Creation vs Evolution

Originally posted by ~Flamboyant~
Sorry if this has been done, but which do you beleive in and why?

I personally beleive in the Evolution theory, because it has basically been scientifically proven. Especially by the Hard-Weinberg Principle.

No, it hasn't been proven. Only idiots could possibly believe that the universe was created by an accidental "big bang" explosion of absolutely nothing. Purposeful creation by a higher being makes MUCH more sense than creation by an accidental explosion of nothing. Creation itself is all the proof I need to believe in God. Now, OTOH, I do actually believe that SOME humans evolved from monkeys but Adam and Eve were created long before that happened and I believe that many humans are not descendants of apes but of Adam and Eve.

Originally posted by Jynocidus
Creation wins. Comics are more believable than the theory of evolution, where as creation is logical and factual

👆

Originally posted by Star428
No, it hasn't been proven. Only idiots could possibly believe that the universe was created by an accidental "big bang" explosion of absolutely nothing. Purposeful creation by a higher being makes MUCH more sense than creation by an accidental explosion of nothing. Creation itself is all the proof I need to believe in God. Now, OTOH, I do actually believe that SOME humans evolved from monkeys but Adam and Eve were created long before that happened and I believe that many humans are not descendants of apes but of Adam and Eve.

well, the accepted definition of Big Bang is - a large quantity of nothing decided to pack tightly together,—and then explode outward into hydrogen and helium.

i just don't know how this "nothing" has a large quantity, and how this "nothing" decided to do something...

Originally posted by dyajeep
well, the accepted definition of Big Bang is - a large quantity of nothing decided to pack tightly together,—and then explode outward into hydrogen and helium.

i just don't know how this "nothing" has a large quantity, and how this "nothing" decided to do something...

No one know what happened before the big bang. It could have been two other universes within a multiverse that collided to spark the big bang. Or this universe is inside a black hole inside another universe. There is a lot of speculation, but we don't know what was before. It could even have been a God before the big bang.

Originally posted by dyajeep
well, the accepted definition of Big Bang is - a large quantity of nothing decided to pack tightly together,—and then explode outward into hydrogen and helium.

i just don't know how this "nothing" has a large quantity, and how this "nothing" decided to do something...

It's more about it being impossible for us to know what it was than it being actual "nothing".

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No one know what happened before the big bang. It could have been two other universes within a multiverse that collided to spark the big bang. Or this universe is inside a black hole inside another universe. There is a lot of speculation, but we don't know what was before. It could even have been a God before the big bang.

so you agreed that there's an explosion? we've seen small explosions from grenades in movies... how can an explosion create orderly things? we all know that the ecosystem is perfect at some point in time, right?

Originally posted by dyajeep
so you agreed that there's an explosion? we've seen small explosions from grenades in movies... how can an explosion create orderly things? we all know that the ecosystem is perfect at some point in time, right?

Well. Let's assume there wasn't one Big Bang, that there were thirty million big bangs (or seven, let's say seven). After every explosion, when the ecosystems weren't perfect nor any order was created, no life happened and no one ever asked why things were perfect.

So we're not assuming every explosion creates order, whenever it doesn't, it's irrelevant because nobody ever exists to ask questions about those banal explosions. What we are assuming is that one explosion among an undefined number of explosions was capable of creating order, which is totally possible under quantum physics.

Originally posted by Bentley
Well. Let's assume there wasn't one Big Bang, that there were thirty million big bangs (or seven, let's say seven). After every explosion, when the ecosystems weren't perfect nor any order was created, no life happened and no one ever asked why things were perfect.

So we're not assuming every explosion creates order, whenever it doesn't, it's irrelevant because nobody ever exists to ask questions about those banal explosions. What we are assuming is that one explosion among an undefined number of explosions was capable of creating order, which is totally possible under quantum physics.

Big Bang is supposed to be a theory of the beginning of everything... when there's an explosion, what we get is disorder, and not order... all i'm asking is how can an explosion - which creates disorder - can create life (of plants, animals, humans... everything we have now)?

Originally posted by dyajeep
Big Bang is supposed to be a theory of the beginning of everything... when there's an explosion, what we get is disorder, and not order... all i'm asking is how can an explosion - which creates disorder - can create life (of plants, animals, humans... everything we have now)?

Are we assuming that explosions can't generate order then? Because that's the only case in which the argument could hold any ground at all.

I just illustrated how an argument about the likeness of order coming out of an explosion can be easily dismissed because it's not a probability unrelated with us asking the question.

Originally posted by dyajeep
Big Bang is supposed to be a theory of the beginning of everything... when there's an explosion, what we get is disorder, and not order... all i'm asking is how can an explosion - which creates disorder - can create life (of plants, animals, humans... everything we have now)?

While your post has the very common problem of using commonly used words and definitions to talk about scientific concepts that have the same name. When you say "disorder" you mean something completely different to the "disorder" discussed in entropy.

im not really knowledgeable on physics but i thought 'explosion' was a sort of analogy for the big bang. was it a literal explosion or just a rapid expansion?

Originally posted by dyajeep
Big Bang is supposed to be a theory of the beginning of everything... when there's an explosion, what we get is disorder, and not order... all i'm asking is how can an explosion - which creates disorder - can create life (of plants, animals, humans... everything we have now)?

The universe and the size of said explosion is beyond human comprehension in size. Order in space is born from gravity, mass, heat, and time. You can have a chaotic moment like when you mix a bunch of ingredients into a liquid and wait; the different densities of materials will sort themselves out seeking like materials and eventually you will have a balanced dispersion of different layers of liquid materials with different densities. This is gravity and mass compounded with time and the momentary heat which determines the density level of each material.

Originally posted by red g jacks
im not really knowledgeable on physics but i thought 'explosion' was a sort of analogy for the big bang. was it a literal explosion or just a rapid expansion?

I think it's an explosion in the sense that particles were broken into even tinier particles over the influence of some undefined force. We call it an explosion because it sort of has a similar aftermath, but that's even pinpointing a very explicit kind of explosion.

But my knowledge on the subject is far from being the being all do all answer to the topic.

Originally posted by dyajeep
Big Bang is supposed to be a theory of the beginning of everything... when there's an explosion, what we get is disorder, and not order... all i'm asking is how can an explosion - which creates disorder - can create life (of plants, animals, humans... everything we have now)?

The term "Big Bang" refers to an expansion event which there is evidence supporting, but only back to a certain point. As for how an explosion can result in life, a person would need a better understanding of Physics and Gravity. Physics gives way to Chemistry which gives way to Biology/Biochemistry/Organic Chemistry. In lay terms, Energy has a state where it becomes matter. Matter can take on various forms with various properties (elements). The point where energy become matter gives rise to Chemistry. Elements can combine to create various compounds and molecules. Among the various compounds and molecules one of the resulting combinations are proteins. Another is amino acids, which is a precursor for proteins, and so on. If a person can't grasp that progression Evolution will never make sense to them.

Originally posted by dyajeep
so you agreed that there's an explosion? we've seen small explosions from grenades in movies... how can an explosion create orderly things? we all know that the ecosystem is perfect at some point in time, right?

No! There was no bang, and it wasn't big. Fred Hoyle, who was a steady-state theory supporter came up with the name mocking the theory. The big bang was not an explosion. It was the rapid expansion of space-time from smaller then a proton to about the size of the galaxy. This is called cosmic inflation. It was a moment in time when the universe expanded faster then the speed of light.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison

No one know what happened before the big bang ...
we don't know what was before.
It could even have been ... God before the big bang ...

mmm

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No! There was no bang, and it wasn't big. Fred Hoyle, who was a steady-state theory supporter came up with the name mocking the theory. The big bang was not an explosion. It was the rapid expansion of space-time from smaller then a proton to about the size of the galaxy. This is called cosmic inflation. It was a moment in time when the universe expanded faster then the speed of light.

Huh, to me that sounds quite big and quite.. bangy.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No! There was no bang, and it wasn't big. Fred Hoyle, who was a steady-state theory supporter came up with the name mocking the theory. The big bang was not an explosion. It was the rapid expansion of space-time from smaller then a proton to about the size of the galaxy. This is called cosmic inflation. It was a moment in time when the universe expanded faster then the speed of light.

wasn't the steady-state already obsolete? anyway, so the universe expanded faster than the speed of light? i just thought science was arguing that the universe was existing billions of years ago? as opposed to the Bible saying it's 6 days (although i believe that the 6 days are not literal 24-hour days)...

and i'm just wondering that if the accepted definition of Big Bang is:

a large quantity of nothing decided to pack tightly together,—and then explode outward into hydrogen and helium.

then, why are you now arguing that there is no explosion? seems like there are many interpretations about the Big Bang... which is which?

Originally posted by dyajeep
wasn't the steady-state already obsolete?

Originally posted by dyajeep
anyway, so the universe expanded faster than the speed of light? i just thought science was arguing that the universe was existing billions of years ago? as opposed to the Bible saying it's 6 days (although i believe that the 6 days are not literal 24-hour days)...

Originally posted by dyajeep
and i'm just wondering that if the accepted definition of Big Bang is:
“a large quantity of nothing decided to pack tightly together,—and then explode outward into hydrogen and helium.”

Originally posted by dyajeep
then, why are you now arguing that there is no explosion? seems like there are many interpretations about the Big Bang... which is which?