A further note on the Creation Museum vs. the vertebrate paleontologists
This note follows up this story:
My lawyer friend has stressed that the Creation Museum makes one thing quite clear: It is a privately funded enterprise whose purpose is apologetics based on a literal interpretation of Genesis.
By denouncing the Museum, the vert paleos are revealing a classic modernist agenda - namely that they are the only ones who have a right to interpret the story. In a post-modern society, they are sure to lose.
Just watch them blame the swelling crowds of museum-goers (the outcome of their private stupidity in this matter) on ID theorists like Mike Behe, who would want nothing to do with the Creation Museum.
Given their (inevitable) views, the vert paleos would be wiser to treat the Creation Museum’s account of Earth’s history the way a smart church treats the Da Vinci Code’s account of Christianity’s history.
That is, don’t bother to get hot and bothered about it, just make clear that this is all very fun and interesting as a novel but it is simply not history. Period.
I wonder if the invert paleos (we haven’t heard from the inverts yet) will behave in their own best interests, or if they will help swell the crowds at the Creation Museum by denouncing it?
Come to think of it, if I were doing PR for the Creation Museum, I would be trying to schedule a denunciation from the paleobotanists as well ...
Update September 8, 2007 Here is an interesting comment from a Christian science historian who is not a creationist.