Post a Comment

Comment #182710

Posted by Miguelito on June 8, 2007 1:25 PM (e)

In other news, Ted Haggard was in charge of casting the part of Adam for the creationism museum.

Comment #182711

Posted by harold on June 8, 2007 1:37 PM (e)

A person naive to this issue could be forgiven for thinking that this isn’t relevant to questions such as how old the earth is, etc.

But as I’ve mentioned before, a significant proportion of people who inexplicably insist that the earth is much younger than it actually is, etc, are motivated by what seems to be not just (or even) a “religious” agenda, but a social and political agenda.

They’re more interested in fantasies of forcing brutal harsh “Biblical Law” on other people than in living up to it themselves, and every time that’s demonstrated, it’s beneficial.

One of the many parts of the Bible they don’t take literally is that bit about “Let he who is without sin throw the first stone”.

Comment #182720

Posted by James McGrath on June 8, 2007 2:16 PM (e)

They are going to hold him up to a Biblical standard on sexuality? What does that mean - he can rape someone, but then must marry her?

Comment #182722

Posted by Peter Henderson on June 8, 2007 2:30 PM (e)

They’re more interested in fantasies of forcing brutal harsh “Biblical Law” on other people than in living up to it themselves, and every time that’s demonstrated, it’s beneficial.

One of the many parts of the Bible they don’t take literally is that bit about “Let he who is without sin throw the first stone”.

You’re quite correct Harold. Here’s one of their responses to the Defcon leaflet which was handed out during the opening ceremony of the creation museum:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2007/06…

For a person to make the claim that humans and dinosaurs did not coexist, they would have to be able to see all history at exactly the same time, which would make that person omniscient and omnipresent, qualities of God. So, when someone says emphatically that humans and dinosaurs did not exist together in the past, that person is claiming to be a god, while calling God Himself a liar, or, at best, deceptive.

It’s the second part of this statement that interested me. i.e. someone who claims that humans and dinosaurs didn’t exist together (and that would include many Christians) is in fact calling himself a God ????? That’s a new one on me and I can’t see what the scriptural justification is for this.

Comment #182726

Posted by Henry J on June 8, 2007 3:46 PM (e)

So, when someone says emphatically that humans and dinosaurs did not exist together in the past, that person is claiming to be a god

That “argument” can be used against their position just as easily as for it.

Henry

Comment #182728

Posted by harold on June 8, 2007 4:13 PM (e)

that person is claiming to be a god, while calling God Himself a liar, or, at best, deceptive.

Besides being crazy, illogical nonsense that argues more against their position (because the Bible most certainly does not mention dinosaurs in clear terminology), this has a very threatening tone, to put it mildly. After all, if someone is “calling God Him a liar”…

Comment #182732

Posted by brightmoon on June 8, 2007 6:28 PM (e)

actually creationists ARE calling God a liar

God’s creation itself has no evidence of this dino-human fantasy

on a theological basis alone this is why i refused to even consider YEC as a valid belief for a christian …i really think this is blasphemy

Comment #182733

Posted by the pro from dover on June 8, 2007 6:37 PM (e)

Since birds are dinosaurs why is this such a big deal?

Comment #182736

Posted by Sherry Konkus on June 8, 2007 7:02 PM (e)

Syntax Error: mismatched tag 'kwickxml'

Comment #182739

Posted by raven on June 8, 2007 7:41 PM (e)

For a person to make the claim that humans and dinosaurs did not coexist, they would have to be able to see all history at exactly the same time, which would make that person omniscient and omnipresent, qualities of God.

That is a false statement. The history of the earth is accesible to us through geology, paleontology, astronomy, and indirectly through biology. What they are saying is that the fossil record and dating methods etc.. don’t prove anything which is nonsense.

By their argument, anything beyond living memory could also not exist or be known or be valid. There are books but you know maybe they are just made up stories. Were you there when Mayans rose and fell?

Comment #182741

Posted by brightmoon on June 8, 2007 8:17 PM (e)

Since birds are dinosaurs why is this such a big deal?

they dont mean birds they mean long extinct giants like stegosaurus

its a big deal because they are trying to discredit the real age of the earth (along with physics and geology)& they can’t do that if the big dinos died out 65 mya

Comment #182745

Posted by Sherry Konkus on June 8, 2007 8:40 PM (e)

actually creationists ARE calling God a liar

God’s creation itself has no evidence of this dino-human fantasy

on a theological basis alone this is why i refused to even consider YEC as a valid belief for a christian …i really think this is blasphemy

I say “Amen!” to that, Brother. :-)

Comment #182751

Posted by normdoering on June 8, 2007 9:42 PM (e)

You guys mock the Answers in Genesis people, but have you read what Chris Hedges has said in his debates with Harris and Hitchens?

If not, here’s a bit of an introduction:
http://normdoering.blogspot.com/2007/06/chris-he…

Chris Hedges told Sam Harris that biblical literalists didn’t exist. Perhaps a version of the Answers in Genesis flyer argument would work on him?

The assault on reason isn’t necessarily worse on the right.

Comment #182752

Posted by Gerry L on June 8, 2007 10:34 PM (e)

From post: Note that “Last Updated” date: five months ago. This is in Linden’s “past” just like while you are screaming in pain from stubbing your toe that injury is in your “past”.

If you believe in a 6000-year-old Earth, five months probably seems like a long time.

Comment #182757

Posted by Wesley R. Elsberry on June 8, 2007 11:22 PM (e)

If you believe in a 6000-year-old Earth, five months probably seems like a long time.

Telling kids that some experts think the earth is 4.55 billion years old, and others think it is 10,000 years old is like telling them that some historians think the American Revolutionary War took place two hundred and some years ago, and other historians disagree, saying it happened about four and a half hours ago.

Comment #182776

Posted by harold on June 9, 2007 9:35 AM (e)

Norm Doering

The assault on reason isn’t necessarily worse on the right.

Historically, assaults on reason have come from extremes on the political left and on the political right.

The current situation in this country is that there is no mainstream representation of the extreme political left. Of course, there are surely Marxists, Maoists, and so on out there, but they aren’t represented by the Democratic or even Green party to any serious extent. Even very liberal Democrats like Dennis Kucinich or Barney Frank are by no means ideological “leftists” or science-deniers. To suggest such a characterization of figures like Hillary Clinton or Barrack Obama would be comical.

On the other hand, the extreme right is well-represented in the Republican Party, even as multi-term representatives who are running for president (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Tancredo).

Hence, we see the major current assaults on reason - denial of evolution, denial of climate change, gross manipulation of national security intelligence, claims that we can have a “war” against abstract ideas, claims that we should provide “abstinence only sex education” to enhance public health, etc - coming mainly from the right. Some Democrats have certainly supported some of these things passively after the fact, but they originated from, and have more support on, the right.

Chris Hedges, whoever that is, may have just been factually wrong, or he may have been making a point that I often make - “Biblical literalists” are nothing of the sort, they publicly claim to take Genesis (and when they think they can get away with it, Leviticus, Exodus, and Deuteronomy) “literally”, but ignore and distort much of the Bible, including most of the Old Testament, and most of the four major Gospels of the New Testament. Whatever he meant, and whatever one’s personal opinions on social or economic policy, the assault on reason in the United States, at this point in history, is overwhelmingly coming from the right.

Even if you’re a “libertarian” or “science-supporting Republican”, that’s how it is.

Comment #182784

Posted by Gary Hurd on June 9, 2007 12:53 PM (e)

BEDROOMACROBAT.COM has been closed and they have a statement up that Linden is not associated. Oh, and that it was nothing about porn anyway.

Comment #182789

Posted by Sir_Toejam on June 9, 2007 3:13 PM (e)

By their argument, anything beyond living memory could also not exist or be known or be valid. There are books but you know maybe they are just made up stories. Were you there when Mayans rose and fell?

that’s what you get when raised on Ken Hammy’s “Were you THERE?” ™ philosophy.

Comment #182791

Posted by scytale on June 9, 2007 4:06 PM (e)

Did he show a navel?

Comment #182793

Posted by George Cauldron on June 9, 2007 6:11 PM (e)

Linden’s not the same person as Jeff Gannon, is he?

Comment #182796

Posted by Sir_Toejam on June 9, 2007 6:16 PM (e)

Linden’s not the same person as Jeff Gannon, is he?

as silly as it sounds, these days it wouldn’t actually surprise me if they were.

Comment #182798

Posted by FL on June 9, 2007 6:47 PM (e)

actually creationists ARE calling God a liar

God’s creation itself has no evidence of this dino-human fantasy

No time to wade into the human-dino coexistence issue, but I couldn’t help noticing that you seem to assume that “absence of evidence is evidence of absence”.
Is that what you are assuming?

Comment #182800

Posted by Flint on June 9, 2007 7:20 PM (e)

FL:

Is that what you are assuming?

You have at least produced a very creative interpretation of what has been said. In fact, there is an enormous amount of evidence, from many different sources, all consistent with one another, to place both dinosaur and human evolution into the context of geological history.

So the assumption being made here is that evidence matters. I’m aware from your many posts that you don’t regard this assumption as valid in any cases where you find it inconvenient to your religious requirements. But you might at least correctly identify the assumption with which you’re having problems.

Comment #182802

Posted by FL on June 9, 2007 7:40 PM (e)

I figured it wouldn’t be long before somebody jumped in there to help out a little, Flint.

Still, I was hoping to hear Brightmoon’s answer to the question, rather than any “rescue attempts”, so to speak.

Btw, we all agree that “evidence matters.” No problem.
(And the “interpretation of said evidence” matters equally as much, as I’m sure you’ll agree.)

However, that’s not the question on the table at this time.
Given what Brightmoon said there, it’s entirely reasonable and relevant to ask, direct & upfront, the particular question that I asked.

So, I am content to wait for Brightmoon’s direct & upfront answer to that question.

Comment #182803

Posted by Sir_Toejam on June 9, 2007 7:43 PM (e)

“rescue attempts”

uh, sorry to say, but he doesn’t need rescuing from your misinterpretations.

I rather think Flint was attempting to come to your rescue, if anything.

I wouldn’t have bothered, but hey, that’s just the kind of guy Flint is.

Comment #182804

Posted by raven on June 9, 2007 7:48 PM (e)

No time to wade into the human-dino coexistence issue, but I couldn’t help noticing that you seem to assume that “absence of evidence is evidence of absence”.
Is that what you are assuming?

It’s OK to believe Ham’s fairy tale that Jewish people used to ride around on dinosaurs a few thousand years ago. The evidence for this is nonexistent but fairy tales, whatever. There is a huge amount of evidence from geology, astronomy, paleontology, and biology gathered over centuries by many scientists, many of whom were christian that dinosaurs and humans are separated by at least 65 million years.

But you have to expect the reality accepting community to laugh out loud once in a while.

So creo guy, all terrestrial animals got on the Big Boat and presumably got off. We also know that 99% of all known life is now extinct. So where are our dinosaurs!! What did you do with them?

I do believe this was a monumental Iraq class case of poor post deluge planning.

Comment #182808

Posted by harold on June 9, 2007 8:44 PM (e)

FL -

No time to wade into the human-dino coexistence issue, but I couldn’t help noticing that you seem to assume that “absence of evidence is evidence of absence”.

Actually, it takes relatively little time to admit that every dinosaur fossil ever found, dated by any scientically acceptable method, is much, much older than every hominid fossil ever found. Of course, I’m not counting birds as dinosaurs, but neither are you. I could add a bunch of scientific links or references, and someone else probably will, and that would only take about five minutes. I could add theological links saying that unsophisticated or, as I believe, deeply disingenuous and politically/economically motivated (this is an understatement of very sinister implications), creationists claim that a few Biblical lines, referring to “Leviathan” or whatnot, “may” refer to dinosaurs, but that serious Christian and Jewish Biblical scholars don’t think so, and that, too, could probably be done in five minutes.

Although your statement could be literally true if you didn’t even have a few minutes as you wrote it, more likely it’s a dodge.

Now that the factual assertion has been shown to be false with a high degree of probability, let’s move on to shred the flawed logic.

In fact, absence of evidence is often evidence of abscence. It simply depends, as you actually already know, on how hard evidence has been sought.

In the case of hominids and dinosaurs, we are talking about categories of fossil remains that have attracted very intense study. Therefore, evidence of absence is obviously absence of evidence. If a dinosaur lineage (not counting modern birds) lived on to the time of hominids, that would be a major find indeed. It hasn’t been found yet.

Comment #182811

Posted by CBG on June 9, 2007 9:19 PM (e)

For a person to make the claim that humans and dinosaurs did not coexist, they would have to be able to see all history at exactly the same time, which would make that person omniscient and omnipresent, qualities of God. So, when someone says emphatically that humans and dinosaurs did not exist together in the past, that person is claiming to be a god, while calling God Himself a liar, or, at best, deceptive.

Sure, if you believe in a “god” who is omniscient and omnipresent then those are qualities of that god.
However, to have (some of) the same qualities as something or someone else does not mean you are it or them.
I have 2 eyes and a nose, so does my dog - are they saying that I am my dog?

Comment #182820

Posted by mclaren on June 9, 2007 11:49 PM (e)

Cue the gay hooker crystal meth addict in…three…two…one…

Comment #182828

Posted by meme on June 10, 2007 3:50 AM (e)

“No time to wade into the human-dino coexistence issue, but I couldn’t help noticing that you seem to assume that “absence of evidence is evidence of absence”.
Is that what you are assuming?”

Silly thing, absence of evidence _is_ evidence of absence _when_ we can expect presence of evidence.

Comment #182831

Posted by hoary puccoon on June 10, 2007 5:35 AM (e)

This is the famous Sherlock Holmes conumdrum of the ‘curious’ incident of the dog barking in the night.
Dr. Watson– But the dog did not bark in the night.
Holmes– THAT was the curious incident.
Apparently the dinosaurs did not bark in the night, either; our shrew-like ancestors of the time were prudently nocturnal.

Comment #182832

Posted by demallien on June 10, 2007 6:26 AM (e)

This article makes me laugh: I mean, you just can’t make this stuff up! Only the AiG could create a museum, and then use a porn star for one of the exhibits…

The possibility of parodying creationists without hitting reality diminishes yet again.

Comment #182845

Posted by Shaun Apple on June 10, 2007 9:27 AM (e)

It still relates to now.

Comment #182847

Posted by haceaton on June 10, 2007 10:10 AM (e)

Gary Hurd wrote:

BEDROOMACROBAT.COM has been closed and they have a statement up that Linden is not associated. Oh, and that it was nothing about porn anyway.

bedroomacrobat.com wrote:

You are about to enter the domain of the sexually advanced.
This is a site that the underground community of Bedroom Acrobat’s call home.
A place where people from all walks of life go for News, Guidance,
Information, Reviews, Toys, Killer T-Shirts, Laughs and Sexy Amazement.

May 22, 2006 bedroomacrobat.com

Comment #182864

Posted by Gary Hurd on June 10, 2007 8:18 PM (e)

“Adam’s” other gig is as ambassador for the clothing and design industry star,

SIRFUXALOT INTERNATIONAL.

Seriously, I hope that none of this hassels Linden, after all, a gig is a gig. But gud ol’ Ken Ham sure is a wanker.

Comment #182867

Posted by raven on June 10, 2007 9:01 PM (e)

I wonder if Linden is going to put his Creation Museum gig on his CV? After all that could ruin his reputation.

Guy isn’t too bright or he doesn’t care. It is very easy to register a website offshore anonymously in such a way that it is virtually impossible to ID. I vote for he didn’t care.

Comment #182873

Posted by Chris Andrews on June 10, 2007 11:34 PM (e)

This Eric Linden?

http://sfxinternational.com/aboutus_ericlinden.p…

Oh Jesus, funny! His t-shirt, I admit, does seem to imply that he’s ready to populate a planet.

Comment #182878

Posted by Robin on June 11, 2007 1:05 AM (e)

Perhaps the museum is trying a different angle to draw non-believers…

From the Economist: (31 May 2007)
The debate about the origins of everything is presented even-handedly. Some people trust God, accept that the universe is 6,000 years old and will go to heaven. Others trust human reason, think the Big Bang happened 14 billion years ago and, having abandoned God, are quite likely to start browsing the internet for pornography or commit genocide. Visitors are spared graphic examples of porn, but there are some nasty pictures of lynched black Americans and of Nazi concentration camps.

Adam and Eve… barely legal teens!

Comment #182896

Posted by Raging Bee on June 11, 2007 10:34 AM (e)

Adam and Eve… barely legal teens!

Not if they were created with only the appearance of age.

Comment #182899

Posted by André Luis Ferreira da Silva Bacci on June 11, 2007 11:12 AM (e)

Not if they were created with only the appearance of age.

With or without memories?

Comment #182903

Posted by Gary Hurd on June 11, 2007 1:02 PM (e)

Linden has the Creation Museum listed in his credits, and I don’t see why not. Like I said, “a gig is a gig.”

Comment #182912

Posted by Mike Shields on June 11, 2007 2:53 PM (e)

Does it truly matter? He could’ve sold the site, and forgotten to take his name off of it….

Comment #182917

Posted by Moses on June 11, 2007 6:11 PM (e)

For a person to make the claim that humans and dinosaurs did not coexist, they would have to be able to see all history at exactly the same time, which would make that person omniscient and omnipresent, qualities of God.

And this comes from the “Watchmaker” argument people? It’s a wonder their heads don’t explode from the constant internal contradictions.

Comment #182951

Posted by chunkdz on June 12, 2007 11:52 AM (e)

Thank you, Dr. Elsberry, for defending science education.

Comment #182953

Posted by harold on June 12, 2007 12:41 PM (e)

chunkdz -

Your implication is that Elsberry should not have commented at all on the situation; that he should have simply let it go unmentioned.

That’s wrong, for two reasons.

First of all, as I pointed out above, nobody just “believes” in creationism in isolation, without a larger agenda (this isn’t the case for the theory of evolution, which is based on neutral evidence and is accepted across many religious, philosophical, and political boundaries).

Forcing creationism into taxpayer funded schools is part of an agenda to make the world a “better” place by enforcing outward observation of a narrow version of Christianity.

Yet we see that literally within days of its opening, the Creationism Museum is beset by lawsuits and scandals that appear to reflect a failure to live up to the morals it ostensibly preaches.

Although I would be in favor of teaching science honestly even if enforcing creationism would make people morally better, that might be a difficult choice. When we see time and time again that fundamentalist creationism is both false, and apparently unrelated to moral superiority (not surprising given that it is fundamentally dishonest), the already overwhelming case for honesty is further strengthened.

Second of all, it’s a free country, and Elsberry has every right to draw attention to this amusing story.

Comment #182956

Posted by Wesley R. Elsberry on June 12, 2007 2:35 PM (e)

Does it truly matter? He could’ve sold the site, and forgotten to take his name off of it….

Let’s see… The whois data was updated late in January. That means that Linden either changed something or at least confirmed the accuracy of the data at that time. The Creation Museum opened late in May. That’s a spread of four months. However, the exhibits for the Creation Museum have been in preparation for several years now. The odds are good that the video that Linden acted in for AiG was produced well before January 2007, and may even predate the “Bedroom Acrobat” domain registration of January 2006.

What matters here is what AiG is making of it. They could have simply said that their ministry was relevant even to workers in the pornography industry, and pitched Linden’s disavowals of the website as evidence that they had made a difference in Linden’s life. Instead, they’ve sided with Mrs. Grundy and yanked the video from their museum and are talking up “investigating” the claims.

“Chunkdz”

Thank you, Dr. Elsberry, for defending science education.

Hey, no problem. Of course, this little piece is one I filed under the “Humor” category. For something with a bit of meat on the bones, check out my thread on Dry Rot, Not Arson: National Park System and Science. You seem to have missed the opportunity to make this comment there. Or any comment there, as it turns out.

Comment #182966

Posted by Peter Henderson on June 12, 2007 5:24 PM (e)

Yet we see that literally within days of its opening, the Creationism Museum is beset by lawsuits and scandals that appear to reflect a failure to live up to the morals it ostensibly preaches.

Their vetting procedures seem to have gone awry !

Comment #182967

Posted by wrpd45 on June 12, 2007 6:13 PM (e)

Check out ericlinden.com. He praises the Creation Museum and says it “they show you another point of view that needs to be heard.”
I would question why anyone would buy the domain name of bedroomacrobats. He also says the other organization he is associated with, SFXI, is just a new line of clothing. The full name of the group, Sirfuxalot International, somehow just doesn’t seem spiritually inclined, but I would love to see Bev LaHaye in one of their tee shirts.

Comment #183063

Posted by Peter Henderson on June 13, 2007 4:45 PM (e)

Found this today:

http://www.columbusdispatch.com/dispatch/content…

Linden, who now lives in Los Angeles, said his modeling work for the clothing line is just one of the many jobs that make up his career. “They’re just like a kind of hip, trendy clothing line,” he said.

He said he learned of the opportunity to play Adam through a childhood friend, and has great respect for the founders of the Creation Museum and their vision.

“For the Creation Museum, I did what I did as an actor. It doesn’t necessarily mean I believe in evolution or I believe in creation,” Linden said. “I’m hired to get a point across. On the flip side, if I was hired to play a murderer, that doesn’t mean I’d go out and kill somebody. It’s make-believe.”

Linden said he was selected for the role from a lineup of contenders because his looks were sufficiently generic.

“I’m very proud to be Adam,” he said. “But just because I’m Adam on the screen, that doesn’t mean I’m Adam off the screen. What I do shouldn’t have anything to do with who they think Adam is.”

Apparently, AiG have withdrawn the offending video !

Comment #183309

Posted by Inthepew on June 15, 2007 4:07 PM (e)

Evangelical Right found the drag queen snapshots. Classic. Creation Museum Drag Queen Photos

Comment #188146

Posted by Martha on July 16, 2007 12:59 PM (e)

AIG has also stopped showing that film. Please get your information straight before pointing an accusing finger. Get the beam out of your own eyes before you get the mote out of AIG or even Eric Linden’s eye. “Judge not lest ye be judged.” The real “stange bedfellows” is the merging of creation with evolution.

The people at AIG are not stupid; they are scientists, and very educated men and women. They’ve gone to the very same schools as secular scientists, and have studied the exact same evolutionary theories as all the other students.

AIG is not the only ministry that has disproven evolution. In his attempt to disprove creation, Roger Oakland of http://www.understandthetimes.org realized creation was true and turned his life over to Christ. He has several videos on the subject and he includes his observations on those videos. So, it’s not some “fantasy” that people are believing. It takes more faith to believe evolution than the creation account. Evolution is nothing more than a “cunningly devised man-made fable” to rebel against a loving God who wants a relationship with His creation.

Why is it so hard to believe the creation account when that has more supported evidence that the hoax of evolution? Historians have said that, after studying the human eye, Darwin himself denounced his own theory, because he knew it was a lie, and he turned his life over to Jesus Christ. The human eye is too complex of an organ to “just evolve”. There is an intelligent being behind the creation of man. But I bet none of you have the guts to face Ken Ham, or Roger Oakland in a debate over this subject.

The Scripture says, “God’s ways are higher than man’s ways”. “A way that seems right to a man is the way of death”. God uses “the foolish things of this world” (or what seems foolish in the eyes of unregenerated man) “to confound those who profess to be wise”, such as yourselves. “Professing yourselves to be wise, you become fools.” And “a fool has said in his heart, ‘there is no God.’”

This gossip is all part of the last days attack on the true believers. The kingdom of God is at hand, therefore repent your own selves of the heresy (any and all forms of evolution) you are believing, and turn to the Lord – the one in the Bible, not “another Jesus” that the cults (including Catholicism) preach.

Comment #188160

Posted by Wesley R. Elsberry on July 16, 2007 2:19 PM (e)

What part of,

“Instead, they’ve sided with Mrs. Grundy and yanked the video from their museum and are talking up “investigating” the claims.”

did you find unclear?

Comment #188161

Posted by Wesley R. Elsberry on July 16, 2007 2:22 PM (e)

Of course, it’s tough to tell whether the fulsome comment from “Martha” is the usual bottom-of-the-ignorance-barrel antievolution rant, or a trollish parody. I mean, the whole Lady Hope thing is sooooo 1980s.

Comment #188162

Posted by raven on July 16, 2007 2:43 PM (e)

Martha the cultist:

Why is it so hard to believe the creation account when that has more supported evidence that the hoax of evolution? Historians have said that, after studying the human eye, Darwin himself denounced his own theory, because he knew it was a lie, and he turned his life over to Jesus Christ.

That is a lie. One that even most creos don’t bother to repeat because it is easily disproven. Talkorigins has the truth in simple language you may even understand.

Got any more lies? I’m sure you have collected them all. A veritable mountain of them. Do look in your bible at the ten commandments again. There is one about not lying. Good advice IMO.

Comment #188190

Posted by PUMA-MAN on July 16, 2007 4:08 PM (e)

It’s the second part of this statement that interested me. i.e. someone who claims that humans and dinosaurs didn’t exist together (and that would include many Christians) is in fact calling himself a God ?????

EACH MAN IS A GOD!

EACH MAN IS FREE!

Comment #188249

Posted by neo-anti-luddite on July 16, 2007 5:44 PM (e)

Ah, it’s always good to see another MST3K fan…