A few thoughts upon watching the video. The narrator does a nice job of presenting his report, although I'd say there's too much of him on camera compared with the Ark itself that he is supposed to be introducing to the viewer.
Also, he seemingly cannot resist using some prejudicial terms and dwelling too much on what's wrong with Ken Ham. Stick mainly with the Ark itself!
Obviously, the creator of a museum is going to present the facts as he understands them. That doesn't mean the visitor has to believe them. I disagree totally with that dinosaurs-in-the-time-of-Noah idea, but I'm not going to be outraged about it any more than if I were to be present for a play put on by Mormons (for example) and find that the script actually represents Joseph Smith as having been a prophet who did translate golden plates.
Indeed, I don't think I've ever been to any museum that took pains to present every competing POV concerning whatever the subject happened to be.