Rev. Barry Lynn Formulated Scheme Concerning Ark Park

Ken Ham who is the founder of Answers in Genesis, which advocates biblical creationism. He wrote a piece about his debate which was aired on CNN with the Rev. Barry Lynn who advocates a particular type of wall between government and religion. His blog, it unveils a conspiracy which is also mentioned in the debate…

“Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear thinks it’s a good idea for his state to be the home of Noah’s Ark – one that will include dinosaurs! Beshear announced yesterday his plan to provide tax incentives to the developers of a creationism theme park that will feature a replica of the well-known biblical boat. The $150 million facility will be a collaboration between Ark Encounters, a private company in Springfield, Mo., and Answers in Genesis, a fundamentalist Christian organization that runs the Creation Museum that opened in Kentucky in 2007.”

Rev. Barry then applies his best strawman’s argrument, “The government should not be giving tax incentives for religious projects. Religion should be supported by voluntary donations, not the government.” He repeats this in more detail in the debate by claiming that part of the state’s budget is funding the Ark Park which otherwise would be used for social services or other government programs. Ken Ham responds…

“I tried my best to make the point that if there is no Ark Encounter in the state, there is no sales tax generated and handed over to the state. I added that the Ark Encounter will have an economic impact in the first year of around $250 million for the state’s economy, and $4 billion over 10 years.”

“This generates money for the state. And the state government collects all the sales tax outside the attraction and the payroll taxes from businesses generated by the Ark’s presence. The reason the state has an economic tax incentive for tourist-related attractions is to bring money into the state—which is exactly what the Ark Encounter will do.”

Ken Ham states that’s he is not sure if Rev. Barry Lynn is lying or didn’t do his research but repeats the same allegations in his blog. Let’s tell it like it is, he’s lying. First of all, state budgets have to become law in order for the money to be spent, he sights no government bills whatsoever (because there isn’t any) that allocates tax dollars to the theme park. Second of all, the theme park will be increasing the state’s revenue for government programs. The visitors who go there are paying for it, just like any other business.

Although this theme park based on Noah’s Ark has received much media attention, it’s not the only one. There is a Noah’s Ark water park which is the largest in the world and it’s based in the Wisconsin Dells. It has been highlighted on the travel channel quite a number of times as one of the best tourist places to go.

Not surprisingly, Rev. Barry Lynn is a bible skeptic who uses the “Rev” title only to mock those who use it, in the debate he attacks creationism which has nothing to do with the Ark Park being built. So with all his strawman’s arguments some of which are lies that he used because of his war against Christianity is unjustified. Theme parks are businesses and it doesn’t matter if it’s religious or not. Generally businesses use the name Noah’s Ark as a way to connect with families and the one  being built in Kentucky is no different.

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “Rev. Barry Lynn Formulated Scheme Concerning Ark Park

  1. @Michael

    You say, “Not surprisingly, Rev. Barry Lynn is a bible skeptic who uses the “Rev” title only to mock those who use it, in the debate he attacks creationism which has nothing to do with the Ark Park being built.”

    Wow, Michael! With this statement, you are implying that Barry Lynn is not a real reverend (i.e., a minister.) It so happens that you are completely wrong. He is an ordained minister of the United Church of Christ. [1] — Epic fail!

    You then say, “….in the debate he attacks creationism which has nothing to do with the Ark Park being built. So with all his strawman’s arguments some of which are lies that he used because of his war against Christianity is unjustified. “

    Well, he certainly is not a Creationist, but you are making three fallacies in this statement:

    1. You are committing the false dichotomy fallacy (Creationist = Christian, and Non-Creationist = Non-Christian). As I pointed out, he is an ordained minister and is a Christian himself.

    2. You called him a liar, in which you are now committing the Ad hominem attack fallacy.

    The way you wave around “Strawman argument,” it actually makes me wonder if you even know what one is. But even if you do and if you are right that Barry Lynn has committed them, you certainly are a master of committing a variety of other logical fallacies within a couple of sentences.

    —-
    [1] Though he is part of the Religious Left which is perhaps Michael’s real problem. Not to mention, he is an advocate for the separation of Church and state, as I am.

  2. @Michael: “Not to mention, he is an advocate for the separation of Church and state, as I am.”

    Michael, being as deficient in history as he is in science, does not realize that the founding fathers established the separation of church and state for the protection of the churches, not for the protection of the state.

    You’d hear Michael clamoring for separation of church and state too, if the govmint were to choose the Methodists as the official national religion.

    England has an official religion. So does Italy. In France, the government owns the churches and pays the priests; they do what the government likes.

  3. @Michael: “Ken Ham states that’s he is not sure if Rev. Barry Lynn is lying or didn’t do his research “

    Well, we do know that Ken Ham is lying. He refuses to release his so-called study estimating the potential draw for the Ark Park. He has let slip, however, that he got his raw numbers from a survey of everyone in the whole United States who felt the least bit of sympathy for cr5erationism.

    Like they’re all going to come to Kentucky.

    ===========

    Ohio joke: Did you hear about the new Cincinnati zoo?

    No.

    They built a fence around Kentucky.

  4. Perhaps this is what fundamentally bothers Michael.

    Religion seems to be on the rise—more and more people in the US identify themselves as religious, or at least “spiritual.”

    On the other hand, religion has forever lost its authority in people’s lives.

    For millenia in Europe, the church was the center of all life. Moral, social, even economic—cathedrals in Europe were surrounded by merchants’ and farmers’ stalls. Every city had two spires, the church and the town hall—b ut the church spire was always higher. Even kings could be brought to heel by threats of damnation . During the Enlightenment, secular thought gained the upper hand. In revolution-era America, the founding fathers were enamored of this view. To the point where many of them considered themselves deists, rather than Christians. They went to church. Churches were still the meeting halls and social centers, often the only such in a town.

    In the past two centuries, modern science has taken great leaps. “Natural” explanations replaced religious interpretations of phenomena. Gravitation orders the planets, not divine will. Germs cause disease, not evil spirits. Lightning is impersonal electricity, not God’s wrath.[1]

    Newspapers, magazines and TV invoke science to solve our problems, to tell us what to do. Does religion get any popular press in rearing our children? Raise them ‘scientifically.’ Does faith cure disease? We pray, but mostly we get chemotherapy.[2] Church socials finish miles behind internet speed dating with ‘scientific’ profile matching.

    Even as church membership grows, religion has less influence on how we conduct our everyday lives.

    Creationists attempt to restore the influence of religion by insinuating it into the institution that has replaced its former authority: Science.

    ===========

    [1] Benjamin Franklin offered free lightning rods to every church in Philadelphia. A couple refused, on the wrath theory. Within the year, two of them were hit by lightning, and burned to the ground.

    [2] The odd ‘cultist’ who refuses cancer treatments for his child in favor of prayer is convicted of child abuse. (In Minnesota, last year.)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s