The title pretty much says it all so let's get started:
National Archives = 4 (Craig = 4.5 MacKenzie = 3.5)
The lines are long but we went early and they moved fast. Craig knew just where to go so we got to the line for the cool stuff quickly and headed in. There isn't really a whole lot here, but what they have is pretty impressive (Declaration of Independence, Constitution, Bill of Rights). I didn't take any pictures because even with it's no flash setting, my camera sends out a metering light and I didn't want take part in any destruction of historical documents or be whisked away to the torture chamber where they send the "flashers" although the big group of kids flashing their camera lights all over Magna Carta didn't seem to be bothered by any security detail.
We did take a few minutes to look around other stuff that most people skip where we found - President Taft's bath tub! How cool is that?! Now, I have to let you know that in my excitement over the bathtub, I did take a picture. And despite the fact that there weren't any "No Camera Flash" signs or any reason to think that bath tubs would be damaged by a flash, I kept my camera's flash off. But even the metering light was too much and a security guy came running over with arms flailing to stop me. I really wanted to tell him he would be better off guarding the Magna Carta, but I kept my mouth shut. I just hope you readers appreciate this picture.
National Gallery of Art (West) = 4 (Craig = 4 MacKenzie =4)
Our first museum of the trip and what a delightful way to start. We actually started out at the East Gallery but took the tunnel over to this one when the East seemed too modern and that isn't how we roll (we tend to like our art like we like our hymns - old). The "What to see in an hour" guide helped us hit the highlights but we took a longer convoluted route so we could see more on our way.
The Smithsonians:
American History = 4 (Craig = 4 MacKenzie = 4)
I wanted to go here for the pop culture item like Dorothy's Red Slippers
and the Muppets
and Craig said okay because 1) he's nice (don't let the grouchy picture fool you) and 2) they had Lincoln stuff. If you've been reading this blog for a while, you know that Craig is a big fan of Lincoln (see here, here and here). I personally found some of the Lincoln memorabilia kinda creepy.
We both enjoyed Julia Child's kitchen and the "Within the Walls" exhibit which showed the changes to a house over 200 years and had stories on the real-life American families that lived there. I was excited about the Science in American Life exhibit but got annoyed with the "Better than Nature - The Pill" section and environmental hazards sections. (I might go into more detail about those later but I don't know if I can do it without ranting so maybe not).
Natural History = 4.75 (Craig = 5 MacKenzie = 4.5)
We got there right when it opened and after some issues with the security (you can take a crochet hook onto an airplane but apparently not into the Smithsonian) we headed up the second floor. It was great, we probably only saw 4 or 5 people in our first hour we spent exploring the crazy world of Ants (way more fascinating that you would think, especially with the cool macro photos), the Hope Diamond and the Western Cultures. Apparently Monday at 10am is the time to go museuming. By the time we finished those and got to the exhibit about forensic science and it's role in determining what happened in 17th century settlements in Maryland and Virginia, the people were arriving. But it was still worth it. That was one of the coolest exhibits I've ever seen. I'm sad that it is only there until February 2011 but I really hope you all get to go to D.C. by then to see it. The mammal hall was pretty cool too, but it was really crowded. Overall, this was our favorite museum of the three. It had an ideal mix of history for Craig and science for me.
I really really wanted to give it a five but the entire downstairs (Ocean Floor and Mammal hall) was inundated with evolution. I was expecting it to be there occasionally (like the Evolution Trail, which we skipped) but it was in places it didn't need to be and in ways that didn't even make sense.
For example, a sign about large birds said that they evolved to be oddly proportioned and flightless because they didn't have any predators and didn't need to be small and flighted anymore, except in areas where they do have predators, there they evolved to be oddly proportioned and flightless but with the ability to run fast. Why couldn't they have just said that although these birds are oddly proportioned and can't fly, they can still run fast to escape predators? So, after that, I had to give it a 4.5. But you should still go.
So, I bet this is the #1 question that anti-evolution people get, but I don't think I've asked it before so I'm still curious: what's your take on dinosaurs?
ReplyDeleteI think they are boring. Oh, was that not what you meant? :-) I'm guessing you're really asking if I think they were created in the same 6 days as everything else?
ReplyDeleteYes, I do. Which also means I believe the lived at the same time as humans did.
Do I think the behemoth mentioned in Job is a dinosuar? It's possible. Do I think they died due the major changes that occurred after the deluge? Probable. Those are ideas I've heard and they seem plausible. But I don't know, I haven't really looked into it because as I said, dinosaurs are boring. (Back when Craig and I were discussing plastic placemats, I told him we are not going to be buying any dinosaur placemats because I don't want a "dinosaur kid." Give me a space kid, an animal kid, a dance kid, even a horse kid...just not a dinosaur kid. I just don't want to have to read books and books about dinosaurs.)
I don't actually think I've ever been asked about dinosaurs before. The question I normally get is if I struggle with being a christian scientist (not to be confused with Christian Scientist). No, I don't, as I don't see any conflict between the two. If I didn't believe so ardently that the Bible is the word of God and is true, I think I might have worried if my job would somehow shake my faith. We have categorized the world into history and science and religion but in reality, truth is truth. And if I believe that God is who He says He is, then I don't have to worry about discovering more truth about His world.
I do sometimes get wary of this non-biased infallible entity people have in their mind when you say the word "SCIENCE." Science is just people trying to discover things. And people are biased, some will admit it, some won't. They use certain methods to try and remove bias and personal slants but everyone understands their world through their worldview so it is still there. If "Science" is used to discover more about the world and to make advances, then it is useful and good. God has given us the ability to reason and think and I believe He enjoys us learning more about the amazingly complex world He created and using that knowledge to help others. But I think many have fallen for this idea that "Science" will save us and that we should place our faith in it. That it can solve all our problems and if only we knew more, we knew everything, the world could be made perfect. In those cases, the scientific search has become nothing more than another tower of babel.
Sorry, that was much longer than I planned for it to be, but I hope it answers your question :-)
ReplyDelete