ummm there has to be a first human, how'd that happen?
Do you mean hominid life in general, or homo sapiens specifically?
ummm there has to be a first human, how'd that happen?
Also worth pointing out is that the Big Bang is the base foundation for a self-creating universe excluding God. Exactly how does this pass the test of the Scientific Method? It is equally as religious as creation.
ummm there has to be a first human, how'd that happen?
... There is even a creation museum not too far from here just over the ohio border.
This is a great point. We cannot observe evolution; we can only observe fossils. Macro evolution has never been observed by man; so to believe in it requires faith.
You mean the guys who think that The Flintstones is a documentary? That black hole of ignorance is in Kentucky. Seriously, I can't believe you offered the Creation Museum as a reference.
Let me give you a tip: Shibumi is offering you knowledge. You're brushing it aside and attempting to correct him. The sad fact is that both you and DustinG have been completely pwned and neither of you seem to know it.
The difference is not about the theories being believed or implied assumptions, the difference is the ability for the scientific method to be applied. Since it is plausible by observing our natural environment and application of the scientific method to discover unknowns in physics that disprove the theoretical expansions of the universe inherent in the big bang theory - empirical evidence could plausibly disprove the big bang theory. Further investigation into the theory can also lead to other breakthroughs in physics that help explain other phenomenon in our world, advancing our understanding of our universe. Information and knowledge gained could disprove the big bang theory, but it would still be a scientific theory (albeit considered incorrect) - because scientific experimentation can be performed to prove/disprove its merits.Gunner:
Scientists observe what are ASSUMED to be facts/effects from the big bang. If you have a secret observer who saw it, please say so. there are more holes in what we "should" see as a result of a supposed big bang of uknown size, cause, and origin, than the world's biggest cheese grater.
This is a good resource for those still on the fence about the fossil record.
The list posted on the first page has over ten thousand scientists that are petitioning to reconsider evolution because they do not believe it is a good theory.
You mean the guys who think that The Flintstones is a documentary? That black hole of ignorance is in Kentucky. Seriously, I can't believe you offered the Creation Museum as a reference.
Let me give you a tip: Shibumi is offering you knowledge. You're brushing it aside and attempting to correct him. The sad fact is that both you and DustinG have been completely pwned and neither of you seem to know it.
"The fool hath said in his heart. There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good." Psalm 14:1. Ain't that the truth
1. I am pleased to see you're reading even if not participating.
2. Just for the record, it is evolutionists who believe in prehistoric cavemen. Insulting me with what evolutionists believe doesn't really have the desired effect, I wager .
That said, I look forward to any thoughts you have.
...
I'm sorry that I do not take everything that is taught to me as a fact
and I must follow it as a sheep
because some brilliant scientist made a theory a decade and a half ago.
or altered the theory slightly to fit the evidence
(never disposing of the theory in whole to look at the evidence objectively).
why you gotta bring particle physics and subatomic energy levels into it?
you're harshing my mellow
I knew you weren't really paying attention.
Just for the record "evolutionist" is a term used primarily by the superstitious in an attempt to lower Science to their level. See the "ist"?
Yes, most "evolutionists" accept the huge amount of evidence for prehistoric humans living in caves. They also accept the huge amount of evidence that humans did not live at the same time as dinosaurs. Turns out prehistoric just means "before we started writing stuff down", not "when the dinosaurs roamed".
The Evolution Museum, which you suggested as a source, has a diorama with humans and dinosaurs living together. And they're serious! They simply can not accept that a twisted interpretation of a series of stories handed down word of mouth for generations might not be literally accurate.
Any thoughts I have? I'm way past accepting the evidence for evolution. Flu vaccines usually work. I'm good. Now, do you think they'll find the Higgs Boson between 114 and 140 gev or will an explanation of mass require another hypothesis altogether?