Giant roadside dinosaur attractions are used by a new breed of creationists as pulpits to spread their version of Earth’s origins.
By Ashley Powers, Times Staff Writer
CABAZON, Calif. — Dinny the roadside dinosaur has found religion.
The 45-foot-high concrete apatosaurus has towered over Interstate 10 near Palm Springs for nearly three decades as a kitschy prehistoric pit stop for tourists.
Now he is the star of a renovated attraction that disputes the fact that dinosaurs died off millions of years before humans first walked the planet.
Dinny’s new owners, pointing to the Book of Genesis, contend that most dinosaurs arrived on Earth the same day as Adam and Eve, some 6,000 years ago, and later marched two by two onto Noah’s Ark. The gift shop at the attraction, called the Cabazon Dinosaurs, sells toy dinosaurs whose labels warn, “Don’t swallow it! The fossil record does not support evolution.”
Careful, Sven, the people down in the village here at C&F are on their way with torches and pickforks. They think any religious/political threads are going to destroy their way of life.
Careful, Sven, the people down in the village here at C&F are on their way with torches and pickforks. They think any religious/political threads are going to destroy their way of life
Wow Jack you saw it coming as the post following yours demonstrates so eloquently.
Maybe Nanohedron would care to outline his list of approved topics to post on this forum? I.e what he considers spam and what he considers to be approved, appropriate topics?
Does Nanohedron have any substantive argument to make or is he limited to insult without any intellectual foundation?
Nano’s one of my favorite posters, BTW. “Posts: 6626” I think there’s a pretty good chance he’s pulling your leg.
I freely acknowledge that i sometimes miss someones intent to be sarcastic or cynical, mostly because i’m not too familiar with many of the posters here yet. If I’m mistaken in Nano’s intent I apologize, but maybe he can clarify…
It’s very sweet, the way you so casually separate yourself from the C&F community – even putting yourself on the hill to separate yourself from the folks “down in the village” – and throw a preemptive insult at the entire group.
Similarly, you often preemptively dis other posters. Someone will post a liberal opinion or link, and you’ll immediately respond with “Watch out, [conservative-poster-Gilder-has-issues-with] is going to come in here and attack the person and not the idea!” Before anything of the sort has happened.
This is very bad manners.
Right after discussing what a great place this is, in the overlong thread Murph started. It’s good to know you care, Jack.
Political and religious threads have been around here since the beginning, and haven’t destroyed anyone’s way of life. The only real complaint I’ve heard about those posts is the sheer number that have started up lately, as if a few members have loudly taken over discussion in the Pub. Sheesh.
And yes, Nano was being funny.
And yes, the scientifically unsupportable claims of creationists are disturbing, and it’s sad to see a kitsch icon fall into a heated political/religious debate. All the fun will drain out of the place, if it hasn’t already.
Hey, Blacky. Nano’s cool in my book too. I’m sure he’s just playing with you. Give him a chance - you’ll grow to like him and appreciate his humour as much as the rest of us.
Get a grip, I was making a joke for feck’s sake. It amazes me how some of you who get frustrated in the political discussions seem to be lying in wait to pounce on me at the first opportunity. Now if you’ll kindly remove your chip from your shoulder maybe we could move on.
But Blackwood, do you ever post anything that’s not intended to cause a stir? Maybe Nano is joking, I don’t know but I do wonder if you live under a bridge.
I’m with Herbivore on this one. Mr. Gilder, you’re stirring the pot. Trolling, if you will, and it undercuts your credibility when you try to defend yourself against the criticism you attract. You’re making a choice to draw people’s fire and then pretend innocence and victimhood.
Cheers… I have to say, I’m glad Enders is here because his views are diametrically opposed to mine and it makes the discussions more interesting and challenging. I don’t appreciate the tone he sometimes takes, but I’ve noticed that over time we’re both tempering our responses to one another more. If we could stick to the facts and evidence without negative innuendo it would be a big improvement.
Trolling eh? Isn’t there a principal about how long before someone brings that sort of term up? Well anyway – you’re misinterpreting my comment too. Maybe you can start a thread with a poll and see how many people will agree with you and herb. (Watch out for Murphy though – he doesn’t like controversial polls)
The only one here that knows what my intent was in that post – is me. To assume you are a higher authority on what someone else is thinking or intending might be considered pompous by some folks and harm YOUR credibility, but it’s your choice if you want to believe that.
So, who’s next? Anyone else waiting to take a shot at me?
Another way of putting this would be to say, the signal to noise ratio in your posts and the unnecessary controversy you systematically inflame (as you’re doing now) is about the lowest of anyone who presently posts on this board.
It’s not about political opinions. Pretending the controversy is about politics is your smokescreen. You could post the same INFORMATION you post now, but without all the provocative hooks and tricky little snide remarks, and you would not be subjected to anything like the kind of criticism you’re attracting. You are making a choice, whether you are willing to look squarely in the mirror and face that fact or not.
ON THE topic of roadside dinos…
there was reference in a thread a couple weeks back to
this: http://www.answersingenesis.org/museum/
I had a look around the museum preview. Quite intriguing. It looks like a very well done museum in many technical ways if it doesn’t bother you that the resident dinosaurs insist they’re only 5000 (or so) years old.
“Often a person will post a sincere message that they are emotionally sensitive about. Skillful trolls know that the easiest way to upset them is to disingenuously claim that the person is a troll. On other occasions a person may not instantly understand or fit into the social norms of a forum where most users are the same. As a result, their acting just slightly out of social norms (often unintentionally, and for legitimate reasons) garners the label “troll”. Whether they actually “are” a troll depends wholly on whether one takes the political view of trolling, in which motives are not considered.
Sometimes people who are merely attempting to be funny are accused of trolling, when that is not their intent. Many trolls now find that the traditional trolling tactics are so overused and commonplace that they have to disguise their trolling to make it effective - although, quite often, the disguising merely involves accusing others of being trolls themselves.” - Wikipedia
Obviously, I’m the troll. Thanks for enlightening me.
A question, if you don’t mind. Why is it that these repeated long discussions and controversies about posting style seem to refer disproportionately to Mr. Gilder’s posts and not mine? I’m willing to accept the explanation that I’m an extremely clever and gifted troll.
