Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
It's funny.  Laugh. Idle Technology

Inside the Museum of Nonsense 83

Posted by samzenpus
from the one-man's-junk dept.
coondoggie writes "Some call it the museum of failed inventions and others might just call it the stupidity museum, either way it is officially known as the Museum of Nonsense and it opened in Austria this month. It is decidedly low-tech though it does contain some high-tech ideas like a truly interesting way to anonymize identity (a piece of black card on a stick so people can't see your eyes) and a device that promises to cut down on those huge cell-phone bills (think tin cans and a string)."

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Inside the Museum of Nonsense

Comments Filter:
  • Stupidity museum. Sounds like cable.
  • by vlm (69642) on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @10:58AM (#38877171)

    Is this that creationist place I heard about?

    • by slyrat (1143997)
      Nope, this is what you were talking about [creationmuseum.org]. Though in all fairness both could be called the nonsense museum and it would fit.
      • by masternerdguy (2468142) on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @11:07AM (#38877249)
        I've actually been to that place. I wanted to laugh but probably would have been attacked. They made claims such as that radioactive decay didn't start occuring until modern times, and that light was getting slower. They had an exhibit of a prehistoric scene with a white girl feeding a dinosaur. They didn't even stick to the actual Bible stories. When a projector broke down everyone was singing amazing grace until it was fixed. An *interesting* experience.
        • by Tablizer (95088) on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @12:12PM (#38878065) Homepage Journal

          When a projector broke down everyone was singing amazing grace until it was fixed.

          See, it works!
                 

        • by operagost (62405)
          I doubt they claimed that radioactive decay didn't occur until "modern times", because that would do the opposite of supporting the "young earth" theory. It's known that carbon dating gets inaccurate at about 11,000 years ago, because environmental conditions affected the decay rate-- that may have been part of their arguments.
          • by Anonymous Coward

            The problem being that the creationists try to make it seem as though carbon dating is the only kind of radiometric dating there is, while in fact it's one of many (with slight overlaps, and different accuracy) covering different timespans (some in the range of a billion years).

        • I would probably back off and go away. Experiences like you state freak me out especially when they take these kinds of place way too seriously from the way you say it.
          • by RDW (41497)

            I would probably back off and go away. Experiences like you state freak me out especially when they take these kinds of place way too seriously from the way you say it.

            A couple of visits to their Plane'arium might change your mind:

            http://creationmuseum.org/whats-here/exhibits/planetarium/ [creationmuseum.org]

            "Even if you've been to the planetarium before, come join us again and see the universe in a whole new light."

      • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

        by wjousts (1529427)
        In fairness, you can't call the creation "museum" a museum. A Museum is dedicated to educating it's visitors. The creation "museum" is, as far as I'm aware, the only museum with the goal of making it's visitors dumber and less informed.
      • Awesome. I noticed they feature a Noah's Ark exhibit [creationmuseum.org]. Of all the crazy Old Testament stories to hang your pseudo-scientific hat on, are you sure that the ship that carried two of each of the millions of known species that currently exists (since, you know, evolution isn't true) is the one you're gonna pick?
        • by ByOhTek (1181381)

          Oh, come on, didn't you listen to River Tam?

        • by SuricouRaven (1897204) on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @11:53AM (#38877757)
          The creationists thought of that long ago. Their answer, simplified for convenience, is roughly that *just enough* evolution happened to make it possible... and no more. Eg, the ark carried two 'cats' which then evolved-but-not-in-the-nasty-darwinist-way into wildcats, domestic cats, lions, tigers, lynxes and all the other cats big and small. They also claim that this isn't due to natural selection, but divine preemptive inclusion of the DNA for all modern cats into the ark proto-cat.

          If you really want to stump them, ask why the predatory species didn't immediatly render the prey species extinct. Their answer - and I am not making this up, really, this is the official Answers in Genesis position - is that the ark also carried a plant that grew meat, and the predators all ate that until the herbivores established a sustainable population. The plant is conveniently extinct without trace now, of course.
          • by Tablizer (95088) on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @12:45PM (#38878547) Homepage Journal

            Whenever there's a logical "stumper" to their story, they can just claim Wink Wink, Kabling! as the work-around and there's nothing you can say back.

            I wash JavaScript had such a work-around instead of "object is not an object" errors. Divide by Zero error? No problem: Wink Wink Kabling!

            • Of course it does! It's called try { ... } catch(err) { };.
              • by Tablizer (95088)

                Well, that can explain black-holes, but not much else. Good try though (pun intended).

            • They *could* just claim 'God did it' for all points, but they consider that to be bad form. Cheating, in a way. They'll use it if they have to, but their first choice is always to try to find an explanation that at least sounds vaguely scientific. Thus you end up with things like hypertectonics, the claim that continential drift used to be really fast (Kilometers per day) so that pangea broke up only a few thousand years ago, but slowed down before we could measure it. This explains how it was possible for
            • by ThePeices (635180)

              Its also known as the God of the Gaps argument.

              Though to be honest, the only gap is the long silence you hear as you suddenly realise that the person making the claim is genuinely delusional, and possibly mentally unstable.

          • That is the most staggeringly and phenomenally, mind-blowingly stupidest thing I have ever heard.

            But you have given me inspiration for a new joke.

            Q. Why haven't biologists evolved the ability to tell good jokes?

            A. The ecological niche was already filled.

            • I didn't even get to the bit where they believe the upper atmosphere used to be a giant hollow sphere of crystal-clear ice.

              Again, not making it up... though that one is a minority view even to young-earth creationists.

              They also believe sin causes mutations. That is their explanation for why mutation-rate dating gives species divergence figures millions of years in the past: Before modern culture started spreading sin all over the place, the mutation rate was much lower.
              • I can already feel my ability to make jokes succumbing to natural selection.
              • by Bucky24 (1943328)

                I didn't even get to the bit where they believe the upper atmosphere used to be a giant hollow sphere of crystal-clear ice.

                I remember hearing that in church... That was one of the things that make me start to question the blind creationist theory. While I don't find it hard to believe that a sphere of ice could form around a planet, I find it hard to believe that a sphere of ice formed around THIS planet, while still allowing sunlight through, and not melting until the flood.

                • It'd also have to be a hollow sphere so people could live under it, with the planet perfectly balanced in the middle - and it'd have to be perfect ice too, as Genesis describes stars pre-flood, which means it must have been optically clear.
                  • by Bucky24 (1943328)

                    and it'd have to be perfect ice too, as Genesis describes stars pre-flood, which means it must have been optically clear.

                    Oh, so that sort of thing actually exists? All the ice I've ever seen is clearISH, see-through to the point where a thick enough concentration would obscure vision. But if perfectly clear ice exists then I guess that sort of thing would work...

                    • Perfectly clear ice does exist. It just forms under only very specific conditions that are very, very rarely found in nature. If you want clear ice, you'll have to make some yourself.
                    • by tehcyder (746570)
                      I can't believe people are seriously debating this idea here.

                      It's bollocks, end of.
                    • I think it's part of the geek mind-set, take a completely ridiculous idea, then think about things in the real world that could be different enough to make it happen, then think about what else that would change. It's the same line of thinking that leads to science fiction.

          • If this "meat tree" thing is really an official AIG position, post a link to it. I try to keep up with what they publish, but haven't ever heard of it.
            • Seems they have changed it. It would be more precise to say they believed that before the fall, there existed a plant which grew meat-like bark upon which carnivorous creatures would feed (Needing their sharp claws to strip the bark off). They have now reconsidered that, and decided on grounds of more precise bible translation that carnivores actually could survive based on any plant, and it was only after the fall that they became unable to survive except on meat due to a divine rewriting of their DNA. Pre
          • by tehcyder (746570)

            If you really want to stump them, ask why the predatory species didn't immediatly render the prey species extinct. Their answer - and I am not making this up, really, this is the official Answers in Genesis position - is that the ark also carried a plant that grew meat, and the predators all ate that until the herbivores established a sustainable population. The plant is conveniently extinct without trace now, of course.

            And people wonder how a loony belief system like Scientology can fool so many people.

        • the ship that carried two of each of the millions of known species that currently exists

          Oh, that one's easy! Noah only took two of each animal that existed at the time, which wasn't many. There was only, like, one type of dog. After he landed, speciation [creationwiki.org] occurred, and now there's all sorts of different dogs!

          What do you mean a breed is not a species [scientificamerican.com]? Now you're just being difficult on purpose.

      • by AngryDeuce (2205124) on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @11:24AM (#38877415)

        You want to read a hysterical article about that place, check this out [buffalobeast.com].

        A guy basically pretended to be mentally handicapped and trolled the fuck out of everyone there, to include Ken Ham [wikipedia.org], the guy who created the place.

        Not a very politically correct article, but fucking awesome anyway...

      • by Sique (173459) on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @11:24AM (#38877417) Homepage

        The austrian one is actually called The Nonseum [nonseum.at].

        • by owlnation (858981)
          Thanks for posting the direct link, it's far more useful than the Godawful summary, and the even worse "full" article, which is full of backlinks and keyword spamming for other blogs.

          The Museum's been open since 1994-ish, so why samzenpus thinks this is an article worthy of anything, is far beyond my understanding.
          • by tehcyder (746570)
            Samzenpus is like the peace of God that passeth all understanding, except that he's not the peace of God..
      • As a nearby resident, I am ashamed of that place. And believe it or not, the governor is planning on re-appropriating state funds for this "museum"....despite the clear need in other state-funded areas. Like, oh I don't know, education. Well, now I know who I'm not voting for next gubernatorial election.
        On behalf of all Kentuckians, I apologize to the rest of the world.
        • You've just got to have a guber in a gubernatorial, don't you?

        • by tehcyder (746570)

          On behalf of all Kentuckians, I apologize to the rest of the world.

          You could always set fire to it and say that it was hit by lightning, and therefore an act of God.

    • by Cyko_01 (1092499)
      how did this get modded +5 Funny and not troll?
      • by tehcyder (746570)

        how did this get modded +5 Funny and not troll?

        Probably because it's (a) fucking hilarious and (b) not a troll, since, hard as it may be for you to believe, many of us sincerely believe that Creationism and the Bible in general are nonsense.

    • by Jawnn (445279)
      The Creationist Museum sprang immediately to mind for me, but y'all beat me to it. Well done, lads.
  • by Artea (2527062) on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @11:03AM (#38877209)
    Right next door to the Ministry of Silly Walks
    • by Sulphur (1548251)

      Right next door to the Ministry of Silly Walks

      Down the street from the Hole in the Ground housing project.

    • by Ihmhi (1206036)

      There's quite the nice pet store in that area too, but for some reason they don't accept customer returns anymore.

  • Wow (Score:5, Funny)

    by mr1911 (1942298) on Tuesday January 31, 2012 @11:05AM (#38877233)
    Who knew the Museum of Nonsense was a real place. I expected this to be a story about Congress.
  • I thought it was about the one in Washington DC. My Bad.
  • It's in Austria? Well, "G'day Mate!"

  • The code is decidedly low tech, and most of it is nonsense!
  • Couldn't resist.

    And then there's Occupy wherever. Wake me when they start looking like those lovely Ukrainian ladies protesting at Davos...topless.

  • That is not too far from where I live. Might give it a go if my pending patent application is refused.
  • If this really is a museum about nonsense, then I will only take it seriously if it includes all of the world's religions.*

    On the other hand, if it's really called the "Museum of Failed Inventions", perhaps religions should not be included, because as viruses of the mind they have been very effective indeed.

    *) Well, say all of the ones that at some point had over a million followers.

  • Why not build a museum on the history of hoaxes propagated by leading scientists? Over the years, scientists were absolutely sure that some doomsday event would happen. They were sure that the 1910 Haley comet would extinguish all life on Earth; some flu pandemic would kill billions of people because we are "overdue"; the earth is supposed to heat to a fireball, or cool to an ice ball; genetic "degeneracy" would take over the human race; killer bees would wipe out humanity; nuclear war is a certainty; the

Life is difficult because it is non-linear.

Working...