So the animals didn't eat flesh in the Garden of Eden before the fall, but did they ever poo?

Well, Mr. Johnnyvento, it doesn't say evolution in the Bible. You have been disproved. Oh, and there is no rebuttal, because its the BIBLE, and its all true without question. If you don't believe me, ask God.

(P.S. For more silly logic like this, take a trip over to the "Answers in Science" website that is linked in the story. All of their "scientific" explanations begin with the Bible, which is of course accepted as true without question).

So, not only, according to this "museum" Adam and Eve lived among dinausors. But they were white, of course.

I'm sure they were born with an natural sense of capitalism too; and, it goes without saying that they were totally comfortable as to enslave their offsprings, if by the wrath of God - well, Jesus - these unlucky ones happen to be born with darker tones from the original skin...

But at the risk of asking an obvious question, would any of you offer the same level of ridicule for a similar museum created by Muslim, Hindu, Jewish, Zoroastrian, Wiccan, or Shinto fanatics? You say you would. But of course you wouldn't. We all know it./

I don't think we would because, for one major reason, those other religions don't open themselves to ridicule in the same way, if at all. Most people of most religions know where myth ends and reality, or science, begins. Almost all the Christians I know have a clear idea of the boundaries of myth, including the nuns who taught me biology and chemistry in high school.

These creationists are whackos. I know that's judgmental and probably un-PC, but I am not willing to accept lunacy in public discourse quietly.

...did they all just get along in Eden? Only after the Fall did they start their destructive life cycles?

Did Noah carry them onto the Ark?

What about HIV? Just hanging out with nothing to do for all those years?

Oh, I forgot. HIV was designed, built, and sent by God RECENTLY. To kill the homosexuals.

Science is fun.

http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/irol/14/147565/NEWimages/Teletubbies-Group2.jpg

The dewey eyed review of these fascists' little fantasy land leaves me slack jawed. Beautiful? Sort of like those crappy little Thomas Kinkade cottage "paintings". The revolting dishonesty of the creation museum, and your uncritical report of the corruption inherent therein makes me reconsider my support of this publication.

If the Gordy Slack thinks being nice to these anti humanist will somehow make them like liberalism a bit then the author belongs in this fantasy world where science and the beauty of the natural world have no meaning.

The purpose of this "museum" and its parent organization, "Answers in Genesis" is repeatedly stated in their mission statements. A Christian theocratic regime governing in their god's name.

Lies are different from mistakes. A lie is when a person ignores evidence to prove a falsehood. These people are the true enemy of Western Civilization. Our ancestors created the Enlightenment to throw off the chains of the superstition represented by the Creation Museum.

On the bright side, since gravity is just a theory, just think of the rides they could build.

At the risk of being pedantic, the article has a few mistakes:

o) The Creation Museum mentions the "7 C's of History," not 6. You left out "Cross," which is, let's face it, pretty important to Christians.

o) The Seventh Commandment is not "Thou Shalt Not Lie." In the Jewish and Protestant traditions, the Seventh Commandment is "Thou shalt not commit adultery." In the Catholic tradition, it's "Thou shalt not steal."

o) The Ninth Commandment (Eighth for Catholics) is "Thou shalt not bear false witness," which is different (and more specific) than not telling lies.

Not that I'm defending the museum, mind; just thinking about it makes my head spin. But if you're going to be talking about it, better get your source material right.

But evolution is not science. Neither is archeology and much of astronomy. Not only are these conjectural, but, they take on a life of their own which forms the foundation of future work. If there's a wrong direction discovered anywhere, it is heresy to reveal it and it will never be proven. I'm a literal believer in the Holy Bible as the word of God, though not necessarily in agreement with all the contentions of the Creation Museum. I think that all the posters at Salon.com don't understand the meaning of cost / benefit / risk analysis. There's a whiff of denial in the tone. It's really pretty easy to get where the Creation museum is (at):

First, accept a construct. If you don't like the six day plan, then ask about the magnificent unchanging physical laws and the fact that we're made of the same stuff as my computer. Just remains to ask how it got put together.

Second, determine interaction. Be honest. If you cannot think of any examples or if you cannot admit to personal experience, then think about the rise of the U.S.

Third, figure that it might not be a bad idea to at least peruse the most published compilation in history. How about this fact. The Holy Bible is very long and EVERY LINE WRITTEN pertains to man's relationship to his God. You probably will not be the same aftewards.

I, too, am confused by the buff, European Adam and Eve wax models.

This really bothers me -- shakes my faith, even: it's before the Fall. There must be no sex, because sex is sinful and Genesis only mentions childbirth after the Unholy Snack.

Please forgive my crudeness for just a moment, ladies. I'll give you a second to turn away.

Okay -- is it just us boys now? Great. Look at the rack on on Eve! That babe is built! Holy cr*p!

Ladies, you may cease averting your eyes.

So I've gotta ask: what are those breasts for? In most mammals (all, actually), breasts are for nursing young. But there's no sex, and no babies. Cain and Abel aren't even a notch on Adam's bedpost yet.

Unless ... no, they wouldn't be there for pleasure. He's not THAT kind of Creator.