Citations:evilution
Appearance
English citations of evilution
Noun: "(informal, pejorative, often humorous) evolutionary theory viewed as something detrimental to human society"
[edit]1993 1994 1996 1997 | 2001 2002 2003 2005 | ||||||
ME « | 15th c. | 16th c. | 17th c. | 18th c. | 19th c. | 20th c. | 21st c. |
- 1996 October 5, Paul Myers, “Re: The eloquent words of Immanuel Velikovsky [really: more on Carboniferous bones]”, in talk.origins[3] (Usenet):
- Ooops, no, he can't use alcohol, either. That's produced by fermentation, which is studied and optimized by evil biologists and chemists, almost all of whom believe in evilution.
- 1997 May 2, Mark Smith, “Re: A Questions for the Atheist (shamelessly cross-posted to alt.bible.prophecy)”, in alt.bible.prophecy[4] (Usenet):
- If a scientist tells you that you evalved[sic] from a worm, you believe this guy without questioning. Hey, it's science! But there are so many holes in evilution and it can not be proven.
- 2001 March 7, Zaph'enath, “Re: where's the evolutionary discussion?”, in talk.origins[5] (Usenet):
- As a result, threads would be increasingly dominated by those whose style of argumentation tends to emotional appeals, arguments from personal incredulity, and arguments from fear ("you'll go to heLL if you believe in evilution").
- 2002 May 9, Loren, “Re: Tradition and Scripture”, in soc.religion.christian[6] (Usenet):
- I don't care if every man, woman and child, from the first conscious ape (if you believe in evilution) to the last man standing, if they all believe that "X" is wrong and "Y" is right, it is still a relative ethic.
- 2003 November 22, Wakboth, “When (if ever) did Creationist posters last make sense?”, in talk.origins[8] (Usenet):
- In the time I've been following this newsgroup, there have been bizarre rants from Man Older Than Coal, a variety of one-shot posters with strip-mined quotes and/or crazy misrepresentations of ToE, religious ranters who try to show that "belief in evilution" destroys our morality, and a spate of ID advocates whose logic appears to be not just circular, but actually spiraling (ie. inwards-turning and leading to nowhere in circles).