A Message From Creation Museum’s Mark Looy

Mark Looy of the Creation Museum visited our comments section to dispute another of our commentators’ accounts of the theories on display at the museum:

Just about every claim Paul has made about our science in the Creation Museum is untrue, i.e., we don’t say what he says we say. And with some points, Paul wants to see problems where they don’t even exist. In fact, the museum was attempting to communicate OPPOSITE points with the visuals — e.g., about the scale of the Flood jets and the varied features of Noah’s descendants! Our museum depicts Adam and Eve as middle brown in skin shade, not as “white Europeans”; now, to give Paul the benefit of the doubt, perhaps the photos he took were with a flash, and after viewing them he got the mistaken impression that Adam and Eve are portrayed as “white Europeans,” when it was Paul’s flash that changed their skin shade. It’s remarkable that a reviewer can post something in public like this and not get his facts straight. Disagree with our viewpoints all you want want, but please be accurate. — Mark Looy, CCO, The Creation Museum

I haven’t personally been to the museum myself so I am to some extent dependent on others’ accounts. Your Thoughts?

Comparing Humanism and Religion and Exploring Their Relationships to Each Other
Before I Deconverted: I Saw My First “Secular Humanist” On TV
Alix Jules On Being An African American Humanist
Why Would Being Controlled By A Brain Be Any Less Free Than Being Controlled By An Immaterial Soul?
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.

  • George

    I haven’t personally been to the museum either but why should that stop us from criticizing the science they display?

    Did the creationists actually start understanding the theory of evolution before criticizing it? No.

    Do they take the time to learn about carbon dating before attacking it? No.

    Do any of them understand the second law of thermodynamics before abusing it to “disprove” evolution? Nope.

    If you want to obfuscate the truth, boldly lie about facts, and generally misinform the public then you should be ready to defend those positions. If we are misinformed of the facts then it’s also your right to properly defend yourself.

    It’s remarkable that a reviewer can post something in public like this and not get his facts straight.
    It’s “remarkable” that a person who works at the museum can flippantly reject someones analysis in public like this by seizing upon a simple observation without actually “straightening” the “facts”.

    • Daniel Fincke

      Well, I don’t mean this post to be a concession of any sort. I am just putting out the call for more information from those who have actually been to the museum and confirm who is more credible. I have been happy to host numerous criticisms of the museum’s travesties against science without having been there. I just want to make sure we’re actually displaying information about the precise nature of their bogus theories. So hopefully more people who have information will explain what they know for us.