On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Judith Dancoff <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

I cannot keep silent on what I see as an essential confusion. A scientific theory is not the same as a belief system. A belief, by its very definition, can exist on faith alone and does not require facts to support it. Conversely, a scientific theory cannot exist without some (or a lot of) factual evidence, and because it is science, invites vigorous experimentation, criticism, and debate to achieve the level of fact. Many theories are eventually overturned by new theories, in what is seen as the progress of science to determine truth.

Here, then, is my problem with creationism as a so-called scientific theory: it wants it both ways. Half the time it wants the respect given to a scientific fact or theory without the vigorous debate, and the other half, it wants to hide behind the mantle of faith. Creationist stories are numerous in human cultures and valuable. Of course they should be presented to the general public, and not simply the Adam and Eve story. Museums as institutions of learning, however, must not present impressionable minds with untested or quasi-tested theory, what I consider the theory of intelligent design (as compared to the theory of evolution which as science, has had a 150 year head start), and simply let children "decide what they want to believe in." A belief is not a science; science is not a belief. If the evidence proves the facts, then the facts are true, regardless of whether they contradict our beliefs. The earth was still round even for all the centuries people believed it to be flat, and it still orbited around the sun, regardless of what the church and scripture said. We don't get to choose our facts, only our beliefs.

Judith Dancoff
Los Angeles, California

On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 6:57 PM, John Martinson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

No, I am speaking specifically to two theories --- creationalism and evolution. Two
concepts based upon some type of faith, speculation, unknown conclusion, and
a personal belief and/or conviction by an individual who accepts either of the subjects.

What is implied sounds more like what Hitler, or KKK type museum(s) would promote, i.e., "you accept our view (creationalism or evolution) and you get no other story by ours." Indeed, a person can go to a church to get creationism, but do museums serious weigh both subjects against each other without personal bias of the staff, board, director, etc.?   One can also pick up a science book and hear evolution, but to have an open ground where both subjects are treated equally is a real learning environment for the visitor.

In relationship, how many in the scientific community accept that Paleo-Indian came into America ONLY across the land bridge 10,000 to 14,000 years ago? However, there is strong evidence that man may have been into the Americas as early as 18,000 to 24,000 years ago?   Do we trash can all the evidence that other sites are scientifically carbon-dated to older dates? And only tell the public about the land bridge?

Or do we present the total facts that there may be other routes man came to the America.   That they followed the coast by boat from both not only the Pacific but also the Atlantic, and even migrated from South Pacific routes. In fact, most Native American people would say they were here always. But, yet many still cling only to the land bridge theory. If a museum holds back new evidence and other theories showing the earlier sites discovered in South America is that fair to the visitor?

How many people believe that Lucy is the oldest prehistoric related human? But, how many new discoveries have stripped and shifted the time-line and “human link” back as earlier remains are discovered? With the changing world because something is not solidly proven, does not mean it is wrong or false – and I mean BOTH creationalism and evolution. I see plenty of fallacy, straw men to say in each theory.   I base that totally upon the fact man does not have all the answers; and BOTH remain based upon much speculation, hearsay, and personal conjecture.

I guess I have it wrong. Alas, I thought museums were there to provide opportunities to learn, not hear only pre-conceived scientific standards of the museum, and not force fed the personal opinions of the exhibit committee, board, director, or curator. Myself, I like a museum that is not "one way" and present both sides of the subjects no matter what the exhibit or theories are about. Are not museums “learning centers,” or are they now institutions of hearing what is only “scientific” or “accepted ONLY by the bias of museum staff members?”

I learned my lesson in relations to presenting both sides of the story. I do not accept BIG FOOT, but my staff swayed me to present both sides of the issues, and provide the evidence that there could be a BIG FOOT. I have seen other museums give such open, and well rounded exhibits, and the visitor have walked away maybe not BELIEVING in Big Foot, but seeing the reasons why others do.   The same could apply to creationislm, allowing the learning to learn something new about it from the scientific point of view.

Yes --- I would tell the story of the Holocaust and what Hitler did and why. I would get into the mind of Hitler and what made him think and do the things he did, and why the German people followed him – when they saw the smoke coming out of the stacks of the concentration camp furnaces. I would tell about the prejudice and hatred of the KKK against people of color because of prejudice and discrimination attitudes. Yes, I would tell about the force march of the Cherokee Indians on the Trail of Tears. I would tell how America have not honored one treaty with the Native American people.

One can go on and on – but both sides of the story should be told. How else can we teach other children, and their children about the mistakes men have made -- so that it does not happen again --- if only one side is told?

Museums ignore their objective to be a learnng center without presenting a learning experience given by an intellectual exhibit offering both points of view; an exhibit without bias, prejudice, scientific priority, or religous contention.  Obviously, if there is ONLY a one side exhibit the visitor cannot make a comparison of how man came to be—either by a creation by a Superior Being, by evolution, or even by a creator allowing the creation to evolve naturally.

John
Boise

> Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:07:46 -0500
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [MUSEUM-L] Hate speech on this forum--one opinion over the other
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 3:45 PM, John Martinson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > Thus, presenting the subject of "evolution" or "creationalism" should be done with an "open mind" to include BOTH aspects of the "theories" or issues, to allow the visitor to come up with their own interpretation or understanding of the subject(s).   But, in no way do I feel that it is the responsibility of a museum to "tell" visitors one opinion over the other or what to believe.
>
> I respectfully disagree. It depends on the mission of the museum.
> Would you expect equal time for the Nazi point of view in a Holocaust
> museum? Should the Creation Museum in Kentucky devote equal time to
> the purely scientific theories of evolution? How about an exhibit
> promoting the KKK or other white supremacy groups in a Black/African
> museum?
>
>
> Deb Fuller
>
> =========================================================
> Important Subscriber Information:
>
> The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).
>
> If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).

========================================================= Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).
If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).

========================================================= Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).
If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).