. In fact, I would say "any student of any spiritual text from around the world and throughout history knows...". Now, in saying so, I never mean to suggest that the Bible is essentially no different than any other spiritual text, which is what I wonder so many Biblical "literalists" are worried and defensive about, as though to admit the obvious symbolism would be to discredit its message. But, there is no question that at any point for any group, the mysteries of our spiritual lives are often and likely can only be spoke about in allegory and metaphor, which regularly relate to tangible everyday realities. "

G. Larson wrote on Oct 12, 2008 9:07 AM:

" A simple thing I could never understand: Why does the worst kind of Creationist refuse to acknowledge that God Himself could have created evolution? Put simply, and in my humble opinion, the "story" presented by the Bible is nothing but a pathetic little nursery rhyme in comparison to the absolutely vast, profound, cataclysmic and utterly complex processes of "evolution" that science still can barely wrap its minds around. Why in the world would the Creationist, the self-proclaimed Faithful God-fearing person, want to grossly OVERSIMPLIFY his God and his beliefs? Wouldn't the Believer WANT their God, and His Prophets stories of Creation, to be actually impressive, actually believable, and actually MORE complex and profound than a nursery rhyme or aesop's fables? I have no idea why such a powerful and complex and mysterious God CAN'T do everything exactly as science has suggested. In fact, if He did, its far more impressive than anything in some ancient desert nomads' mythologies. "

Woody wrote on Oct 11, 2008 10:06 PM:

" doulos,
ask yourself, if there was any scientific evidence to support creationism, why doesn't this museum have any of it on display? Why is everything in it faked using the same technology that Disney uses in their theme parks to produce fantasy worlds? Why isn't there anything REAL in this museum?

Any student of the Bible knows that it is full of allegory. God's no dummy. He knew that primitive men couldn't begin to comprehend the advanced science that would explain how He created the universe. So he put things in terms that people of that era could understand, knowing that we would eventually discover the basic scientific explanations as we were ready to grasp them.

Unless time travel can be invented, we'll never know the exact details. But that limitation is part of being human. If He thinks there is something that we really need to know, but can't discover on our own, I'm confident he'll reveal that to us in His own way. But IMO, He also wouldn't leave all of those clues showing how life has evolved if he didn't expect us to follow them. "

Redbeard wrote on Oct 11, 2008 9:11 PM:

" doulos - the Paluxy River "man prints" have been debunked for over 30 years by paleontologists. Even most creationists don't believe this tall tale anymore. The footprints weren't human. That's been proven rather conclusively. Even if they were, based on the size of them, they'd have to be 11 feet tall. "

annagraham wrote on Oct 11, 2008 8:42 PM:

" Woody, thank you! :-)

I have to comment further on the idea that "we are just to complex to have just happened." This isn't evidence for Creationism, it's a cop-out and an admission of simply giving up searching for the truth. Two thousand years ago, man said the same thing about weather. Five hundred years ago, man said the same thing about disease. Why should we be so bold to think that we have everything figured out, and that we won't learn the processes behind the beginnings of our universe? Creationism is a wonderful, romantic idea, but it should not be presented as science. "

doulos wrote on Oct 11, 2008 8:32 PM:

" The fact that we have fossils that include footprints of dinasuars and humans together is pretty good evidence. "

Woody wrote on Oct 11, 2008 7:01 PM:

" doulos wrote: There is considerable evidence that humans and dinosaurs existed together.
No, there isn't.

doulos wrote: It is unfortunate that the pantagraph throws out the 65,000,000 year figure out like it is fact.
The article didn't say it was a fact. It said that it is the figure found in most science textbooks.

And textbooks use that figure because there is a mountain of evidence to support it.

doulos wrote: By the way, there are many "scientists" that discount the theory of evolution. "
Only if "many" means "almost none". Surveys show that less than one-quarter of one percent of all life and earth scientists are creationists. People who really study the evidence realize that evolution occurred. We may never know the exact details or timeline, but we know it happened. "

Woody wrote on Oct 11, 2008 6:48 PM:

" MRS. wrote: " Why are scientists afraid a child will challenge a teacher when he/she teaches evolution?"
They aren't. But students should challenge it with SCIENCE, not RELIGION.

MRS. wrote: Ever since this nonsense of evolution garbage started being forced in schools teachers have basically been calling Christian parents liars.
Pure nonsense! There is no conflict between Christianity and evolutionary science.

MRS. wrote: The monkey "evolves into a human invetro. LOL, that is just so stupid you have to laugh.
Of course it is stupid. That is NOT what evolution says at all.

MRS. wrote: It is just inconceivable this world and humans were not created.
They were created - but God used evolution to create us.

MRS. wrote: When this big bang occurred, ...
The Big Bang has nothing to do with evolution. They are completely separate and unrelated theories. One could be false and the other could still be true.

If you don't know how unrelated they are, then you don't know enough to make any judgment about either one. "

Citizen#9 wrote on Oct 11, 2008 6:46 PM:

" All you have to do is watch the movie "1,000,000 Years B.C." and, if you can tear your eyes off Raquel Welch's fur bikini, you'll see proof positive that man and dinosaurs coexisted. "

The Original JD wrote on Oct 11, 2008 6:27 PM:

" Questioning evolution, which is a very robust theory, is a good thing. Challenging it with the idea that a level 5 magician created everything instead is a bad idea. Creationism has no evidence to support it. Sure, it is an interesting hypothesis, but there is not one shred of real evidence to support it, while evolution has a plethora of supporting evidence. People should be glad for places like this though, as it gives normal children the advantage over those who think the Earth is flat and lightning comes from Zues. "

Redbeard wrote on Oct 11, 2008 5:39 PM:

" Creationism, by definition, is not science, but a form of religion. I have no objection to it being taught in a religion class, but it doesn't belong in a science class.

Still, it saddens me to continually see so-called Christians with such a limited view of their God that they are unable to consider that God is not created in their image, but is so much greater than their knowledge. To me, the God that created the universe, including evolution and science and our questioning brains, is astonishing and full of wonder.

It is the height of impertinence to believe that, simply by reading the pages of a book, you can contain God.

God is like a proud father, hoping his children will learn and make mistakes and create and explore and achieve greatness. He wants a child who questions, not an obedient dog who looks at His finger when He points. "

annagraham wrote on Oct 11, 2008 12:05 PM:

" to: MRS. -- I was laughing along with your post until I realized you were serious... Yikes. What credible scientist says that a human embryo is a monkey until a certain point during pregnancy??? Answer: none. In fact, human, monkey, and even fish embryos are indistinguishable to the naked eye until a certain point when their development diverges to grow their distinguishing characteristics. I've seen this firsthand. That doesn't mean the human embryo *is* a monkey or a fish, simply that they haven't grown enough to display their differences.

To doulos: The article doesn't state the 65 million year difference as fact; it states that most science textbooks do. It doesn't actually claim whether that's true or not. "

ArnoldLayne wrote on Oct 11, 2008 11:49 AM:

" Museum, no. Theme Park, yes.

To MRS. - I believe the question is: Why are evangelical Christians so afraid of science? Even the Pope says evolution is okay.

Your right doulus - dinosaurs and man did exist at the same time - just watch the Saturday morning classic "Land of the Lost". There were Sleezaks too. "

SemiNormal wrote on Oct 11, 2008 11:30 AM:

" To Meh: I have noticed that it is quite popular in B/N as well. "

doulos wrote on Oct 11, 2008 11:21 AM:

" Dear Readers: There is considerable evidence that humans and dinosaurs existed together. It is unfortunate that the pantagraph throws out the 65,000,000 year figure out like it is fact.

By the way, there are many "scientists" that discount the theory of evolution. "

PitbullMom wrote on Oct 11, 2008 11:16 AM:

" And the dumbing of the US continues. "

Bloomington Resident wrote on Oct 11, 2008 10:48 AM:

" How does the Pantagraph decide what is newsworthy? An article like this front and center? "

CharlieHustle wrote on Oct 11, 2008 10:39 AM:

" I still blieve in Santa Clause, and my great, great, great, great, great, great grandfather rode a pterodactyl. "

steinbeck11 wrote on Oct 11, 2008 10:37 AM:

" Well at least now I know where to build my "The earth is flat" and "We never went to the moon" museums "

MRS. wrote on Oct 11, 2008 10:29 AM:

" Why are scientists afraid a child will challenge a teacher when he/she teaches evolution? Why shouldn't a child question it? Have schools turned into communists? Ever since this nonsense of evolution garbage started being forced in schools teachers have basically been calling Christian parents liars. They have been telling children their parents don’t know as much as they do. That is why creation should be taught in schools right along with big bangs, swinging from trees, stars blowing up and my favorite, a "scientist in Mexico says when a woman gets pregnant she is carrying a monkey. The monkey "evolves into a human invetro. LOL, that is just so stupid you have to laugh. It is just inconceivable this world and humans were not created. We are to complex to have just happened. When this big bang occurred, how did it know to make male and female or were we all male and somewhere some of us had part of our body fall off and open up? Evolution is funny. Leave our children alone. Teach a lie but don’t say parents are the liars. "

Woody wrote on Oct 11, 2008 9:45 AM:

" Just what we need, a museum to promote phony science. It is a free country, and they have every right to peddle their beliefs, but this museum does a disservice to both Christianity and education. "

Meh wrote on Oct 11, 2008 9:08 AM:

" Ignorance is America's most popular religion, so this is hardly a surprise. "
Add your own comments

Please read the rules before posting comments.

You must be logged in to leave comments.
If you don't have a member ID, please register.

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login?
(requires cookies)
  Forgot Your Password?
 
Lee Enterprises Customer Service | 301 W. Washington St., PO Box 2907, Bloomington, IL 61701-2907 | Ph. 309-829-9000 | 800-747-7323
Copyright © 2008, Pantagraph Publishing Co. and Lee Enterprises. All rights reserved. | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy