In a most non-academic way, contrary to all one would expect from scientists dedicated to careful research, leading American atheist Dr. Eugenie Scott (director of the National Center for Science Education, a somewhat misnamed organization because its primary mission is to oppose creationists) is convincing other scientists to sign petitions against the ready-to-open Creation Museum, even though these scientists have not yet toured the museum (opening May 28). While these scientists have not read any of the museum’s signs, have not viewed any of its 55 videos, and have not discussed its content with any of AiG’s Ph.D. scientists, they somehow manage to render an opinion without visiting.
In a letter about the museum sent to scientists in universities across the U.S., Dr. John Pearse, president of the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology, stated (in regards to a letter Scott had sent to him):
Museum of make-believe facts being opened in the Cincinnati area. She [Eugenie Scott] is directing it mainly to our members in the Kentucky-Ohio-Indiana area, but the Core Officers and I think it should go out to all of you. The new museum could be a fun thing to go to if it was taken as a sort of Disneyland of anti-intellectualism. However, it is a serious frontal attack on evidence-based reasoning, and as such is a real threat to educating an informed, modern citizenry [emphasis mine].
Pearce urges academics in AiG’s tri-state area of Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky to sign a petition that Scott says “will be made available to the press at the time of the opening.” Part of the petition states: “We, the undersigned scientists at universities and colleges in Kentucky, Ohio, and Indiana, are concerned about scientifically inaccurate material on display at the Answers in Genesis Museum.”
I find it ironic that these academics, who are supposedly trained to check the evidence for themselves and not rely on second-hand sources, are worried about our alleged “attack” on “evidence” and yet they have not examined our museum. If a student of these professors even dared to conduct their research in this haphazard manner, they might fail them.
But it gets even worse. Scott (as part of the petition) tries to scare parents and college-bound students when she also states: “Students who accept such material as scientifically valid are unlikely to succeed in science courses at the college level. These students will need remedial instruction in the nature of science, as well as in the specific areas of science misrepresented by Answers in Genesis.”
This seeming threat is not just directed against parents of students visiting the Creation Museum, but it is a way for her to intimidate parents of Christian school and homeschool students (or parents of public school students who might take their children to the Creation Museum) who take a stand on accepting the record of Genesis in the Bible. In fact, there have already been moves in the U.S. (in California, for instance) not to allow students from homeschools and Christian schools into certain secular colleges if the students were taught a literal view of biblical origins.
But what is Scott’s real motive? Well, she was picked as the 1998 winner of the American Humanist Association’s “Isaac Asimov Science Award” (she is an atheist). The organization she directs, the NCSE, is dedicated to propagating evolutionary beliefs and opposing creationists—she dogmatically equates “science” with “evolution.”
In the letter she sent to Pearce, Scott stated: “This museum is viewed with dismay by teachers and scientists because it will present as scientifically valid religious views such as special creation, a 10,000 year old Earth, Noah’s Flood, and the like.”
She is not just against the Creation Museum—she is against “special creation” and “Noah’s Flood.” Of course, this means that she must also be against the words of the Bible and Jesus Christ, for it was by Him that “all things were created” (Colossians 1). And Jesus Himself quoted from Genesis concerning the actual event of Noah’s Flood.
Dr. Scott (and other evolutionists like her) will tell people that they can believe in a god, but one has to ask: what kind of god? This god can’t have anything to do with creation, after all, for she purports that “special creation” cannot be accepted as a “scientifically valid” view. In other words, the only god that is allowed is one in which you can “believe” whatever you want, as long as you don’t claim that your beliefs (such as special creation) have any basis in objective reality. As long as these beliefs are kept in one’s head or in the church and not offered to others, there does not seem to be a problem. But as soon as an organization (like AiG) starts authoritatively presenting a biblical view of origins that is corroborated by scientific evidence and research, Dr. Scott and her colleagues are in a total uproar!
As Dr. Pearce stated in his letter to academics concerning the Creation Museum, “it is a serious frontal attack on evidence-based reasoning.” What he is saying (although he apparently doesn't realize it) is that the Creation Museum is a frontal attack on “naturalism”—his belief about origins that rejects the supernatural. And he is right; it is that!
There are secular evolutionist-based museums in most major cities all across America (like the Field Museum in Chicago or the American Museum of Natural History in New York, which are massive facilities with impressive collections and exhibits). Almost all public schools across the nation teach evolution as fact, evolutionary TV programs often appear on PBS, The Learning Channel, Discovery Channel, and others, yet Scott and her colleagues are worried about one Creation Museum. Why are they so concerned?
A detriment to science?
As Dr. Scott states in her letter to Pearce: “The AIG museum is a multi-million dollar structure with first-rate exhibits, skillfully-crafted animatronic figures (of humans and dinosaurs coexisting), and a state-of-the-art planetarium. Students who are taken to this museum are very likely to consider it authoritative, to the detriment of science literacy.”
Because, as the Lord has blessed, AiG and its supporters have built a quality facility that is first class in every way, Scott is greatly concerned that students will go through the museum and be convinced that the Bible is true! Surely, if Dr. Scott and all the multi-million dollar museums, evolution-dominated TV programs, schools and universities across the nation have evidence to prove evolution and millions of years is obviously true, they wouldn’t be worried about one Creation Museum!
Secular humanists have had many victories in the U.S., and this new museum must be seen by them as a setback. While creation, prayer, and the Bible have by and large been thrown out of public schools, abortion has been legalized; gay “marriage” is making inroads across the country; and nativity scenes and the Ten Commandments have all but been thrown out of public places—all resulting in Christians being marginalized more and more. The humanists, however, are apparently not happy with their “progress,” and now they are offended by one museum not built by taxpayer money that no one is being forced to visit.
The Creation Museum is becoming a rallying place for Christians, takes on the evolutionary establishment, and challenges both church and culture to return to the authoritative Word of God. The uniqueness of this Christian facility is that scientific research from biology, geology, astronomy, and anthropology is used to confirm the Bible’s history in Genesis and demonstrate clearly the bankruptcy of evolutionary/millions-of-years ideas.
At the same time, the Creation Museum presents the wonderful message of the gospel so that visitors will understand the true purpose and meaning of life. The Creation Museum establishes the foundational history to show people that marriage is only between one man and one woman, that abortion is killing a human being, and that the gospel and Christian morality are based on the true history found in the Bible.
Perhaps these evolutionists don’t want students and others to hear and see the information presented in the Creation Museum. If they did, then they would quickly recognize that the study of origins is a very different than studying operational science that has built our modern-day technology. Actually, the students who are being taught evolution and millions of years as fact are the ones who may need the “remedial instruction.” They have been indoctrinated to a false understanding of what “science” is.
The Scriptures describe why Drs. Scott and Pearce and their colleagues believe as they do:
... scoffers will come ... walking according to their own lusts ... For this they willingly are ignorant of: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, ... by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. (2 Peter 3:3–6)
It’s about time Christians stand up to those who “suppress the truth” and are “willingly ignorant.” Please understand: those like Drs. Scott and Pearce who are opposed to the Creation Museum aren’t just against the museum itself—they are against the Bible! They are against the Word of the Creator God! They are, thus, wanting to suppress the saving message of the true and complete gospel! How sad, that people in the church (including many church leaders) have become allies of these secular humanists. In fact, these inconsistent Christians are used to further the atheistic, God-hating agendas of some.
The Creation Museum is engaging the culture war at its very foundation! The secularists are becoming more and more vocal. But, as we say about the Creation Museum to future visitors: “Prepare to believe.” I truly believe that the museum will be a significant event in the history of Christendom!
Praise be to God, Christianity is on the move once again in America!