I think that they went gives an image of what it was like. That they took video of it gives a look at the museum that offers a sense of legitimacy to arguments against it. People can now look at their footage and get a good idea of what it's like there without giving them a dime and be able to counter people who say things like "well, you don't know what it's like there!" (Even though it's true that you don't need to be there to know it's wrong).
I think it was a good thing for them to go. It sucks that they had to pay a fee, essentially supporting the Creationist Museum.. But I believe they did is as a learning experience and to better understand the other side. I think it's good, in any case, to always see the other side of the story.
If you're talking about whether or not we should support anti-science museums and other organizations to learn about them and their positions to better form our opinions and counter their arguments, I'm not troubled by the fact that I'm paying a $15 admission ticket that will benefit a creation museum.
If you are going to speak on the Creation Museum and other organizations, you have to have an informed opinion about it and its contents. Nobody anywhere is entitled to an uninformed opinion.
But the thing is Ken Ham's views are no secret. They are well documented. Is it really reasonable to ask people to pay $15 up front to get the facts you are presenting in order to argue with you? I don't think so.
That being said, I have no problem w. paying admission to such a place for the entertainment value.
What are you trying to tell me, man did not ride on dinosaurs? You mean the Flintstones ARE NOT the "historical documents?" Next you'll be telling me we can send men to the moon!
I wouldn't go. Ive read an article on the place so I no whats there(crap) and how nice and expensive it is. Also I'm not sure I could hold my composure and not just freak out, maybe burn it or something poorly thought out.
I wouldn't pay for entrance to a creationist museum, for the same reason as I wouldn't pay to watch Expelled. I'm not going to give away my hard-earned money to a bunch of anti-science lunatics.
I'm not going to judge whether others should or not. But my money is better spent on other things.
To many believers--perhaps half the US population-- the Creationism Museum provides legitimate science. To them, given their pitiful education, science is not a process of QUESTION-BASED DISCOVERY, but simply a topical SUBJECT matter--if you are going to talk about fossils, bugs and stars, it is "science". Because of this, on the t-shirt, the word "science" is not perceived the same way by different people, so for many who see it, it is effective propaganda...that's why Ken made it!
that's a toughie irwt. off the top of my head though, with organisations such as ken hams creation museum they are misleading the public. such places should not be allowed to be built without very large disclaimers on exhibits telling people that " this is not fact and has not been proven" so people can at least decide for themselves. but since many in gov feel obligated to help these individuals due to sharing thier mythos science suffers and so does reason and logic.
One could also argue that non-religious visits are largely "freak tourism". Compare it with a Baptist minister from KY who visits an Amsterdam sex club--camera in hand--to have something to rant about back home. Who, among his flock, would not want to follow after him?
I wanted to go visit that museum next summer. Maybe I still will. But instead of giving them money, perhaps I'll show up with a placard. I think it's important for somepeople to go once in awhile, just to know of the possible dangers. A recon mission. But for the rest of us, go and speak truth with a protest.
It is true that you can't fairly say it is bogus unless you know the exact claims. It would be nice if someone documented every single aspect of the exhibits then provided a point-by-point counter to the precise language of the exhibit's text. But would that help more than hurt? The rule of the game is publicity, not accuracy. Controversy sells their two-bit product.
I think that it was wrong in a way that they gave their money to such an organization, but they did make that video showing "the belly of the beast", saving many of us from giving our money to go see it for out self. Also, the T-shirt that the one guy bought was pretty funny; "Science rocks!... The creation museum"
I think that they went gives an image of what it was like. That they took video of it gives a look at the museum that offers a sense of legitimacy to arguments against it. People can now look at their footage and get a good idea of what it's like there without giving them a dime and be able to counter people who say things like "well, you don't know what it's like there!" (Even though it's true that you don't need to be there to know it's wrong).
zetanato 2 years ago
I think it was a good thing for them to go. It sucks that they had to pay a fee, essentially supporting the Creationist Museum.. But I believe they did is as a learning experience and to better understand the other side. I think it's good, in any case, to always see the other side of the story.
nippleninja77 2 years ago
If you're talking about whether or not we should support anti-science museums and other organizations to learn about them and their positions to better form our opinions and counter their arguments, I'm not troubled by the fact that I'm paying a $15 admission ticket that will benefit a creation museum.
If you are going to speak on the Creation Museum and other organizations, you have to have an informed opinion about it and its contents. Nobody anywhere is entitled to an uninformed opinion.
CristinaFernandez 3 years ago 2
But the thing is Ken Ham's views are no secret. They are well documented. Is it really reasonable to ask people to pay $15 up front to get the facts you are presenting in order to argue with you? I don't think so.
That being said, I have no problem w. paying admission to such a place for the entertainment value.
Maxdwolf 2 years ago
If i were a resident in USA i would find a way to either spraypaint myself or sue to change the name of the place to "lulz musem"
GronTheMighty 2 years ago
Give nothing to Ken. But stand at a legally acceptable distance off property holding protest posters of the periodic table.
xander55577 3 years ago 2
No. We shouldn't be giving them our money. At all.
Fordi 3 years ago
What are you trying to tell me, man did not ride on dinosaurs? You mean the Flintstones ARE NOT the "historical documents?" Next you'll be telling me we can send men to the moon!
andawawego 3 years ago 2
when you get to the "museum", ask to be let in for free!
if they refuse, pray out loud to god for free entry.
creationist can't afford to let the power of prayer fail, it will make god look bad!
SuperAtheist 3 years ago 5
Even if it fails, it still might work.
InReasonWeTrust 3 years ago
I wouldn't go. Ive read an article on the place so I no whats there(crap) and how nice and expensive it is. Also I'm not sure I could hold my composure and not just freak out, maybe burn it or something poorly thought out.
AfrSkin 3 years ago
While, I would not go.. I do think it is nice that someone else goes so that I don't have to.
Does that make sense?
Better them than me?
rnistuk 3 years ago
One could argue that if enough non-creationists go, they would fill up the parking lot so true believers can't find a place.
InReasonWeTrust 3 years ago
I wouldn't pay for entrance to a creationist museum, for the same reason as I wouldn't pay to watch Expelled. I'm not going to give away my hard-earned money to a bunch of anti-science lunatics.
I'm not going to judge whether others should or not. But my money is better spent on other things.
CapnOrdinary 3 years ago 2
Right with you, C.O.
InReasonWeTrust 3 years ago
I'd like to go to that place, but the rage would make me vomit blood on a dinosaur.
BohemianBlasphemy 3 years ago
Why vomit blood on an innocent dinosaur; save it for Eve.
InReasonWeTrust 3 years ago
"Why vomit blood on an innocent dinosaur; save it for Eve"
Internet + Creationism = weirdest sentences ever.
BohemianBlasphemy 3 years ago 3
rotflol
InReasonWeTrust 3 years ago
To many believers--perhaps half the US population-- the Creationism Museum provides legitimate science. To them, given their pitiful education, science is not a process of QUESTION-BASED DISCOVERY, but simply a topical SUBJECT matter--if you are going to talk about fossils, bugs and stars, it is "science". Because of this, on the t-shirt, the word "science" is not perceived the same way by different people, so for many who see it, it is effective propaganda...that's why Ken made it!
InReasonWeTrust 3 years ago
that's a toughie irwt. off the top of my head though, with organisations such as ken hams creation museum they are misleading the public. such places should not be allowed to be built without very large disclaimers on exhibits telling people that " this is not fact and has not been proven" so people can at least decide for themselves. but since many in gov feel obligated to help these individuals due to sharing thier mythos science suffers and so does reason and logic.
hellshade2 3 years ago
One could also argue that non-religious visits are largely "freak tourism". Compare it with a Baptist minister from KY who visits an Amsterdam sex club--camera in hand--to have something to rant about back home. Who, among his flock, would not want to follow after him?
InReasonWeTrust 3 years ago
I wanted to go visit that museum next summer. Maybe I still will. But instead of giving them money, perhaps I'll show up with a placard. I think it's important for somepeople to go once in awhile, just to know of the possible dangers. A recon mission. But for the rest of us, go and speak truth with a protest.
DanielJGreenJr 3 years ago 2
It is true that you can't fairly say it is bogus unless you know the exact claims. It would be nice if someone documented every single aspect of the exhibits then provided a point-by-point counter to the precise language of the exhibit's text. But would that help more than hurt? The rule of the game is publicity, not accuracy. Controversy sells their two-bit product.
InReasonWeTrust 3 years ago
I think that it was wrong in a way that they gave their money to such an organization, but they did make that video showing "the belly of the beast", saving many of us from giving our money to go see it for out self. Also, the T-shirt that the one guy bought was pretty funny; "Science rocks!... The creation museum"
spence111 3 years ago 2