Code42

Damn, if only I had the dough these creationists have. https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/a-giant-ark-is-just-the-start-these-creationists-have-a-bigger-plan-for-recruiting-new-believers/2017/05/24/b497bd14-2920-11e7-be51-b3fc6ff7faee_story.html?tid=sm_tw&utm_term=.6935bd432b10

I think those elements can be incorporated too. It would have all the qualities of a good science center, but with thrill rides and very high end effects that display scientifically accurate depictions. Like I said, there could be one ride that takes you on a quest through the history of planet Earth, you start off with the lifeless planet of 3-4 billion years ago, then you are presented with several scenarios that depict popular hypothesis about the origin of living material such as abiogenesis, then there's fish, then the Cambrian explosion, then primates, then civilization, then modern times, etc. The animatronics would be first rate. I for one think it would have exactly the result I think it would if done right. Of course it would be called something obvious like "Science World". It would be a hoot.

It's probably a stupid idea, but I still find it fun to think up cool new ideas for It. I'm not talking about merely a science center like you guys are talking about. I'm talking about a full-blown theme park. Something that would attract the intellectual and non-intellectual alike. It could potentially he get laypeople interested in science.

Apparently I do misunderstand my key demographic. Who are you suggesting they would be? And why would I not be appealing to them?

What I'm proposing is essentially one huge science center like those mentioned, but it's a full-blown theme park with thrilling rollercoasters and other high-end rides. It would just be one totally cool, pro-science, pro-science literacy park. Like I said, it would be the antithesis of Ken Ham's ridiculously stupid Ark Park. One roller coaster name could be "The Large Hadron Collider", and there could be an attraction that has guests competing at Mars rover driving, and there could be a ride that takes guests on a journey through the "March of Progress" that shows the evolution of life on Earth etc. with life-like sets and animatronics. Every attraction could ask kids some very thought-provoking questions at the end and give them something to think about as they leave. The gift shops could sell telescopes, chemistry sets, astronomy kits, crystal-making kits, science books for both children and adults, and all sorts of cool stuff. There could be an attraction similar to Disney's "Carousel of Progress" that takes guests on a journey through the history of science, highlighting the most important scientists in history from Galileo to Newton to Darwin to Einstein etc... I know personally that I, as a visitor, would want to be spend all my time there. It would be a super cool place. Also, like I said before, it could have a "science camp" similar to "space camp" where kids and adults alike could come spend a week or so and do fun sciencey stuff. Visualize something more like a science-themed Universal Studios. Very large-scale and big budget. Like Jurassic Park/World, but with real stuff. You're over-thinking it. Of course you could never simulate those things accurately. That's not what I'm suggesting. What I'm saying is that there would be rides that are science-themed and contain scientifically-accurate information. Of course you could have rides for physics and other sciences. You don't have to literally simulate the "forces of an atom" in order to have a thrilling ride that contains accurate information about it.

Yeah, you've got the idea. I'm talking about building a huge version of that, comparable to Disney World or Universal Studios. I'm talking something huge. I personally think it would be very cool. Some people might think that it's silly, or that it might perhaps go against science in someway. But I think it would be cool to Propose it as a kind of educational adventure that is also loads of fun, like a museum meets an amusement park. It would be more of a concept park, but I think if done right it could be cool. It would be littered with little Easter eggs throughout the park, like choice quotes from famous scientists, and there would be a heavy emphasis on promoting actual science instead of science fiction and fantasy. I think it could definitely be cool. There could also be a "science camp" thing for both kids and adults.

It wouldn't "teach" in the sense of the word that you are invoking, as in college lectures and PhD dissertations. Obviously that would be an impossible waste of time of a project. Rather, it would simply be a theme park that is science-themed, wherein the attractions are based on accurate representations of scientific knowledge and are designed to promote and inspire the learning and passion for science and science-based thinking. Obviously, it couldn't possibly be perfect, but at least it would be a great attraction for children and adults alike to have fun and be inspired at the same time. It is really hard to communicate science to the general population. Many movies and theme parks, and other forms of family entertainment only focus on science fiction and depictions of science that are purely fantasy. I've always thought having a theme park that is grounded in real science would be both a fun and educational place for American families. Keep in mind, I am visualizing how utterly unscientific and oblivious to science-based thinking most Americans are. I just think it's time science entered the world of entertainment and tried to offer something fun and awe-inspiring that also was aimed at teaching real science to the broad public. But like I said, this will never happen. It's purely hypothetical. But I am speaking about it in this thread as if I am planning to carry this out. It has been a fun little idea I've been tossing around in my mind for several years now. I've never really asked people for their opinions on this idea, so I'd like to see what the guys here thought. I understand (sort of) why you may not get about this idea, but I felt I had explained it pretty well in my original post. I would like not to get bogged down in the stuff you're talking about. I'd like to keep this thread mostly lighthearted and casual. But I would also encourage commenters to offer serious and honest answers. I would love to hear some of your ideas.

Meaning that it would teach science, promote the learning of science, and ultimately strive to inspire it's guests to be interested in science. Not just inspiring interest in what science can do, but interest in the foundations of science, like free-inquiry, skepticism, evidence-based thinking, epistemology, etc.

This is an idea I've thought about for some time. I, for one, love theme parks, and I've always wanted there to be one that is fully science-based. It's fun to sit and dream up all the possible ideas one could put into some kind of attraction of this sort. I'm talking about the idea (hypothetical of course) of building a major theme/amusement park that is fully based on true representations of science (not science fiction or pseudoscience). This park would contain a myriad of thrill rides and the like, but would also contain mini museum-esque attractions, shows, activities, etc. All attractions would be centered around factual representations of true science, and would be presented in such a way as to inspire children and adults alike to explore and understand science. It would essentially be the antithesis of Ken Ham's Ark Encounter park. Of course, for this idea I'm taking some inspiration from some more minor attractions that are science-based such as the rocket museum in Hunstville, Alabama which contains science and engineering-based attractions with some fun rides and attractions. But this one would be completely a theme park of Disney and Universal proportions. There would be an area of the park that, for instance, would deal with biology, geology, paleontology, and evolution, another area about physics/quantum theory/relativity, another area about astronomy and space exploration, another area about technology/computer science/AI, another area about climate science, and then perhaps a "future" world that deals with speculation about the future, etc. Of course this will never happen, but I find this idea fun to conspire on and dream up ideas. I thought it would be fun to run it past the guys here and see what you think/what ideas you might concoct.

Took the Mensa test. Asked for money. I thought, what the hell, I'm curious enough how I did. 120. I believe them I guess. Sounds about right. Not too smart, but definitely not stupid.

Not sure. I'm just wondering where people get their IQs measured. I've taken some online tests, but I'm not for sure if they're regarded as accurate or legitimate.

Title says it all. Thanks.

Agreed. Atheism offers absolutely nothing except a guarantee that you don't believe in god(s). Morality and how one should act/live are topics on which atheism has nothing to say. This, I think, is why atheists 'could' have a principal advantage in constructing a good moral system, because we can cherry pick from any worldview without the slightest fear of hypocrisy. It is circular and hypocritical on part of the religious to claim to have the divine, inerrant word of God, then ignore parts that make them feel uncomfortable. There's nothing wrong with cherry-picking, I say, so long as you admit to cherry picking and don't try to pass off the idea that your belief system is perfect and inerrant.

I was talking mostly about the values religions try to teach. Christians in the US (though they don't like to admit it) have pretty much thrown out much of the bible's teachings, the mosaic law, etc.. That's because they know it's not the type of world they'd want to live in. But this is no reason to ignore the good parts. I would just argue that you don't need "Religion" (or dogma of you will). We can recognize good values wherever they happen to stem from. I'm sure you could skim through Mein Kampf and find good bits. Doesn't make Hitler's ideology as a whole worth following. Religion (with a capital "R") must die in my view. Doesn't mean we must turn a blind eye to the parts where religion might have had good points or some good values.

The question of this forum should be "do we really need religion anymore?" I mean, we've got all their messages written down and noted. We've already effectively applied the ones and filtered out (most of) the bad ones in our western societies. The atheist is in the only position to really cherry pick the best of all of them.

I've been reading this thread, and the solution is very simple in my view. Religion in public schools is okay as long as it is not taught as fact, one religion is not favored over another, and there is no indoctrination. Private schools can do as they wish. Boom, that was easy!