Creation by God / Big Bang Theory

[Caid Ivik]

Caid, please give a better description of Entogenesy

Development?

[paul_of_arrakis]

is this board ever going to stop

[sneezer3]

it did quit a while ago. ???

[paul_of_arrakis]

Is the Big bang theory or the big crunch theory more credible

[sneezer3]

Is the Big bang theory or the big crunch theory more credible

No because it has to many holes in it.

Such as

Earths Rotation, and earth population, there should be way more bones.(they seem to have a problem digin'em up these days) and it should be way higher.

So no it isn't. and there are many more arguements that can't be refuted such as Saturn is loseing its Rings.

i very highly recomend you see this video

[Acriku]

ROFL James, there is a lot of evidence for the Big Bang theory, even if it is a wrong theory there will still be parts of it that has evidence to support it, and can be used to generate another theory to replace it. And you say creation by God is more credible? Oh man I needed that laugh to wake me up from having to work all night. Sneezer, if I'm tired, I know I can count on you.

Way more bones?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! Pardon the extra '?!' but this is the most ignorant statement so far. Do you know how rare fossilization occurs? Do you know how picky and strict the environment has to be, and the situation has to be, in order for fossilization to occur? But let's not get too far into that, since the "statement" that there should be way more bones is not part of the Big bang theory so don't try to put the two together please.

Oh and did you forget we are finding fossils every fricking day? I'm not laughing now, because this is pitiful.

It's easy to come up with a story about something outside our realm and ask somebody to refute it. If I made a story about the Larxdoofs and put a bit of accurate history in it, with a little big ot outside of this world existence, and a little war here and there, you would not be able to refute it. The idea that because an idea can't be refuted makes it more credible is so ludicrous it makes me want to beat my head with a stick.

[emprworm]

"And you say creation by God is more credible?"

yes, I am. self-effectation of matter is the most laughable non-scientific nonsense far beyond the minds of most supernaturalists...though apparantly not for the naturalists.

[sneezer3]

ROFL James, there is a lot of evidence for the Big Bang theory,

back up your claims?

Way more bones?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! Pardon the extra '?!' but this is the most ignorant statement so far. Do you know how rare fossilization occurs? Do you know how picky and strict the environment has to be, and the situation has to be, in order for fossilization to occur?

lol DO YOU KNOW HOW LONG THREE MILLION YEARS IS?!? That is a very long time for such occurences. there would be billions of people dead and therefore hundreds of bones. assumeing there were that great plagues that killed so many people unlike the last 2000 years.

But let's not get too far into that, since the "statement" that there should be way more bones is not part of the Big bang theory so don't try to put the two together please.

that is what this thread is about.

Oh and did you forget we are finding fossils every fricking day? I'm not laughing now, because this is pitiful.

Yeah in a desert, all you know is it died.

It's easy to come up with a story about something outside our realm and ask somebody to refute it. If I made a story about the Larxdoofs and put a bit of accurate history in it, with a little big ot outside of this world existence, and a little war here and there, you would not be able to refute it. The idea that because an idea can't be refuted makes it more credible is so ludicrous it makes me want to beat my head with a stick.

It is the same way with the Big Bang but it has been refuted. Yet it remains to be tought and belived among many. If you ever want to tell a lie mix some truth in with it like micro-and macro evolution. and evolution itself.

"If you tell a lie long enough, loud enough, and often enough, the people will believe it."

"Also people are more likely to believe a big lie than a small one."

-Adolph Hitler

Man question asked earlyer- which is most credible. Defently Creation.

[exatreide]

[qoute]Way more bones?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! Pardon the extra '?!' but this is the most ignorant statement so far. Do you know how rare fossilization occurs? Do you know how picky and strict the environment has to be, and the situation has to be, in order for fossilization to occur?

lol DO YOU KNOW HOW LONG THREE MILLION YEARS IS?!? That is a very long time for such occurences. there would be billions of people dead and therefore hundreds of bones. assumeing there were that great plagues that killed so many people unlike the last 2000 years.[/qoute]

huh? there are more humans on earth now then there have ever been in the past 200,000 years put together

[sneezer3]

huh? there are more humans on earth now then there have ever been in the past 200,000 years put together

I was reffering to three million years he belives we've been here that long. or at least he never said he din't for about one and a half pages of this thread.

[Acriku]

First of all, I don't know where you got your 3 million, and if I said that sorry I didn't mean to - I said before it would be most likely 7-8 or 9 million years ago.

And also, the population back then would be hundreds at best, with many dying from starvation, disease, predators, etc. Then came the neolithic era with the start of farming, which made more food - and allowed tribes to stay put and make more children due to the abundance of food. Then the populations grew due to the children living long enough to be viable. You should have learned about this in 9th grade.

back up your claims?

Oh I don't know...

Most importantly, astronomers using the Astro-2 observatory were able to confirm one of the requirements for the foundation of the universe through the Big Bang. In June, 1995, scientists were able to detect primordial helium, such as deuterium, in the far reaches of the universe. These findings are consistent with an important aspect of the Big Bang theory that a mixture of hydrogen and helium was created at the beginning of the universe.

http://www.umich.edu/~gs265/bigbang.htm and that is the tip of the iceberg. If you research, you will know..

that is what this thread is about.

This thread is about the beginning, not the fossils.

Yeah in a desert, all you know is it died.

*Crickets chirping* I am astonished into silence.

It is the same way with the Big Bang but it has been refuted. Yet it remains to be tought and belived among many. If you ever want to tell a lie mix some truth in with it like micro-and macro evolution. and evolution itself.

"If you tell a lie long enough, loud enough, and often enough, the people will believe it."

"Also people are more likely to believe a big lie than a small one."

-Adolph Hitler

Man question asked earlyer- which is most credible. Defently Creation.

It is not the same way with the big bang, the big bang has evidence, the Larxdoofs does not. The Big Bang theory is taught not as what exactly happened, but is taught as the most likely theory thus far. That is what a science class does - teach about the theories most likely thus far.

Again, not creation. It doesn't have evidence. If god gave us evidence for his actions, why would he put so much emphasis on faith? Faith is the belief in something without evidence. Evidence destroys faith, and leaves god's words in his mouth.

[Dunenewt]

The Big Crunch theory has been proved impossible by the amount of Dark Matter in the universe

[ken124578]

WOW, more sneezer vs acriko debates, i'm going to read this entire topic tomorrow :O

[sneezer3]

First of all, I don't know where you got your 3 million, and if I said that sorry I didn't mean to - I said before it would be most likely 7-8 or 9 million years ago.

I think you misunderstood. i'm not talking about evolution i'm talking about how long humans were around.

And also, the population back then would be hundreds at best, with many dying from starvation, disease, predators, etc. Then came the neolithic era with the start of farming, which made more food - and allowed tribes to stay put and make more children due to the abundance of food. Then the populations grew due to the children living long enough to be viable. You should have learned about this in 9th grade.

Disease wasn't that bad back then. They would put people with it outside of the city. Starvation wasn't that strong even if before they had farms they would have had fish fruit vegtables and animals. that is quit a few rescources.

Most importantly, astronomers using the Astro-2 observatory were able to confirm one of the requirements for the foundation of the universe through the Big Bang. In June, 1995, scientists were able to detect primordial helium, such as deuterium, in the far reaches of the universe. These findings are consistent with an important aspect of the Big Bang theory that a mixture of hydrogen and helium was created at the beginning of the universe.

http://www.umich.edu/~gs265/bigbang.htm and that is the tip of the iceberg. If you research, you will know..

i'm not suprised there still teaching that. that has been refuted a long time ago.

This thread is about the beginning, not the fossils.

lol its about the Big Bang plus evolution. read the first page of this thread.

Yeah in a desert, all you know is it died.

*Crickets chirping* I am astonished into silence.

lol it does not prove evolution Dionsaurs are in the Bible and no fossil that i am aware of hasn't been refuted.

It is the same way with the Big Bang but it has been refuted. Yet it remains to be tought and belived among many. If you ever want to tell a lie mix some truth in with it like micro-and macro evolution. and evolution itself.

"If you tell a lie long enough, loud enough, and often enough, the people will believe it."

"Also people are more likely to believe a big lie than a small one."

-Adolph Hitler

Man question asked earlyer- which is most credible. Defently Creation.

It is not the same way with the big bang, the big bang has evidence, the Larxdoofs does not. The Big Bang theory is taught not as what exactly happened, but is taught as the most likely theory thus far. That is what a science class does - teach about the theories most likely thus far.

Again, not creation. It doesn't have evidence. If god gave us evidence for his actions, why would he put so much emphasis on faith? Faith is the belief in something without evidence. Evidence destroys faith, and leaves god's words in his mouth.

lol there is no evidence for the Big Bang. and there is no evidence for Larxdoofs. but there is evidence for God and the Bible. but if y ou can't belive the Bible as is with or without a miracle you won't belive.

He proves it in creation

In the begining God created the heavens and the earth

Gen 1:1

In science in many ways.

He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing. Job 26:7

Isaiah 40:22

It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth,(the old famus creationest arguements the world was flat?) and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers;(old english) that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:

Leviticus 17:11

For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.

When George Washington died a Bible was laying beside him with that verse in it.

Lastly in prophecy.

Nahum 2:4

The chariots shall rage in the streets, they shall justle one against another in the broad ways: they shall seem like torches, they shall run like the lightnings.

This predicts cars.

That then the Lord thy God will turn thy captivity, and have compassion upon thee, and will return and gather thee from all the nations, whither the Lord thy God hath scattered thee. -Deut 30:3

They were scattered in A.D. 70 and returned in A.D. 1948.

also see

this. it shows in tons of ways how it is scientific.

[Dunenewt]

I think this was supposed to be to ehlp him with his GCSEs ::)