A. You don't get a joke?(thingy)<quoted text>
I see your degrees in theater, anthropology and religious studies have prepared you well for this debate. So many words and so little content.
Go back and look at your words "gasses ignited by rock collisions", etc, and what is clear is that you have no clue about the theories you're attempting to dispute.
Furthermore, from looking at your comments elsewhere on this site it's apparent you are not the mental giant you long to be.
B. You miss-direct, I make a very viable argument above and you can not comment on that. You can't keep on track. Why? Because if you admit you don't know what happened before the big bang you don't have legs to stand on. If you admit there may be other means, your religion of big-bang may crumble. I don't care how the event started, be it God, two rocks colliding, a little non-linear dynamics (i.e. Chaos). Somehow the universe was created, yes created and that does include created by a big bang. Your little brain can't see that.
C. As for "mental giant", when you have worked with people who read a book on optics one night and the next day they design the optics for a star-wars satellite you come to realize just how little you know, I know my limitations. I accept my limitation and I accept the idea that theories are ideas of men, men have limitations and therefore the theories have flaws. I have had wonderful debates with awesome scientists, my college room designed an experiment that flew on the space shuttle. He is one of the people in the world you say "wicked smart" in describing, he will agree on limitations and theories. However, you - "I know science" probably are clueless and as my roommate would say, "too stupid to grow a brain".


