The Creation “Museum” is losing money, so Answers in Genesis is going to try and shore up profits with a renovation. It’s not looking good.
They’re going to upgrade the theater with 3-D projection. This is the theater where they currently show Men in White, a short movie that is so bad that when I visited the “museum” I only lasted 30 seconds before concluding that I wouldn’t be able to sit through it, or the gimmicky shaky seats and water sprays. Now they’re going to have plesiosaurs looming out at you as an excuse to drip water.
But the big deal they’re bragging about is that they’re going to redesign the entrance to include…new displays! Static displays with no evidence! More apologetics! I’m not feeling the urge to visit it a second time.
Wait, what’s that in the center of the exhibits? Those red balls? That looks familiar.
It is familiar! I’ve seen that so many times. It’s the centerpiece of many of Ham’s droning talks.
They have taken this cartoon, and plan to turn it into a 3D diorama.
You know, this doesn’t suddenly make it more true or believable. It does discredit the “museum” even more that they think it a noteworthy addition to create a sculpture of an old cartoon by a creationist hack. Why? Was Ben Garrison unavailable?
Seeing racism in that picture makes me think that people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. Or fire cannons as the case may be.
I’m trying to parse that cartoon, and I’m having problems. I get that the Christian castle is built of steel(?) on a rock, and the Humanism castle is built on sand, but what is up with the balloons? They’re . . . holding up the Humanism castle? Humanism is supported by abortion?
OK, maybe it’s supposed to be more like: The balloons were/are actually supposed to be mostly labeled with freedoms and rights — sexual freedom; personal autonomy; sexual equality. But of course, those really look like positive things. So they had to replace them with (perceived) negative outcomes of those freedoms. So “sexual freedom” means “pornography and homosexual behavior”; “personal autonomy” means “euthanasia” and “abortion”; “sexual equality” means “family break-up”.
So “Christianity”, for creationists, is really directly opposed to freedom, egalitarianism, and autonomy.
As noted by Becca @#1, the really odd one is “racism”; racism was never derived from humanistic values. But since creationists were going to be dishonest about the labels anyway, I guess they decided they might as well go whole hog.
Perhaps they mean that with humanism, racism is identified and denounced whereas in their “Christianity”, it is accepted as God’s will and all the “others” have to shut up and take it.
The racism balloon is probably another example of their attempts to take credit for shit that other people did, as though they were the true anti-racists all along and not open perpetrators that had to be dragged kicking and screaming by the rest of society.
Needs zombies. And slot machines. Definitely slot machines!
Good grief, that’s an old cartoon. I first saw it in christian school in the 80s.
If I remember correctly, the gist is more a critique of other Christians. Humanism has thrown up all those distraction balloons that Christians are wasting their time on, while sitting on a foundation of sand (the author tends to put their favourite boogeyman in said foundation. Of course for AIG it would be “billions of years”).
The “solution” is always “simple”. All the Christians need to do is take a few direct shots on the foundation of sand, and the whole Humanist edifice will come crumbling down, taking all the various “evils” of the world with it. The racism balloon is a new addition from the version I saw. Doesn’t change the fact that all this demonstrates is a staggering failure on the part on AIG to understand Humanism.
I wrote a reaction to that shitty comic on my bloge, though it may have been an over-reaction, as I agree with Dave – this comic was addressed to other xtians, not atheists like me.
The comic is hella ironic because “weak” theism that doesn’t overtly claim everything we see and think is a lie? It’s much stronger than fundamentalism. My boyfriend reached young adulthood as a deist because he’d never been asked to believe anything outrageous. My potential faith was strangled in its crib because I was asked to believe in an obvious falsehood and couldn’t.
–
@2:
I think the idea is that Christianity is always attacking the symptoms of humanism, like homo-abortion-porn, as represented by the balloons, while humanism is attacking Christianity’s foundation. Also, some of Christianity’s cannons are pointed elsewhere (at what, one wonders? The Jews?). The solution then is to concentrate firing on the base of humanism, though apparently some cannons still get to shoot at the homos.
There’s so much wrong with it all that it’s not really worth understanding anyway.
That cartoon was the visual analog to Alex Jones’ angry rants.
They should learn from Disneyland and have spectacular entertainment. Provide cannons people can shoot at the evil castle of ateism? Burning the library of seedy secularism, visit the dungeons of the inquisition.
– – –
When the Ark park goes bankrupt, can the odd structure ever be rebuilt as anything useful ?
Re-create what a big sailing ship from the 18th century looked like inside. “This is what Ahab’ ship was like”
Or maybe “The ateist landlocked boat of libido”? “Come for a godless pleasure cruise”.
Day saved, I’m going home.
Lol, Christians and their siege complex, now in 3D. Notice how they can’t stop themselves from using analogies related to warfare.
Ha Ha! I followed the link to the ‘museum’ website. The renovators are refered to as ‘fabricators’. Says it all really.
Just thought I’d look up the verses in the cartoons:
Psalms 11:3 — When the foundations are being destroyed, what can the righteous do? (NIV)
Isaiah 58:12 — Your people will rebuild the ancient ruins and will raise up the age-old foundations; you will be called Repairer of Broken Walls, Restorer of Streets with Dwellings. (NIV)
Well, alrighty then. Nothing about cannons, but I guess there’s some poetic license involved.
Thanks for looking up the verses; I was wondering what they said. It provides another instance of AIG not paying attention to the book they says contains their salvation. The first picture can, with license, fit the verse. But the second picture is supposedly the representation of the second verse, and the verse is all about repairing and rebuilding (and getting that cool pat on the back for it, from like everybody). But the picture “representing” this repair and rebuilding is just blowing stuff up.
It’s as though they read the verse and simply substituted their own thoughts for what’s on the page. Okay sometimes if you’re reading fiction, but this is a book they supposedly believe must be followed to the letter on pain of eternal torment. You’d think they try a little harder to read the verse and draw a picture that in some way matches it.
totally off topic and a bit of a commercial but octopus kites! https://www.facebook.com/uniladmag/videos/3294570670565969/
I think the thought process for the verses is simple.
First one: “I want something that bends over backwards to fit some analogy based on a bible verse. Also, I’m feeling defensive because people are pointing out my ideas don’t make a lot of sense.”
Second one: “I want something that fits a bible verse… Ah you know what? Screw it. Just give me some feel-good nothing line from my holy book and I’m good. Let’s draw people I don’t like being mistreated and… Done! It’s a wrap.”
This feels like the natural logical progression of an idiot. Also, inevitable when one tries to make the resurrected zombie corpse of an ancient book do their speaking for them. Then again I don’t think they desire anyone to understand them, their arguments are literally in code they can’t be arsed to spell out for anyone.
I think in the cartoons, down at the base of the castles it says: “Millions of year equals Man is authority” and “6 days equals God is authority”. OMG, this is stupidity is off the charts.
Also, these wankers have no business talking about “Morality”, “Racism”, or “Family breakup” after having voted for fucking Trump.
” Static displays with no evidence!”
and ” this stupidity is off the charts”
-That’s just your librul education talking!
Us Real Mercuns just need faith.
I’ve seen one panel each from two other versions of the same cartoon, on the Friendly Atheist & comments thereunto.
In one, the Humanism “foundation” says “AUTONOMOUS HUMAN REASONING”, and the Christianity “foundation” says “REVELATION GOD’S WORD”.
In the other, the Humanism “foundation” says “EVOLUTION MAN DECIDES ‘TRUTH”, and the Christianity “foundation” says “CREATION GOD’s WORD IS TRUTH”.
(Both of which make more sense to me than the version that PZ posted)
Clearly, the comic has been evolving over time as AIG tries to figure out just exactly what they want to say.
Pretty much any religion in a nutshell…
My interpretation:
Ham is claiming that Humanism’s foundation is built upon the untenable lie that the Earth is millions of years old and that life started from natural processes.
While Christians waste time attacking the symptoms, the Humanists use their filthy science to attack the foundation of Christianity: the Genesis account. Ham has invested everything (intellectually as well as financially) on the Genesis account. He is convinced that without a Biblically literal creation, Christianity makes no sense.
However, if Christians spend their resources attacking the false narrative ofscience, and “rebuild” Christianity’s foundation by accepting Crestionism, they will prevail.
It’s a tangled mess as political cartoons go, but not impossible to figure out.
Yes. That’s Ham’s primary argument: the foundation of Christianity is his literal interpretation of the first chapter of the book of Genesis, and therefore you must follow his version or you’re not a Christian, and when scientists find evidence that contradicts Genesis, they are directly attacking all of Christianity.
Can someone please introduce the hamnites to the people (usually christians, since non-christians will consider the mammoth task boring) who research t he context of Caananite religion, and compare religios texts to approximately date the varoius contradictory fragments that is Genesis.
Some fragments are from the polytheist era, with El/Jahwe a Zeus-type boss god that is anthropomorpic. These are pretty similar to the religion of Ugarit.
Others are from the transition period before the monarchic period.
Most are from the monarchic period and feature blatand inventions to make anjcient israel and its god look far more powerful that the reality.
Some is from the Babylonian captivity and shortly after, with Noah standing in for Utnapishtim.
All of this forms a big mess of contadictions that are obvious for anyone with four brain cells.
“Hammite” here means follower of Ken Ham (and in case he contradicts orthodoxy at any point, he is a false Prophet, and you know what to do with those…)
(clue; women have to wear false beards to witness the process)
@ birgerjohansson:
Godless liars all of them!
sowa @ 11;
Exactly – this is a Freudian slip in a visual format, with the Xians tipping their hand and effectively admitting that, beneath all the lies to the contrary, what they really fantasise about is a good old fashioned holy war they can use as a means to exterminate anyone who won’t bend the knee to their megalomaniacal faith leaders and their psychotic Sky Fairy.
Actually trying to construct an argument that makes some kind of sense is just such hard work, especially when you are acting as apologist for the patently ludicrous and counter-factual, and doubly so when your patently ludicrous and counter-factual beliefs are also repugnant in their attitude toward the vulnerable and marginalised. Far easier to simply do what their forebears did, and just murder all the open apostates and thereby intimidate the rest into silence and acquiescence.
It really is undeniably true that religion lost its only persuasive argument when it lost the ability to burn unbelievers at the stake with impunity.
Well, at least this is correct, and this is how we know that Christianity is one big pile of bullshit.
The filthiest part of ALL of this is nearly all fundamentalist pseudochristians (redundant–I know) voted for and still strongly support Drumpfh. 100% of everything I ever learned in Sunday School taught me that Drumpfh is wrong on every single issue, but Drumpfh supporter fundamentalists must have had a different Bible than mine. For example, the part about not taking care of the hungry, the naked, the sick, the jailed –“whatever you did for the least of them, you did for ME” said Jesus. That part must have been missing from their Bible(s).
Nothing but massive filth in the fundamentalist pseudochristian Drumpfh-infested world.
Shown by AM Joy (Joy Reid) every weekend on MSNBC with Evangelical Bishop Barber.
Funny how the religious right can’t read their babbles except for minor passages in the old testament ignoring what Jebus said.
Your first mistake was to assume they even read the verse. Your second was to assume they put any thought into it.
Just FYI to those not from a religious upbringing… Tacking a bible reference on to something doesn’t mean “go look this up”, it means “god said this, take my word for it”. Its a bible bumper sticker.
Haaaaaaaaaaaa