I stumbled onto the website for the Creation Museum.

I’m all for people believing whatever they want to believe, but once you post something on your website, or say something publically, it’s fair game. I’m not implying here that I think Creationism is wrong anymore than I can say the purely scientific approach is correct. However, I think if you’re going to try to have a meaningful debate on the topic you should be using sound logic and reasoning. I also just find this fun. Let’s take a look at some content in the FAQ portion of their website.

1. On the topic of the origin of life on earth, speaking of Scientists:
They have been unable to explain the origin of life on Earth, and even the ‘simplest’ living cell is now known to be unimaginably complex.

Hmm. And the Creationists have a great explanation backed up by a whole ton of facts, right? Both sides of the argument have “explanations.” One just happens to have been subjected to more rigorous scientific inspection. I’ll let you decide which…

2. On the topic of life on other planets:
Whether there is life on any planet other than Earth is another matter. The Bible teaches that life began on Earth through a process of commanded-by-God creation (Genesis 1:11-27). It also tells us that God’s purposes are centred on Earth. Thus God created Earth (on Day 1) before ‘the lights in the firmament of heaven’ (on Day 4), which were ‘to divide the day from the night’ and were ‘for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years’ (Genesis 1:14), i.e. for the benefit of mankind.

Man and woman were both ‘made in the likeness of God’ (Genesis 1:27). This, coupled with factors such as the Fall, the Incarnation, the redemption of mankind through the once-only death and Resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Second Coming of Christ to Earth, and the coming Judgment of all mankind, show Earth’s unique importance among the billions of billions of stars in the universe. This is despite the frequent belittling, by evolutionists, of the importance of Earth.

The above also implies that God did not create any other life forms elsewhere in the universe.

This is a great attempt at using logic. It sounds very believable because of their use of the fancy word “implies.” There is absolutely nothing in the paragraphs above that “implies” anything meaningful, aside from the fact that they say so. It’s like me saying “Pigs eat their own crap. This implies that pigs eat their own crap.”

3. On the topic of the search for life elsewhere:
No scientists have ever seen a complex language system like our DNA evolve by chance. They know that it takes information to get information, that information never arises unless an intelligence is operating.

What? What are they basing this on? What is their definition of intelligence. And where does this “it takes information to get information” come from? If I randomly scatter a handful of rocks, there’s information to be gained from the output. Was my hand somehow conveying intelligence in the way it scattered them? This makes absolutely no sense.

4. NASA scientists today know there is an intelligence greater than they. They know there has to be more than just us. In a sense, they are desperately trying to find God, not accepting that God has already found them.
Ok, I’ll let them know. I think the ones who are not devout Christians just forgot.

I’ll hopefully have some more fun and post more of these when I get some more time :)