Round Up Of More Creation Museum Responses

Yesterday morning we liveblogged the creation museum twitter feed and then provided a wealth of photos from that same feed from yesterday afternoon. Today we profiled some of the videos circulating the ‘net and commented on one of the first mainstream media news stories about the event.  Now here come some more odds and ends (mostly found via Greg Laden‘s helpful list of links) about yesterday’s secularist visit to the Creation Museum:

The Empirical Infidel was doubly morally offended by his visit to the Creation “Museum”:

The museum inside and out screams of money. Huge amounts of currency must have been poured into the place and all for the expressed goal of teaching people that their public school education is wrong. It’s like going to Disneyland and being earnestly told that Cinderella is historical fact. Investing so much in fairy tales while public schools are having to cut their curricula and activities for lack of funds is obscene. I think such a financial investment in propaganda is even more immoral than the multitude of lies that fill the building.

A representative of The Thomas Society, a student which commits itself to “creating a ‘Third Place’ at the Ohio State University for conversation about faith, doubt, culture and illumination,” had these impressions (among others):

No media circus. More like media ripple.

Everyone behaved themselves, Christian and atheist alike. It was tense, no question, but no hostility either. I could tell the museum staff was tense and they watched the atheists like hawks.

The museum has its own security staff with guns and guard dogs. Yes, you read that right. Guard dogs. Why????

Met PZ Myers (in) famous atheist blogger. Much nicer in person than on his blog. Will be hanging with him more during the conference. http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/

A dualistic worldview is a bad thing.

Dinosaurs rock. Probably my favorite part of the museum. What is it about those things that turn me into a seven year old?

Book store: Terrible. I’ll get into the more later, but the only book I would recommend in that store was Francis Schaeffer’s “How Should We then Live?” .

Seriously? People are still using Bishop Ussher’s dating of the age of the world? Why? Why???????? I love the good bishop theologicially, but the dating system, yuck.

Atheists annoyed me a few times with some of their comments. Christians annoyed me with their hostile looks at the atheists.

Surprisingly the Thomas Society, while endorsing Francis Schaeffer gave the “philosophical worldview” of the Creation Museum a D and conversations had with atheists an A.  Sounds to me like the approval of Francis Schaeffer is a liberal Christian’s last existentialist fig leaf on what should be just turn into an honest atheism here.  What is puzzling is that the Thomas Society would denounce dualism vehemently and repeatedly as part of assuming that a “third” middle way must be right, while embracing a moral dualist, “atheism=moral nihilism” huckster like Schaeffer.  If they think his message is really, at its core, any more sophisticated than the rest of what the Creation Museum offers, then they haven’t listened to what his son thinks carefully enough.

ABC News reports that there was one point of agreement between the atheists and the Christians:

at least one conversation between religious believers and members of the group found common ground. Beneath a poster that presented the creationist interpretation of fossils, two students from North Carolina and a man who became religious after being diagnosed with cancer engaged in a polite dialogue about helping others and tolerating differences that drew a crowd.”Regardless of religion, we both live our lives for the same reasons,” said one of the students. “The big thing we have a problem with here is the faulty science.”

Dave Nichols’s flickr account is chock full of more Creation “Museum” photosThe Ruffington Post has a few too.

And, in honor, of the big secularist trip to the Creation “Museum”, South Dakota Humanist highlights this video of fundamentalists storming a real museum:

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt

And if all that’s not enough for you, Greg Laden has even more links.

Your Thoughts?

About Daniel Fincke

Dr. Daniel Fincke  has his PhD in philosophy from Fordham University and spent 11 years teaching in college classrooms. He wrote his dissertation on Ethics and the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche. On Camels With Hammers, the careful philosophy blog he writes for a popular audience, Dan argues for atheism and develops a humanistic ethical theory he calls “Empowerment Ethics”. Dan also teaches affordable, non-matriculated, video-conferencing philosophy classes on ethics, Nietzsche, historical philosophy, and philosophy for atheists that anyone around the world can sign up for. (You can learn more about Dan’s online classes here.) Dan is an APPA  (American Philosophical Practitioners Association) certified philosophical counselor who offers philosophical advice services to help people work through the philosophical aspects of their practical problems or to work out their views on philosophical issues. (You can read examples of Dan’s advice here.) Through his blogging, his online teaching, and his philosophical advice services each, Dan specializes in helping people who have recently left a religious tradition work out their constructive answers to questions of ethics, metaphysics, the meaning of life, etc. as part of their process of radical worldview change.

  • thomas2026

    Hey Camels,
    Thanks for the blog love. However, I would like to correct a few things. I’m the leader of my student group and not an actual student at Ohio State. My students are gone for the summer. I was invited by the SSA to go with them to the museum and speak at the conference.

    “Sounds to me like the approval of Francis Schaeffer is a liberal Christian’s last existentialist fig leaf on what should be just turn into an honest atheism here.”

    We aren’t actually liberal Christians. We aren’t conservative either. You are making the same mistake as the museum, giving only two choices.

    “while embracing a moral dualist, “atheism=moral nihilism” huckster like Schaeffer.”

    This is a complete misunderstanding of Schaeffer’s point. He doesn’t say that atheism equals moral nihlism. He says that atheism equals philsophical inconsistency. Big Difference.

    “If they think his message is really, at its core, any more sophisticated than the rest of what the Creation Museum offers, then they haven’t listened to what his son thinks carefully”

    We do think his message is more sophisticated than the creation museum. And, I have read much of what Frank has written. In fact, Frank and I write each other occasionally. Schaeffer became disillusioned with the creation museum types, but not with Christianity itself.

    The Thomas Society.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X