Creation Museum Part 5

(this is a continuation of Creation Museum Part 4 )

Ark Section To clean up the shenanigans that occurred after God screwed things up in the Garden of Eden, the story says that God decided to wipe the Earth clean except for Noah, his wife, his sons, and their wives… and of course two (or seven) of every “kind” of animal (not counting sea animals).

The Creation Museum has quite a bit about the ark and there’s a definite dividing line that separates the two main parts. The first part shows how the ark could have been created and has incredibly detailed dioramas of different stages of the ark’s progress. The second part contains all the tortured, pseudo-scientific rationale for the flood’s being real. The first part was fun (if unbelievable). The second part was painful.

Scale of the ark room The room pictured above showed animatronic workers helping build the ark… and complaining about all the hard work. The plaque on the scaffolding explains that this section represents only about one percent of the size of the “actual” ark. The design of the ark is explained in one of the Creation Museum videos and is definitely not the stereotypical “box” form that is frequently shown.

22_HowToBuildAnArk Another sign explains how the ark is a technological marvel, the building of which was completely independent of any financial concerns… and the hull could have been made “incredibly strong using ordinary wood and simple tools.”

23_ArkSectionModel A smaller model shows another cross-sectioned segment of the ark, clearly showing multiple decks. It’s actually a little bigger than what God commanded Noah to build, but it’s an impressive model nonetheless. Great pains are taken to explain how the ark could have been built large enough to hold all the animals, sturdy enough to withstand all the raging floodwaters, and technologically advanced enough that it wouldn’t fall apart or tip over after floating aimlessly on the water for about a year… even though it was built by folks who weren’t shipwrights.

In the bible, God tells Noah to build the ark and about that, it only says, “And Noah did according unto all that the LORD commanded him.” The Creation Museum takes a few liberties with the details, since they’re not spelled out in the bible.

Noah may have had help? The World-Famous Ark!

The first plaque explains how, though it’s perfectly reasonable to think that Noah and his family built the ark by themselves (!), because he lived righteously for centuries (!), he may have been wealthy enough to hire shipbuilders… which evidently would have been cool, because then Noah could preach to them about the coming judgment (or so the plaque says).

The second plaque says that, because the ark was built far inland (where there probably weren’t many shipbuilders) and was of such a massive scale, it “would likely have been known the world over.” Somehow, I tend to doubt that the Chinese folks knew of it.

Loading the Ark The ark dioramas were one of my favorite sections of the museum because they were spectacular. The ark in the first diorama was probably close to four feet long and the level of detail (in all of them) was just astounding. In fact, the Creation Museum DVD about the ark uses close-ups of these dioramas in their footage and it looks real… like full-sized real. It’s very impressive.

Loading the Ark - Detail If you look closely in the picture to the right, which is just a close-up of the loading ramp, you’ll notice something interesting following just behind the giraffes. Dinosaurs! The Creation Museum makes it very clear that Noah took dinosaurs onto the ark. They’re very clear that dinosaurs lived with humans. They’re very clear that they really have no concept whatsoever of science… or reality. They are, however, exquisite craftsmen who make awesome dioramas.

Dinosaurs and young adults A plaque explains about the animals that were loaded onto the ark. They included, of course, dinosaurs, but most of the animals were likely young adults because “Being smaller, they would also be easier to care for.” That would only apply briefly because, since the ark was to be afloat for about a year, most animals would have matured to full size during that time. That bit isn’t mentioned, though.

The next diorama showed the ark seaborne as the water rose higher and people were desperate to get on board. Again, the detail was extraordinary… and somewhat disturbing. In the third picture, you can see some competition going on for the top spot (the man holding the rock over his head) and another guy who looks like he’s become the target of a bear’s attention.

Screw you, sinners! Screw you, sinners! Screw you, sinners!

After that, however, once all the sinners drowned, things must have gotten somewhat more peaceful.

Dinner time Noah and his family (a total of eight) got to hang out in the ark, seemingly in a bit of luxury with fine clothes and plenty of food. It must have been a pleasant cruise from the looks of it. Never mind that eight people had to care for (according to Answers in Genesis, the Creation Museum’s parent company) about 16,000 animals. Never mind that they had to deal with (again, according to AiG) about 12 tons of animal waste each day. Never mind that the ammonia from the rabbit urine alone would be enough to choke a rhino.

The thing is, if you explain the whole ark story by claiming supernatural intervention by God, then there’s really no arguing (other than the whole “God” thing). However, the Creation Museum doesn’t make that claim.

From the AiG page linked above:

While it is possible that God made miraculous provisions for the daily care of these animals, it is not necessary or required by Scripture to appeal to miracles.

They try to show how it’s entirely possible that the flood story was literally true without any significant divine intervention. It’s an absurdist notion.

The ark comes to rest Finally, the ark came to rest and the floodwaters began to drain away to… somewhere. This was the final diorama in the ark room, showing the happy ending for Noah and his family. All they had to do from this point is to wait for things to dry out and then go repopulate the planet. Piece of cake.

This is also the demarcation point I mentioned at the beginning. The museum was done with the story of the flood and now turned its focus to the aftereffects of the flood. This is where the pseudo-scientific hogwash really takes wing.

God's Word is the key to post-flood catastrophes Here’s the sign that sets the stage for what’s to come. The flood caused natural catastrophes like erosion and earthquakes… perhaps the greatest earthquake ever known (sorry… Land of the Lost grabbed hold of me there). They make it clear again that God’s Word, not the past, is the key to everything. Then they go on, ad nauseum, with a vain and scientifically ludicrous attempt to prove their case.

Plate tectonics in three easy steps Starting with the laughable idea that the world’s continents changed from Rodinia to Pangea to their current form in about a year, they show case after case of scientific ignorance. Just for the record, Rodinia is thought to have existed 1,100 and 750 million years ago. Pangea is thought to have existed roughly 300 million years ago. Not so for the Creation Museum. Their claim is that the global flood caused well over 500 million years of plate tectonic shift in about a year… and they’re just getting started.

They try to show how receding floodwaters account for the different geological layers, the corresponding fossil layers, coal deposits, canyons, deserts, mountains, and various other geological features. They fail.

33_FloatingForests 34_HotWaterReefs 35_TheFloodRecedes

36_FloodBuriesLife 37_CanyonsErode 38_TheWorldDries

Ark Equid?After showing geological features, they make an attempt to explain how biological development took place. From the evolution of animals (within their “kind,” of course) to the distribution of the animals across all the continents of the world (since Rodinia and Pangea were broken up underwater into separate continents), the explanations are far-fetched at times and hysterically childish at others. Marsupials what?Starting with the development of the horse, implying that the “horse” on the ark was just a little guy, it continues with a completely incomprehensible claim about marsupials.

There are a  number of other claims as well, including that Noah only had to have one pair of dogs on board the ark which would have then evolved into all the different canids that we have today, including foxes, wolves, and domestic dogs. That’s a pretty big stretch for a museum that claims to refute the notion of Darwinian Evolution, especially considering that foxes and wolves are completely different species, sharing only a distant common ancestor (as do we all).

One has to wonder, however, how all these different animals spread across the globe so rapidly, especially considering there were so few of them and they supposedly landed high on Mount Ararat. No worries. The Creation Museum folks have got that all figured out, too.

Rafting... be amazed. Their explanation is called “rafting.” Here’s the description.

When the flood destroyed the world’s forests, it must have left billions of trees floating for centuries on the ocean. These log mats served as ready-made rafts for animals to cross oceans. The paths of ocean currents, carrying these rafts, would explain: similar animals and plants on opposite sides of the oceans, places of high diversity (probably landing sites), and the distribution of Geochelone tortoises.

Rafting... are you serious?I can’t make that kind of stuff up, but evidently someone has a vivid enough imagination and a low enough self-respect to offer that up as a legitimate hypothesis for the distribution of land animals.

You can read it yourself by enlarging this image to the left.

There’s also a mention of a post-flood ice age, ice cores, the thickening of the Earth’s crust, super volcanoes, super quakes (see! I knew Land of the Lost would factor in here!) and super rapid fossilization due to all the flood-induced catastrophes. It’s worded to sound very science-like, but to anyone with a decent high school education in science, it’s pretty delusional.

God's World and God's Word Agree... ? After showing all this “evidence” about the post-flood world, this sign makes the claim that everything is in agreement with the bible. “The more we learn about the Flood and its place in earth history, the more we understand God’s world.” The claim is that the flood explains fossils, rocks, and the “pattern of life.”

No. No. No.

It explains none of these things. Every single one of those things is actually a stunning refutation of a biblical global flood. Everything we know about fossils, everything we know about geology, everything we know about the evolution of life… it all shows that our Earth is billions of years old. It does not show, by any rational argument, that the biblical story of Genesis is anything more than a fanciful tale written 2,000 years ago by primitive, tribal humans.

Willfully ignorant? I would say so. The next sign, I found to be somewhat ironic. It’s a bible verse from 2 Peter claiming that, in the last days, there will be scoffers. It calls them “willingly ignorant.” If ever there was a better fitting label for creationists in general, and this Creation Museum in particular, I have not heard it. The whole museum screams of willful ignorance… from simple scientific principles to common sense history.

Human Religions In the next (and last) section, we got to the fourth “C” of “Confusion” which goes into Babel and the splitting of human languages and related issues. I was far too weary at that point to deal with it. At the end, however, it showed a sign telling how human religion came to be when people starting “worshipping the creation rather than the Creator… blah, blah, blah.”

For people who believe all this, the end of the tour probably leaves them feeling inspired and feeling as though their faith has been strengthened. For me, since I have enough science knowledge to know that it’s all bunk, it left me feeling tired… battered… assaulted… profaned… contaminated… and sad.

It’s sad that so many people maintain that incredibly high level of willful ignorance. It’s sad that they let their lives be governed by ancient folklore. It’s very sad that they indoctrinate their children with the same baseless beliefs… and the same horribly detrimental misunderstanding of basic science and our world.

The final three “C’s” were jammed together at the end with a video titled The Last Adam… about Jesus and his death on the cross and resurrection. It was a somewhat bloody video and, like the rest of the museum videos, was of an extremely high production value. Also like the rest of the museum, it put in the information that supported its case and left out the information that didn’t.

Christ Cross Consummation

I omitted a special exhibit in an earlier post that I’ll touch on in the next post. It was titled “Natural Selection is Not Evolution” and was packed full of creationist claims that have been debunked and disproven for years and years… just more intellectual dishonesty.

But that, it seems, is what the Creation Museum is all about.

(the tour will continue in part 6)


18 Comments

  1. Ugh, the willful ignorance abounds. The irony is palpable. I am disgusted and sad as well. :(

  2. The “rafting” display is beyond belief! Maybe, just maybe, I could accept that snails hopped a log somewhere in Japan and years later landed in the Pacific Northwest. (Though I’m not quite sure how they would sustain themselves during the journey, and they would have to be incredibly lucky for the log not to overturn on their trip. I would imagine that snails and seawater don’t make a good combination).

    But Rhinoceroses! Drifting from East Africa to Southeast Asia on logs! For years, with no source of food.

    It’s kind of a slippery slope towards gullibility. First, you accept that “God’s word” is superior to “Man’s opinion”, then creationism, the 6000-year-old earth, and finally you’re reduced to arguing Rhinos on logs with a straight face.

    • I stood in front of that sign in disbelief for a few minutes. I was thinking, they can’t be serious, right? …but then I looked to the left and right and realized, yeah… they’re serious. Oiy!

  3. They might want to wonder that if the ark DID survive the torrent of rain over 40 days and nights, why this torrent did not sweep them to the other side of the earth? How convenient is it that you are in the same spot after 40 days. Ask a sailor, that wouldn’t happen in CALM waters, unless perhaps you were in the doldrums…..

  4. Sick sick sick. Those flood dioramas are beyond disturbing. I can only compare it to little dioramas reveling in Jews getting gassed in Auschwitz.
    At least the flood scenes never happened… but it’s just beyond sick that they can exult in those and pat each other happily on the back for being of the Pure Race–I mean, the “Chosen”. Sorry.

    • I thought that about the ark scenes, too… with all the people climbing on the rock scrambling for survival. My thoughts went to the kids there seeing how God was a genocidal maniac.

      And all the blood sacrifice stuff, of course. That’s all good kid material, too. I remember going into a Catholic church and seeing all the little alcove dioramas and stained glass windows with bloody pictures of Jesus getting the crap beaten out of him and then hanging on the cross. What the hell kind of place is that for kids?! That’s just wrong, wrong, wrong.

      • I’m glad all the sinner babies were all drowned before the last, desperate, scrabbling up the rock scene. That wouldn’t have been nice to look at, even though they were, after all, sinners, and so deserved it.

      • On the other hand, I am much cheered up by the rafting Rhinocerotidae

  5. ah, so they DO still claim the whole changes after the ark thing. I just couldn’t find it that one day. Wow. Just wow.

    • Wow, indeed!

      It’s one thing to speculate about stuff, but it’s another to launch yourself into orbit around planet crazy. ;-)

  6. Good thing you were tired by the time you reached the Babel room. That’s where they try to scientifically justify their racist attitides, particularity their vile Hammite Theory of Origins, in which Africans are the cursed descendants of Ham.

  7. Ah, yes… “rafting”. A perfectly sensible way to account for how some creatures might survive Ye Olde Floode without being on Noah’s Big Boat. Alas, the notion of Things Surviving Outside Ye Olde Arke is flatly contradicted by the Bible — you know, that document which is the One True Word of God, and literally true in every word? I quote, with emphasis on appropriate bits:

    And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both ***man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air***; for it repenteth me that I have made them. (Gen6:7)

    And God said unto Noah, The end of ***all flesh*** is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth. (Gen6:13)

    And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy ***all flesh***, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and ***every thing that is in the earth*** shall die. (Gen6:17)

    For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and ***every living substance that I have made*** will I destroy from off the face of the earth. (Gen7:4)

    And ***all flesh*** died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of ***every creeping thing*** that creepeth upon the earth, and every man: ***All*** in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of ***all that was in the dry land***, died. And ***every living substance*** was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and ***they that were with him in the ark***. (Gen7:21-23)

    What part of “every living substance was destroyed” does Ken Ham have trouble understanding?

    • MutantJedi

      “What part of “every living substance was destroyed” does Ken Ham have trouble understanding?”

      Every part that doesn’t fit into his interpretation.

  8. I have a quick question regarding the Flood. Why? If the Jesus plan was in place way back in 4004 BC, it seems odd that God grew impatient waiting for the Romans to come along and crucify Christ, so he decided to wipe the slate clean for some reason.

    I really don’t understand why Creationists cling so solidly to the Ark story since it really is a contradiction of the overall message of the totality of the Bible as read through fundamentalist eyes.

    • I agree. There was a plaque that said that when God created everything, he knew it would get borked up and already had a plan in place to send his Son to save us all. Seems silly to send a flood in the meantime to wipe everyone out.

      I guess that was part of his plan.

      “Let’s see. I’ll create this flawed creation but plan to fix it later. I the meantime, I’m gonna screw with these people and slaughter them.”

      Brilliant.

  9. First, they say that there’s not enough time for nature to evolve all the myriad species we have.

    Then they say that Adam only had to name 200 or so “kinds” of animals, roughly cooresponding to our modern day taxonomic families. So I guess he named horses, but not zebras.

    Then they continue in that vein, with Noah only having to find room for those 200 or so named “kinds”.

    And then, after the flood, all those “kinds” spread out across the world and develop into the millions of species we see today.

    …in a few thousand years, without constant miraculous intervention.

    …when it’s impossible for it to occur naturally over a timespan a million times as long.

    *ping*

    Damn, broke ANOTHER irony meter!

  10. Dan, whilst I am not saying I agree with the 6000 year old earth, I do find you guilty of using the same argument as the creationists for your so called science, which are really only beliefs. No scientist has ever been able to explain to me why they think parts of the earth are more than 6000 years old. Simply we think it is 150 million years old because we think so!!!!!!! Duuuurgh! What kind of logic and science is that.
    Is carbon dating reliable, and how far back is it accurate and it’s only a theory, right or wrong. Just trying to find the truth here. So easy to ridicule but where is your evidence or is it another case of. “Evolution must be true because so many people believe in it.” ?!!

    • No. I am not using the “same argument as the creationists” and my “so called science” is not just belief. If no scientists has ever been able to explain to you why parts (?) of the Earth are more than 6,000 years old, then you really haven’t talked to any scientists… or read anything relevant.

      Rather than taking the time, effort, and space to reiterate the evidence here in a comment thread, I’ll simply direct you to any public library for plenty of books explaining the relevant evidence.

      You have said multiple times that your mind is open to evidence and reason, but have shown just the opposite in your statements.