Evidence for God from Science

Big Bang was made to support evolution...though when you realize that it goes against so many laws and chaos->order etc....it eventually points to creationism. But look how many jokes that support evolution are published They get through because they support the belief...which a flipping magnetic field would do by explaining why the field is declining cyclically.

I'm somewhat cynical. Mainly because I was taught all of these things AS THE TRUTH....and now as I read...there are so many theories, and there are problems in each according to each side, and each side refutes the other, and it's a mess.


I'm a fundamentalist, not just one on the fringe. *don't nobody come near, I'll jump*

You did not answer the question, are we going to argue scientifically or not?

The big bang theory was not "made" to support anything, it was the result of applying the known laws of physics to observed evidence, and coming to a conclusion. The conclusion happens to support creation. Scientists in general don't start out with a presupposition, even Darwin didn't. Nowadays the biological evolutionists do it though, but they are slowly but surely being exposed.

Yes^^ I missed the question or thought it rhetorical....


Anways, how was Big Bang the result of observations? We see an ordered universe, so how does that imply the universe bent BIG BANG *I just love the name by the way, it's the most sophisticated term in science*

before you try and disprove big bang you need to PROVE that the earth is NOT millions of years old first
*points to the last post on the 1st page of this topic*

OK.

Big bang was a derogatory term invented by a scientist who thought it would be proven untrue, lol. Egg on the face there....

Go read http://www.reasons.org/resources/fff/20 ... tive_power

Do you guys all worship Rosh or something? (not derogatory, but he's the source of many sources here!)

And how can you tell the universe is flat (no curve) if you can only see from a small perspective? (No I don't have a standpoint on whether the universe is curved or not, I'm wide open on that because, heck, doesn't seem to be a way that we could know....as far as I know).

Still reading but I'll hit submit *click*

Planets out of this solar system have not been seen...only indirectly have they been "seen"

ok what your emplying is that fossils over 6000 years have been planted right? if the earth is only 6000 years old then all those fossils are figments of scientists imagonations right?

I'm getting tired of answering your questions, but you never answer any.

Do you worship Walt Brown? Almost all of your links are to his book.

Why don't you answer Deborah's questions first?

if this is old earth young earth then get off the topic of the Universe!
LOL
talk about OFF TOPIC!
If you don;t have an answer say so, don't tippi toe around it!

OOH BTW this topic is LITERAL lol
YOUNG EARTH OR OLD EARTH

*I can only hand so many frustrations a day. A guy on another thread I can't use the 2nd law of thermodynamics to refute evolution, who also said I was usign pseudoscience, and then an 8th grader saying that evolution is true, and then a Christian preaching compromise with evolution....it's hit the high water mark*

How are fossils determined to be older than 6,000 years old? Why, by being examined using dating techniques that flatly don't work in the real world with precision. Fossils were "planted" during the Flood I think (and read that it is highly probable). If something is gradually buried, it rots before it can become a fossil (example being millions of buffalo America had killed to reduce the Indian threat...you can't find their remains anymore, they were left to rot). It takes a lot of dirt being dumped quickly to encase so many animals and plants...heck, I've seen pictures of one fish eating another fish in a fossilized (?)picture. The strata could not have occured slowly, for many reasons.

I'm pasting, I give up for tonight.

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebo ... #wp1054820

I like the first one

the Ross thing was a joke, sheeesh....lol.

So when was the NT written? Was it 500 years ago, or 2000 years ago?

Before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, after Christ's birth (max and min limits). So it would be around 2000 years ago, as opposed to the 1500's.

How are fossils determined to be older than 6,000 years old? Why, by being examined using dating techniques that flatly don't work in the real world with precision. Fossils were "planted" during the Flood I think (and read that it is highly probable). If something is gradually buried, it rots before it can become a fossil (example being millions of buffalo America had killed to reduce the Indian threat...you can't find their remains anymore, they were left to rot). It takes a lot of dirt being dumped quickly to encase so many animals and plants...heck, I've seen pictures of one fish eating another fish in a fossilized (?)picture. The strata could not have occured slowly, for many reasons.

Since we agreed that we were going to argue in a scientific manner, please provide the references for where this was peer-reviewed and published in an accepted scientific journal.