• Welcome to the PopMalt Forums! Whether you're new to forums or a veteran, welcome to our humble home on the web! We're a 20-year old forum community with thousands of discussions on entertainment, lifestyle, leisure, and more.

    Our rules are simple. Be nice and don't spam. Registration is free, so what are you waiting for? Join today!.

Noah's Ark Theme park sparks debate in Kentucky USA

Ilus_Unistus

Registered Member
Planned Noah's Ark Encounter Park in Kentucky Sparks Church-State Controversy - ABC News

"A private company can build a theme park about the Bible. But the government shouldn't be using its money to advance religion. That's what's unconstitutional about this," said Erwin Chemerinsky, a constitutional scholar at the University of California, Irvine School of Law. "It's wrong to force people to pay tax dollars to support religions they don't belong to."

As quoted from the article I think you can see the controversy over this Theme park. What is it you feel about this? Is it within the Constitution of America, yes or no and why?
 

PretzelCorps

Registered Member
Planned Noah's Ark Encounter Park in Kentucky Sparks Church-State Controversy - ABC News

"A private company can build a theme park about the Bible. But the government shouldn't be using its money to advance religion. That's what's unconstitutional about this," said Erwin Chemerinsky, a constitutional scholar at the University of California, Irvine School of Law. "It's wrong to force people to pay tax dollars to support religions they don't belong to."

As quoted from the article I think you can see the controversy over this Theme park. What is it you feel about this? Is it within the Constitution of America, yes or no and why?
I think the more interesting controversy will be whether or not two creatures of every species known to man will be able to fit on this replica and survive for seven months when it's finished.

And, hey, off subject, but how did North American animals make it back to North America from the Mountains of Ararat? This museum could turn out to be very interesting, indeed...
 
Last edited:

Nevyrmoore

AKA Ass-Bandit
I think the more interesting controversy will be whether or not two creatures of every species known to man will be able to fit on this replica and survive for seven months when it's finished.
Make that seven of every clean animal and two of every unclean.

Clean and unclean being based on what animals are approved for eating.
 

CaptainObvious

Embrace the Suck
V.I.P.
I do think they way the courts have interpreted the Establishment Clause is not by it's original intent. That is, the way "separation of church and state" has been defined and interpreted is not the way the framers intended. I know Mr. Chemerinsky disagrees with this.

I don't have a problem with them receiving tax breaks just like I don't have a problem with any religion recieving tax breaks. If any religion decided to open up a theme park I would have no problem with them recieving tax breaks so long as one religion recieved tax breaks and another didn't.
 

MenInTights

not a plastic bag
Governments give tax breaks to companies as incentives to expand their business all the time. Its good practice as the jobs that they will create will far outweigh the benefits the company gets. Answers In Genesis already has a Creation Museum down the road so this would be a great addition and will have a multiplier effect as people will go to one and then drive 50 miles to the other. Spending multiple days in hotels, restaurants, gas stations, gift stores, etc.

Here's my question though to anyone that thinks government can't support religion by giving a tax break here: If AIG funded the project entirely by donations would it then be ok if they required every worker from start to perpetuity to be an evangelical Christian and sign a sworn statement that they believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible, ie 6,000 year old Earth? That would seem fair to me.
 
Last edited:

ExpectantlyIronic

e̳̳̺͕ͬ̓̑̂ͮͦͣ͒͒h̙ͦ̔͂?̅̂ ̾͗̑
Someone in Hong Kong already made a full-sized ark:



They even have 67 sets of replica animals. So only around 25,000,000 left to go.

As for the question in the OP: If we apply the Lemon test, I think we have to admit it does nothing to advance religion by calling attention to one of the most ridiculous parts of the Bible.
 
Last edited:

MenInTights

not a plastic bag
That's not a full sized ark.

That was an excellent point EI. People who believe the ark is a myth should welcome this to be built. I think it will prove the story plausible. Maybe you and I can tour it together EI? :lol: I'll buy your ticket.
 

PretzelCorps

Registered Member
I propose an experiment!
We know of 29,633 land species of animals (excluding insects). 90 of those species are listed as potentially 'unclean.'

29,633 - 90 = 29,543 species of clean animals + 90 species of unclean animals.

(29,543 species * 7 sets) + (90 species * 2 sets) = 206,981 sets * 2 animals per set = 413,962 animals -12 excess humans = 413,950 organisms on Noah's Ark.
So lets do it --> Lets throw 413,950 creatures onto the full size replica and fill whatever free space that happens to be left, if any, with provisions, and see if they survive for 7 months!

And actually, since that wouldn't ever fly with PETA (unless we used 413,950 people), there's another way --> We should be able to tell genetically if pigs and the other 'unclean' animals came from only 4 complete sets of chromosomes; after all, 4,000 years really isn't a very long time, even for microevolution.
 
Last edited:

MenInTights

not a plastic bag
I'm not sure where you got those numbers from. AIG estimates the total number of animals on the ark at around 16,000. I haven't studying it for a long time so I couldn't say how they arrived at 16,000 without looking into it further.
 

PretzelCorps

Registered Member
I'm not sure where you got those numbers from. AIG estimates the total number of animals on the ark at around 16,000. I haven't studying it for a long time so I couldn't say how they arrived at 16,000 without looking into it further.
The numbers in my post have hyperlinks on them to their respective Wikipedia articles. Not the best source, I know, but it still makes for a good estimate.

But even ignoring that, say we go with 16,000 animals and work backwards:
16,000 total - 360 'unclean animals' = 15,640 clean animals + 360 unclean animals

15,640 = (X number species * 7 sets) * 2 animals per set

∴ X number species = 15,640 animals / 7 sets / 2 animals per set = 1,117 species of land animal, including birds, mammals, reptiles, etc.
Considering biologists have identified almost 10,000 species of bird alone, 1,117 seems to come up incredibly short. Even if we theorize that the birds could simply fly for seven months without resting, biologists have documented over 5,000 different species of mammals, and over 8,000 different reptiles.

So basically, either Noah's Ark did not occur as the Bible tells it, or these numbers effectively prove beyond all doubt and incertitude the theory of evolution...
 
Last edited:
Top