New to Creation-Evolution Headlines? These words may be unfamiliar. Our Darwin Dictionary can help make everything clear!
Aminocamino, interj,: the bio-astrologist‘s equivalent of Abracadabra. Origin-of-life researchers and SETI advocates think that amino acids are on the highway to life. By ignoring the fact that only 20 of the possible amino acids work for life (23 Oct 2019), and that they must all be one-handed, astrobiologists misuse amino acids as the building blocks of lie. Source: 10/25/19.
BAD, n.: acronym for bluffing assertion of Darwinism or bald assertion of Darwinism; i.e., the strategy of stating an evolutionary mythoid (q.v.) with chutzpah in hopes it will sway the unwary. Similar to the Big Lie tactic and bluffing. Source: 12/28/05.
bio-astrology, n. synonym for astrobiology, formed by rearranging the letters into a more descriptive order. Source: 6/21/18.
confability, n.: the ability to confabulate fables. This ability is an integral part of an evolutionist’s training at secular universities. It’s closely related to confibility, the ability to confabulate fibs. Source: 1/16/07.
confabulating, v.: storytelling. Source: 5/06/13: “They are just gesticulating, speculating, confabulating, somnabulating, absquatulating out of their own imaginations, where miracles of emergence happen when they wish upon a star.”
DAM Law, n. phrase: a law of evolutionary theorizing, that states: any article or paper on the evolution of flowering plants will be accompanied by the phrase, “Darwin’s Abominable Mystery” (DAM). This is a time-invariant law describing the predicament of not only Darwin, but his disciples down to the present. Darwinists are MAD about the DAM law, showing the law is commutative: the Mystery’s Abominable Darwin. Source: 12/16/10.
Darwinese, n.: a dialect in science reporting that embellishes tidbits of observation with wide-reaching conclusions and tries to incorporate the questionable tidbits into support for macroevolution. Source: 3/06/08.
Darwin Flubber, n. phrase: a magical elastic substance made of a secret blend of Emergence, Convergence and Submergence. Darwin Flubber allows the Evolutionary Web of Belief to absorb any falsifying blow. Emergence allows creatures to arise further back in time than previously thought by supplying googols of beneficial mutations to the theory on demand. Convergence allows the web to reshape itself with new connections when similar fossils appear out of order. And Submergence is a cloaking substance that allows the keepers of Darwin’s Web of Belief to hide vulnerable parts of the web from the public. Source: 9/29/15.
Darwin Sharia, n. phrase: a practice in Big Science and Big Media that stifles dissent. The Darwinians are like radical muslims who have imposed a virtual Sharia Law on science: convert, pay a tax, or die (i.e., be Expelled). Darwin skeptics of all stripes are excluded from the Big Science institutions, and courts have long prohibited them from sharing alternatives in schools. So not only do the Darwin skeptics have to raise their own money for research and education, they are forced to pay, through their taxes, for the institutions that persecute them. It’s an unholy atheocracy that stifles clear thinking and actual progress in understanding the world. Source: 12/21/15
Darwin Years, n. phrase: imaginary spans of time, usually expressed in units of millions of years (m.y.), put forth by the moyboys as periods when Stuff Happens, primarily because Darwin needs the time. First use: 4/20/12.
DIDO, n.: acronym for “Darwin In, Darwin Out” (related to “Garbage In, Garbage Out,” abbrev. GIGO). Corollaries: GIDO and DIGO. Source: 5/06/08.
D-Merit Badge, n.: a required pass to be able to enter Darwin Party circles, the “D” standing for “Darwin”. The pass takes the form of a pledge of allegiance to 100% Darwinian natural selection, or a sufficient expression of revulsion at creationism, such that the security guards know you are not one of “them.” The pass gives one freedom to present contrary data at conferences or in publications, including the same contrary data creationists shout from a distance outside the gates. First use: 3/19/15 commentary.
DODO, interj.: the chant, “Darwin only! Darwin only!” by evolutionists reacting to school boards contemplating academic freedom bills for their science curricula, worried that such bills might open the door a crack for intelligent design, even if the bill does not mention ID, but only prevents punishment of science teachers who teach Darwinism honestly. Source: 1/25/06. Etymology: the word arose in reaction to Randy Olson’s 2006 documentary “Flock of Dodos” criticizing intelligent design (1/07/06).
DOPE, n.: acronym for “Darwin-Only Public Education.” Source: 6/12/09.
dumbfloundering, v.: the reaction of evolutionists who are stunned with a tinge of dismay at the design in life, particularly single cells. Their delight in discovery is tempered by the unexpected levels of complexity in organisms that were supposed to primitive and simple. Dumbstruck, they flounder about, looking for mythoids to speculate how they could have evolved. Source: 7/25/08.
evillusion, n.: Darwin’s brand of science, the result of superstitiously confabulating in the absence of evidence, to create the illusion of scholarship. Source: 7/27/07. Etymology: a contraction of evil + illusion. Pronunciation: pronounced the way the British say evolution.
fogma, n.: dogma so thick you can’t see through it unless you’re outside it. Once surrounded by fogma, it begins to represent all of reality—a shifting, shapeless mass of evolutionary change. The only thing providing a sense of stability in all the confability is the voice of the Darwin Party announcer speaking through the fogma and interpreting the ever-shifting view. Source: 5/14/07.
futureware, n.: explanations that are promised but not yet available. Usually accompanied by the sentence, “More research is needed.” Etymology: hyped software that fails to reach market. See also: vaporware.
Guth Goof, n. phrase: proposing a solution to a problem that makes the problem infinitely worse. In 1980, Alan Guth proposed inflation as a solution to the flatness problem and horizon problem in cosmology. His initial unworkable model led to Andrei Linde’s chaotic inflation, which implied multiple universes spontaneously budding out of control, which can never be observed. The resulting “multiverse” implied that anything and everything is predictable and will happen—a repudiation of science’s goal to provide understanding by simplifying phenomena with natural law. See 9/25/14 and 7/01/14. Another example is Hugh Everett’s “many worlds” interpretation of quantum mechanics (7/07/07, 7/27/04).
hydrobioscopy, n.: the tendency to focus on the possibility of life whenever water is found on another planet or moon. Source: 8/07/13. See also red herring and sidestepping in the Baloney Detector.
Jargonwocky, n.: A mythical land where the wizard Niwrad revealed, with his apprentice Ecallaw, a new theory of everything to the incredulous townspeople, proclaiming Galumph as the explanation for all the wonders of life. Source: 11 Feb 2016 commentary.
In the land of Jargonwocky, a scientist named Niwrad came up with a theory of everything he called Galumph. With frabjous joy, he investigated all the creatures of the borogoves with his apprentice, Ecallaw. He found that the Jubjub birds had round eyes and the mome raths, though similar, have square eyes. That’s because of Galumph, he explained. The Bandersnatch and Jabberwock, though looking very different, both have round eyes. “Galumph triumphs again!” Niwrad chortled. “But how can that be?” burbled Ecallaw with uffish look. “They are so very different in other respects.” “Callooh! Callay!” exclaimed Niwrad frumiously. “’Tis only to demonstrate the power of Galumph. The former is a case of Parallel Galumph. This one, a case of Convergent Galumph. Do you see? Galumph explains all. We must away and tell Yelxuh, our mimsy publicist, to announce our scientific triumph to the townspeople! We have slain the mystery of Jargonwock with Galumph. Galumph has wiped the brillig from our slithy toves, and given us Enlightenment!”
Law of Higgledy-Piggledy: see Stuff Happens Law.
moyboy, n.: acronym standing for “millions of years, billions of years”; used in reference to secular scientists who toss around those phrases with reckless abandon, simply because Charlie & Charlie** need the time. Source: 9/16/05. **Lyell, Darwin.
MUST, n.: acronym for Mysterious Unknown Stuff that “must” exist to keep a theory from collapsing: e.g., dark matter, dark energy. The current philosophy of science in vogue, called “scientific realism,” reserves the right to consider “unobservable reality” if it serves the “best” theories – but what is considered best is subjective, varying according to the whims of the consensus or paradigm (if one is a Kuhnian). Appeals to “occult forces” like phlogiston, epicycles or caloric have plagued the history of science. At some point, the proposed placeholder must be confirmed by evidence, or it becomes indistinguishable from confabulating. Source: 2/28/08.
mythoid, n.: a succinctly-stated, plausible-sounding storyette that requires no evidence, but can be propounded confidently by a scientist and is sure to be readily accepted because a scientist said so (see Thumb’s Second Postulate*). A mythoid is usually accompanied by a little bluffing jargon to make it sound highfalutin. Sources: 5/29/03, 5/14/07. Ant., factoid. *Thumb’s Second Postulate: “An easily understood, workable falsehood is more useful than a complex, incomprehensible truth.”
The Charlie and Tinker Bell Theater uses state-of-the-art fogma machines with Charlie’s secret recipe. It produces the perfect colloid of mythoids. The stage hands aim the fogma so that it reveals only the things they want the audience to see – the props that fit the script at the right time – and conceals everything else. Surprises are inserted occasionally to keep the audience awake. After all, every good work of fiction needs a crisis. But not to worry; the entire production crew knows how to bring the plot to a proper denouement. This works well indoors under controlled conditions. Take the fogma out into the real world, though, and the sunlight of evidence quickly dissipates it. The design of the world then stands out in clear relief.
people of fluff, n. phrase: Darwinists who offer just-so stories instead of scientific evidence. Source: 9/09/08: “The people of fluff like to swagger and bluff, but connecting lab stuff to historical huff is tough – and as science, we rebuff, is not good enough. The observations without the stuffing will suffice.”
people of froth, n. phrase: angry Darwinists. A counter to their oft-used labeling of their critics as “people of faith.” Source: 9/26/05: “Foaming at the mouth, these merciless warriors emit masses of fearsome-looking, bubbling matter from their lips, making reporters wilt with awe. But what is froth upon closer inspection, but a mere agglutination of thin, vulnerable membranes enclosing hot air?” Can also be construed as “people of frothy faith” or “people of fluffy froth.” For refutation of the “people of faith” label, see commentary from 8/14/12, “Rocks don’t lie, but liars rock”).
perhapsimaybecouldness index (PCMI), n.: a measure of the amount of speculation in an evolutionary explanation. Exercising their confability, some evolutionary scientists and reporters use the power of suggestion to promote Darwin futureware. Usually revealed by the number of hedging words in their writings (could, would, should, may have, might have, maybe, possibly, probably, perhaps, suggests). Source: 7/01/13.
poof spoof, n.: a phrase representing the evolutionists’ propensity to use words like “emergence” — a miracle word masquerading as a natural process. Applicable when they say something emerged, arose, originated, became, developed, exploded, radiated, diversified or appeared, without saying exactly how. Source: 10/21/15.
puddingoscopy, n.: a divination method occasionally used by Darwin soothslayers who claim the proof for Darwinism is in the pudding. The angle of the folds and bubbles, the color and texture, or some other attributes of unknown character, provide Lady Luck with clues that Darwinian evolution produced the trait under consideration, e.g., “For some reason, just being a turtle is an idea that came along and just really works.” Why? “And the proof could be in the pudding – their body plan is the world’s oldest, changing little over 200 million years.” Source: 10/09/08.
Science Fudge, n. phrase: the product of fudging data in a theoretical crapshoot (crapshoot: “a risky or uncertain matter”). Reporters, finding the you-know-what on the ground, spray perfume on it and hold it up to the public as the latest Science Fudge. Source: 01/10/17.
Shlooping, v.: using the Stuff Happens Law as a primary means of scientific explanation, and being careless about it (“oops”). A Schlooper (alt. Schloopist) is somebody who engages in SHLooping. The worst are those who make the SHL the foundation of their worldview. SHLoopers and SHLoopists actually make their own ‘explanations’ implode, because even their explanations—indeed, their very minds—become attributed to the SHL. Source: 1/27/2021.
sophoxymoroniac, n.: a sophomoric (wise-fool) scientist with a mania for speaking in oxymorons (wise-foolish statements), like evolutionary design, evolutionary sense, Darwinian rationality, evolutionary thinking, evolutionary experimentation, evolutionary algorithm, evolutionary masterpiece, consensus science, etc. Source: 2/02/08.
Stuff Happens Law (SHL): the natural law that the Law of Natural Selection reduces to. When a scientist says “stuff happens,” he or she basically gives up, abandoning any attempt at scientific explanation. The SHL is the antithesis of science’s goal to understand the world, but since mutation and natural selection (the elements of neo-Darwinian theory) are both unguided and random, they reduce to the SHL Source: 9/22/09; for explanation of how the SHL can be defended as scientific, see the 9/15/08 commentary. Note: SHL is synonymous with the “Law of Higgledy-Piggledy” (LHP) that Sir John Herschel used to describe Darwin’s theory of natural selection.
Tontologism, n.: A statement including the collective “we” that deserves a response from Tonto, the Indian co-star of the Lone Ranger TV series: namely, “Who’s ‘we,’ Paleface?” It comes from a joke about the Lone Ranger and Tonto finding themselves surrounded by dozens of screaming Indians on horseback galloping around them, brandishing their bows and arrows. The Lone Ranger looks at his partner and comments, “It looks like we’re in big trouble, Tonto.” Tonto looks at him with a wry grin, and asks, “Who’s ‘we,’ Paleface?”. Evolutionists have an obnoxious habit of using the first person plural when they find the facts contrary to their theories, as in “This fossil means we will have to rethink our story of butterfly evolution” or “We were totally wrong about much of what we thought we knew about stellar evolution.” For their readers who never accepted the evolutionary line to begin with, Tonto’s response is fitting. Source: 1/13/18.
vaporware, n.: explanations that are vacuous. Etymology: software advertised by companies that remains forever in the conception stage, not the implementation stage. See also: futureware.
Yoda Complex, n.: a delusional mental disorder in Darwinian circles characterized by imagining oneself on an exalted plane that exempts oneself from the evolutionary forces to which other humans are subject; e.g., an evolutionist who speaks as if he were a rational scientist with free will while claiming evolution destroys free will. The patient feels immune from the evolutionary forces he claims cause other humans’ behavior; e.g., one who uses rational arguments to claim all human behavior (except his own reasoning) is explained by evolutionary game theory. He imagines himself to be a kind of exalted master, an Enlightened One on an alternate plane of reality, like the green Jedi Master Yoda in Star Wars with pointy ears, presuming to talk down to the rest of humanity. Source: 9/25/06. Note this refutation of the “transcendent standpoint” by blogger Origenes from Dec 19, 2022:
The skeptic wants to criticize, but he doesn’t want to be criticized himself. We all make statements of belief, skeptics included. But the skeptic posits a closed circle in which no beliefs are justified. Yet at the same time, he arrogates to himself a position outside of this circle by which he can judge the beliefs of others, a move he denies to his opponents. Since the raison d’être of his thesis is that there is no outside of the circle, he does not have the epistemic right to assume a position independent of it, and so his belief about the unjustifiability of beliefs or reasoning is just as unjustifiable as those he criticizes. If the circle encloses all beliefs, if all beliefs are unjustifiable, he cannot judge between truth and falsity, since any such judgment would be just as unjustifiable as what it seeks to adjudicate. At no point can he step out of the circle to a transcendent standpoint that would allow him to reject some beliefs as tainted while remaining untainted himself.
yold, adj.: an object that looks young and old at the same time, as with most planets and moons of the solar system, Uranus’ moon Miranda, the asteroid Vesta and the dwarf planet Pluto being prime examples. Source: 10/28/11.