In late January, a frequent Answers in Genesis’ critic had her letter appear in one of our local newspapers, the Kenton Recorder (Kenton County, Kentucky, not far from the Creation Museum). It was in response to my guest column two weeks prior in the same paper. Over the years, Nancy R. has written letters to the editor in various newspapers to attack the Creation Museum and Ark Encounter. Her latest letter is below. It is followed by a rebuttal letter from Dr. Stephen Kees, a dentist in our area and an avid AiG supporter.
(Letter to the Editor, Kenton Recorder, January 31, 2019)
It is not to celebrate as Ken Ham, the purveyor of Answers in Genesis, would have the 25th anniversary so much as a time to mourn that the Creation Museum and the more recent Ark are taken seriously and not what they are—money-making amusement parks. He can site all the attendance numbers he likes. The tragic number is the many young people who are exposed to junk science.
One asks faith leaders for the meaning of life—one asks geologists, biologists, chemists and physicists among other sciences for answers to science. The two need not be mutually exclusive but there is a limit. It is science and religion, not religion vs. science. But the metaphor of Genesis was never intended to be a science lesson. Science is an evidence-based search. It is not having an answer such as a young earth and then cramming everything to fit that false premise.
This PhD holders Mr. Ham mentions have been discredited by the science community for not allowing open review of their work for openers. It does not count if the handful of them praise each other or where they attained their degrees. Those same institutions have not endorsed their work.
At a time when the world needs young people to study credible science it is reassuring that Covington Catholic High School is completing its multi-million-dollar STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) center. The country is counting on those young men going to college to become leaders in real science. One hopes that the young women at their sister school Notre Dame Academy will be able to profit from this priceless facility too.
–Nancy R., Covington, Kentucky
Several weeks later, the newspaper printed a letter to the editor in response to the letter by Nancy R., appearing April 4, 2019:
I am responding to a letter-writer who recently attacked the Ark Encounter and Creation Museum. She labeled them as “money-making amusement parks” and challenged the credibility of their impressive scientists.
First, the attractions are owned and operated by a nonprofit organization, Answers in Genesis. Any money they might make at the end of the year is returned to AIG to use toward developing their attractions.
Second, they are not “amusement” parks, which suggest frivolous places with thrill rides like roller coasters. The Ark Encounter is a historical themed attraction.
While the Ark is a fun place, I’ve learned much about biblical history and science there. Also, the Creation Museum contains many remarkable exhibits that would be welcome in any world-class museum.
AIG has full-time scientists with doctorate degrees from schools like Harvard, Brown, Ohio State, and many others, yet the letter-writer denigrated their academic achievements by claiming that the scientists will “not allow open review of their work.” That’s preposterous. These scientists have had several papers published in peer-reviewed secular journals.
As someone trained in science, I find it laughable when closed-minded naysayers make false claims to support their one-sided worldview.
–Dr. Stephen R. Kees, Edgewood, Kentucky
The Creation Museum and Ark Encounter don’t stir up controversy. But people who reject the message of the truth of God’s Word and the gospel of Jesus Christ to a lost world presented at those two attractions do. Come and see these world-class facilities for yourself and be challenged by the message. Plan your visit at ArkEncounter.com and CreationMuseum.org.
Thanks for stopping by and thanks for praying,
This item was written with the assistance of AiG’s research team.