in the town of bedrock

They’re apparently about halfway done with the new $25 million “biblical interpretation” museum being built in Petersburg, Kentucky, right outside of Cincinnati (formerly “Porkopolis”). Here are a few clips from an update that ran in today’s Washington Post:

…The guide, a soft-spoken fellow with a scholarly aspect, walks through the halls of this handsome, half-finished museum and points to the sculpture of a young velociraptor.

“We’re placing this one in the hall that explains the post-Flood world,” explains the guide. “When dinosaurs lived with man.”

A reporter has a question or two about this dinosaur-man business, but Mark Looy — the guide and a vice president at the museum — already has walked over to the lifelike head of a T. rex, with its three-inch teeth and carnivore’s grin.

“We call him our ‘missionary lizard,’ ” Looy says. “When people realize the T. rex lived in Eden, it will lead us to a discussion of the gospel. The T. rex once was a vegetarian, too”…

“Evolutionary Darwinists need to understand we are taking the dinosaurs back,” says Kenneth Ham, president of Answers in Genesis-USA, which is building the museum. “This is a battle cry to recognize the science in the revealed truth of God”…

Polls taken last year showed that 45 percent of Americans believe that God created humans in their present form 10,000 years ago (or less) and that man shares no common ancestor with the ape. Only 26 percent believe in the central tenet of evolution, that all life descended from a single ancestor…

According to the same article, there’s another Creationist organization there that’s organizing expeditions to the highlands of Papua New Guinea to search for “living pterodactyls.”

Closer to home, the battle for America’s classrooms was initiated in the Pennsylvania courts today as a federal judge began hearing arguments as to whether Intelligent Design can be taught alongside evolution.

And, remember, this is just the kind of case that will probably wind up in front of the Supreme Court. So, before you decide to just passively sit by and allow John Roberts to take his seat on the high court, you might want to consider whether or not you like the idea of your children being taught about Christianity in science class, from textbooks, like the one shown above, that feature vegetarian dinosaurs frolicking playfully in front of what appear to be Biblical townhome communities. As unthinkable as that might have been even ten years ago, that’s exactly where we’re headed.

On the subject of the Roberts nomination, according to the most recent information I have access to, Michigan Senator Debbie Stabenow has said that she would vote no, and, as of right now, our other Senator, Carl Levin, has yet to take a position one way or the other. (If you would like to speak to someone in the Senator’s office, and ask that he please vote “no” on this important matter, you can call (202) 224-6221.)

And, while we’re on the subject of evolution, I’ve got two more links to share. The first will take you to an interesting series at MSNBC on the future of evolution on Earth (if you believe in such “Christ-hating” concepts). And, the second will take you to a humor piece on Intelligent Design from the new issue of The New Yorker.

I have a lot more to say, but it’s already an hour past my newly imposed bed-time… Good night, my invisible friends. (Let’s all try to dream of dinosaurs tonight!)

This entry was posted in Church and State. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.

31 Comments

  1. Shanster
    Posted September 27, 2005 at 4:47 am | Permalink

    Mark-
    While you see the PA case as an issue of ‘teaching ID alongside evolution’, the facts show that the case is about providing secondary supplemental information to those who want to explore it further. If you read your own link, you will see that the Dover statement doesn’t say anything about teaching ID in the classroom. But, of course, you may be looking to the future when the IDers push the agenda even further. Is this the evolutionist ‘line in the sand’: no alternate information? Do you want all dissenting texts removed from the public library?

  2. Posted September 27, 2005 at 8:18 am | Permalink

    The point here is if ID materials are to be provided and/or taught and at the taxpayers expense I might add, then I want every single religion represented and genesis texts representing every established and/or crackpot religion provided for those who want to explore it further also. As well as the Atheist creed. Do you want to pay for, and have available in every SCIENCE classroom copies of The Vedas, The Dhammapala, The Seth Materials, The Golden Bough, Every Barbara Walker book available, The Koran, The Torah, Whatever Scientology book covers their genesis theory, Crowley, etc.etc.etc. etc. ad nauseum? Should we be teaching the laws of Karma in a science class? Well if you are teaching ID then we damn well should.
    And even if every group is willing to provide the materials for free does it not belong in the SCIENCE classroom or does it?
    That is the only condition under which I will accept ID in the science classroom.
    And reminding you again that there are several very old and very well established religions out there who do not believe in a creator God AT All.

  3. Shanster
    Posted September 27, 2005 at 9:29 am | Permalink

    You’re right, Stella, that will inevitably become the issue. Those materials are definitely available on-line. If you are going to offer ID as an alternative to the traditionally accepted evolution theory, then you should offer other options, too. This could get exhaustive, but could be broken down on an on-line wikipedia or something. Students could be directed to that page, to search out what they want to learn about.

  4. Posted September 27, 2005 at 11:27 am | Permalink

    Perhaps we should stop teaching contentious topics like “science” in American schools.

    It’s not like science ever did anybody any good.

  5. Posted September 27, 2005 at 12:16 pm | Permalink

    …and this from CNN:

    http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/09/27/evolution.trial.ap/index.html

  6. Posted September 27, 2005 at 12:56 pm | Permalink

    Stella, that’s a very nice list of suggested course materials. I’m a big fan of Jane Roberts, actually, and I think putting Seth in a classroom (maybe the teacher could even channel him) is a wonderful idea.

    As for the museum in Kentucky, I have no problem with it, so long as they give equal time to the crucial influences in our prehistoric development made by The Great Gazoo.

  7. chris
    Posted September 27, 2005 at 1:22 pm | Permalink

    Didn’t Popeye have a Gazoo too? Was it Bleep?

  8. Tony Buttons
    Posted September 27, 2005 at 1:34 pm | Permalink

    I believe you’re thinking of “Eugene the magical Jeep.” (This was, of course, before we had vehicles called Jeeps.)

    http://members.tripod.com/HoboJeepers/eugene.htm

  9. Tony Buttons
    Posted September 27, 2005 at 1:36 pm | Permalink

    “Professor Brainstine, in Eugene’s first appearance in the Sunday comics on August 9, 1936, gives a full and comprehensive answer to these questions.

  10. be OH bE
    Posted September 27, 2005 at 1:47 pm | Permalink

    I believe it was Eugene the Jeep.

    Also,
    He-Man had his Orko
    and
    Lion-O had his Snarf

  11. Posted September 27, 2005 at 2:22 pm | Permalink

    I’m actually thinking that the Flintstones should possibly be re-examined for evidence of Biblical Paradigms, as I just discovered the existence of Hanna-Barbera’s Greatest Adventure: Stories from the Bible , a series that apparently even some Christians don’t like.

  12. Posted September 27, 2005 at 2:31 pm | Permalink

    Well, darnit. It figures. I was born a few thousand years too late to be able to ride a T-Rex to school. Darn my luck to heck! Heck I say!

  13. Teddy Glass
    Posted September 27, 2005 at 4:25 pm | Permalink

    I just called Carl Levin’s office and, according to the intern I spoke with, he’s decided to vote to confirm Roberts. I guess he wants to “keep his powder dry” for the fight over the next nominee, who is more likely to be even worse. It still pisses me off though. I asked, “How can Levin vote to confirm when the White House didn’t even release all the documents authored by Roberts?” The guy on the other end just said that Levin didn’t think it was that important. Jesus.

  14. chris
    Posted September 27, 2005 at 4:28 pm | Permalink

    I find it wholly unacceptable that Hanna Barbera’s Bible stories are not given equal play in Sunday school! If they are going to teach King James interpretations of these parables I believe it behooves them in the interest of a true understanding of Christianity to use cartoon version of biblical characters.

    What is the problem with providing supplementary secondary information of Christ’s teachings? Why can’t we provide children with these options and let them choose as they see fit, or even have interest?

    Of course, I am sure you will agree with me that intrepretations resulting from the Modern Living Bible are unacceptable given their inclination to use street slang (ie-druggie talk).

  15. Doug Skinner
    Posted September 27, 2005 at 4:56 pm | Permalink

    According to Professor Brainstine, the Jeep was created when fourth dimensional cells combined with the African hooey hound. This would make a fascinating diorama.

    Collin — I understand your disappointment. Maybe you can ride one of the pterodactyls when the expedition returns.

    Chris — Shouldn’t the Hanna-Barbera cartoons be balanced with Foolbert Sturgeon’s classic underground comic “The Adventures of Jesus”?

  16. john galt
    Posted September 27, 2005 at 7:20 pm | Permalink

    What about Great Spaghetti monsterism? I for one fear his noodly wrath… I’m off to accept the sacrement of the chef boyardee. I see his noodly appendage at work in causing all this debate.

  17. john galt
    Posted September 27, 2005 at 8:14 pm | Permalink

    why would a T-Rex live in Eden, thats like a wookie living on Endor. That does not make sense.. I repeat that does not make sense. If you don’t believe that a Wookie would live on Endor you must not believe that a T-Rex would live in Eden.

  18. chris
    Posted September 27, 2005 at 8:58 pm | Permalink

    Endor? I can’t remember where is Endor. BTW, I just told my son-who has cycled back into a pretty extreme dinosaur cycle-that some Christians believe that T-Rex was at one time a vegan. He disconcertedly queried whether we practiced that type of Christianity. In fact, this could be the straw that breaks Creationism’s back. Trying to get little boys, and girls for that matter, to believe that T-Rex was ever a vegan.

    I can appreciate the attempt to believe that man and dinosaurs cohabitated. But, T-Rex a vegan? That shit don’t play.

  19. Posted September 27, 2005 at 10:22 pm | Permalink

    I believe that’s the first time The Chewbacca Defense has been used on this weblog. (john galt)

  20. Posted September 27, 2005 at 10:35 pm | Permalink

    I might be getting into hot water here, and I’m not trying to insult mark’s readership, but I think there’s probably a few of you that know more about Star Wars than I do.

    That having been said, I was under the impression (and no, I’m not going to try and find a link to prove it) that in fact, the original series outline of George Lucas WAS to have Wookies on Endor:

    His early plan was to have the Empire eventually beaten by wookies, living on a woodland planet with a primitive level of technology (The wookie christmas special featured this planet); by the time Return of the Jedi came along, he decided that 1) he had already established wookies as being more technologically advanced than his early plot called for, and 2) he had already begun the ‘Muppetization’ of characters (which reached its zenith with Jar-Jar), and wanted a cuter protagonist race.

    So, although names and appearances changed, you actually could say that, in a way, Chewbacca lived on Endor.

    Please, somebody back me up on this.

  21. mark
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 12:04 am | Permalink

    Even if I could, I would not back you up on this, Brett. I’m sorry. The memories of being picked on in school are rising to the surface at the very thought of it.

    And thank you for the Chewbacca Defense link, Steve. I’ve got to remember to use that somewhere.

  22. Posted September 28, 2005 at 10:44 am | Permalink

    “Help me, wikipedia, you’re my only hope”:

    A climactic battle between the technologically advanced Empire and a race of primitive hairy aliens, the Wookiees, was present in George Lucas’ original treatment for Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope. As the story changed and the trilogy structure was solidified in Lucas’ mind, the battle was postponed until Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi, where it developed into a battle featuring Ewoks on the moon of Endor. At the same time, the Wookiees developed into a more technologically savvy, though no less hairy, species.
    Lucas’ original conception of the battle featured hundreds of Wookiees on screen. Due to costs, the original idea was scrapped and replaced by a battle featuring relatively few diminutive Ewoks, who do not play a very significant tactical role in the battle. A large scale battle with hundreds of characters was eventually realized in The Phantom Menace, but was not viewed as a significant battle by fans. The Battle of Kashyyyk in Revenge of the Sith finally brings this concept to the screen.

    (endquote)

    So, my Chewbacca defense rests. Incidentally, I was so surprised by the amount of information in the wikipedia entry for this fake battle, that out of curiousity I looked up their page for the Battle of New Orleans, which I was disturbed to notice is less than half that size.

  23. Teddy Glass
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 10:51 am | Permalink

    I don’t think the Battle of New Orleans had any product tie-ins, Brett.

  24. Posted September 28, 2005 at 11:37 am | Permalink

    Teddy, I think Johnny Horton would disagree with you.

  25. Teddy Glass
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 12:34 pm | Permalink

    From today’s Detroit Free Press:

    Levin, D-Mich., said his review of Roberts’ writings and Senate testimony led him to believe that the judge’s views had evolved since his days as a young lawyer in the Reagan administration.

    “To vote against Judge Roberts, I would need to believe either that he were an ideologue whose ideology distorts his judgment and brings into question his fairness and open-mindedness, or that his policy values were inconsistent with fundamental principles of American law,” Levin said.

    “I do not believe either to the be case. Judge Roberts has modified some of his views over time, which I take as evidence that he is not an ideologue, and has not only a keen mind but a mind open to argument,” he said.

    Levin said he met with Roberts on Monday, asking the judge point-blank whether he talked to Vice President Dick Cheney and top Bush administration officials before his nomination about his views on several constitutional flashpoints, including the powers of the presidency, prayer in public places and affirmative action.

    “He looked me square in the eye and said that they didn’t take place,” Levin said. “I must take Judge Roberts at his word.”

    Yup, he took him at his word.

    The whole article can be found here:

    http://www.freep.com/news/latestnews/pm6285_20050927.htm

  26. john galt
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 7:02 pm | Permalink

    Movie Concept:

    Mad Max 4 : Beyond the SuperDome
    “20,000 men enter one man leaves”

  27. mark
    Posted September 28, 2005 at 8:29 pm | Permalink

    Getting back to our earlier conversation, one wonders if our friend Chewbacca will have a different defense for the harrassment charges.

    (like courtesy of boingboing)

  28. Posted October 13, 2005 at 10:04 am | Permalink

    I realize that it seems like several years have passed since this thread, but I thought that if anyone reads it, gets to the end of the comments, and follows mark’s link to the chewbacca/Leia image, they may want to also examine a Star Trek equivalent I just found.

  29. mark
    Posted October 13, 2005 at 8:49 pm | Permalink

    If that’s how men greet women in the future, I wonder how women greet men.

  30. be OH bE
    Posted October 14, 2005 at 9:02 am | Permalink

    “I wonder how women greet men.”

    Wonder … or fantasize?

  31. Tony Buttons
    Posted October 14, 2005 at 11:50 am | Permalink

    The future’s gonna be so fuckin’ great!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Connect

BUY LOCAL... or shop at Amazon through this link Banner Initiative ryan