Strange Bedfellows: New York Times and Creationist Museum

Media • Views: 2,234

Irony alert: on the page for the New York Times Art and Leisure Week “Special Cultural Offerings” promotion, choose “Kentucky” (KY) and “Museum” from the dropdown menus and click Submit, and you’ll discover that last weekend the Times was pushing a package deal that included a visit to Ken Ham’s absurd Creation Museum. Wonder if they knew?

Museum listings for KY

Buy one admission and receive a second one of the same value free at most
museums from January 8 to 11, 2009, unless otherwise specified.

Creation Museum
2800 Bullittsburg Church Rd.
Petersburg
(888) 582-____
CreationMuseum.org

For more on this 60,000 square foot animatronic advertisement for young earth creationism: LGF search: Creation Museum.

Jump to bottom

120 comments
1 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:23:52am

I see a connection.

Fossils.

2 Guanxi88  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:23:56am

Doubt they knew or cared. No way to blame Zionism or the Bush administration for it, so they probably take no notice one way or another.

3 CIA Reject  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:24:21am

Now this is just too weird...

4 Leonidas Hoplite  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:24:36am

It doesn't matter if they knew, they are desperate for advertising revenue.

5 [deleted]  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:25:05am
6 Dianna  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:25:44am

That's just ridiculous. For pity's sake, did they promote it as "Go ridicule the hayseeds" or something?

7 Oh no...Sand People!  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:26:58am

The NYT's mental contortions must have come full circle.

8 Spider Mensch  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:27:24am

Uncle Cletus' baby gator petting zoo and live bait stop can probably soon get linked to the ny slimes the way their revenue/advertising has fallen off.

9 CIA Reject  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:28:46am

re: #6 Dianna

That's just ridiculous. For pity's sake, did they promote it as "Go ridicule the hayseeds" or something?

That's my initial reaction too, but I think folks in NY should stay out of the Times Square area just in case the combination of the secular humanist NYT and the Christian fundamentalist Creation Museum causes some kind of "matter-antimatter" reaction.

10 Bloodnok  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:29:18am

Seems about right that at this point they'd take a buck from anyone.

11 lawhawk  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:29:37am

Gee, we could go for the obvious punnage:

Advertising in the NYT - so easy, a caveman could do it, which happens to coincide with the last time that the NYT was profitable.

12 AmeriDan  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:29:49am

re: #8 Spider Mensch

Uncle Cletus' baby gator petting zoo and live bait stop can probably soon get linked to the ny slimes the way their revenue/advertising has fallen off.

I doubt Uncle Cletus' BGPZ would want to be associated with them.

13 yma o hyd  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:30:23am

Heh.
That image Mi-Kalm had on the thread below is right!
NYT = dinosaurs, us = shrews sucking out their eggs, and they don't know it, like the dinosaurs didn't.
This ad is the proof!

:-))

14 MandyManners  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:30:57am

An alliance of ignorance?

15 ThinkRight  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:31:21am

Charles
You should apply for a bailout stimulus handout from the gov
Then buy the NYT

16 Killgore Trout  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:32:39am

The two choices for museums in Kentucky are the Creation museum and a Mohammed Ali museum. Heh.

17 [deleted]  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:33:40am
18 yma o hyd  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:33:49am

Oh no!
How sad.

Sorry to go OT so early, but I just found this:

British WWI veteran dies aged 108

He was one of the three WWI veterans laying a wreath on Armistice Day, Nov 11th, 2008.

19 AmeriDan  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:34:17am

re: #16 Killgore Trout

The two choices for museums in Kentucky are the Creation museum and a Mohammed Ali museum. Heh.

And Horse Racing, and Corvette.

20 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:34:18am

re: #16 Killgore Trout

The two choices for museums in Kentucky are the Creation museum and a Mohammed Ali museum. Heh.

[Link: www.kygallery.com...]

21 davinvalkri  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:34:55am

Is the New York Times getting desperate?! He he...ha haha...BWAHAHAHAHAHA!

22 Guanxi88  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:35:39am

re: #16 Killgore Trout

The two choices for museums in Kentucky are the Creation museum and a Mohammed Ali museum. Heh.

re: #19 AmeriDan

And Horse Racing, and Corvette.

re: #20 Walter L. Newton

[Link: www.kygallery.com...]

All of which makes me think the thing is a calculated insult against the Bluegrass State.

23 [deleted]  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:36:24am
24 Occasional Reader  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:36:44am
Buy one admission and receive a second one of the same value free

Even when their tickets undergo meiosis, the Creationists don't believe in it.

25 Son of the Black Dog  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:37:00am

re: #6 Dianna

That's just ridiculous. For pity's sake, did they promote it as "Go ridicule the hayseeds" or something?

Don't know if they promoted it that way, but it'd be accurate.

26 MandyManners  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:37:14am

re: #15 ThinkRight

Charles
You should apply for a bailout stimulus handout from the gov
Then buy the NYT

Best idea I've heard in a long time.

27 Spider Mensch  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:37:27am

re: #12 AmeriDan

I doubt Uncle Cletus' BGPZ would want to be associated with them.

that's true..everyone knows uncle Cletus is a card carrying conservative..."Yup! I vooted fer that Sarah Payleen lady! she sure is purty! I'd neever vote fer that obammy fella, I hear tell he's one of them there mooslim alkqueeder types! Ahyuck!"

28 Occasional Reader  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:37:48am

re: #23 onlinegangsta

To be honest I'm not interested in that sort of nonsense.

Au revoir, mon enfant.

29 Lincolntf  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:37:50am

Speaking of tenuous connections to Creationism, has anyone else noticed that most of the Israeli news agencies/websites, etc. use the 5769 date (indicating 5, 769 years since Creation) as well as the AD/CE date?
Does that mean that when I'm reading pro-Israeli sources, I'm somehow getting my info. from Creationists?
I know I should stay out of these threads, but I only noticed the date thing yesterday.

30 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:38:00am

re: #23 onlinegangsta

What's with the obsession over anything " creation" related?
To be honest I'm not interested in that sort of nonsense.

I read LFG for info about islamofacists and the like.

By the way. The owner of this blog does not like to be told what issues to cover and not cover. It's his blog. If you don't like it, leave.

This blog covers many issues.

31 DeafDog  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:38:11am

Anyone know whether the Creationst Museum got the same rates as Moveon.org or did they have to pay full price?

32 MandyManners  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:38:16am

re: #23 onlinegangsta

You're welcome to get your own blog.

33 Oh no...Sand People!  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:38:27am

re: #23 onlinegangsta

What's with the obsession over anything " creation" related?
To be honest I'm not interested in that sort of nonsense.

I read LFG for info about islamofacists and the like.

/ducks under desk...

34 eon  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:38:37am

re: #22 Guanxi88

All of which makes me think the thing is a calculated insult against the Bluegrass State.

Agreed. Particularly since they failed to mention

Patton Museum of Cavalry and Armor, Fort Knox, KY

cheers

eon

35 MandyManners  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:39:02am

re: #23 onlinegangsta

Do you know that a Turkish, Islamist creationist is in league with the D.I.?

36 Occasional Reader  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:39:41am

re: #29 Lincolntf

Does that mean that when I'm reading pro-Israeli sources, I'm somehow getting my info. from Creationists?

Um, no. It's the Jewish calendar. That's all.

37 AmeriDan  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:39:46am

re: #32 MandyManners

You're welcome to get your own blog.

Can I have a Blog too?

/ ;)

38 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:40:22am

re: #32 MandyManners

You're welcome to get your own blog.

I suspect he may, since he is now gone.

39 Occasional Reader  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:40:42am

re: #37 AmeriDan

Can I have a Blog too?

/ ;)

We should all be issued blogs!

Paging Obama!

40 albusteve  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:40:54am

re: #16 Killgore Trout

The two choices for museums in Kentucky are the Creation museum and a Mohammed Ali museum. Heh.

hisssss....I love Kentucky....lota good people and history...D Boone rests there

41 MandyManners  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:41:13am

re: #23 onlinegangsta

If we allow creationism to be taught in science class in public schools, CAIR is watching. Expect them to demand that Muslim theology be taught, too.

42 Son of the Black Dog  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:41:55am

re: #40 albusteve

hisssss....I love Kentucky....lota good people and history...D Boone rests there

And bourbon!

43 Kosh's Shadow  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:42:01am

re: #8 Spider Mensch

Uncle Cletus' baby gator petting zoo and live bait stop can probably soon get linked to the ny slimes the way their revenue/advertising has fallen off.

I suggest the NYT reporters and editors do NOT go there; I think they are too stupid to keep their hands away from the gator's mouths.
The gators would not be able to eat their thick heads, though.

44 MandyManners  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:42:51am

re: #38 Walter L. Newton

I suspect he may, since he is now gone.

I thought I smelled the aroma of tender, singed shells.

45 Lincolntf  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:42:54am

re: #36 Occasional Reader

I didn't know (never been to Israel and never asked any of my Jewish compadres) if it was some sort of "statement" to use one date or the other. So the Creationist date is interchangeable with the CE date and both are accepted by both sides of the political spectrum?

46 FrogMarch  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:43:03am

re: #1 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

ding - you win. perfection.

47 MandyManners  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:43:06am

re: #37 AmeriDan

Can I have a Blog too?

/ ;)

You know it!

48 yma o hyd  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:43:08am

re: #38 Walter L. Newton

I suspect he may, since he is now gone.

Heh.
You can't cure stupid ...

I mean - anybody who registers ahs presumably lurked for a bit and must know the consequences for an idiotic comment like that? Or at least read the rules?

49 albusteve  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:43:30am

re: #42 Son of the Black Dog

And bourbon!

right!...get back here KT you perch!

50 Guanxi88  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:43:47am

re: #34 eon

Agreed. Particularly since they failed to mention

Patton Museum of Cavalry and Armor, Fort Knox, KY

cheers

eon

You know, there are times I wish we could resurrect guys like him (or produce and unleash our own versions). Something deeply satisfying about the idea.

51 Kosh's Shadow  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:44:16am

re: #29 Lincolntf

Speaking of tenuous connections to Creationism, has anyone else noticed that most of the Israeli news agencies/websites, etc. use the 5769 date (indicating 5, 769 years since Creation) as well as the AD/CE date?
Does that mean that when I'm reading pro-Israeli sources, I'm somehow getting my info. from Creationists?
I know I should stay out of these threads, but I only noticed the date thing yesterday.

Not any more than using AD means you must accept Jesus.
Jews use CE, for Common Era, because AD means "anno domini", or "in the year of our lord". Technically, only Christians should use AD, and then, only when communicating with each other.

52 Ringo the Gringo  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:44:33am

I visited a creationist museum just yesterday. Nice folks but completely off their rockers. I only happened to stumble across the place while driving through the desert on a Sunday outing with wife and kid.The whole purpose of the place was to "prove" that dinosaurs and humans lived side by side on the Earth only a few thousand years ago. I was the only customer in the museum ( it cost five bucks and my wife refused to pay so she waited in the car with my daughter).

I took some pictures but the wife was bored and thought I was nuts for photgraphing every display so I'm going to go back in a few weeks and maybe post a short photo essay on the place at my website.

53 AmeriDan  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:44:35am

re: #39 Occasional Reader

We should all be issued blogs!

Paging Obama!

Blog redistribution! Now that's change I can believe in.

I call dibs on Instapundit.

54 Guanxi88  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:45:05am

re: #45 Lincolntf

I didn't know (never been to Israel and never asked any of my Jewish compadres) if it was some sort of "statement" to use one date or the other. So the Creationist date is interchangeable with the CE date and both are accepted by both sides of the political spectrum?

No, no, no; there's nothing Creationist about using the Hebrew calendar. Look, it's part of the history and culture, and, for most folks, that's as far as it goes. Don't read anything more into it.

55 AmeriDan  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:45:17am

re: #47 MandyManners

You know it!

Thanks!

56 experiencedtraveller  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:45:33am

The dinosaurs read the NYT and died of laughter.

57 Hard Right  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:45:47am

The NYT pushes global warming, so it is natural they would associate with those who know jack about real science.

58 carefulnow  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:46:03am

re: #29 Lincolntf

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

59 Lincolntf  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:46:04am

re: #51 Kosh's Shadow

I know that.
I use AD all the time, but my wife (an Art Historian at a pub. Univ.) uses CE because of some "standards and practices" policy that is the rule in her field.

60 CIA Reject  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:46:06am

re: #50 Guanxi88

You know, there are times I wish we could resurrect guys like him (or produce and unleash our own versions). Something deeply satisfying about the idea.

They are still out there- just not as many as some of us might like to see. Problem is once BO is finished with the military most of them will resign in disgust.

61 eon  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:46:15am

re: #29 Lincolntf

Speaking of tenuous connections to Creationism, has anyone else noticed that most of the Israeli news agencies/websites, etc. use the 5769 date (indicating 5, 769 years since Creation) as well as the AD/CE date?
Does that mean that when I'm reading pro-Israeli sources, I'm somehow getting my info. from Creationists?
I know I should stay out of these threads, but I only noticed the date thing yesterday.

The Jewish calendar is based on the traditional time since the first book of Genesis, derived from the number of generations since Adam. (Note that the Bible gives three different figures for this number in three different places). However, most Jews do not take this as a literal figure; Orthodox Jews, for instance, regard the "seven days of creation" as an arbitrary number, as no one knows how G-d defined a "day" back then, and the concepts of "day " and "night" would be irrelevant until the Sun was created on the fourth "day" anyway.

Courtesy of the Jewish Museum Online.

/Which is where I looked it up just now.

cheers

eon

62 Occasional Reader  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:46:17am

re: #45 Lincolntf

I didn't know (never been to Israel and never asked any of my Jewish compadres) if it was some sort of "statement" to use one date or the other. So the Creationist date is interchangeable with the CE date and both are accepted by both sides of the political spectrum?

I don't know. I don't believe that the use of the Jewish calendar date necessarily implies any connection to Torah-literalism.

Israeli lizards? Any thoughts?

63 Guanxi88  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:46:20am

re: #56 experiencedtraveller

The dinosaurs read the NYT and died of laughter.

The dinos invested heavily in the NYT and starved trying to live off dividends and equity growth.

64 Ringo the Gringo  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:46:30am

The way things are going, the NY Times will be joining the dinosaurs soon enough.

65 Occasional Reader  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:47:22am

re: #51 Kosh's Shadow

Jews use CE, for Common Era

"Common Era" is a semi-pet peeve. It pretends to solve a "cultural insensitivity" problem, but doesn't. "Common" to whom?

66 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:47:34am

re: #51 Kosh's Shadow

Not any more than using AD means you must accept Jesus.
Jews use CE, for Common Era, because AD means "anno domini", or "in the year of our lord". Technically, only Christians should use AD, and then, only when communicating with each other.

And C.E and in a 1615 book by Johannes Kepler.[6] Kepler uses it again in a 1617 table of ephemerides.[25] (also see B.C.E)

It is a secular designation, and has been used for years in schools and universities etc.

67 subsailor68  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:47:37am

re: #52 Ringo the Gringo

I visited a creationist museum just yesterday. Nice folks but completely off their rockers. I only happened to stumble across the place while driving through the desert on a Sunday outing with wife and kid.The whole purpose of the place was to "prove" that dinosaurs and humans lived side by side on the Earth only a few thousand years ago. I was the only customer in the museum ( it cost five bucks and my wife refused to pay so she waited in the car with my daughter).

I took some pictures but the wife was bored and thought I was nuts for photgraphing every display so I'm going to go back in a few weeks and maybe post a short photo essay on the place at my website.

I was listening to one of the blue collar comics recently (can't remember which one) and he told a story about being on a bus tour with a group of people, and they stopped at a place where the guide said there were dinosaur tracks close to the road that everyone might want to see.

He said the woman next to him turned and said, "you wouldn't think those dinosaurs would come that close to the road."

68 alegrias  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:48:24am

re: #56 experiencedtraveller

The dinosaurs read the NYT and died of laughter.

* * *
Dictatorship For Dummies: Learn how to quash dissent Chávez-style.

Another article you'll never read in the NYT

[Link: online.wsj.com...]

Go, Mary O'Grady at the WSJ~ She's a lizard too.

69 Wishing  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:48:36am

I am still shaking my head about the cops in London running from the mohammedans.
What is happening to our world?

70 Kosh's Shadow  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:49:08am

re: #65 Occasional Reader

"Common Era" is a semi-pet peeve. It pretends to solve a "cultural insensitivity" problem, but doesn't. "Common" to whom?

OK. Maybe then, it should stand for "Christian Era", because that is what the dates are based on. It wouldn't bother me, because it is an accurate term, but it would piss off Muslims.

71 Kosh's Shadow  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:50:00am

re: #67 subsailor68

I was listening to one of the blue collar comics recently (can't remember which one) and he told a story about being on a bus tour with a group of people, and they stopped at a place where the guide said there were dinosaur tracks close to the road that everyone might want to see.

He said the woman next to him turned and said, "you wouldn't think those dinosaurs would come that close to the road."

The dinosaur swerved off the road to avoid running into the bus heading to Bedrock.

72 alegrias  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:50:43am

re: #69 Wishing

I am still shaking my head about the cops in London running from the mohammedans.
What is happening to our world?

* * *
Welcome to the Brave New Fatwahood.
(Where have you been these last few years while the Caliphate moved in?)

73 Oh no...Sand People!  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:50:45am

re: #53 AmeriDan

Blog redistribution! Now that's change I can believe in.

I call dibs on Instapundit.

That would go swimmingly... Markos 'Screw You' would get handed LGF and Charles would be forced to take this.

Then he would have to check with a government worker in the newly formed Ministry of Design before he could make any updates.

74 subsailor68  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:50:56am

re: #71 Kosh's Shadow

The dinosaur swerved off the road to avoid running into the bus heading to Bedrock.

LOL! Yabba Dabba Do!

75 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:51:49am

re: #70 Kosh's Shadow

OK. Maybe then, it should stand for "Christian Era", because that is what the dates are based on. It wouldn't bother me, because it is an accurate term, but it would piss off Muslims.

C.E and B.C.E has been around from the 1600's. There is nothing new about it, it is used in scholarly works and journals, thesis and so forth, it has only recently been rooted to "to solve a cultural insensitivity problem."

It's been use way before anyone cared about being PC. I've seen it in my archeology books for over 40 years.

76 Occasional Reader  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:51:59am

re: #70 Kosh's Shadow

OK. Maybe then, it should stand for "Christian Era", because that is what the dates are based on. It wouldn't bother me, because it is an accurate term, but it would piss off Muslims.

I file it under the same heading as the re-designation of "Oriental" with the supposedly more PC "Asian". Except... the Japanese, arguably, don't live in "Asia". And the Filipinos certainly don't.

77 eon  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:52:13am

re: #70 Kosh's Shadow

OK. Maybe then, it should stand for "Christian Era", because that is what the dates are based on. It wouldn't bother me, because it is an accurate term, but it would piss off Muslims.

My preferred dating method would probably honk off everybody. It defines 1942 as Year 1 of the Atomic Era. Hence, this year is 67 A.E.

/Taken from the works of H. Beam Piper.

cheers

eon

78 abolitionist  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:53:10am

Giddyyap

79 [deleted]  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:53:11am
80 opnion  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:53:23am

Speaking of Kentucky, two Kentucky farmers were looking at a Sears catalogue.
One says' these gals sure are purty.' His friend say, 'yup & don't cost too much. I'm gonna order one of those gals"
His friend says , "Well if it works out for you, I might do the same thing?"
They see each other in about two weeks, one guy says, "Well dija git that gal?"
His pal says," I think soon. They already sent her clothes."

81 Occasional Reader  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:53:56am

re: #68 alegrias

Learn how to quash dissent Chávez-style

The technical term for this science is porquenotecallasología.

82 jwb7605  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:55:11am

re: #61 eon

The Jewish calendar is based on the traditional time since the first book of Genesis, derived from the number of generations since Adam. (Note that the Bible gives three different figures for this number in three different places). However, most Jews do not take this as a literal figure; Orthodox Jews, for instance, regard the "seven days of creation" as an arbitrary number, as no one knows how G-d defined a "day" back then, and the concepts of "day " and "night" would be irrelevant until the Sun was created on the fourth "day" anyway.

Courtesy of the Jewish Museum Online.

/Which is where I looked it up just now.


cheers

eon


upding. I wish I had more to give.

83 Occasional Reader  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:55:38am

re: #79 buzzsawmonkey

"Common" to everyone who uses Western solar-calendar year-numbering system in order to communicate the date.

First of all, MY calendar is powered by a 12-cylinder, 485 hp. leaded gas-burning engine, thank you very much, and has a glasspack muffler.

Second, I understand that's the "common" explanation, but it's something of a tautology.

84 experiencedtraveller  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:58:27am

re: #68 alegrias


[Link: online.wsj.com...]

Thanks. Good article. I liked this part:

In government schools children are indoctrinated in Bolivarian thought.

Outside of madrassas in Pakistan (and some public schools in New Jersey) I cannot imagine a more worthless education.

/Shout out to Mary O'!

85 Occasional Reader  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:58:46am

re: #77 eon

My preferred dating method would probably honk off everybody. It defines 1942 as Year 1 of the Atomic Era. Hence, this year is 67 A.E.

/Taken from the works of H. Beam Piper.

cheers

eon


Nonsense. The year commonly called "1961" is actually the Year Zero, because it is the birth year of Our Dear Zero. Therefore, we are currently in the year 47 A.O. (anno obamani).

86 experiencedtraveller  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 12:02:12pm

re: #85 Occasional Reader

Nonsense. The year commonly called "1961" is actually the Year Zero, because it is the birth year of Our Dear Zero. Therefore, we are currently in the year 47 A.O. (anno obamani).

Colloquially, Anno nullus

87 Spare O'Lake  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 12:09:13pm

re: #70 Kosh's Shadow

OK. Maybe then, it should stand for "Christian Era", because that is what the dates are based on. It wouldn't bother me, because it is an accurate term, but it would piss off Muslims.

Before Common Domino

88 Lincolntf  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 12:12:07pm

I just wikipedia-ed myself to death on this topic. Apparently the two dates live side-by-side with nobody getting too worked up about the usage.
Nice to see that something (anything!) in the Mideast can be left with two competing versions and nobody killing anyone over the difference.

89 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 12:21:49pm

re: #85 Occasional Reader

I thought Year Zero was 1962?

I'm gonna need a separate calendar to keep track of all these calendars.

90 Scion9  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 12:29:21pm

re: #75 Walter L. Newton

C.E and B.C.E has been around from the 1600's. There is nothing new about it, it is used in scholarly works and journals, thesis and so forth, it has only recently been rooted to "to solve a cultural insensitivity problem."

It's been use way before anyone cared about being PC. I've seen it in my archeology books for over 40 years.

It has nothing to do with being "New". It is the year 2009 CE...of the Gregorian Calendar. The current year and start of the calendar of the Common Era is based off of the date some monks thought was the birth of a potentially mythological figure. If there is a "Common Era", presumably the calendar itself wouldn't be entirely based off of Christian theological concepts.

The reason it is the "Common Era", is because the Gregorian dating system was used by Commoners. The nomenclature in the 17th century was not CE, but VE (by Kepler). Without any kind of separate roll of years for the now essentially non-existent royalty and its for-official-use only dating scheme, there isn't any necessity to differentiate between the Regnal and Vlugar. Eventually Vulgar becomes Common and VE becomes CE, however the nomenclature is still completely irrelevant. CE does appear before VE regardless, referring to the Christian Era.

I'm not even a Christian, but am willing to call a spade a spade. The reason that it is now 2009 CE instead of AD 2009 is for political correctness. Common/Vulgar Era, is as antiquated and useless as 'In the year of our Lord' and went several centuries without consistent use, after Regnal dating went to the wayside.

As an atheist I'm all for a non-AD dating system, but if there is to be one it probably shouldn't be based on the year that Jesus was allegedly born. If we are going to use one that is based on such, I don't see any issue with using religiously inspired terminology for a religiously inspired calendar. As it stands, it is much more intellectually honest to use terminology in a dating scheme that directly references the epochal event that defines the starting date of the calendar (ie Before Christ and 'In the year of our Lord'), rather than antiquated terminology that was coined based on who once used said dating scheme (ie Common Era, as in For Use by Commoners).

91 tigger2005  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 12:40:43pm

Isn't an "sh" missing from "Bullittsburg" ?

92 [deleted]  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 1:08:38pm
93 J'accuzzi  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 1:20:10pm

You must admit the cut away T Rex with its gizzard full of stomach stones,half eroded human skulls, thigh bones, and whatnot was awesome. To chomp down on that many people all at once! They must have been having a "party" and got careless.

94 lincolntf  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 1:26:27pm

I find it a bit hilarious that I was down-dinged for asking a perfectly legit. question. Tolerance is a two-way street, people, and I'm an absolute believer in evolution, Israel and Jewish traditions.
Ugh, I knew there was a reason I stayed out of these threads, they seem to bring out the worst in everyone.

95 Salamantis  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 1:32:28pm

Kudos to Charles for this post! It's a great way to get back at the New York Grime for stealing his fauxtography scoop!

The cognoscenti will be horrified!

HeeHee!

96 onlinegangsta  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 2:08:54pm

Christ on a cracker...

I just made a comment saying I'm not into the whole creationist thing.

No need to jump all over me (unless your cute and female, then by all means do so). :D

97 johnb  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 2:49:33pm

Dear dear... we wouldn't want anyone to go to the Creation museum and use their brain to judge for themselves, would we? No - much better to censor it.

98 Charles Johnson  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 3:46:30pm

re: #97 johnb

Dear dear... we wouldn't want anyone to go to the Creation museum and use their brain to judge for themselves, would we? No - much better to censor it.

Hey, if I'd happened to be in Kentucky last weekend, I probably would have taken advantage of this fine offer myself! Who said anything about censoring anybody?

99 Abu Bin Squid  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 4:20:19pm

re: #85 Occasional Reader

Nonsense. The year commonly called "1961" is actually the Year Zero, because it is the birth year of Our Dear Zero. Therefore, we are currently in the year 47 A.O. (anno obamani).

Wait! He "came along" after the Selma march, no?
*gnashing teeth*

100 Abu Bin Squid  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 4:21:13pm

Sorry. Didn't see this is a D.T.

101 Salamantis  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 4:48:34pm

re: #97 johnb

Dear dear... we wouldn't want anyone to go to the Creation museum and use their brain to judge for themselves, would we? No - much better to censor it.

As much as I hate to give YEC propagandists money, I might have to show up just to get myself a double dose of the best medicine on the market: hysterical laughter.

102 Sharmuta  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 4:49:27pm

re: #101 Salamantis

As much as I hate to give YEC propagandists money, I might have to show up just to get myself a double dose of the best medicine on the market: hysterical laughter.

LGF Meet-Up?

103 Salamantis  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 4:51:46pm

re: #102 Sharmuta

LGF Meet-Up?

Yeah; all us Lizards could show up wearing saddles...;~)

104 Davehm  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 7:13:07pm

In the beginning there was nothing...then nothing exploded and the universe was formed? hmm? I'll stick with God.... as a matter of fact our rights come from the Him (Declaration of Independence), on the other hand if evolution were true where do our rights come from? or the universe for that matter?

food for thought

105 Sharmuta  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 7:44:58pm

re: #104 Davehm

Here's some food for thought- science vs. God is a false dichotomy.

106 Claire  Mon, Jan 12, 2009 9:58:46pm

We should have an LGF meetup in the Galapagos. Now that would be cool.

107 Salamantis  Tue, Jan 13, 2009 3:15:24am

re: #104 Davehm

In the beginning there was nothing...then nothing exploded and the universe was formed? hmm? I'll stick with God.... as a matter of fact our rights come from the Him (Declaration of Independence), on the other hand if evolution were true where do our rights come from? or the universe for that matter?

food for thought

"Ah yes, [life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness]... Life? What 'right' to life has a man who is drowning in the Pacific? The ocean will not hearken to his cries. What 'right' to life has a man who must die to save his children? If he chooses to save his own life, does he do so as a matter of 'right'? If two men are starving and cannibalism is the only alternative to death, which man's right is 'unalienable'? And is it 'right'? As to liberty, the heroes who signed the great document pledged themselves to buy liberty with their lives. Liberty is never unalienable; it must be redeemed regularly with the blood of patriots or it always vanishes. Of all the so-called natural human rights that have ever been invented, liberty is least likely to be cheap and is never free of cost. The third 'right'?—the 'pursuit of happiness'? It is indeed unalienable but it is not a right; it is simply a universal condition which tyrants cannot take away nor patriots restore. Cast me into a dungeon, burn me at the stake, crown me king of kings, I can 'pursue happiness' as long as my brain lives—but neither gods nor saints, wise men nor subtle drugs, can insure that I will catch it."

As spoken by Lt. Col. Jean V. Dubois (Ret.), in
Robert A. Heinlein's novel Starship Troopers, Chapter 8, page 119

108 Yashmak  Tue, Jan 13, 2009 7:43:17am

re: #97 johnb

Dear dear... we wouldn't want anyone to go to the Creation museum and use their brain to judge for themselves, would we? No - much better to censor it.

Someone already did, and the entirety of the review, complete with illustrations and lengthy descriptions of the exhibit, was linked here a couple months ago.

109 Ayeless in Ghazi  Tue, Jan 13, 2009 7:56:37am

re: #97 johnb

Dear dear... we wouldn't want anyone to go to the Creation museum and use their brain to judge for themselves, would we? No - much better to censor it.

You nailed it genius. We're all afraid to put everything we have learned about evolution to the test - the test of looking at some animatronic papier-mache dinosaurs with plastic bible characters sitting on them./

110 johnb  Wed, Jan 14, 2009 2:41:34am

Sadly Jimmah, I feel that your salutation 'genius' may not be wholehearted. It generally doesn't take too long for your particular side of the argument to descend into name-calling. On a lighter note: Do you think they should have used real dinosaurs and actual Bible characters. Come on, think about it - do most museums not use models and recreations? Best wishes, John

111 TheObjectivist  Wed, Jan 14, 2009 4:27:02am

I hope people still read these older comments, let me know if you do.

I was over at Atlas Shrugs, and lots of people were griping about Charles putting up anti-creationist post, in terms of "not focusing on Jihad".

These are very related topics. Charles above all, is invested in Reason, and it is not reasonable to believe in Islam, nor is it reasonable to teach Creationism in public schools.

I for one am so glad Charles is consistent across topics. If for example, we got all the current posts, but he also add posts about why UFOs have been watching us for years, it would diminish the credibility of the fine thinking he does on this blog.

This might sound like a reasonable statement to some of you: "In public schools, in the spirit of intellectual freedom, we should be willing to show both sides of the evolution/intelligent design debate." This is NOT a reasonable statement. For a better understanding of why, please watch this highly informative presentation:

Ken Miller on Intelligent Design

Youtube Video

I am sure many of you have seen it, but for those who have not, it should settle the issue for you. Please pass it on to those who don't know of it.

112 claire  Wed, Jan 14, 2009 8:14:58am

re: #110 johnb

What would be even better than papier mache would be to have some fossil evidence of humans and dino's in the same strata. You know, some actual evidence that they existed at the same time. Oh, right! I forgot- you can't do that because there isn't any.........and why would that be, John? Given any brain-power to that dilemma? Nope?

113 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, Jan 14, 2009 8:31:06am

re: #110 johnb

Sadly Jimmah, I feel that your salutation 'genius' may not be wholehearted. It generally doesn't take too long for your particular side of the argument to descend into name-calling. On a lighter note: Do you think they should have used real dinosaurs and actual Bible characters. Come on, think about it - do most museums not use models and recreations? Best wishes, John

The thing about models and recreations in most museums is that they illustrate facts, not silly religious fantasies which have no evidential basis whatsoever. Being confronted with a physical manifestation of those fantasies is not going to constitute a challenge to anyones scientific understanding, but it might give them a good laugh.

As for name calling, not to mention lying, flaming, trollage, and more lying - that's your sides 'thing', and everyone who has been reading these threads here on LGF knows it.

114 johnb  Wed, Jan 14, 2009 9:27:24am

Well Claire, just to lighten the debate, I could point out that my brain power extends to the correct use of the apostrophe. As for Jimmah: your language quickly becomes intemperate I fear. Best wishes, John

115 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, Jan 14, 2009 9:54:42am

Do you have anything of substance to contribute, John, since you think yourself to be in a debate? Something beyond snideness, pedantry, and offering your 'best wishes' through gritted teeth?

I invite you to offer whatever thoughts of yours you would like to share on the topic.

BBL.

116 johnb  Wed, Jan 14, 2009 10:22:56am

Hi Jimmah, I understand 'snide' to mean nasty and mean. Is there honestly any trace of that in my posts? Come on. As for gritted teeth, I assure you, you couldn't be more wrong. I fear that's you going overboard again. When I close with best wishes, that's exactly what I mean, otherwise I wouldn't say it. The topic as I understood it was whether a discount should be offered to enable people to go to the Creation Museum. My thoughts were (and are) that people should go and make up their own minds. John

117 Ayeless in Ghazi  Wed, Jan 14, 2009 11:06:07am

re: #116 johnb

Hi Jimmah, I understand 'snide' to mean nasty and mean. Is there honestly any trace of that in my posts?

Yes, they ooze snideness. And pedantry. Example:


Well Claire, just to lighten the debate, I could point out that my brain power extends to the correct use of the apostrophe.

As for gritted teeth, I assure you, you couldn't be more wrong. I fear that's you going overboard again. When I close with best wishes, that's exactly what I mean, otherwise I wouldn't say it.

Considered together with the tone of your posts, I very much doubt that.

The topic as I understood it was whether a discount should be offered to enable people to go to the Creation Museum. My thoughts were (and are) that people should go and make up their own minds.

Is that it? Going back to your first post - again btw, the snide tone is there to see:

Dear dear... we wouldn't want anyone to go to the Creation museum and use their brain to judge for themselves, would we? No - much better to censor it.

You seemed to think there was an issue of censorship involved. Any new thoughts on that?

Personally, I would like to discourage people from visiting this place, because it's purpose is to misinform, and each visit brings them more money that supports them in this hucksterism.

118 Yashmak  Wed, Jan 14, 2009 11:20:52am

re: #114 johnb

Well Claire, just to lighten the debate, I could point out that my brain power extends to the correct use of the apostrophe. As for Jimmah: your language quickly becomes intemperate I fear. Best wishes, John

I'd far rather be known for correct use of the facts, than for correct use of the apostrophe. I note you didn't have anything to say with regards to Claire's statement about there being exactly ZERO evidence for the concurrent existence of homo sapiens and dinosaurs. . .but at least you got your friggin' apostrophes right! HUZZAH!

119 Yashmak  Wed, Jan 14, 2009 11:26:18am

re: #116 johnb

The topic as I understood it was whether a discount should be offered to enable people to go to the Creation Museum. My thoughts were (and are) that people should go and make up their own minds. John

Your thoughts are that people should go and make up their minds based on exhibits supported by a complete lack of evidence, exhibits that have been put together contrary to all existing archaeological evidence?

Maybe that's what you really want. Personally, I prefer that people make up their minds based on facts, not fantasy.

120 claire  Wed, Jan 14, 2009 2:32:22pm

re: #114 johnb

I could point out that my brain power extends to the correct use of the apostrophe.

Well, at least you'll always have that.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
The Pandemic Cost 7 Million Lives, but Talks to Prevent a Repeat Stall In late 2021, as the world reeled from the arrival of the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus, representatives of almost 200 countries met - some online, some in-person in Geneva - hoping to forestall a future worldwide ...
Cheechako
6 days ago
Views: 158 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
2 weeks ago
Views: 324 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1