Killing Kittens's definitions
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).
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 wanting. I will not list those reasons here but will instead include a few links below.
Creatonists aim to keep the American public ignorant of evolution and science (which they have done a pretty good job of doing, as recent polls suggest) and desire that creation be taught in public schools along with evolution.
This would be about as ridiculous as teaching two different versions of the Holocaust in history classes (as some people claim that it never happened, and can back up this claim with phony evidence) or teaching an alternate flat earth theory (which another society can find "evidence" for) in geography.
That is not to say that there isn't a place for Genesis in the sphere of public education, but that would most likely be in courses involving theology, religion, culture, anthropology, and philosophy.
The moral here, of course, is that one shouldn't look to science to back up theology and vice versa.
Here are some links to learn the truth and why "creation scientists" are wrong (the links themselves can't be included because this site can't have words with more than 50 characters--wtf??). Go to a search engine and type in:
www.talkorigins.org
And perhaps Karl Thornley's page on Theistic Evolution for a few more good links.
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 wanting. I will not list those reasons here but will instead include a few links below.
Creatonists aim to keep the American public ignorant of evolution and science (which they have done a pretty good job of doing, as recent polls suggest) and desire that creation be taught in public schools along with evolution.
This would be about as ridiculous as teaching two different versions of the Holocaust in history classes (as some people claim that it never happened, and can back up this claim with phony evidence) or teaching an alternate flat earth theory (which another society can find "evidence" for) in geography.
That is not to say that there isn't a place for Genesis in the sphere of public education, but that would most likely be in courses involving theology, religion, culture, anthropology, and philosophy.
The moral here, of course, is that one shouldn't look to science to back up theology and vice versa.
Here are some links to learn the truth and why "creation scientists" are wrong (the links themselves can't be included because this site can't have words with more than 50 characters--wtf??). Go to a search engine and type in:
www.talkorigins.org
And perhaps Karl Thornley's page on Theistic Evolution for a few more good links.
"Did I tell you about my trip to the American Museum of Natural History?" I asked.
"No," she said, "That sounds wonderful."
"Yeah, I have a profound interest in all things prehistoric."
"I know," she said with a smile.
"You know, I really liked the section on human evolution," I began, almost immediately noticing her tense up a little.
"I don't believe in human evolution," she said.
"Fossils don't lie," I said.
"No," she said, "That sounds wonderful."
"Yeah, I have a profound interest in all things prehistoric."
"I know," she said with a smile.
"You know, I really liked the section on human evolution," I began, almost immediately noticing her tense up a little.
"I don't believe in human evolution," she said.
"Fossils don't lie," I said.
by Killing Kittens November 16, 2004
Get the creationist mug.Take three impressive-sounding words that have nothing to do with each other and put them together. Then you have the title of the next Dimmu Borgir album!
by Killing Kittens June 23, 2004
Get the Dimmu Borgir mug.A supernatural being that has inherited the powers of Proteus and uses them to don the guise of whatever love interest currently holds our attention. Once the victim's attention has been goaded and he or she is compelled to follow, Mr./Ms. Right then vanishes, but always reappears again, forcing his or her weary victims into endless pursuit of desperate futility.
by Killing Kittens March 17, 2005
Get the Mr./Ms. Right mug.Motion Picture Assosciation of America. An organization that believes it can universalize standards of morality and appropriateness in the social production of film, claiming, of course to have the best interests of the youth of America in mind. Thus it exists in place of parents, rendering the NC-17 rating useless (due to assosciations with porn) but hypocritically using the R rating as a junkbasket and thus proving that theaters rely on audience members under 17 to see R-rated films.
And it is also important to add that the MPAA is a great moral teacher, proving to everyone that nudity and sexuality are more harmful to young people than depictions of graphic violence. A beating, beheading, disembowelment, immolation, crucifixion, dismemberment? No problem! But catch a brief glimpse of a breast or a patch of pubic hair? Pornography!
Where would America be without the MPAA?
And it is also important to add that the MPAA is a great moral teacher, proving to everyone that nudity and sexuality are more harmful to young people than depictions of graphic violence. A beating, beheading, disembowelment, immolation, crucifixion, dismemberment? No problem! But catch a brief glimpse of a breast or a patch of pubic hair? Pornography!
Where would America be without the MPAA?
Thus the erect male member may become the last taboo of cinema censorship, although why tumescence is considered more of a threat to a nation's well-being than the numerous examples of stomach-churning violence, destruction and misogyny that are allowed on screens remains a mystery. --Allan Hunter, "Book of Movie Classics"
by Killing Kittens May 18, 2004
Get the MPAA mug.by Killing Kittens October 24, 2006
Get the erotica mug."I'd feel guilty taking your virginity away from you," she said, "You're so . . . nice."
"It's not like I value it," said he.
"It's not like I value it," said he.
by Killing Kittens November 1, 2004
Get the virginity mug.The position you inevitably support when you realize that, no matter how strongly you are against abortion, it is a necessary evil.
by Killing Kittens June 2, 2004
Get the pro-choice mug.