This site fills me with such intense rage!

brucebruce
edited July 2007 in General
A creationist museum.

I'm sorry, but I am just so fucking pissed off by the very notion of it... You're basically going to turn your kids into the next generation of idiots who are so blinded by this BS that they're unable to accept and acknowledge the scientific facts!

At least they refrain from the argument that Dinosaur bones are a joke from God...
«1

Comments

  • Amoeba BoyAmoeba Boy
    edited July 2007
    That's pretty special. My favorite parts are about how Adam named 200 animals in a few hours and that mutations in DNA are mistakes that came about because of humanities sins.

    I'm too tired right now to be properly enraged.
  • Professor MacJakeProfessor MacJake
    edited July 2007
    This is slightly better than that creationist theme park, DinoLand, that was seized for tax evasion a while ago.
  • MrCheezeMrCheeze
    edited July 2007
    Creationist Museum wrote:
    Don’t think, just listen and believe.
    Fail.
  • godgod
    edited July 2007
    Oh, and there’s no need to be afraid, because all of the animals at this time were like Disney cartoon characters. They did not bite, sting, or even defecate for that matter.
    This is the point I stopped reading and started laughing. Although, I really shouldn't, seeing as there's people who actually believe this crap. To me, that's frightening that people will take these "truths" and teach their childeren, and to believe them without question.
  • HamelinHamelin
    edited July 2007
    That's silly, clearly the curator of that museum never read Everyone Poops.
  • BehemothBehemoth
    edited July 2007
    Sure, everyone poops now. But this was in the Garden of Eden. The plants were a perfectly balanced meal that when consumed would produce absolutely no waste.
  • HamelinHamelin
    edited July 2007
    I don't think any plant could maintain structural integrity without all that stuff in the middle that we don't digest, hell if I know though.
  • mariomario
    edited July 2007
    I think the implication is that stuff like evolving and defecating are the acts of sinful creatures, and there was no sin prior to the bite of the apple?
  • SilverwardSilverward
    edited July 2007
    Except Adam and Eve being naked, and not married.
  • mariomario
    edited July 2007
    Nudity isn't a sin. Shame is. And I can only assume they were wed in a metaphysical sense of one being made out of the other.
  • SilverwardSilverward
    edited July 2007
    So, if you show up to church, naked and not ashamed of it, it's not a sin?
  • brucebruce
    edited July 2007
    Depends on whether your restraining order lets you near children...
  • mariomario
    edited July 2007
    Not technically a sin, but conservative church-goers might frown upon it, and you'll most certainly be arrested. Sin is not always synonymous with crime.
  • TriremeTrireme
    edited July 2007
    A lot of it would depend on your intent, but mostly you would just look stupid.
  • KhanFusionKhanFusion
    edited July 2007
    Behemoth wrote: »
    Sure, everyone poops now. But this was in the Garden of Eden. The plants were a perfectly balanced meal that when consumed would produce absolutely no waste.

    Yes, but then Adam sinned, and as a result his(and subsequently our) digestive tracts were transformed. Meanwhile, all of the rest of God's creations now have it out for us, including the plants, and thus transformed themselves to make it harder for us to eat them. Duh.



    You know, all this makes me want to start my own religion. Something wacky. Like Pastafarianism, only with less suck.
  • NoLongerNoLonger
    edited July 2007
    I started one a couple years ago.
    All hail!!! The Dead Demented Fish!!!
  • mariomario
    edited July 2007
    Why start a new religion when there's a perfectly good Church of the Sub-Genius?
  • KhanFusionKhanFusion
    edited July 2007
    Why, Mario?

    Because all other religions are wrong, that's why.

    Any religion that doesn't acknowledge that the world was created On January 7th, 1981 is obviously a religion that is based on lies.
  • DrLeopoldStrabismusDrLeopoldStrabismus
    edited July 2007
    Is that your birthday?
  • Professor MacJakeProfessor MacJake
    edited July 2007
    I prefer the Church of Euthanasia
  • BehemothBehemoth
    edited July 2007
    That video pissed me off even more than the creation museum. I am rarely offended, sometimes I joke around, but never really offended. But that video was in unfathomably poor taste.
  • illithid235illithid235
    edited July 2007
    I'm not sure if the Lost World Museum has been linked on the boards, but since we're talking about stupidity linked with creationism, here's some really interesting tidbits from creationists. Particularly news item #16 about one-eyed dinosaurs is a must read. The comments are quite interesting and display just how little this person knows about biology and evolution.

    http://www.lostworldmuseum.com/index.php?paged=3

    One-eyed dinosaurs, indeed.
  • Amoeba BoyAmoeba Boy
    edited July 2007
    About that Creationism musem, I saw that apparantly the dinosaurs existed with Adam and I'd imagine they boarded the Ark with Noah. But does it say anything about how they all died out but pretty much nothing else did? Or how did some of the huger dinos even board the boat?
  • UnknownUnknown
    edited July 2007
    Amoeba Boy wrote: »
    About that Creationism musem, I saw that apparantly the dinosaurs existed with Adam and I'd imagine they boarded the Ark with Noah. But does it say anything about how they all died out but pretty much nothing else did? Or how did some of the huger dinos even board the boat?

    I believe it says that they didn't board the ark, and died in the Great Flood. Then, people use the bible instead of carbon dating to find out how old they are.
  • TriremeTrireme
    edited July 2007
    That video was absolutely disgusting.
  • mariomario
    edited July 2007
    The museum photos and captions did suggest that there were dinosaurs aboard the Ark (two of each, obviously). As far as I could tell, it didn't mention what happened to them after the flood, but they probably died off from other causes. I mean, they can't deny that species become extinct sometimes, or else they'd have to tell us where all the dodos went.

    The flood is also used as an argument against radiocarbon dating; Creationists often suggest that a massive flood can skew the results of such tests. It can't, but that's what they say.
  • Amoeba BoyAmoeba Boy
    edited July 2007
    Do they have anything to say about how even if all the ice on Earth melted the global waterline would only raise a couple dozen feet at most and there's nowhere near enough water on the planet to submerge any sizable chunk of land?

    Run on's FTW!
  • geokogeoko
    edited July 2007
    You, sir, need to see "Deep Shock", it quite clearly proves otherwise, and if David Keith says so, it must be true.
  • brucebruce
    edited July 2007
    They also don't mention (and I never got this part), why, if even the mountains were covered by water, did the water stay on earth? What held it in? Do you sort of get my meaning?
  • mariomario
    edited July 2007
    I do believe an all-powerful deity leaves some room for divine intervention.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2023