Bible Science

Isn't the point of the science vs religion "tension" the factual conclusions drawn from the evidence in the first place? You're taking science and running it through a filter. At that point it's just data with biased human interpretation wrapped around it.

This doesn't look like it provides many answers at all. It looks more like an animatronic theme park aimed at the christian demographic to me.

Carbon dating anyone? C'mon....the stories of Gilgamesh, Beowulf and Ancient Egypt are older than the stories in the Bible. Why don't we start with the Sumarians versions of Creation? Or possibly Ancient Asia's versions of creation.

It's really amazing how easily people can be swayed by pseudoscience and total BS... Erosion of family morals? How about erosion of intelligence. If creationists had their way it would be the dark ages all over again. If your looking for a way to understand the world and your own existence, try opening your eyes and thinking.

I really like how you present the information without judging them. While I don't agree with them about anything it's compelling to see Ph.Ds who believe in the bible more than science. I find their claim that evolution leads to a vacant and immoral existence particularly interesting.

Thanks for braving the wilds of Kentucky to bring us this story.

No disrespect to the homie Adam but I think this piece is empty of content. First, I don't see why it's important to claim that Adam is an anthropologist. Was this suppose to make his inquiry seem 'scientifically' oriented. Nothing in the piece touched on issues in anthropology.

Further, I didn't see anything that could be considered 'humorous' about the piece. Apparently, simply believing God communicates to his creatures (through direct revelation and the natural world) is 'funny in and of itself.'

It looks like Adam did what most uninterested people do at museums...look and keep moving. Too bad he didnt address the science...even more, too bad Current thought this was a fair piece to air.

creationist believe that god created the universe in 7 days!?

earth existed before day 1
day 1: light
day 2: water
day 3: land
day 4: sun, moon and stars
day 5: birds and sea creatures
day 6: land animals including man and woman made from man
day 7: rest

So apparently the earth existed before the sun and other stars. Light existed before the sun and stars. birds existed before land animals. This all seems to make perfect sense.

http://www.pbs.org/deepspace/timeline/

My favorite part is when he talks about George Washington. "Would I go and carbon date one of his buttons? No i would trust the history books!"

I really don't see how anyone could take any of that as solid evidence, all of their arguments are fundamentally flawed. Good god, Kentucky.

Leave Kentucky out of this.

Gotta say Kentucky is not as backward as you might think. It is less progressive than most states but this could've easily been in WV, Alabama, Kansas, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas or even Ohio. I mean, have you ever been northbound on I-75 just south of Dayton where a 60-70 ft statue of Jesus stands? And in the very beginning, the video shows a billboard with the 10 commandments, which can be found Northbound I-71 in Ohio about 20 minutes from where I grew up. The point is that it's not a state issue, it's a country-wide education issue. To understand science, is to understand how the scientific method works and thats what people in this country need to learn, whether they live in backwoods Kentucky or Los Angeles.

abandon all ye hope!

when people say stuff like "christians hijack science" it's not only offensive but its ignorant. Even a cursory view of the history of science shows that the 'scientific enterprise' emerges our of Christian cultural context...and even more strongly, many early pioneers of modern science worked out of a christian conviction about the order and nature of the universe.

There is definitly more to life than science! This museum of confusion is just not right. How can you use the term "science" and connect that to "religion". The physical and the spiritual, are two seperate worlds. Did they really feel that threatened by "science"?

And if it is out of pride, I always thought that, being passive is more true to your faith, then exploiting it.

Does this really help the church?

Sounded little porny there for a second... the wispering, the track... I dunno about that stuff. I know many have profit margins go up like in the 80's with this stuff. Again, not all are bad apples.

I got some data for you, see the link?
http://current.com/items/88950964_#88952388

What a fantastic monument to human ignorance and blind faith! If a fact is uncomfortable, just refuse to believe it. Ah, true religion and its attendant wars, bigotry, cruelty, prejudice, destructiveness and most of all self righteousness. Maybe humanity has not yet evolved enough, and maybe our species will not last long enough to cure our ignorance. Very sad...

The Bible is not a history book, it is a fictional story book written by men thousands of years ago. Someday " Dianetics" will be an ancient text, and it will (possibly) be looked at the same way the Christian Bible is.

equiping christian's to defend their faith?? Is this a call to arms?

sean,
it's a 2000 year old call to defend your belief system by providing a rational defense for your worldview...it says as much in that bible thing collecting dust on your shelf (try the book of Acts chapter 17).

The last comment about getting dignity to man only from creationism is absurd. I would rather have dignity that is deserved from actions, rather than just handed over to me. Another example of laziness from the believers of the one who can't be seen--or won't be seen which is just rude.

Also, $30,000,000.00 to make this museum. Wow, I knew the mega churches were profitable and have lobbyists in washington d.c., but holy moses maybe I should have been a minister.

I sure hope this farce is paying taxes.

TAX CHURCHES AND CREATION MUSEUMS NOW!

Booksbrown,

Using my knowledge of human evolution, physical archaeology, and historical geology in my interviews with the creation scientists would have produced a very polemic, divisive, and subjective pod. None of my anthropological training was used to deconstruct their arguments--and this is a valid criticism of the pod. I did not interject in interviews nor did I editorialize in the voice-over narration. Current and I agreed that this is far too energizing and political of a topic to use critical journalism in a four-minute investigation.

To argue on behalf of my professional training would have violated the trust of my informants, and my friend Pastor Brad Bigney, afforded me and Current TV.

You are responding to the write-up about the pod which is an inaccurate description about the pod's content. I have requested that Current replace the pod description with one that is accurate.

Religion is based on nothing but emotionalism and is concerned with facts only if they happen to support some silly belief of a religious practitioner. To accept the idea of creationism, a person would have to be very good at self deception.

I agree that this museum only appears to graphically portray the idea of Christianity as a means for physical extortion of a child's amusement park.

it is interesting how the human brain can delude it self, and also the need of a lot of humans to have an answer. not necessarily the truth , but a answer.
notice that this "museum" dosent recognize that there are a lot of different ethnics in the world.these peopole have a combination of delusion,irrational belief and racist mind set. Instead of using the poor, black inner city as an example of the degradation of man, how about showing white slave masters whipping and mutilating black men for trying to run to freedom, or how about white men raping black women for 200 years!! a bunch of liars, fools and hypocrites

Right on, tesmith47. Religion has been used throughout history to excuse inexcusable behavior. Since emotions are the prime mover in religious beliefs, consider this. An emotion is a response to an objective fact as seen through the lens of one's perception. The objective fact, however, is absolutely independent of any emotion. For example, a religious person may passionately believe that the universe is only 6,000 years old, but that doesn't change the fact that it's actual age is about 14 billion years.

How does the 6,000 year bunch manage to avoid trigonometry. Astronomers can look at a distant star and check its angle in winter and summer. Using those two positions as a baseline and the different angles, trigonometry tables will let you calculate the distance of the star. There are other methods, but this one is fairly simple. If that star happens to be a couple million light years away, It took that long for the light to reach us. In the religious model, the farthest object from earth can be only 6,000 light years away. It just ain't so, people.

Amazing how we all preach tolerance - except nobody's tolerant of Christianity anymore. Half of these comments allude that people that are religious or have strong faith are "less than" people who rely solely on science.

I'm not condoning what Christians do or excuse "in the name of God." But Science and Religion can go together. It doesn't have to be mutually exclusive. But, at the same time, I don't really agree with this museum either. The whole point of faith is believing in something without knowing all the answers or facts - not trying to make all the facts based on our assumptions.