Not a hate-mail, but I don’t have a category for this sort:
I am not a scientist but I am a teacher (not in florida). I am a Christian and personally believe in intelligent design. However, I do not believe it is my place to force Christianity into the classroom either. I will live my life as a Christian and feel free to share my faith when necessary and unforcefully. Anyway, I don’t think anyone will get anywhere in this argument. First, even if there was a “Big Bang” where did the first big rock come from and what hit it? Even science can’t explain something coming from nothing. On the flip-side even Christians can’t explain when or how God began. All I know is that science can only explain so much and so does the bible. So, it’s faith in either God or Science. Faith that God did it or that science will discover it. I personally believe that science studies God’s creation including scientific laws. I also believe that there are some things in the Holy Bible that will better understood in the end. Even the gospels told of secrets that were not shared with the masses. Also, who can argue that evolution exists? That’s fact!!! The argument is creation v. just happening.
-tgilmer
That science cannot explain ’something from nothing’ is a fallacy.
You’re a teacher – look up quantum foam, zero point energy, hawking radiation, virtual particle pairs, etc. Somthings and antisomethings come from “nothing” all the time…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Actually, if you are a teacher, your ignorance is astonishing. How is a science teacher not aware of M-Theory, or even String Theory. Something out of nothing? Big rock. I dare say you are fucking stupid.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It was probably the collision of two membranes, not big rocks.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Where did the first god from and who or what decided what qualities it would have?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Translation:
“I don’t understand (nor will I make an effort TO understand) the Big Bang theory, but I do know that it doesn’t comply with certain Bronze Age texts that I believe without question. Therefore, I will bleat out my misunderstandings and plug my fingers into my ears because I do not want to lose my precious ignorance.”
.
Goodness, you are a teacher?!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
This person qualifies for at least the half-brainer club.
The reasoning seems to be in line with actual opinion, and it’s not really reaming people for their beliefs. I’d rank this one as ‘interesting’, because they’re not on a nut hunt.
Change of pace is an alright idea for this section of the site.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Perhaps a kindergarten teacher. The Big Bang doesn’t involve two colliding objects. It involves all the energy in the universe being condensed into such a tiny space by the gravity given off by it’s own sheer mass that it goes critical and explodes, quickly condensing into subatomic particles of matter and antimatter which then proceed to annihilate eachother again releasing the energy. 99.9% of the matter and antimatter created in the big bang turns back into energy (light, heat, kinetic etc), the universe as we know it is made of that last 0.1% being hurled in every direction, eventually slowing, condensing into nebulae, stars, galaxies, planets, you and I. The expansion of the universe is slowing, It may eventually stop and reverse, colapsing in onto itself untill all the matter and energy in the universe is again condensed into a brilliant point of light. Ready for the next Big Bang, the one post humanity, and perhaps the billionth one in the history of the universe.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The Big Bang simply says all the enegy-matter in the universe was at one point in space at one point in time. It doesn’t say anything about rocks, except that these were formed by gravity billions of years later, after some stars already went supernova and spit out the heavy elements in their guts. Right after the Big Bang – there’s only hydrogen and helium. Right before the Big Bang – who knows?
Just because we don’t know something yet doesn’t mean we should invent a supernatural explanation. It will end up contradicting the eventual natural explanation anyway.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I fear for your students. The wording of your question shows that you have zero understanding of the Big Bang. Big problem in schools: unqualified teachers. I hope your knowledge of this isnt indicative of your knowledge of other subjects.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Tgilmer, slow yer roll.
1. I don’t think any scientists describe the big bang as “the first big rock” hitting something else.
Stick to Christianity rather than attempting to describe something so clearly out of your grasp, science.
2. Also out of your grasp, proper sentence and paragraph structure. Glad to have you teaching the nations young by Christian example.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“First, even if there was a “Big Bang” where did the first big rock come from and what hit it?”
.
The Big Bang is not about rocks. It’s about a point of singularity that, under enormous pressure, exploded. The high heat of this explosion caused immense nuclear fusion from which the elements on the periodic table were ‘created’.
.
The Big Bang also does not ‘believe’ that something came from nothing. It assumes that energy and matter, which can neither be created not destroyed, have always been in existence.
.
It is so improbable that an intelligent designer assembled himself out of the energy-matter that existed in order to create the universe that most Science-minded people simply reject the notion. There’s no point in considering something that defies every law of Physics, when an explanation exists that does not (Big Bang Theory).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
this is a very good argument
In my opinion there had to be tremendous amounts of gas in the begining and that there was no begining and time is infinute
anyways this gas somehow exploded and therefore condensed into all the other elements
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You have a very valid point, and it is a question I struggled with for a long time.
I became a born again christian at a very young age, and it wasn’t until around 19 before I began to question what I had always been told.
When it comes down to it, no one really knows for sure where the first particle came from, and that is ultimately the whole point of agnosticism. I firmly believe there had to be something that inspired energy to organize and pull together particles to form giant masses. There had to be something… some higher power. But I don’t know what that being is, and aside from the faith that you have developed over your years in the church, you, along with anyone involved in any form of religion, do not have any evidence to prove that you know either.
The point i’m trying to make is, no one knows for sure, and I refuse to pretend I do “just in case”.
It would sure help your god’s case, however, if he were to make a modern, pre-apocalypse appearance.
in the name of lasagna, macaroni, and angel hair pasta,
r’Amen.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hah! I knew I would eventually find an intelligent believer in intelligent design.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You have a complete misconception of what the big bang is. The big bang is not someone hitting something with “a big rock”. For the sake of your own edification, and so you do not look like an idiot when you discuss this argument with other people, I suggest you go to your local bookstore and invest the $10.05 in a book which explains the theory of the universe in layman’s terms. Based on your writing, I am certain you are intelligent enough to understand it. And this is not a matter of fairth or atheism, just getting straight what the expounded theory is.
As for your other argument, you are correct–everything does in fact start from a first princliple which is beyond the ken of the person espousing it to explain. As an athest/agnostic, I merely believe the idea of a personal creator, particularly as depicted in the Xtain bible is far fetched. I believe that for a couple of reasons.
1) It is inconceivable to me that an all intelligent,”supreme being” would create a universe, leaving no direct evidence of his existence and then demand his only cognizant creations believe unquestioningly in his existence WITH NO DIRECT EVIDENCE, and then punish any beings who balk at that deal with everlasting, torture. Why would he do that? Because faith is such a good thing? Well, was faith in Hitler, Stalin, and Mao a good thing? Seems to me human beings attain their best and highest state of being when they doubt, question and withhold belief unless something can be proved. Or would you rather go back to the age of faith when women were dropped in the lake and declared witches if they floated and good xtains if they drowned?
2) The traces are all over the bible–the god of the bible was the creation of a bronze age people. He’s murderous, bloodthirsty-demands the jews rape, murder, kill and enslave the Caanites, drowns all humanity, including all their children, orders his only follower to murder his only son, and requires his own son be murdered to atone for the sin of adam.
3) By the way, if man evolved over millions of years, there was no adam and eve, and there was no original sin. Also, death has always been part of creation. The geological history of the world indicates that there have been several mass extinction events in earth’s history, so death did not originate with the sin of adam and eve. So what, therefore, is the justification for Jesus, who was sent to attone for a sin that never occurred. In short, evolutionary theory shoots a bullet through the heart of Chriistian theory, the theory of how and why Jesus came to be, and what he did.
4) Finally, there is ample evidence that Jesus, even if is he is based on an historical personage (itself a questionable proposition), is an amalgram of pagan beliefs which antedate him. The Eqyptian sun god, Horus, was born of a virgin, had a star mark out his birth, was visited by wise men as an infant, preached in the temple when he was 12, and began his ministry among men at age 30. Sound familiar. It should, the gospel authors cribbed the life story of christ from astrological and egyptian folklore.. So how valid can it be?
Like I have maintained, none of this is iron clad proof that things did not happen the way they are depicted in the Gospels, but I think it provides compelling evidence to cast their historicity into question. In short, as historical truth, the Xtain god is one far-fetched proposition.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Very well written, and quite well thought out. Just as I would have hoped from a teacher. However, there is one problem. You see to have misinterpreted the “Big Bang”, thinking that it was caused by a collision of items in space. This is not what the theory says. I am not an expert on the Big Bang, but I thought that it was spontaineous (sp?), and caused the creation of matter. Therefore, matter could not have existed before the Big Bang. I suppose the spontenaiety (sp again?) could lean towards an argument for the existance of God but , again, who created the creator if the universe had to be created. Sorry for the long post.
RAmen
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The “Holy Bible” and all its secrets?
Is this the same Bible that supports Slavery, banishes Homosexuals and the prohibits eating shellfish (Leviticus)?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Matter was there in the first place.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You know, the word “science” comes from the Latin word “scientia,” meaning “knowledge.”
Science, according to Wikipedia, is the effort to discover, understand, or to understand better how the physical world works, with observable physical evidence as the basis of that understanding.
You almost treat science as if it’s a belief. You think that science and religion don’t mix, but in fact they mix all the time. If science didn’t exist–a phrase that I feel needs to be reworded somehow–we wouldn’t be where we are today. In fact, complex religions such as Christianity wouldn’t exist.
…
-Xcapt. Etay
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
TGILMER, not in Florida. Of course this universe and life as we know it are products of intelligent design. If you will take the time to study Pasafarianism, you will learn that our beloved Flying Spaghetti, in his infinite wisdom, created everything, even the first big rock, while exercising his divine intellect. RAmen
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I haven’t got a clue whats going on or why, and i don’t understand stuff, and it’s too hard to think about it so I believe in the FSM.
That makes me happy so I must be right, right?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
First, even if there was a “Big Bang” where did the first big rock come from and what hit it? Even science can’t explain something coming from nothing.
o_O
What big rock? I’ve never heard that one.
There’s at least a dozen different theories about the big-bang, all of them supported by very complex mathematics and physics. Very likely (in my opinion) none of these theories are in any way accurate, but that’s something scientists are still working on (and really has nothing to do with evolution at all).
(I’m not a scientist either, all my knowledge on these subjects come from sources like New Scientist Magazine, so I know I have some big gaps in my understanding, but…)
It took many decades of research and careful accumulation of evidence before Darwin’s theory of evolution was accepted in the classroom. Why should intelligent design be included without similarly rigorous research? As far as I’m aware, the only “evidence” of intelligent design are claims that this or that biological feature could not have possibly evolved naturally (while at the same time, other scientists continue to discover exactly how they evolved).
Evolution is a developing field of research, with new discoveries and theories coming up all the time. There is still heated debate about how life began. Some claim life began from the organic molecules found in “carbonous carbuncle” asteroids which sometimes fall to earth, others believe that the first organisms were based on the simple RNA instead of DNA… the list goes on. Some of Darwin’s assumptions and conclusions in Origin Of Species have been proven wrong, but the evidence supports the central idea more than ever.
I think I’ve wasted enough time with this pointless rant, so I’ll finish off with this one final thought…
Evolution may be a “theory”, but Intelligent Design is only a hypothesis.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The Big Bang is not about a Big Rock, nor is it about a collision between said big rock and something else. Its the theory that all of the energy and matter was packed into a tiny tiny tiny space, perhaps created by the collapse of another universe (Big crunch idea, not a likely fate for our universe but potentially the fate of some previous one), that exploded outwards creating the universe we know today. Not being a scientist, the details on how they determined this happened are a bit fuzzy to me, but that is my understanding of the basics. The only collisions I can think of that you might be confusing the Big Bang with would be the creation of planets/creation of the moon. These involved big hunks of rock smashing into each other to make bigger hunks of rocks. You are right to a degree, however Science does not require faith. We do not know it yet, and so we do not make wild, impossible speculation about what it could be and call it fact without evidence. Science doesn’t do that. Faith is a term that can be applied strictly to religion; science is backed with fact, and what isn’t known is simply labeled as “not known yet,” The leap of faith religion requires is seeing things in this category and determining that a magical man done it. No faith in science, Proof, fact, hypothesis and the unknown.
Thanks for not being the typical religious twit who emails. Your religious views are always yours to hold in a private setting, and I respect that. I may disagree, but if it isn’t hurting any others, all the power to you. If you feel like joining me for a ceremonial bowl of pasta, I will be in my living room, practicing my religion.
.
All the best.
.
Cey
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It wasn’t a big rock, it was a meatball and His Noodly Goodness put it there. It was hit by a delicious ladleful of a rich garlicky marinara, garnished with a sprinkle of finely shredded parmesan cheese and a dash of ground parsley. Everybody knows that!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Ah! that is the question. You are correct, niether religion nor science CAN answer that but my beef is that religion tries (and fails) to answer it. How? By saying God did it. Completely fails to explain where God came from except to say, very unsatisfactorily, that he is ‘eternal’. At least science will never give up on attempting to go back to the true beginning, which I agree the Big Bang cannot be. We’re slowly getting further back and maybe coming up with very original ideas as to how to test these theories.
You ask where the first big rock came from and what hit it.
You may be referring to the ’singularity’ postulated in the big bang theory, which contained all matter/energy until the moment of the ‘bang’. Of course big bang is only a soubricuet or nick name for an event assumed to have taken place approx 14 billion years ago, at which point ‘time’ began also. So it is probably not even an approachable question scientifically, as to what went before, because ‘nothing’ happened before. This therefore assumes that there is such a state as pure stasis where nothing happens, even time. One type of variation of this is to assume that the BB was only one of an infinite series of same events which lead to a slightly different type of universe for each event.
The problem with all these scenarios (including god) is that no end point is ever reached. This is all well and good because there is no reason why there should be either a beginning point or an end point. Such a scenario though requires an exceptance of infinity. Infinity is a concept that I don’t think the human mind can encompass either so we are back to square one where you have a choice of believing ‘God did it’, or be left forever wondering and puzzling about infinity. I’m of this type ! You are not ! QED
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
THE FUCKING SPAGGETI MONSTROSITY!!!!!11
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I only hope that you are NOT a science teacher
RAmen
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
GOLD!!!!! ARRRGGGGGGG!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The arguement is this: Can we teach our children what we have observed to happen without adding on wild speculations to explain it?
That’s it in a sentence. ID says “Yeah all that evolution happened but it couldn’t happen by itself so an undetectable higher power did it.” Problem is that by any definition of science, the statement “it couldn’t happen by itself” is arrogant and baseless. It might be possible to get something from nothing under conditions we haven’t studied. There is nothing empowering anyone to dismiss it as impossible. Second, saying that some intelligence or power at work doesn’t tell us anything about the process. We don’t gain any understanding that we wouldn’t have otherwise. It has no scientific value.
If Christian children come home confused by evolution and their parents tell them “that’s how God did it”, that’s fine. No conflict. Enjoy your freedom of religeon. However if the teachers say “a god did it”, imagine the discussion I’ll have with my children.
When you mix science and religeon, both are weakened.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Please, please tell me you are not a science teacher. I can’t believe that you’re any kind of teacher and believe that the big bang happened because two rocks hit together. Do yourself a favor and google big bang theory or at least visit the wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang .
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
If you come to the conclusion that there is an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent deity in our universe, and said deity makes a point of being actively involved in the affairs of his creation, I don’t think you can truly say that anything ‘just happens.’ Every event down to the simplest chemical reaction would have to be either directly or indirectly ‘approved’ by the deity in order for it to happen. It is relevant to note that as time goes by and science progresses further, many mysterious, obscure phenomena that used to be attributed to Yahweh have been found to have a completely explicable, documentable cause, no god required. I suppose you could still say it’s Yahweh moving the atoms around, but why would you do that unless you had a belief you desperately wanted to prove to yourself?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hi,
Am feeling really happy to see a rational (I read it as meaningful) post from a religious person. You were totally right. Both of us have no clue about what was there before the Big Bang. But it does give the authority for religion to dictate anything it thinks as the cause and expect others to believe in the same without questioning it. This is where the problem begins. When we don’t know something, we should admit that we don’t know it and try to find it out and NOT fill up our ignorance with our imagination. We, evolutionists, have the guts to admit that we don’t know what was there before the Big Bang and we work on finding out that. But proponents of creationalism don’t posses that. What good is it going to make in summoning God to fill every gap which current human knowledge cannot explain? As a matter of fact, it will cause harm to just sit and do nothing saying God just created it. Do you think that Galileo was wrong in questioning the church regarding its Geo-Centric theory? Just imagine what would have happened had he not stood by his Helio-centric theory?
The point is this. It’s an easy task to call God to answer everything we don’t know. But it’s going to help our progress in no way. Actually it’s going to hinder our progress. I think there is no point in saying that the skin is brown because God wanted it to look brown. Such an explanation is empty and void and will take us nowhere.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hi,
Am feeling really happy to see a rational (I read it as meaningful) post from a religious person. You were totally right. Both of us have no clue about what was there before the Big Bang. But it does not give the authority for religion to dictate anything it thinks as the cause and expect others to believe in the same without questioning it. This is where the problem begins. When we don’t know something, we should admit that we don’t know it and try to find it out and NOT fill up our ignorance with our imagination. We, evolutionists, have the guts to admit that we don’t know what was there before the Big Bang and we work on finding out that. But proponents of creationalism don’t posses that. What good is it going to make in summoning God to fill every gap which current human knowledge cannot explain? As a matter of fact, it will cause harm to just sit and do nothing saying God just created it. Do you think that Galileo was wrong in questioning the church regarding its Geo-Centric theory? Just imagine what would have happened had he not stood by his Helio-centric theory?
The point is this. It’s an easy task to call God to answer everything we don’t know. But it’s going to help our progress in no way. Actually it’s going to hinder our progress. I think there is no point in saying that the skin is brown because God wanted it to look brown. Such an explanation is empty and void and will take us nowhere.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
We need an all intelligent, all powerful, supreme being to explain the existence of the first rock?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Actually, the theory of the Big Bang says that in the beginning there was only an extremely dense ball of matter, not a rock. It exploded outward because it got too large and dense.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Well with all due respect, if science can’t explain how something came from nothing, I don’t think that a myth of a supernatural being that pre-existed anything explains it one jot better. In fact to my mind it is far less likely and a parody of science. It just implies that the answer to anything you don’t know is to make it up rather than to bust your brain trying to find out. It is just a convenient cop-out.
Oh and by the way, science HAS explained for many years how something came from nothing in the early moments of the big bang. It was nothing to do with rocks hitting eachother, but a balance of probabilities with about one particle in a million failing to find it’s antiparticle and annihilate with it.
That’s about where my scientific knowledge ends, but I honestly have to say, if I had to choose between the idea of some god sitting there for millennia and then thinking up the universe and all in it, I’d really find it easier to believe it was all made by a flying spaghetti monster. While we’re taking wild and massively unlikely stabs at it with no rational basis at all, let’s do the job properly.
Oh and by the other way, that insect’s knee stuff was disproven long ago. That little feller left many traces of development and certainly didn’t pop into existence fully developed….sorry.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
tgilmer,
.
Thanks for the opinion…I certainly hope you don’t teach science. Can you explain to me what you think “Big Bang” means? I’m totally confused by your mentioning of a “big rock” and “what hit it”…the Big Bang presumes a supermassive point in space infinitely small (think a black hole only much much bigger). Current physics is attempting to explain what occurred before the Big Bang via extensive experimentation (the latest of which is occuring underground under Switzerland and France this summer in a massive particle accelerator). Theoretical physics can accurately explain what the universe was like 0.000000000001 seconds after the Big Bang but not 0.0000000001 seconds before the Big Bang, but this will likely change with future research.
.
Science does not presume “Faith.” My saying that research will likely yield further results is not faith that it will, it is founded on previous results and previous experimentation. Scientists do not have “faith” in their results, they have probability curves and detailed data analyses. Do you have “faith” that your plane will take off when you travel? Do you have “faith” that your headache will go away when you take aspirin? No…you have scientific evidence based on theory telling you that these things will (and do) happen.
.
And yes, I can argue that evolution exisits and that’s a fact! Do you want to explain yourself a little bit more? All you state is the old, run-of-the-mill faith argument, something about a big rock and evolution is “just happening.” If you mean that evolution is a natural process that is run by the natural law of “survival of the fittest” (in reproductive terms), then yes, I agree with you, evolution is “just happening.” Listen, there is unbelievable evidence for evolution that you, as a teacher, should be aware of. The fossil record of both paleontology and archaeology, geological strata, Ar-Ar and U-Series dating techniques, genetic affiliation and scores more research areas have left no doubt that evolution occurs…the specifics behind how evolution operates in certain circumstances and the effects of natural vs. more specific types of sexual selection are realms of current research (as opposed to “does evolution happen”). By arguing the way you have you show your true ignorance in terms of the scientific field and current research. Please, read a bit more before taking such a strong stand against something you simply don’t understand.
.
P.E.T.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I agree, as you respect the belives of the children the rest of the world should respect the FSM!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Q: where did the first big rock come from and what hit it?
A: weelll….. there are some things that the fsm does deem indigestible. i would’ve suggested peptol-bismol.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You’re a teacher?? I hope you only teach gym class – what the hell are you talking about with a big rock?? What hit it?? Are you fucking serious?? Yet another Christian with absolutely no knowlege of science besides what his pastor has told him, what a joke.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Science can only explain so much(which actually is lot more than this commentator seems to understand), but the Bible and the Koran explain absolutely nothing. They simply illuminate the ignorance of the nomads of pre-historic Middle East.
Creationist dogma is like “The Groundhog Day” movie. You try to approach it with logic time and again, and the next day the same rubbish is peddled at you again. This is pretty boring.
Now if this person were trying to learn something, there would be better ways than to write to a satire website, don’t you think? Because as Genesis says, God Sayeth Let There Be Google, and Let There Be the Scientific American…
Scary to think what kind of people qualify as teachers these days.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You said: “So, it’s faith in either God or Science”
Science is not a Faith, Please don’t confuse it as one.
Being a teacher (as you claim) I would think at some point you were taught the scientific method and should understand that Science in not a faith, but by your post I question if you are a teacher.
I know it’s hard for people of faith to understand some people just don’t have faith in anything, they just make choices based on the facts.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I wish you had posted the school where you got your teaching degree so I could tranfer there. At my University they actually make us learn stuff.
And it gets even worse. Some of the class invove science.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Boy, am I glad this person is not one of my kids’ teachers (not in Florida)! On second thought, however, did he/she (a) graduate college and (b) pass that licensing/certification exam? By god’s grace no doubt…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hello All, I have posted many times and read much of the hate mail that comes in. Like Bobby put it in the beginning this is not hate mail.
.
Tgilmer has not been disrespectful to anyone on the site even with his / her misunderstanding of the Big Bang or with the belief in God. Personally I like science and don’t like the when people use “god did it” to answer questions. Nonetheless, they can believe what they want. With that in mind, I do not believe we need to succumb to making personal attacks on this person just because it is rare that profanity and personal attacks were not made against us.
.
Let’s show what FSM is all about and not be rude unless they attack us first then we blow them out of the water with flying meatball bombs and spaghetti spears.
.
RAmen!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I was just about to ask, “Are you from Florida?”, but you went ahead and answered it for me!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I think this question is very sad and shows how religion preys on ignorance and credulity. Worse than the fact this questioner thinks the scientific case rests on two rocks banging together is the fact that some religious leader will have implanted this silly notion and also will have gone to lengths to ensure that those who fall for it feel no need to ask questions and find out the real facts.
You might expect questions like this in really primitive areas of the world, but in America? And you let these people vote? Now you understand why the Arab countries don’t let their people vote and long may it remain so.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The big bang wasn’t even an “explosion”, but a rapid expansion of space and time. There was no rock involved whatsoever. At least you accept Evolution, though, and that it doesn’t ‘just happen’. It is guided by natural selection and mutation.
Here’s an article on The Big Bang. http://www.umich.edu/~gs265/bigbang.htm
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’m not sure what the Bible explains “better” than science. If by “better,” you mean that it is “easier” to understand that you will exist beyond death rather than accept your own mortality, yeah, I guess that is better in a sense (wishful thinking). It’s a good thing for Bible thumpers that there is no standard of proof – just an arbitrary inclusion to the bible throughout the centuries by superstitious men and equally harrowing interpretations. I hate it when science moves so slowly just because it has to demand repeatability, peer review, causality and all that nonsense!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The big bang came from a one-dimensional point in a one-dimensional universe…not some floating rock.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0