Re: Lawrence Krauss: Museum of misinformation posing as science

On May 20, 4:58 am, Jason Spaceman <notrea...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
From the article:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
An interesting cultural experiment is taking place in Petersburg
Kentucky, near the Ohio border. The experiment will shed light on the
following question: How much money and glitz does it take to
institutionalize a scientific lie?

Great media fanfare is already beginning to surround the official
opening later this month of the $27 Million Creation Museum, close to
the Cincinnati airport. Designed to oddly resemble natural history
museums throughout the world, this will be a supernatural history
museum, denying most, if not all, of natural history on this planet as
centuries of careful study and experimentation have revealed it.

The reason for this colossal unreason is quite simple: The historical
record in Genesis, as it is interpreted by Ken Ham, who created the
organization Answers in Genesis, must be literally true. Since this is
incompatible with essentially all of modern scientific knowledge,
therefore modern scientific knowledge must be incorrect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------­--

Read it athttp://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070519/EDIT02/7...

J. Spaceman

QUOTE:
Because the wizardry of modern science actually works, the Creation
Museum was designed to suggest that science demonstrates the viability
of a literal interpretation of Genesis. In order to argue that science
justifies a six-day creation of the Earth, a 6000 year old universe,
and a world where dinosaurs and humans happily roamed together, the
Creation Museum has to misrepresent the process and results of
science, and lies about the scientific record. And it does this not
just once, but via every single dazzling animatronic display and
explanation that goes along with it.
END QUOTE:

Creationists should be willing to challenge Krauss on this point.
"Every single" is a stunning rhetorical assertion. There is most
likely something in the museum that is not a misrepresentation of real
science.

My guess is that parts of displays and explanations will have some
scientific basis, but the legitimate science will be embedded in
dishonest rhetoric. Creationists that want to test the validity of
AIG's arguments just have to go to their web site and pick out any of
their "scientific arguments" and bring them back here for evaluation.
Tell us what you think that the argument is and what take home message
the argument has, and then give a link to the argument and see what
happens.

This should have been done with the AIG's museum exhibits. They
didn't have to bring their ideas here. They just had to get a panel
of experts to review the exhibit ideas and get their input. Why
couldn't they go to the Smithsonian, or any major natural history
museum to get help in evaluating the scientific validity of their
exhibits? Why couldn't they go to any major university in the world
to get a consensus validation of their notions? Could it possibly be
true that there is a world wide conspiracy to deny their "truths"
about nature?

Check out how feeble the creationists claims are. Just go to their
web site and pick what you consider to be a good argument and bring it
back here and tell us what you think the argument is and sit back and
be educated. Don't leave it up to the science side to give their
interpretation of the argument, give your interpretation of what the
argument is and what the argument tells you about nature. Sadly you
will find out that the creationists propaganda is designed to fool
you. They have had years to hone these arguments to manipulate they
way that you perceive them. Just do the experiment and find out.

Ron Okimoto


.

Relevant Pages