Yahoo!But only at the Creation Museum in Kentucky do the dinosaurs sail on the ship -- Noah's Ark, to be precise.
The Christian creators of the sprawling museum, unveiled on Saturday, hope to draw as many as half a million people each year to their state-of-the-art project, which depicts the Bible's first book, Genesis, as literal truth.
While the $27 million museum near Cincinnati has drawn snickers from media and condemnation from U.S. scientists, those who believe God created the heavens and the Earth in six days about 6,000 years ago say their views are finally being represented.
"What we've done here is to give people an opportunity to hear information that is not readily available ... to challenge them that really you can believe the Bible's history," said Ken Ham, president of the group Answers in Genesis that founded the museum.
Here exhibits show the Grand Canyon took just days to form during Noah's flood, dinosaurs coexisted with humans and had a place on Noah's Ark, and Cain married his sister to people the earth, among other Biblical wonders.
Confused?
The Skeptic Annotated Bible
if god created the heaven and earth in 6 days about 6ooo years ago, then wtf is correct then scientist say this planet if 1-2million years old, dinosaurs appeared at that time....now they found about new planets so is the bible going to change its text and say god created the universe to keep on feeding us bs?
A new(er) covenant?
Too bad some people take the political translation of the various English versioned Bible so literal. This earth has been around for so much longer than the religious literal interpretation lets us believe.
The same word translated to "day" and the likes in Genesis' creation story does not mean a day as we know it. These are transitional periods without a distinct time definition. There are so many way to interpret the original Chadean text. Modern scholars know far more about the old tongue and so many long standing beliefs in the bible are flat out wrong.
When God created "Adam," he created "mankind" The word translated to Adam in the creation is mankind, not a proper name. When God created Eve from Adams rib, the word for rib.. of all things... is curve! Women have curves, right? 17th century interpreters took this to mean Adam's rib however. God took a woman from mankind and gave her to a man named Adam, who he gave the property rights to that was know as "The Garden of Eden!" It is not until the story with Adam, Eve, Cain, and Able that the Chaldean word for Adam is a proper name form. Besides, after Cain slew Able, where did his wife come from? Must have been other family units out there somewhere?
So many things are wrong.
If you correlate the Torah with other ancient texts and look at it from our modern understanding, you find that the Gods changed the humanoid forms on this earth and created mankind about 60,000 years ago. The Chaldean words in the creation easily could indicate genetic engineering, as it literally means "formed."
Consider why we have the missing link?
Guess what. The Chaldean form of the word translated to "God" in the old testament is a plural form meaning deities!
Jehovah, the God of the Hebrews says that his subjects shall have "no other gods"
Genesis 6:xx, just before the flood, tells us that the sons of gods had children with the daughters of man....
With this new understanding of the past written history, and faith in God, is it any wonder many of us believe in intelligent design? Evolution given a boost every now and then by the hand of God.
already posted
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=68780
I wonder why God didn't give whales enough sense to find their
way back to the ocean when they take a wrong turn?
I think some humans must have evolved from whales.
I think you evolved from rocks
Interesting, ever heard of the Droppa?If you correlate the Torah with other ancient texts and look at it from our modern understanding, you find that the Gods changed the humanoid forms on this earth and created mankind about 60,000 years ago. The Chaldean words in the creation easily could indicate genetic engineering, as it literally means "formed."
If I am not mistaken, Dinos pre-date the ark. Mention of giants is in genisis' forst 3 chapters, not having to do with either the leviathan or any known animals.
Ultimately, who cares? What difference does it make?
Measure and size two Brontos.
Measure and size the ark, to biblical specs.
End of story.
Not to mention that TRex would have ing EATEN everything else.
Hegamboa's chode has increased in mass two fold.
I don't recall hearing that name. The broad ideas I recall easily. Would it come up if I re-read my sources?
Yup. How can one be a biblical literalist is beyond me. If there really were dinosaurs on the ark, then the bible MUST be wrong about the dimensions, but there were dinorsaurs on the ark because the bible is right about how old the universe is according to some quack in the 14th century.
Are you trying to say that Noah is not our original father?
Droppas are the pygmies in China, right? Where the old Soviets stole those UFO discs from?
Hate to interrupt your intelligent and well reasoned bashing of Biblical history, but you do know that the Brontosaurus never actually existed... right? I also think you need to take another look at your ancient-to-Imperial/Metric measuring conversion chart.
Dude, you are obsessed and need help. Cut that crap out.
Either bring a take or STFU!
Correct on the first part waaaay wrong on the second.
Actually, you don't even need dinosaurs to far exceed any conceivable ark no matter how you convert it.
Two of every species would have to inlcude EVERY species alive today, as well as every species since the flood that has gone extinct.
EVERY SPECIES
[culled from various websites, using google searches of "insect species", etc]
Insects
There are about 900,000 known insect species, three times as many as all other animal species together, and thousands of new ones are described each year.
Birds
8000+ species identified and currently living.
Mammals
4629 currently recognized species of mammals.
Marsupials
Depending on the classification system used, scientists have identified between 260 and 280 species of marsupials
Reptiles
8000+ species
Etc.
This is just what is KNOWN.
We have over 1.3M species of what would have to have been carried on a hypothetical ark. Wikipedia count of species
Let's be generous and say we know about 75% of all those species.
1.3/.75=1.73
Noah's ark carried AT LEAST 1.73 million different species, AND somehow deposited them in biologically similar groupings (notice any marsupials in europe?), with land-locked species distributed over every continent and islands not connected to Eurasia.
Um, right.
The Bible doesn't use our modern taxidermical system.
All it says is that GOD instructed Noah to take two of every creature, male and female, according to its KIND aboard the ark. It makes no mention of EVERY SPECIES as you've implied.
At that point, you take a pair of canines and you have all our dog, wolf, coyote, fox, dingo, and jackal species covered.
Similar for the insect families, for the rodentia family, for the marsupial family, for the feline families, the pachiderms etc....
But that's not the point; no matter what I say, one can choose to believe in Noah's flood or not. Were there dinosuars aboard the Ark? Perhaps, but not likely. For that matter, one can't conclusively state either position with sufficient proof to hold their ground. Inferences and deductions aren't of much use in this case.
One thing is for certain. People need to understand that one can't scientifically prove the supernatural because those events occur outside the realm of the natural laws that bind our universe (i.e. events such as the universe's origin, creation itself, Noah's flood, the Red Sea crossing, Elijah's Chariot, Jesus's miracles, etc...). Science, as you well know, measures and describes our 'world' within the explicit constraints and structure of the natural laws that govern its existence. Those laws allow us to state that if a bowling ball of mass, m, were held 10 ft above the ground that it would strike the ground with a certain velocity and force, and depending on its net spring constant it would bounce back up to a certain height x and so forth. It is predictable. It is measurable. It was true 2000 years ago, just as it is true today (with slight differences accounting for changes to earth's mass, or the proximity of the sun and the moon). The supernatural, on the other hand, is not bound by any laws. Try and measure such an event; where would you begin? Were one to see a supernatural event would we even recognize it? It can occur, and leave no trace behind. That fact doesn't sit well with our 'we need proof of everything society'. It doesn't sit well with a scientific community that wants palpable proof and explicit parameters on which to base their conclusions.
What's funny about that particular take is that they ignore one of GOD's most magnificent gifts of all. LIFE itself is a supernatural incidence. GOD is the author of all life. What marks the difference between a recent cadaver, and a conscious, functional, living, human being? What is the ultimate measure of vitality; between life and death? I don't believe the existence of a spiritual realm will ever be measured scientifically; but I believe it exists. Just like I believe LIFE can't be measured, created, or contained; even though we clearly know it exists.
Once again, to those who keep harping on it; SCIENCE is not the catch all, end all argument to everything. Until people face that reality, using it as an instrument to debunk GOD, or biblical accounts is foolhardy. Particularly because doing so apparently gives them the means of justifying their own social perspectives, without realizing that the mis-matching of realms is intellectually dishonest (false dichotic premise).
Believe what you will. I believe in GOD for an entirely different set of reasons (GOD is my personal fountain of Life, Hope and Love), and not just because I happen to attribute Creation to HIM.
Last edited by Phenomanul; 05-31-2007 at 10:16 AM.
A good working definition of species is pretty much that you can only really sucessfully breed within that species.
For that taxonomy to be effective, it would have to acknowledge that from your proposed "kind" of animal, that all variations of that animal somehow (dare I say it?) evolved from that basic KIND into the variety of species we have today.
It also does not explain how land-locked creatures got to australia or, for that matter to the western hemisphere.
When do we all have our family reunion?
Canines can do it (sharing interfertility amongst themselves). So can many insect families. Others choose not to even though they are fully capable and others still because they've lost the ability to hone in on each others' sexual drives (i.e. they've divergently fine-tuned the pheromones which would attract them to each other).
A good working definition of species is pretty much that you can only really sucessfully breed within that species.
Most animals and plants have branched out genetically. I've never denied that fact. Was that genetic material initially present and inactive or did it randomly create itself? The latter is the process I will vehemently oppose.
Plate tectonics?... trans-siberian ice bridge over the Bering Sea? Or dare I say it! Divine intervention.
Look, I don't presume to know everything about the supernatural events of the Bible. Nor are they the focus of the Bible (a far more important fact). Anyhow, I'm not going to spend my time arguing with you. We decided awhile back to respectfully disagree. But at least I appreciate the fact that your arguments aren't simple-minded hate-driven rants. You have legitimate questions, and unfortunately I don't have all the answers. Belief in GOD is not driven by proof - nor should it be. It is driven by a relationship and until you experience HIM yourself there is not one thing I can say to make you believe otherwise.
Last edited by Phenomanul; 05-31-2007 at 11:13 AM.
Can you expand on this? Your dad's a preacher, right? Isn't he the HIM you experience?
Enough already. What a tired argument. Bible-thumpers will believe what they want to believe.
The only time their belief becomes a problem is when they try and subsitute science with their beliefs in the scientific/educational world.
So far, only weird, ultra-religious small towns of the northwest ban teaching of evolution in public schools (maybe not anymore). When that line of hits home (never going to happen), I'll start to care.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
