Page - 63 - in JRFM - Journal Religion Film Media, Volume 03/02

Emulating Science | 63www.jrfm.eu 2017, 3/2, 53–64 an image or illustration is an affirmation of what someone wants the reader to accept as true. if this is so, the kinship of creationist and secular science muse- ums is not surprising. and if we situate them within the american context of a history of rivalry and competition for public attention, the fact that they use the same visual rhetoric even makes sense. But i have framed their relationship in terms of emulation rather than of merely mirroring one another. this is because the lion’s share of symbolic capital rests with the scientific enterprise, which is much more prestigious, authoritative, and widely affirmed than the creationist view of the origin of the universe. that means that in order to be noticed and to generate authority within their own community of Christian fundamentalism, creationists must borrow from, mimic, and ultimately emulate the techniques, or at least the appearance, of scientific method and reasoning. I choose “emula- tion” very deliberately: the word means the effort to match or surpass another. thus, creationists try to match secular science in order ultimately to surpass it. the sermon preached by the design of the Creation Museum is not content sim- ply to look like science, but aims to do science that is affirmed by the Scriptures. BiBLioGraPhy Campbell, John A., 1990, Scientific Discovery and Rhetorical Invention: The Path to Darwin’s Origin, in: simons, h. W. (ed.), the rhetorical turn: invention and Persuasion in the Conduct of inquiry, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 58–90. darwin, Charles, 1899, the expression of emotions in Man and animals, Chapter 2, in: the Project Gutenberg E-Book website, http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1227/1227-h/1227-h. htm#link2hCh0002 [accessed 9 february 2017]. “darwin’s finches”, n.d. Creation Museum website, https://creationmuseum.org/creation-science/ natural-selection/ [accessed 11 february 2017]. Daston, Lorraine, 2014, Beyond Representation, in: Coopmans, Catelijne/Vertesi, Janet/Lynch, Mi- chael/Woolgar, Steve (eds.), Representation in Scientific Practice Revisited, Cambridge: MIT Press, 319–322. fahnestock, Jeanne, 1999, rhetorical figures in science, New york: oxford University Press. Fleck, Ludwik, 1979, Genesis and Development of Scientific Fact, Chicago: Chicago University Press. Frair, Wayne, 2000, Baraminology – Classification of Created Animals, Creation Research Society Quarterly 37, 2, 82–91. Gross, alan G., 2006, starring the text: the Place of rhetoric in science studies, Carbondale: south- ern illinois University Press. Gould, stephen Jay, 1989, Wonderful Life: the Burgess shale and the Nature of history, New york: W.W. Norton. Latour, Bruno, 1987, science in action, Cambridge, Mass.: harvard University Press. Latour, Bruno/Woolgar, Steve, 1986, Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts, Prince- ton: Princeton University Press.