Thursday, May 24, 2007

A Blog Conversation about the Creation Museum

See at the end or this post on the Creation Science Museum in Kentucky, the post at Howard Friedman's blog, www.The Religion
that sparked these remarks by me and others

Barb said...
Asma makes assumptions --atheistic ones --and academic ones --about evolution vs. creation. Anyone who denies the possibility of design and designer in the universe is NOT basing his view solely on science. the evidence of design is there more than the evidence of descent from extinct common ancestors.

Evolution doesn't even SOUND possible to me. Or we should see some ongoing evidence of it. Why did it stop --and all of a sudden every creature reproduces after its own kind. "O it's happening --just too slowly to see it!" Yeah, right!

Wed May 23, 01:50:00 PM EDT

Anonymous said...
Are you really out of your mind when you say the below comment "Evolution doesn't even SOUND possible to me"


Wed May 23, 03:31:00 PM EDT

Anonymous said...
Barb--Any first year text on evolution addresses your concerns. I suggest you at least read one before you start spouting about what you think 'sounds' possible. Evolution has not stopped. Evolution is one of the cornerstones of modern biology that has been researched and studied by ten of thousands of scientists.

Wed May 23, 07:17:00 PM EDT

Barb said...
So? they all stood around and said the emperor's clothes were beautiful, too. Sometimes it's the minority (and even the laymen) who get it right. There are at least hundreds if not thousands of reputable, capable scientists who will tell you Darwin's evidence ain't there!

The first year text you recommend does not address the fact that Christians believe in the miracles recorded in the historcal accounts of the new testament --not just Jesus' miracles but those by Peter, John, Paul -- and the miraculous conversion of Saul the Jew who became known by his Greek name Paul --(Acts 9) These are recorded as history by multiple authors just 21 centuries ago, and those scriptures have been kept by the church and passed down. Everytime these 1st century Christians (and Christ) did a miracle like healing men who had been crippled from birth, thousands were converted --and the men with the message from God who could prove their divine source by what they did --were persecuted. The first disciples were not brave and Saul would never have become a Christian --had not the risen Jesus appeared to them and promised them that because He lives --they shall live also beyond the grave. "I go to prepare a place for you...." He said.

If I believe THAT, as I do, I see no reason to believe in the long, tedious, happenstance, lucky and capricious, unguided, uncontrolled, unproven process of Evolution.

As for the scientific evidence --yes, I know that even in the 90's the text books were saying things about evolution that embarrassed Patton of the Britisn Museum and Gould of America--because the claims were fictional --one scenario claimed that a couple of guys had simulated the conditions for life to evolve and had created life in a lab. They tried, but they did NOT succeed. The books used obsolete Lamarckian theories of purpose and need dictating evolutions in successive generations --"Man evolved to walk upright so he could carry his food in his hands going through the tall grasses of the African Savannah" --(actually in our text books) -- and giraffes evolved long necks so they could reach food at the top of the trees."

If you can't think this through and wonder why all creatures shouldn't therefore walk upright and carry food in their hands --and why any creatures HAD to reach the tree tops --when they also use their necks to eat from the ground --and why all creatures didn't need to do the same to survive and thus have long necks --anyway, even the evolutionists said the 90's texts in science were abysmal with speculated scenarios on why evolution occured that had no basis in scientific fact.

To have a trait it has to be in your genes -which come from your ancestors --but it's in the genes --and so the genes need all the info from the parent genes to be passed down --yes, occasionally there is a mutation--and its results are usually disaster. And generally rare -- the rule is for the parent genes to pass their traits to the child --and there are no NEW genes in the next generation that spontaneously appear --and creatures can't inter-mate with other categories successfully and pass those genes along --so the likelihood of missing links is poor when we should be, my husband says, standing knee-deep in trans-fossils --if that part of evolution were true. But even when they claim they have a trans fossil of a mammal resembling modern chimp or man, they can't prove it's transitional (most turned out to be frauds or something other than claimed) instead of a unique species or just a human or chimp variant (or a diseased mutation) that would have always begat its own kind or died out. In fact, now that we know about DNA --we know simple cells don't beget more complex cells and higher beings. the dna has to have those elements of DNA in them from the start. They just don't acquire complexity without a designer; it would take a miracle --millions of miracles to evolve all the diverse life forms --and miracles don't take eons of time.

Our Creator used His divine knowledge and created by design and command--the way our Jesus raised the dead, healed the lepers, blind and lame, and calmed the seas --by command. God had infinite knowledge, certainly greater than ours which can be stored in a computer and recalled with a keystroke. And He promised to delete our sins from His memory (the celestial computer?) --if we would simply have faith in the resurrected Jesus of Nazareth, our Passover Lamb who writes my dna code/name in His book (memory /celestial mind/computer/Palm pilot.)

Anyone who resurrects 3 days after being crucified and comes out of the tomb --and an angel later rolls back the stone, and all the guards are dead -- and the angel sits there waiting for the women to find the empty tomb --And says "Why do you look for the living among the dead?" --I'm going to believe someone with that kind of power!

This is history -I believe it--I have no reason not to believe it. My own religious experience confirms my faith--and REASON is not excluded despite the insults of unbelievers to the contrary. How do we know God's guidance? by the Word of God preserved in Judeo-Christian scriptures --by reason applied to the study of these scriptures --by the witness of the Holy Spirit, God's felt presence. As the Bible says, "By the renewing of our minds." Inspired teachers, ministers, and modern writers who believe the Word also contribute to our understanding of God.

Darwin's theory is speculation without solid evidence. Yes, he categorized and studied the myriad of living creatures, organizing them for study. He was right about natural selection and survival of the fittest characteristics for adaptation to environment --but he never proved and no one has since proved --that one category of creature like an ape-man can become the ancestor of man or chimp. So far, the studies claim that DNA is traceable to one woman--and they call her EVe for obvious reasons. I assume they can trace to one man as well?

They now know that all the races came from one couple --just as the Bible says. This couple had the colossal genes for the whole human race. That they share gene traits in DNA with apes and other life forms --is only because life has the same design components in all mammals --all creatures --in the design of the dna of life.

Thu May 24, 12:14:00 PM EDT

From The Religion Clause blog by Prof Friedman at the UT Law School:
Last week's Chronicle of Higher Education carries a fascinating look at the new $27 million Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky. The museum's theme is the literal truth of the Biblical Genesis narrative. (See prior posting.) The Chronicle article titled Dinosaurs on the Ark? is written by Stephen T. Asma, a professor of philosophy at Columbia College Chicago. Asma visited the museum and interviewed its director Ken A. Ham. Prof. Asma writes that Ham did not miss a beat in answering his surreal question about what dinosaurs on Noah's ark ate. Prof. Asma, who has written an Oxford University Press book on the culture and evolution of natural history museums, says that his sense of humor about the new museum fades when he thinks of the young children who will visit it without the tools for critically assessing its displays. The full article is well worth the time to read.
posted by Howard Friedman at 1:10 PM on May 22, 2007

Methinks Asma is really afraid that kids will critically assess the claims of evolution after seeing the museum. If Darwinism is true, why are they protecting it from objections and scrutiny and evidence to the contrary? Because they have not and can not prove Darwinism is true, that's why.

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

No comments: