n. A fundamentalist Christian outreach concept, in which the intent is to "debunk" science with the word of scripture. Its most vocal adherents are southern and mid-western U.S. evangelical protestants (see Bible Thumper.) Creation "scientists" try to convince "unsaved" people that the Earth was formed in a Creation that took place at the hands of Almighty God a few thousand years ago, and hope their evidence will convert a few of these "unsaved" people to the faith.more...
Some key tenets of Creation Science:
--Scientists (the real ones) are going to Hell, where they will burn forever for blasphemy of the Holy Word of God.
--"Evolution" is a scam to trick us into believing that wholesome, white Christians have common ancestry with apes and chimps and (oh no, please no...) black people! Evolution is the Devil's Theory (yes, it is just a theory).
--Hell is real, full of sulfur, and it exists in the center of the Earth. (Most persons on Earth will be summarily cast into this Lake of Fire when we pass away.)
Unfortunately, unlike real scientists,
The modern equivalent of a geocentric universe. Science proves irrefutably that causal, linear events led up to the ecosystem we see today. Since this idea just so happens to go against Christian doctrine, it is condemned by many Christians, who put forth a pseudoscience known as creationism, or intelligent design, in response.more...
Creationism is non-scientific, as there is no way to test it using empirical data. Many creationists see perceived flaws in evolutionary theory as proof that creationism is true and provable. This is not true because
1.The so-called flaws are rooted in the misunderstanding or ignoring of the mechanics of evolution. Arguments such as "irreducible complexity" illustrate that creationists do not understand the process of evolution. Evolution is yet to be discredited in the scientific community, where it is accepted universally.
2.Disproving one theory does not make another theory any more credible. Even though theory A may have been disproved, theory B still must make its case based on sound scientific data.
Creationists also believe that the world is in the order of 6,000 years old, which can easily be disproved with radiometric dating. Creationists say that this technology is inaccurate, but have no proof of this whatsoever. Creationists also use the argument "Evolution is just a theory." All that this argument does is show that they don't understand what a scientific theory is.
Debunking creationism (by virtue of exposing the fa...
Broadly, a belief that the universe and life have divine origins, rather than resulting from chance.
Most often it refers specifically to the creation story of the judeo-christian tradition outlined in the book of Genesis, but the term can also apply to ideas from other religions (Hindu, Islam, various pagan and animist religions, etc)
"The origin of the univers often results in heated debate between creationists and scientists."
A person who believes that the biblical account of Genesis is a literal, scientific document, and that all scientific knowledge of evolution and geology are mistaken and/or misrepresented by biased scientists. According to Creationists, the world was created in 6 days some 4 to 6 thousand years ago, God placed fossils into various depths of the Earth for no apparent reason (or that, since fossils are so rare, not all co-existing animals were fossilized together) all species where created individually (with allowance for individual variation and common design themes, but no common anscestry), that all life was harmonious before the fall of man (hence carnivores ate grass), that dinosaurs (which are said to be referred to in the bible as "leviathan" and "behemoth" and are supposedly represented in ancient art) lived at the same time as humans, and that they were whiped out in the biblical flood because they couldn't fit into Noah's Ark (or that he only fit the small ones, in which case some dinosaurs might be alive today).more...
To promote these views, creationists often misrepresent the data themselves, in an effort to discredit science and abuse it to validate their own beliefs. Hence, they are extremely critical of any and all (overwhelming) evidence that does not support their views while using bogus or equivocal data to prove theirs.
This doesn't work.
Any close, unbiased examination of the evidence reveals that nearly all of the creationist's claims are found wan...
From Wikipedia], the encyclopedia thats a goldmine of information, not matter how stupid or inportant it is:more...
In the video game BioHazard or Resident Evil, the T-Virus, or Tyrant-Virus, was the first and primary mutagen virus developed by the Umbrella Corporation. The T-Virus was responsible for the creation of the majority of their Bio-Organic Weapons or BOWs. However, its intended purpose was to create the perfect BOW: the Tyrant.
n 1978 in Arklay Labs. Umbrella saw potential in the recently discovered Ebola virus that had just been found in Africa. The corporation saw limitless potential in the virus due to its nearly 90% death rate. Umbrella was very careful about its research. The Biological Weapons Convention prohibited the research and development of such things. So to get around this obstacle, Umbrella masqueraded their research, saying they were trying to find a cure for it.
However, their research was halted. The Ebola virus proved to be unable to survive outside a human host except for only a few days due to its extreme sensitivity to ultraviolet radiation. It also killed its host too quickly, which limited the chances of the person infecting others. Lastly, the Ebola could only infect with direct contact with others, even furthering limiting the chances of infection.
Umbrella researchers asked themselves: What if a heavily infected host could continue to still be mobile, and what if the host could continue to ...
Another name for the Hindu divination, Shiva. Ancient Hinduism tells us that there was only a vacuum in space. Out of this vacuum, a Supreme Being was born. The name of this Supreme Being is generally accepted as Brahman, however, there is debate between Hindu philosophers as to who this Being was. The Supreme Being handled the task of creating the universe. The problem arose that in order to conserve existence, the universe or parts of the universe needs to be maintained and then destroyed as well. Thus, the Supreme Being split up into three different supreme "Gods". These gods were Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva, the Creator, the Maintainer, and the Destroyer respectively. Thus, the creation, conservation, and destruction of the universe started.more...
Shiva was known as an ascetic got that made his home at the top of Mount Kailash in the Himalayas. He wore a tiger-skin "skirt" and a cobra around his neck (Shiva was also the serpent-god). He is usually shown with four arms, tied up hair, and the moon in his hair. He sits on a stump on Mount Kailash with one leg crossed and one leg hanging down. Shiva's main weapon is the trisul or in English, trident. He carries this in his lower right hand. He is also shown holding an Indian percussion instrument in his lower left hand. His two upper hands are situated in a meditating position. Shiva Shankar has a third eye in his forehead situated up and down that whe...
An utterly, completely bullshit theory, revolving around CO2, chloroflourocarbons, and other, man-generated pollutants causing the O3 layer to decay, and insulate the atmosphere.
Of course, one large volcanic eruption, such as that at Mount Saint Helens, or another, would spew more ash and pollutants - which, according to this theory would cause the earth to become hotter - in reality, releases more pollutants, than humans do at their current rate in 50 - 100 years. Such events generally occur roughly every 10 years, globally.
On to point two, the earth's climate has been changing constantly since its creation. There've been numerous ice ages, and hot periods in the past, all of which were caused by nature, not people. Of course, one may argue that this "climatic change" is accelerated, but how is one to know that?
Simply put, there are far too many variables which result in a global alteration of the climate of earth, with one of the smallest being pollutants. Isolating and neutralizing most pollution will definitely help large, urban centers, such as Los Angeles, New York, Seattle, for instance, which do have smog problems, but will not affect the entire earth.
Global warming is not an established, scientific fact, you douchers. It is a theory; no more, no less. Taking it as cannon, or dogma, as most "scientists" do, is unscientific, beside being preposterous.