Many letters in response to Matt Hutaff's article on the Creation Museum. Also, a nomination for the Great American novel and thoughts on the housing market in Los Angeles.
My inherent belief in God requires that I believe the earth to have been created in six literal days, and that the entire Bible is the inspired word of God. If a few select chapters of Genesis are a “little kooky”, then the whole Bible cannot be trusted, in which case my faith is in vain. Evolutionists continually ask for “proof”, and continually throw up “evidence” that claims to disprove the account of Genesis. People of faith are going to believe the Bible; Christians of reason are also going to believe science. The point of the museum and the research of Creationists is to show that Creation and science are not enemies of each other, but walk hand-in-hand. Creation Science and evolution science are based on the same evidence. We live on the same planet, see the same fossils, study the same stars and live under the same laws of physics. Assume the age of the earth to be 6000 years (vice the assumption made by the evolutionists)...and the science still works. The exhibits counter evolutionists’ claims that the bible must be false and that there must be no God because the book of Genesis does not jive with their own maniacal theories. Those that would lead us to believe the universe is billions of years old (with no real way to prove it) simply bend science around evolution’s “innate correctness”; when you consider evolution completely infallible, there is no longer a search for rational scientific thought. Sound familiar? Yes, there are churches where we can learn these things. However, it is the public schools—supported by the media and liberal government—that have control of our children’s minds 8 hours a day, five days a week for most of there early lives on through college, teaching popular theories as fact with no room for question. I would be much more concerned for science if there were NOT a Creation Museum open today. Thank you.
Travis
***
You started your article with: “Quick question for the good folks at the Creation Museum <http://www.creationmuseum.org/> : How'd Noah fit all those dinosaurs into his ark?”
If you are truly being honest in journalism and trying to see/understand both sides, here’s their answer: http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2001/dinos_on_ark.asp
Check out the www.answersingenesis.com <http://www.answersingenesis.com/> website and you may be surprised at some great science. (I say that as a former biology major.)
Thanks,
Stephen
***
I don't think it's accurate or fair to call Chick Publications "racist." It is certainly bigoted, but the bigotry is directed solely at religions Jack Chick considers to be false -- primarily Roman Catholicism, but also Mormonism, Jehovah's Witness, Islam, etc. Chick Publications subscribes to some extremely bizarre conspiracy theories, but it doesn't appear to be promoting racism.
Tom
***
IF YOU USED COMMON SENSE YOU WOULD UNDERSTAND HOW LARGE THE ARK WAS AND THE LARGEST DINOSUAR EGG THAT HASE BEEN FOUND IS SMALLER THAN A FOOTBALL. NOAH TOOK BABIES THEY KIVED LONGER AND THE REASON HE WAS TAKING THEM WAS TO REPOPULATE THE EARTH. IF YOU THINK WE GOT HERE BY RANDOM CHANCE HOW CAN YOU TRUST ANY OF YOUR BRAIN THOUGHTS..
Liley
***
How is it that some who considers themselves so intelligent and scientific has such a narrow view of the facts. Just your opening statement aloneproves your unwillingness to actually way the evidence. If you now anythingabout reptile physiology you would know that they grow throughout there lives yet can reproduce at a very young age. Are you not open minded enoughto see the obvious. Nowhere in the bible does it say they took adults. Letsbe realistic if you had limited space what would you do? Also could you please explain to me why if man never walked with dinosaurs, which aremention directly 25 times in the Bible and 10 more indirectly, how come theyexists in tens of thousands of accurate paintings, figurines and historic artifacts dating prior to their discovery as fossils? I could go on withsmall details like the fact what you call scientific approach to creation,but it is based on a theory that on it best day cannot even qualify as a theory. You put your faith in an assumption that everything was created bynothing all by accident. Now that takes faith. If you truly would like tosee the evidence I would be glad to discuss it with you if you dare, but if not I will assume you truly are just close-minded.
Thanks for your time,
Lester
***
You write: Quick question for the good folks at the Creation Museum:
How'd Noah fit all those dinosaurs into his ark? Quick answer: Small dinosaurs. All dinosaurs started out small. Obviously, Noah would have brought young, virile animals onto the ark and not old, large ones. Is that the best you've got?
There really are simple, straight-forward answers to the dilemmas you have written about. Trying to throw in Kent Hovind as a straw man isn't going to work either.
Jason
***
I feel sorry for you. All you do is mock what God made. You mock what you don't understand. Does the Bible scare you? Does it scare youbecause it may be right? Are you 100% sure that it ISN'T right? Justthink, if it IS right and you are wrong.........where will you be when you die? Hmmmmm. Are you so sure of yourself and YOUR science that you stake your life on it, and everyone elses right to chose what is realscience and what is not? Science changes and ideas and "theories"change through time, but the Bible does not. It never has. It's themost widely read book through all of history. There are more originalcopies of it than any other ancient text, and not one sentence hasever been disproven. Can you say that about todays "science". Please don't mock what the majority of folks believe in, in our country.
Jason
***
Thank you for bringing attention to the Creation Museum. I've always understood creation and evolution to BOTH be theories, since none of us was actually present thousands or millions of years ago to witness anything. I don't see why anyone would be worried about a silly creationist museum. Why does it matter if fundamentalists want to have a museum for their point of view. Isn't is at least possible that the Bible's account of creation is true? If so, what would be so bad about it? What do you mean when you say Why, then, the need to create a museum dedicated to fusing faith with its nemesis?
and what wound are you speaking of here Christians feel a wound that can only be healed by merging secular discussions with religious ones?
That same married couple might have been in favor of Proposition #13, so that building malls not taxing houses, was the only way the state could raise money. They might have preferred that L.A. stay the sprawling, one story city that it mostly is, so that not enough housing is built to house the newcomers to California. They might have voted Republican, so that unregulated banking and other financial institutions could recklessly create mortgage loans that allow anyone with NO MONEY to buy a house, but others to speculate and drive the cost up through fraud and speculation.
I have a friend who works in real estate and tells me first hand the liars and fraud going on which helps to drive the prices up. What goes up must come down.
A while back, my neighbor’s 11 year old boy told me to fuck off when I asked him not to tease the dogs (mine and my neighbors). I normally take the high road but this little shit ticked me off so I fired right back and told him to fuck off. Well he went and told dad half the story (I’m sure) and a few days later, there’s dad at my door asking what the hell’s wrong with me. Me? I asked. What does it say about you? I continued. I explained what happened and apologized for supposedly knowing better. The thing is that the kid kept teasing and one day he got too close. Shaggy, my neighbor’s dog bit him through the fence. The parents were pissed and called to have the dog destroyed. I hate to say it but I was thinking they ought to destroy the kid. Why take the kid’s stupidity out on the poor dog? I kept that sentiment to myself. Anyway, the animals are here in Los Angeles too. Heck. I have one of my own and I too think she could never be like that. Oh really?
Tobey will be fine. He is financially secure (I’m assuming) and would never have to work again if he chose not to. He is also not just a pretty face or a physical hunk. He can act and he comes off as an everyday, average guy. My prediction is that he’ll do another Spiderman if the price and other conditions are right. Why the # #@!!*! not? He will also do other serious films to ensure roles in the so-called artsy films because he appears to be just a “normal” person. Anyway, Leonardo survived Titanic despite being labeled just a pretty face at the time so why wouldn’t Tobey?
