Should Christians be able to make a creationism musem even though all scientific evidence contradicts it?

Question

Well, I believe in the personal freedoms of everyone, and I believe that if they place is privately owned they can run it as they wish. However, since this is supposed to be geared in a scientific context to the general public, most importantly children, I am divided on where my conclusive point of view on this should stand. Should they be required to have a disclaimer saying "this is rejected by most of the scientifict community"? I don't know. Of course Christians will jump and say "IT IS SCIENTIFIC. NO DISCLAIMER. YOU HAVEN'T FOUND YOUR MONKEY PERSON." But honestly, should this, regardless of your religious point of view, be presented as SCIENCE when MOST SCIENTISTS agree it isn't?

For Christians that want no disclaimer: Would you be okay if say the Raliens (people that believe aliens made us) had their own "scientific" musem open to children without a disclaimer saying it isn't endorsed as science by most scientists?

Answer 1

Let them build their pseudo-science museums. Then they can loose money and collapse under their own bloviating nonsense. As long as it isn't funded by the State.

The Creationists keep trying to insist that Creationism has a scientific basis to it, but they have yet to provide a single scrap of evidence. The displays that I've seen consist of a lot of carefully rewritten history, wild claims, and accompanied by Biblical quotations. Not a trace of real evidence anywhere.

Answer 2

Christians should have the freedom to argue scientifically for creationism. I think we're agreed there.
Just because most scientists agree with something doesn't make it true or scientific. History shows us this. In the past, the majority of scientists believed in a flat earth, that the world is made out of four elements, that the number 1 was the mother of all other numbers, etc, etc.
We should believe the truth, not what everybody else believes in.
Creationists say "you haven't your monkey person". What's so unscientific about that? Just simply stating "that's not science", without scientifically arguing, testing and concluding, is too easy.
If the community or the government insists on a disclaimer stating that most scientists don't believe in creation, then fine, they'll put one in. But isn't that common knowledge?

Answer 3

Creationism and Evolution would desire to be held with a similar regard, or actual, Creationism would desire to be held with slightly greater regard than Evolution on the grounds that's a theory of intelligence and purpose. Evolution policies out each thing to do with intelligence, somebody or some thing bobbing up existence, and purpose, that somebody or some thing bobbing up existence with a purpose in strategies, leaving Evolution to be consistent with danger. As existence types are fr greater complicated than say an airplane or a working laptop or computer...properly, that's secure to assert that a theory invoking danger is actual much less credible than one invoking purpose and layout. that's uncomplicated sufficient to discover books and sites that specify the various holes you will hit upon in evolution. interior of a species evolution isn't completely fake although; that's shown that organic decision works. that's been shown, and that's seen ordinary experience. that's not evidence even although, or supported by overwhelming information, that single cellular existence types, via danger and organic decision, can exchange into greater complicated, and that's not evidence that a lizard can time beyond regulation improve wings and alter right into a chook, an completely diverse species all jointly. they'd exchange yet no exchange into some thing new. I recommend you study the 1st hyperlink in my aspects, in case you have an interest interior the subject remember of Evolution vs. Creationism. that's a truthful quantity of text cloth even although that's rather exciting and insightful. vacationing the concentration on the family members internet site is likewise a reliable theory for greater training, and in case you like visuals watch the videos Expelled: no Intelligence Allowed, by Ben Stein. i'm hoping I helped you slightly or informed you some thing new! God Bless, compliment God!

Answer 4

First of all we do not need a "creationist" museum. Secondly evolution has not been proven to be fact, and there are an increasing number of scientists abandoning that hypothesis, for in truth Evolution can not be called even a theory. Because as we have been told the process takes to long to have "observable" change for scientific data to be had. The point is that evolutionists (like yourself) have been duped by a few people saying the same thing over and over and over till absurdum till people say that well they have been saying it for so long it must be true. Right? Wrong!

If you were really honest, seeking the truth go look for the evidence instead taking some one elses word for what you believe. How do you know they are telling you the truth of the data that they have found. For all there truth is all subjective truth - that is subject to their own interpretation and viewpoint. Think for yourself. Think about the facts that are truly presented. Don't be deluded and duped into believing what a few people are espousing. Get some backbone and find out for certain the things that you believe in.

Like I say, but do you really want to know the truth or do you just want to keep on listening to those who "claim" to know the truth.

Answer 5

There really is no need for a Christian Museum as history is naturally chocked full of relics verifying various religious beliefs. The Cairo Museum has carvings in stone depicting the Exodus and a miniature Arc of the Covenant. The Dead Sea Scrolls, also writers(non-believers) at the time of Jesus. Other religions or beliefs have equal opportunity to present their material and the results shall speak for itself. I recently saw a program on Darwin & creation theory, demonstrating how some aspects of physics & science in fact PROVES there is a Creator.

Answer 6

well you should attach the same disclaimer to evolution . there is no evidence for evolution . even the great minds of evolution have stated problem with the fossil record. all they have to offer is insults and slurs against people that stand against your theory. Richard Dawkins said that just the earth appears to have design, does not mean it was designed. that is just to funny. how can you have DNA that works with machine like persion without design. how do you have life coming forth from nothing? how do you have new life surviving in an empty Eco system? all questions that evolution leaves unanswered.

Answer 7

I say, let them do it. No disclaimer. Supporters of Evolution should just use it as leverage to allow more scientific endeavors to occur. Such as, "Creationists have a creationism museum, scientists should be aloud to..."

Answer 8

It's not science because most scientists say it isn't... It isn't science because it does not conform to the definition of science.

Science isn't defined by consensus. It is a constant.

And the fact is that since there's no evidence to back up the creation hypothesis, it cannot be presented as anything more than conjecture.

Answer 9

Where do you get that scientific evidence contradicts creationism? You can not be led by others opinions. If that is the case you would believe anything anyone has to tell you

(John 3:19) And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

(John 3:20) For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

Answer 10

It shouldn't be presented as science, since it isn't. But they could still make a museum. They should probably include other things that science has problems with, namely: world wide floods, diagram of a talking snake's bones, blueprint of noah's boat which included millions of species of animals, voodoo dolls, chicken bones that predict the future, ash of dead relatives, magical beans, golden egg laying poultry, etc.
I know that not all magic believers believe in voodoo dolls, worldwide floods, etc, but if it's a museum about popular magic beliefs, then it should be all-inclusive.