Is evolution scientific? Can it be proven? This isn't your typical dry treatise on the subject. It is flavored with lots of humor, beautiful photography, and good old fashioned common sense. Evolutionary believers themselves will show you how unintelligent this theory really is.
Watch More. Apologetic Warrior/ The Way of the Master
Buy the Season. Living Waters
2 comments:
Gavin,
Here, send these to Ray; http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/ and http://evolution.berkeley.edu/
Maybe he, Kirk and you should brush up on evolution first before dissing it. Oh and by the way The Theory of Evolution has nothing to do with the Big Bang. That would be more like Cosmic Evolution or actually the Big Bang Theory, which was not even mentioned in the misleading title. Here are four evidences that support the Big Bang Theory;
First, we are reasonably certain that the universe had a beginning.
Second, galaxies appear to be moving away from us at speeds proportional to their distance. This is called "Hubble's Law," named after Edwin Hubble (1889-1953) who discovered this phenomenon in 1929. This observation supports the expansion of the universe and suggests that the universe was once compacted.
Third, if the universe was initially very, very hot as the Big Bang suggests, we should be able to find some remnant of this heat. In 1965, Radioastronomers Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson discovered a 2.725 degree Kelvin (-454.765 degree Fahrenheit, -270.425 degree Celsius) Cosmic Microwave Background radiation (CMB) which pervades the observable universe. This is thought to be the remnant which scientists were looking for. Penzias and Wilson shared in the 1978 Nobel Prize for Physics for their discovery.
Fourth, the abundance of the "light elements" Hydrogen and Helium found in the observable universe are thought to support the Big Bang model of origins.
Their theory (and yours) is that some supernatural being (naked?) was in total nothingness and decided to go - bing! bing! bing! bing!, bing!, and bing! And poof there everything is, wow that certainly makes a lot more sense. And what exactly is your evidence?
Yes I know you won’t send them those links and you probably won’t even read them, they are a threat to your beliefs and we can’t have that now can we? I am still waiting for you to provide some elaboration on your claims that there is evidence for a young earth. I think I have refuted them, but then again I had to guess on where you were coming from.
We don't believe someone just went 'bling,bling bling' and wala! Like some sort of fairy Godmother turning a pumpkin into a carrige.
We believe someone ie God, created the universe. Created.
Took Him 6 days work (on which the 7th He rested)! This is much like when we create something. Eg a school project or a ceramic sculpture in art class.
We dont just 'bling, bling, bling' and it becomes; we work on it for days (or longer!) and we CREATE it. Why aren't we astounded at this? Like if the process of creation is the big deal, why doesnt it blow us away in unbelief when WE create something?
Ok, lets take it further though. Lets say you didnt seeee me create the sculpture or the painting. You instead see it in an art exhibition or something. I bet you NO-ONE in that room doubts that somebody CREATED that painting or sculpture. No one thinks that painting painted itsel! Or that over a very long time colours just started appearing on the cancas and over a million more years it came together as this marvelous painting.
The interesting point is that they havn't seen me, nor have they even seen me paint it. They do not know me at all. But they know that SOMEBODY created/painted this picture.
So why is it so hard to apply this to God?
Post a Comment