ICR Visits a Real Museum

A few days ago we posted AIG Visits a Real Museum. Little did we know that Answers in Genesis was starting a trend, and we would soon be posting about another creationist outfit doing the same thing.

Today, at the website of the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) — described in the Cast of Characters section of our Intro page — we found this: Evolutionary Eye Candy in New Dallas Museum. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us:

ICR employees visited the new Perot Museum of Nature and Science in downtown Dallas in late 2012. The big block-shaped building that The Dallas Morning News called “brash and breathtaking” had been under construction for several years. Its promoters advertised it as a place where visitors could receive strong doses of much-needed evolutionary teaching.

This is what they’re talking about: Perot Museum of Nature and Science. It must have taken great courage for ICR’s creation scientists to enter such a devilish place. But maybe they learned something. Let’s see how it went:

The $185 million museum, named after the wealthy Perot family who underwrote much of the construction cost, is filled with a barrage of evolution-soaked displays.

“Evolution-soaked displays” — how horrible! Let’s read on:

Immediately after paying for entrance tickets, visitors ascend a giant escalator straight to the fourth floor. On the way up, a lone sign with no accompanying display or context reads, “The earth is 4.6 billion years old.” Apparently, the exhibit architects and content directors took seriously their task of indoctrination.

What fearlessness it must have taken to continue past that point! The ICR article goes on:

As is often true with new museums, visitors to the Perot Museum are challenged to find anything but long-refuted arguments used to promote evolution.

Here’s an example of one of those long-refuted arguments:

One wall, called “Evolution’s Attic,” described useless human body parts that are supposed to be evolutionary leftovers. Visitors can read about how the uselessness of the appendix confirms evolution. But amazingly, the last sentence admitted that the human body does use the appendix, a small sac that retains a cache of useful gut bacteria. The usefulness of the appendix is a function of its design, and design requires a designer.

Remember that, dear reader — the appendix is so useful that it requires a designer. Moving along:

The Perot Museum is packed with whizz-bang displays, interactive exercises, and attention-grabbing effects. Some of them review legitimate science, but many of them merely promote evolution. Printed text is minimal, tailoring the experience to younger audiences. These tactics, combined with repetition of evolutionary dogma, is set to successfully indoctrinate hordes of young visitors.

Truly disgusting! Another excerpt:

It was sad to watch over 20 busloads of children pouring in through the museum’s doors, knowing that they were about to hear and experience lies purveyed as truth. They certainly received the evolution message, regardless of its utter lack of support from laboratory science, historical science, or philosophy.

Weep for the children! Here’s the concluding paragraph:

Wouldn’t it be excellent if an equally impressive museum existed in the region that displayed some of the most convincing and understandable scientific evidence for creation?

ICR needs a generous benefactor. Unfortunately, the Perot family isn’t available; they’re on the rational team.

Copyright © 2013. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

15 responses to “ICR Visits a Real Museum

  1. Wouldn’t it be excellent if some “convincing and understandable scientific evidence for creation” actually existed! Might not want to put the cart before the horse.

  2. I guess the best way I could explain it to them is if let’s say I was a flat Earther. I enter a museum should I be surprised and offended to see the world portrayed as a globe? Should I worry about impressionable children being corrupted? I guess the way America works is you can build their museum based on their fantasy and if you can get enough suckers to visit they’ll stay open. I really hate how the ICR likes to trumpet their degrees. Probably the only place I see an author’s name followed by an M.S. Whenever I see that it reiterates to me, you buy your degree, what you learn is up to you.

  3. The Perot Museum of Nature and Science is a major defeat for creationism. It doesn’t “drip” with evolution, as charged — but evolution is plainly on display throughout. It’s not just the old stuff ICR claims falsely to have refuted, either. There’s plenty of stuff that deals with the physics of an old earth, and the genetics and molecular aspects of evolution.

    One of the displays I thought particularly brilliant compares hibernation and migration in mammals in the Alaskan North Slope, to dinosaurs — and asks boldly a completely unanswered question: How did dinosaurs up there survive the cold? (No, it was not tropical all the times dinosaurs roamed.) The display had stuffed mammals and dinosaur recreations, skeletons of both groups, and a thorough discussion of hibernation and its mysteries, pointing out that research into hibernation relates to humans because, of course, humans are related to hibernating mammals.

    The Perot has been crowded since it opened. It’s had close to 120,000 visitors since December 1, and 12,000 memberships were sold in December (ours included). That’s probably bigger attendance that it will have through the year, but it could hit a million visitors.

    $185 million, with donations still coming in in $5 million and $10 million increments — it was built entirely with private funding — ten exhibit halls, dedication to hard science . . . contrast that with Ken Ham’s closet exhibit in Kentucky, or ICR’s sold-off cupboard in California. There’s no wonder creationists are scared by this thing. It’s fun, it’s popular, it’s scientifically accurate. While it’s squarely with evolution in that little dustup, it’s not hard polemics on display, but hard science.

    If you’re passing through Dallas, come see!

  4. Funny quote: “Apparently, the exhibit architects and content directors took seriously their task of indoctrination [of a 4.6 billion year old Earth].”

    To which the obvious reply is: So are the OECs and IDers indoctrinators, or just indoctrinated?

  5. “Wouldn’t it be excellent if an equally impressive museum existed in the region that displayed some of the most convincing and understandable scientific evidence for creation?”

    Well, there’s always Carl Baugh’s Creation Evidence Museum at Glen Rose, southwest of Ft. Worth: http://www.creationevidence.org/

  6. “Wouldn’t it be excellent if an equally impressive museum existed in the region that displayed some of the most convincing and understandable scientific evidence for creation?”

    Actually, I’ve got all the known evidence for creationism right here in this empty matchbox. They don’t need an impressive building to display absolutely nothing.

  7. I machined the parts for the cladogram mobile hanging in the entrance to the wing. Just another Eastern Liberal doing my part to spread subversive ideas throughout the South :)

  8. Nashoba CNC says: “I machined the parts for the cladogram mobile hanging in the entrance to the wing.”

    Aha! It was intelligently designed!

  9. Reality must be frightening for the drones who drag their knuckles thru the halls of ICR . . . . .

  10. @Nashoba CNC: Got any pics you can share?

  11. This science museum’s location near the downtown/uptown boundary in Dallas is perfect, in a city with a lot of literalism traditions.
    I’ve seen GEICO cavemen pictured on a small poster in a downtown Dallas small business that said” Evolution. Even the cavemen don’t believe it”. The museum will be and is impossible to ignore for those with that mindset.
    Perfect..

  12. retiredsciguy

    Anonymous wrote, “This science museum’s location near the downtown/uptown boundary in Dallas is perfect, in a city with a lot of literalism traditions.”

    It appears then that it was built where it was needed most. Now that the design costs have been covered, it should be a lot cheaper to build some more in places where this sort of museum is also sorely needed — like, say, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Indiana, Kentucky, Florida, Louisiana…

    Do we have enough rich benefactors interested in the advancement of science to get the job done?

  13. This is probably related: http://proofmathisbeautiful.tumblr.com/post/40524182577/heathernicolezilla-someone-has-been-trolling

    Which mentions the person who started this complaint (JM) and links to: http://frontburner.dmagazine.com/2013/01/14/someone-has-been-trolling-the-perot-museum-online-calling-it-fairytale-propaganda/

    JM himself has left a comment, and a link to his blog response (link intentionally incomplete): biblicaltruthresources.wordpress.com/2013/01/15/a-review-of-the-new-perot-sci-fi-museum-jesse-morrell/

    The response itself is fairly predictable, and Droner-like in length.

  14. Tomato Addict, thanks for the tips and the links. That guy’s pretty deep into himself — he appears to think he knows Christian theology better than anyone alive, better than the authors of the New Testament, and better than Jesus.

    No wonder he couldn’t just sit back and enjoy the museum. In his ideological fear of Darwin under every bed, it sounds to me as if he missed most of the museum. At one point he complains that the museum doesn’t talk about aerodynamics of flight in birds — but in fact, it has no fewer than three displays on it, including a brilliant interactive WII-like device in which kids (or adults) can stand in front of a camera and try to get an avatar to fly. It was packed the night I was there. Pure aerodynamics, no evolution — unless, of course, one understood the other displays.

    That was one of the better displays, I thought. It shows several bird skeletons, and compares some dinosaur skeletons — dwelling on the structure of bones in birds that makes them light enough to fly, dwelling on the remarkable structures that enable birds to suck in about as much oxygen as Secretariat, and on the structures of wings.

    What’s up with this guy? He missed all that? Sometimes I think creationists look for ways to be offended, and be offensive.

  15. I can’t wait to check this place out. Last time I visited my parents, who live in that area, they were talking about maybe visiting the place next time I’m there. They are young-earth creationists, so I’m sure this will lead to some hilarious arguments during the ride home.