# Answers in Genesis creation museum



## New wine skin (May 31, 2004)

Anyone have any thoughts to share about the building of the science museum in Ohio by Answers in Genesis ministry? 

Personally I think its a great. This country needs an apologetic platform that can engage our culture in an area that has for too long be conceded to humanist.


----------



## 2legit2quit (May 31, 2004)

Here's me ging out on a limb

I think that it is great that creation science is getting out there and making people think about evolution (at least when it pertains to biological evolution). However, I don't think it should be labeled *the* Christian approach to humanism, because I, for one, believe in atleast the Big Bang Theory as it is preposed by Scientists. This contradicts Creationism but it doesn't contradict the Bible


----------



## New wine skin (May 31, 2004)

actually the big bang cosmology does contradict the bible because the bible says the sun was made on day four. Of course there are many threads on this topic already if you dig around some. I will also encourage you to read the well laid out discussion at answers in genesis website. Not hard to imagine but the traditional big bang model is losing steam with many scientist.


----------



## FrozenChosen (May 31, 2004)

I've always wondered why the &quot;well light has come from 4 bajillion light years away, therefore we must be 4 bajillion years old at least&quot; argument isn't refuted by &quot;Hey, in Day 1, God flipped on the lightswitch.&quot;

I don't see any implication for only one source of light. It's probably just intuitive because we get our daylight from the sun, which blocks out everything else.


----------



## New wine skin (Jun 1, 2004)

The issue with light and distance makes the assumption that conditions today are the exact same as they were at or during creation... for that matter even a few hundred years ago. Gravitational time dialation suggests that the further away you get from the center of the universe the faster light moves. This model is gaining ground as more research goes into it. It assumes a bounded universe. The big bang assumes an unbounded universe. Both have unsolveable problems. Then you have ideas such as a changing speed of light, which unless very dramatic during early creation week doesnt provide sufficient change to make enough difference. Most of the astronomy text books I have which are 5-10 years old admit that estimating distance of 1000 light years becomes speculative. No side is open and closed case regarding starlight. I always enjoy reading science articles to see how bias and assumptive they are... for example an article came out about a planet discovery thought to be the oldest yet, then avoiding Ockums razor they draw all kinds of conclusions about adding addtional eons to the age of the universe etc...whats so laughable is that if people knew how planet hunters determined what was or wasnt a planet they would lose credibility... essentially they look for wobbles (gravitational effects) and changes in light intensity (undetectible to human eye) that are to imply an orbiting object around a star. Using probability and other formulas try to ascertain size and orbit etc... remember that they are unable to image the planet itself. This in itself is speculative however they consider their opinion as almost fact. 

interesting side note. A friend of mine from church is an exploration geologist and he was telling me that about 15 or so years ago he was in Alaska taking core samples and they found some plant fossil (coal) at around 10,000 feet which carbon dated to 4500 years. Since its not suppose to be there or that young they tried to refute it but the lab said they were most certain that was correct. To avoid any &quot;problems&quot; the oil company just changed the report by adding zero's. My friend said he got the report and asked why the information was changed and they told him they didnt want any problems with funding the project or credibility loss etc... he was perplexed at why anyone would care in his industry... he never said anything about after that. hmmmmm


----------



## 2legit2quit (Jun 1, 2004)

[quote:1a534df4ec][i:1a534df4ec]Originally posted by New wine skin[/i:1a534df4ec]
actually the big bang cosmology does contradict the bible because the bible says the sun was made on day four. Of course there are many threads on this topic already if you dig around some. I will also encourage you to read the well laid out discussion at answers in genesis website. Not hard to imagine but the traditional big bang model is losing steam with many scientist. [/quote:1a534df4ec]

1. Actually the hebrew does not say that the sun earth and stars were created *on* the fourth day. The hebrew word for made is the word 'asah. this verb, as it is in Genesis 1:16 is in the hebrew verb form for an action completed in the past. so actually the sun moon and stars could have been created on the fourth, third, second or first day. You might say well why do the scriptures make a point to say that on the fourth day the sun, moon and stars appear?
Well from earth (which is the perspective that we should be looking from Gen 1:2) it was dark and the sun and moon and stars had not yet shown through until the foruth day. Science has found that right around that time the earths atmosphere was opaque and therefore did not show the sun and moon and stars in all there glory. This opaque atmoshpere cleared up on the fourth day.

I do believe one hundred percent that this is atleast a viable interpretation of Scripture but I am definitely open to persuasion

2. I would completely agree with your last statement but i would say that scientists are trying to make theories like the Oscillating Universe Theory and Vaccuum fluctiation models, not becassue of lack of scientific evidence for the big bang but becaseu the big bang points to a personal creator of the universe and they don't like that


----------



## Craig (Jun 1, 2004)

New Wine pondered:
[quote:e87d288398]
I've always wondered why the &quot;well light has come from 4 bajillion light years away, therefore we must be 4 bajillion years old at least&quot; argument isn't refuted by &quot;Hey, in Day 1, God flipped on the lightswitch.&quot; 
[/quote:e87d288398]
Has anyone here heard of white hole cosmology? It's way over my head, but it seems to be a valid explanation for this AND the expanding universe. I think the dude who came up with it is part of Ken Ham's group. You may be able to get the book. It's a theory, just like evolution...but fascinating and more scientific, also.


----------



## New wine skin (Jun 2, 2004)

Hey Craig

that ponder was frozenchosen not new wine skin...


As to the white hole theory, you must be thinking of Dr Russell Humphreys star light and time. Very interesting book.


----------



## DexCisco (Jul 19, 2004)

If the stars were simply not visible until day 4, what was blocking them out? Wasn't the atmosphere created on day 2 (or whatever the "expanse" was)? So were they visible on day 1 until the atmosphere and clouds were created on day 2? How could there be liquid water on day 3 (remembering that days here has been changed to an indeterminate period of time, probably hundreds of millions of years)? How could there be a hospitable climate for plants with no light penetrating the whatever-it-was that was blocking the view of the sun, moon and stars for that "day"? Which existed first according to the text, the earth, or the light, which is usually associated with the big bang?

The consistent answers to these questions escape me.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (May 22, 2005)

Creation Museum Sparks Evolution Debate

May 22, 2005 (AP)

PETERSBURG, Ky. - Ken Ham has spent 11 years working on a museum that poses the big question "” when and how did life begin? Ham hopes to soon offer an answer to that question in his still-unfinished Creation Museum in northern Kentucky.

The $25 million monument to creationism offers Ham's view that God created the world in six, 24-hour days on a planet just 6,000 years old. The largest museum of its kind in the world, it hopes to draw 600,000 people from the Midwest and beyond in its first year.

Ham, 53, isn't bothered that his literal interpretation of the Bible runs counter to accepted scientific theory, which says Earth and its life forms evolved over billions of years.

Ham said the museum is a way of reaching more people along with the Answers in Genesis Web site, which claims to get 10 million page views per month and his "Answers ... with Ken Ham" radio show, carried by more than 725 stations worldwide.

"People will get saved here," Ham said of the museum. "It's going to fire people up. If nothing else, it's going to get them to question their own position of what they believe."

Ham is ready for a fight over his beliefs "” based on a literal interpretation of the book of Genesis, the first book of the Old Testament.

"It's a foundational battle," said Ham, a native of Australia who still speaks with an accent. "You've got to get people believing the right history - and believing that you can trust the Bible."

Among Ham's beliefs are that the Earth is about 6,000 years old, a figure arrived at by tracing the biblical genealogies, and not 4.5 billion years, as mainstream scientists say; the Grand Canyon was formed not by erosion over millions of years, but by floodwaters in a matter of days or weeks and that dinosaurs and man once coexisted, and dozens of the creatures "” including Tyrannosaurus Rex "” were passengers on the ark built by Noah, who was a real man, not a myth.

Although the Creation Museum's full opening is still two years away, already a buzz is building.

"When that museum is finished, it's going to be Cincinnati's No. 1 tourist attraction," says the Rev. Jerry Falwell, nationally known Baptist evangelist and chancellor of Liberty University in Lynchburg, Va. "It's going to be a mini-Disney World."

Respected groups such as the National Science Board, the American
Association for the Advancement of Science and the National Science Teachers Association strongly support the theory of evolution. John Marburger, the Bush administration's science adviser, has said, "Evolution is a cornerstone of modern biology."

Many mainstream scientists worry that creationist theology masquerading as science will have an adverse effect on the public's science literacy.

"It's a giant step backward in science education," says Carolyn Chambers, chair of the biology department at Xavier University, which is operated by the Jesuit order of the Catholic church.

Glenn Storrs, curator of vertebrate paleontology for the Cincinnati Museum Center, leads dinosaur excavations in Montana each summer. He said the theory of dinosaurs and man coexisting is a "non-issue."

"And so, I believe, is the age of the Earth," Storrs said. "It's very clear the Earth is much older than 6,000 years."

The Rev. Mendle Adams, pastor of St. Peter's United Church of Christ in Pleasant Ridge, takes issue with Ham's views "” and the man himself.

"He takes extraordinary liberties with Scripture and theology to prove his point," Adams said. "The bottom line is, he is anti-gay, and he uses that card all the time."

Ham says homosexual behavior is a sin. But he adds that he's careful to condemn the behavior, not the person.

Even detractors concede that Ham has appeal.

Ian Plimer, chair of geology at the University of Melbourne, became aware of Ham in the late 1980s, when Ham's creationist ministry in Australia was just a few years old.

"He is promoting the religion and science of 350 years ago," says Plimer. "He's a far better communicator than most mainstream scientists."

Despite his communication skills, Ham admits he doesn't always make a good first impression. But, that doesn't stop him from trying to spread his beliefs.

"He'd be speaking 20 hours a day if his body would let him," said Mike Zovath, vice president of museum operations.

Ham's wife of 32 years agrees. "He finds it difficult talking about things apart from the ministry," Mally Ham says. "He doesn't shut off."

Ham said he has no choice but to speak out about what he believes.

"The Lord gave me a fire in my bones," Ham says. "The Lord has put this burden in my heart: 'You've got to get this information out.'"


----------



## Augusta (May 23, 2005)

I want to go see it when it opens. I like Ken Ham and have learned alot from listening to his lectures.


----------



## rmwilliamsjr (May 23, 2005)

> _Originally posted by joshua_
> DexCisco,
> Good to see you, back Sir. It's been a minute. Please see this thread:http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3273
> 
> ...



i'm unable to get this link to work.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (May 23, 2005)

That portion of the thread is quite old. I doubt that the link is alive anymore. It may have been a redirect to the policy page regarding the poster's missing signature line.


----------



## BobVigneault (May 23, 2005)

When folks start thinking about the creation of stars and light they start from the wrong side of the puzzle.

The question is, why did God place the stars in the heavens. He did it to display his glory to the angels and to Adam. God created a mature universe. When Adam opened his eyes he saw the stars, including the Andromeda galaxy, 31 billion light years distant even though it was only a few days old. God could create the galaxy and evey photon or wave, however who want to describe the nature of light, between the galaxy and Adams eye. 

Every sub atomic particle was created and appointed a place simultaneously in creation. That is not difficult to understand. 

I was a big banger when I was twenty as well. But I warn you, you are going to feel so silly when you get older and wiser. Please don't ever try to make the bible fit the scientific 'evidence', you will do damage to your understanding and run the risk of suppressing the truth and then suffer all it's devastating consequences.

When it comes to creation I will quickly yield to the ONE who was there and not the scientific sea slugs who believe they are gods.


----------



## rmwilliamsjr (May 23, 2005)

> _Originally posted by maxdetail_
> When folks start thinking about the creation of stars and light they start from the wrong side of the puzzle.
> 
> The question is, why did God place the stars in the heavens. He did it to display his glory to the angels and to Adam. God created a mature universe. When Adam opened his eyes he saw the stars, including the Andromeda galaxy, 31 billion light years distant even though it was only a few days old. God could create the galaxy and evey photon or wave, however who want to describe the nature of light, between the galaxy and Adams eye.
> ...




this is the creation with apparent age argument, often summarized as the omphalos or Adam's belly button argument. AiG itself says not to use it.

it is not the same thing as creation with apparent history, or Adam's childhood scars argument. google: last thursdayism, brains in a vat, decartes demon for this argument.


----------



## Augusta (May 23, 2005)

If you base anything on modern science you will end up wrong because they discover they are wrong all the time. They are in a constant state of proving and disproving their own theories. They are like people stumbling in the dark. They want to understand creation but refuse to understand the creator.


----------



## Authorised (May 23, 2005)

A few points of information:


The universe can be unbounded and finite.

While it is true that we can't measure the parallax shift of stars accurately past 500 parsecs, we can do far more with spectroscopy to determine the distances. 

Most people don't like the "God created a long chain of photons already able to be seen from earth" because it seems irrational of God and contrived by man.

The Andromeda galaxy is 2.9 million light years away. The most distant galaxies are about 14 billion light years.

The Hubble constant sets the age of the universe at about a maximum of 14-15 billion years.


----------



## BobVigneault (May 23, 2005)

> The Andromeda galaxy is 2.9 million light years away. The most distant galaxies are about 14 billion light years.



Thank you for the correction Aaron. I was typing faster than the speed of thought and while I was typing the distance I was thinking 'M31', the messier number for Andromeda. You are on the ball friend and quite right.





> this is the creation with apparent age argument, often summarized as the omphalos or Adam's belly button argument. AiG itself says not to use it.
> 
> it is not the same thing as creation with apparent history, or Adam's childhood scars argument. google: last thursdayism, brains in a vat, decartes demon for this argument.



So in other words I think I just heard you say, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah . :bigsmile:


----------



## Authorised (May 23, 2005)

> _Originally posted by maxdetail_
> 
> 
> I was typing faster than the speed of thought and while I was typing the distance I was thinking 'M31', the messier number for Andromeda.



Senior moment?


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Apr 22, 2007)

The Creation Museum near Cincinnati is scheduled to open in June 2007.


----------



## staythecourse (Apr 22, 2007)

*Was going to make a weekend trip out of it*

But it wasn't opened yet.

I want a visual on how all living creatures got on board the ark. I believe dinosaurs and man walked the earth together as death could not be before original sin. Yet the sheer number of species, esp when dinosaurs are included, leave me without an answer. It happened but I don't yet have a good explanation.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (May 29, 2007)

Ky. Creation Museum opens to thousands (May 29, 2007)


----------



## Romans922 (May 29, 2007)

The Assistant to my pastor went this weekend with his wife and said there were a lot of evolutionists there protesting outside. 

About the actual museum he said it had one of the top security (whatever guarding it) and that includes being on the list for homeland security. This is because so many people want to destroy it. He said he was able to go into the security 'office' and was shown awesome things. Like they know where every single person is at all times. The security video and cameras work at about 400,000 frames/sec! So every person (especially if they are on their watch list) who is seen by cameras (which is everyone) pops up on the security monitor and gives the security people a complete makeup of the person, including name, etc. (he knew someone on the inside so he got to go in!). He said people at the top of their professions help create this museum. The guy who did the dinosaurs for Jurassic Park worked on that. A major construction company CEO sold his company and came to construct the museum. A former security guard for the White House left his job to run the security team. This museum is top of the line everything! Scientists from universities left (who were at the top of their game) to come and invest their time and life into this museum. Evolutionists who have gone through said it was scary --> Because their children in schools would be given such an incredible presentation of Biblical Truth that they could not leave the museum without questioning their beliefs in evolution (what they are taught in schools). My assistant pastor said it was exceptional and done in a presuppositional format! --> http://www.creationmuseum.org/about




http://www.creationmuseum.org/

http://www.answersingenesis.org/


----------



## Devin (May 29, 2007)

Romans922 said:


> The Assistant to my pastor went this weekend with his wife and said there were a lot of evolutionists there protesting outside.



They don't like it when you attack their religion.


----------



## panta dokimazete (May 31, 2007)

Salon Article on the Creation Museum

Saw this:



> A bit farther along we're introduced to Eve, looking like a great big brown Barbie and staring intently into Adam's eyes. Adam and Eve are naked, and Maggie and Tom Thorne, a pair of Christians visiting from Michigan, are smiling at the scene. They agree it seems a little unfair for God to expect two such well-designed specimens not to get around to sinning pretty quickly. A few yards further we see Adam and Eve again, this time standing in a pool of water, their genitals coyly obscured by lily pads. Now they definitely appear to be grappling with the chemistry that will get them in big trouble.



Interesting that they suppose sex is a sin - even the Original Sin...shows their ignorance...


----------



## Anton Bruckner (May 31, 2007)

jdlongmire said:


> Salon Article on the Creation Museum
> 
> Saw this:
> 
> ...


 a biblically illiterate culture.


----------



## SRoper (Jun 4, 2007)

The Creation Museum is open seven days a week. I guess someone needs to tell them that "in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it."


----------

