creation verses big bang

Posted in the Evolution Debate Forum

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 20 of483
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
CICI

Farmington, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Jan 23, 2008
 

Judged:

2

1

There was a big bang (BIG BANG) then the earth came into play. First we were fish, then frogs, then apes then truck divers.................Ya, that's how it happened.LOLOLOLOLOL People can be so foolish. Some people are foolish enough to belive that there is no God. Well how can anyone belive that when there are 6.2 billion people on the planet and we all have different fingerprints. Maybe God, creation and science are all together hand in hand. It's people that tear them into two separates.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Jan 23, 2008
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Right. And first men were dust, then men. And women were ribs, then women. That makes a whole lot of sense, does it?

Said in a dozen words or so, the ideas you mention may *sound* silly to you, but if one takes into account the billions of years involved and the billions of tiny incremental changes, it really isn't silly at all.
EADGBE

Belgrade, MT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Jan 24, 2008
 

Judged:

2

1

1

CICI wrote:
There was a big bang (BIG BANG) then the earth came into play. First we were fish, then frogs, then apes then truck divers..........Ya, that's how it happened.LOLOLOLOLOL People can be so foolish. Some people are foolish enough to belive that there is no God. Well how can anyone belive that when there are 6.2 billion people on the planet and we all have different fingerprints. Maybe God, creation and science are all together hand in hand. It's people that tear them into two separates.
I don't understand why people find it so hard to believe that two of every critter including all them dinosaurs made their way onto a boat and they all sailed merrily around (not eating each other of course) til all that extra water covering up Mt. Everest went back into God's tear ducts or bladder or whatever. I can't say for sure, but ya gotta know God was looking out for us by drowning all them wicked men, women and...well...a couple hundred babies at most. What I can't figure, is why would He make all that oil appear underneath where he knew those heathen Muslims would be living? I mean if you're gonna make oil appear in the ground, why not put in a good ole' God-fearing place like Kansas or even Michigan? If I'm gonna fill up my truck with the compressed corpses of infants drowned in the great flood, I'd sleep better knowing it came out of American soil!
Cici

Farmington, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Jan 24, 2008
 

Judged:

1

1

EADGBE wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't understand why people find it so hard to believe that two of every critter including all them dinosaurs made their way onto a boat and they all sailed merrily around (not eating each other of course) til all that extra water covering up Mt. Everest went back into God's tear ducts or bladder or whatever. I can't say for sure, but ya gotta know God was looking out for us by drowning all them wicked men, women and...well...a couple hundred babies at most. What I can't figure, is why would He make all that oil appear underneath where he knew those heathen Muslims would be living? I mean if you're gonna make oil appear in the ground, why not put in a good ole' God-fearing place like Kansas or even Michigan? If I'm gonna fill up my truck with the compressed corpses of infants drowned in the great flood, I'd sleep better knowing it came out of American soil!
Well, you have given me food for thought. Do you walk everywhere? or ride a bike? skateboard maybe? Or do you just live with insomnia? I am not sure what any of that has to do with there being a God or not? All i was saying is that science and God (in my opinion) goes hand in hand. It seems like it a lot of people think it is one or the other. I think it's both. Anyway, signing off for the night.......
EADGBE

Belgrade, MT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Jan 24, 2008
 

Judged:

1

1

Cici wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, you have given me food for thought. Do you walk everywhere? or ride a bike? skateboard maybe? Or do you just live with insomnia? I am not sure what any of that has to do with there being a God or not? All i was saying is that science and God (in my opinion) goes hand in hand. It seems like it a lot of people think it is one or the other. I think it's both. Anyway, signing off for the night.......
I happen to agree with you in that there truly is no conflict between Evolutionary Science and a belief in God. Many scientists who study and use the ToE in their research are devout Christians, Jews, Muslims, etc. Your initial post indicated that acceptance of the physical evidence for the evolution of life on earth was absurd which would suggest a lack of familiarity with the sciences that have produced those evidences. My post was a response illustrating the absurd beliefs held by many who reject (typically from an ignorance of the actual data) the ToE in their belief that God values a blind and scientifically ignorant literalist's faith more than one that is born of honesty, strong enough to assimilate an inquiry into the history of biodiversity on our planet.
Cheers!
Cici

Farmington, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Jan 28, 2008
 
EADGBE wrote:
<quoted text>
I happen to agree with you in that there truly is no conflict between Evolutionary Science and a belief in God. Many scientists who study and use the ToE in their research are devout Christians, Jews, Muslims, etc. Your initial post indicated that acceptance of the physical evidence for the evolution of life on earth was absurd which would suggest a lack of familiarity with the sciences that have produced those evidences. My post was a response illustrating the absurd beliefs held by many who reject (typically from an ignorance of the actual data) the ToE in their belief that God values a blind and scientifically ignorant literalist's faith more than one that is born of honesty, strong enough to assimilate an inquiry into the history of biodiversity on our planet.
Cheers!
OH.
mr Giblets

India

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Feb 2, 2008
 
the Big Bang WAS the creation - the universe wasn't there before that. Just nothing, and that was about 15 billion years ago, not 6000.

“mae gen i anghenion arbennig”

Level 1

Since: Jan 08

Llandudno, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Feb 3, 2008
 

Judged:

1

1

1

mr Giblets wrote:
the Big Bang WAS the creation - the universe wasn't there before that. Just nothing, and that was about 15 billion years ago, not 6000.
Are you absolutely sure about this? Where is the evidence that there was no universe pre 15 billion years ago? You extrapolate a theory, which you state with absolute certainty to be fact. In doing so you are promoting an irrational belief of a similar nature to one who takes the bible literally.
Mr Giblets

India

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Feb 3, 2008
 

Judged:

1

talorg wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you absolutely sure about this? Where is the evidence that there was no universe pre 15 billion years ago? You extrapolate a theory, which you state with absolute certainty to be fact. In doing so you are promoting an irrational belief of a similar nature to one who takes the bible literally.
what will really upset you is the theory that ours is only ONE of many universes. Where does that put religion? It makes you imaginary special place in the cosmos even less special than now. Also , I am not "extrapolating" a theory, I was pointing out the conclusion of the most acceptable one to fit the EVIDENCE. Please try reading some real science, not some old Jewish folk tale.
Gillette

Burlington, IA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Feb 3, 2008
 

Judged:

1

1

Mr. Giblets

The Big Bang was the rapid and sudden expansion of an extremely (almost infinitely) dense singularity.

Such a singularity is NOT nothing (as far as we know so far). I think Talorg is right, you may be overreaching a bit.
Mr Giblets

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Feb 9, 2008
 

Judged:

1

1

1

wallie_x wrote:
<quoted text>
Funny, but the creation story in Genesis has a strange synchronicity with what's postulated in the theory of the 'Big Bang.'
Equally funny, the universe we live in is so absolutely perfectly tuned for life to exist that in order for the Darwinian fairytale to still have any scientific meaning the bigots of scientism created an even more bizarre scenario: the so-called 'multiverse' theory.
Science becomes speculative pseudoscience by coming to Darwinian theory’s aid lest science in general be made the complete fool for supporting evolutions untenable theoretical idiocy. Go-figure.
what about multiple universes, Membrane universes, and what PROOF have you got there is only one universe? perhaps there is a baboon universe where you are their God.
Mr Giblets

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Feb 9, 2008
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Gillette wrote:
Mr. Giblets
The Big Bang was the rapid and sudden expansion of an extremely (almost infinitely) dense singularity.
Such a singularity is NOT nothing (as far as we know so far). I think Talorg is right, you may be overreaching a bit.
NO, it was a random fluctuation according to one theory, and a membrane collision by another.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Level 2

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Feb 9, 2008
 

Judged:

1

1

1

wallie_x wrote:
Get a life twit.
Here, we see a common "prayer", as prayed by someone who calls himself "wallie_x".

It is clearly a cry for help.

Won't someone HELP this poor deluded fool?

Anyone?

He's clearly in need of education....
Mr Giblets

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Feb 9, 2008
 

Judged:

1

1

wallie_x wrote:
<quoted text>
What a moron. What proof do you have of any 'multiverse'? None, it's completely speculative metaphysics, and even religious in nature. Moreover, it’s not “testable” so by science’s own standards it’s anti-scientific twaddle.
The mutiverse idea was a necessity to support the increasing scientific evidence that the simplistic “fool’s gold” mechanisms of Darwinian ‘evolution’ are unjustified implausible idiocy. If the entire universe is scientifically proven to be intricately fine-tuned for life, and not the by-product of "randomness" then Darwinism gets flushed down the shitter, where it belongs. Why, because if the universe is not a ‘random’ event then neither is the ascension of life.
If this idea is not becoming scientific reality then please explain why even ardent bigots of scientism are flocking to the so-called, "Anthropic principle."
Get a life twit.
actually, scientists don't give a monkey's
fart about what prehistoric idiots like you believe, as they don't use "belief". And that argument of yours is like saying how well the water fits the bucket. You have it all back to front.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Level 2

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Feb 10, 2008
 

Judged:

1

1

wallie_x wrote:
<quoted text>
What?..LOL Can't debate the issues so we show what a brainless moron we are by resorting to ad hominem diatribe (like your silly idiot friend, "Mr. Giblets").
Like I said to him: "Get a life twit"
Oh, it is OKAY for YOU to resort to personal insults?

But whenever anyone ELSE does it it is NOT okay?

Is THAT ABOUT IT?

Seein' as how YOU, from your VERY FIRST POST, offered NOTHING _BUT_ insults, attacks and personal innuendo.

Hmmm.

Can't TAKE it when the tables are turned, CAN you?

You sorry excuse of a human.
CHARLES ISAAC BROOKS

Huntersville, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Mar 19, 2008
 

Judged:

1

I HAVE A TIMES BOOK,THAT HAS SEVERAL MILLION BITS OF INF.IN THE SCIENCE SECTIO ABOUT THE BIG BANG THEORY,IT SYAS THE WHOLE UNIVERSE CAME ABOUT ,BECAUSE A GLOBULAR GAS BALL EXPLODED AND FORMED THE UNIVERSE AND ALL THE PLANETS ,SUN,GALAXIES,SOLAR SYSTEMS.OK IM GOING TO ASK YOU ALL ONE SIMPLE QUESTION, WHAT WAS THE GLOBULAR GAS BALL DOING BEFOR IT EXPLODED AND FORMED THE UNIVERSE NOW LET SEE WHO CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION. EMAIL ME YOUR ANSWERS AT CHARLIEB1950@YAHOO.COM P.S. I CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION FOR ANYONE THAT ASKS ME.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Mar 19, 2008
 

Judged:

1

1

CHARLES ISAAC BROOKS wrote:
I HAVE A TIMES BOOK,THAT HAS SEVERAL MILLION BITS OF INF.IN THE SCIENCE SECTIO ABOUT THE BIG BANG THEORY,IT SYAS THE WHOLE UNIVERSE CAME ABOUT ,BECAUSE A GLOBULAR GAS BALL EXPLODED AND FORMED THE UNIVERSE AND ALL THE PLANETS ,SUN,GALAXIES,SOLAR SYSTEMS.OK IM GOING TO ASK YOU ALL ONE SIMPLE QUESTION, WHAT WAS THE GLOBULAR GAS BALL DOING BEFOR IT EXPLODED AND FORMED THE UNIVERSE NOW LET SEE WHO CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION. EMAIL ME YOUR ANSWERS AT CHARLIEB1950@YAHOO.COM P.S. I CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION FOR ANYONE THAT ASKS ME.
First, learn to use the shift key and don't use caps lock. It is considered rude in internet circles.

Second...a gas ball is a very, very bad description of the start of the big bang.

The start of the big bang was an incredibly tiny, smaller than an atom, point of energy...incredibly dense energy. It was not an explosion as one usually thinks of explosions, but rather an very rapid expansion. For a brief time that expansion exceeded the speed of light. It is still expanding at or near the speed of light.

As for "what was there before the big bang?", there are several problems with that question. One is that time appears to have begun with the big bang, so "before the big bang" may be a nonsensical phrase. Also, it appears that all information from outside the big bang would be destroyed by the big bang itself, so it is likely that the question will never be answerable.

To sum up...We don't know. And probably never will.
CHARLES ISAAC BROOKS

Huntersville, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Mar 20, 2008
 

Judged:

1

Dear darwins stepchild, I do not care what size the atom or maybe just a ion size particle.The question i asked of you,is what was the atom or ion sized particle doing?Any theories my friend?As you ponder this.Please look up the meaning of the word theory.thank you my friend charles i. brooks
EADGBE

Bozeman, MT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22
Mar 20, 2008
 

Judged:

1

1

CHARLES ISAAC BROOKS wrote:
Dear darwins stepchild, I do not care what size the atom or maybe just a ion size particle.The question i asked of you,is what was the atom or ion sized particle doing?Any theories my friend?As you ponder this.Please look up the meaning of the word theory.thank you my friend charles i. brooks
Should he look up "theory" or "scientific theory"?
CHARLES ISAAC BROOKS

Huntersville, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
Mar 20, 2008
 

Judged:

1

Has someone changed the meaning of theory.makes no difference.No one has answered my question yet.what was the so called atom or ion or even anything smaller doing,before it explded and expanded into the whole universe as we behold with our own eyes.There is an answer,IF some one would just give it some real intelligent thought.How about it Darwins child?Can you not think with that closed mind of yours?

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 20 of483
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••