Genesis and The Big Bang

[deathdrow]

I believe in mixture of Genesis and Big bang.

God created everything via Big bang, followed buy evolution etc. Easy.. where should be the problem ?

 

For every change there must be some energy and this evergy is given by God.

and where the [bleep] did god come from?

[Zamorakshadow]

How about we meet up in real life one day because I would really love to prove every single piece of "evidence" you have wrong.

 

 

Lol, if any scientist was able to proove Evolution wrong, he would get 10 nobel prizes for it.

 

Here's some evidence for you to try to prove wrong ( even though you problably can't):

 

1: Transitional fossils. We have thousands of fossils, found in proper order and with clearly intermediate features, showing macroevolution. One example of them is the clear Evolution from reptile to bird, Coelophysis - Deinonychus - Oviraptor - Lisboasaurus - Archeopteryx - Sinornis - Ambiortus - Hesperornis - Ichtyornis.

And this is only ONE example of them, we have thousands.

 

2: Biogeography, that shows species location matching an Evolutionary origin.

 

3: Retroviruses, that in close species ( such as primate species, AKA, us and the monkeys) have insertion in the exacly same genes, pointing at a common descent.

 

4: Both Wobble gene sequence and Intron Gene sequence, that also points to a common descent in close species.

 

5: Dozens of other studies on animal genome, that point to a commom descent between lots of species.

 

6: Observed Macro evolution, both in Lab and in Nature (Speciation, and Culex Pipiens - Culex Molestus)

 

Humans ARE still Evolving. Evolution takes milhons of years to happen. Hundreds, if not thousands of generations are needed for any big change happening.

And there is no freaking limit on Gene changes, where do you people get that information?

[DaN]

I believe in mixture of Genesis and Big bang.

God created everything via Big bang, followed buy evolution etc. Easy.. where should be the problem ?

 

First word of the second line.

[Omar]

You can't really know. You can't prove anything beyond some doubt.

But in between two possibilities, you either go with the one that seems to have the strongest logical structure, or if that fails, with the one with the most likely premises.

I have neither the will or the time to check which is more logical/has more likely premises, the Genesis or the BB. But considering the amount of advancements made today that are based on previous scientific explanations, while religions seem to have no palpable reach into our (or at least, MY) life, the least believable to me is the Genesis. The whole thing is still very blurred...

[Skull]

I know I have no proof, but neither do you. I don't think about or care about what happened billions of years ago because I'm in 2009 not the year one billion. I don't believe that I my ancestors were monkeys. Looks at them now. Do they appear to be getting anymore intelligent...no. They live then they die. Why aren't we still evolving? And there can be about 11 different processes to the water cycle. It basically recycles itself. You're only saying that its' not complex because you couldn't think of anything better to say. Honestly I was stating my opinion, not looking for someone to be a [wagon]. Don't worry, I have plenty in my life.

First of all, calm down. We're not all being [wagon], we're just simply stating our own opinions on this matter.

 

We are still evolving through subtle mutations or changes throughout generations.

Are you sure you understand what evolution is about? I don't know everything about evolution but I do know the jist of it; the monkeys we know today share a common ancestor which we evolved from, which is why the monkeys of today can't evolve into humans now. Okay that sounds kind of confusing, I'm sure someone knows what I'm talking about.

 

What does the water cycle being complex have to do anything? It's just a cycle that occurs, it's not complex at all...

If you would read my original post you would know that I happen to think that it is too complex to just occur "just because". If it's not complex to you guys, I would love to see you live without it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ba2h9tqNYAo

Complexity doesn't imply creation. If anything it's more likely to imply the opposite. I posted that video pages ago, but oh well.

[Wongtong]

I believe in mixture of Genesis and Big bang.

God created everything via Big bang, followed buy evolution etc. Easy.. where should be the problem ?

 

For every change there must be some energy and this evergy is given by God.

and where the [bleep] did god come from?

:lol: That's what I always ask. People who believe in God say "He was always there".

[Guest Mrmegakirby]

In all fairness, the theory of the big bang and god being real are both Impossible according to what we've always said (Mass cannot be created from nothingness, and an invisable man in the sky) and taught. I think we have to be able to understand alot more then we alredy know before we can even begin to comprehend where everything came from.

 

Yeah, my post was pointless.

[Greatsilverwyrm]

In all fairness, the theory of the big bang and god being real are both Impossible according to what we've always said (Mass cannot be created from nothingness, and an invisable man in the sky) and taught. I think we have to be able to understand alot more then we alredy know before we can even begin to comprehend where everything came from.

 

Yeah, my post was pointless.

 

Which is why the most logical explanation is that the mass/energy in our universe has always existed in one form or another.

[meol]

Does the Big Bang Theory even claim that all matter in the universe came from nothing, or appeared suddenly? I was pretty sure it only tried to explain the initial (very hot and dense) conditions, and how it all expanded into our current universe.

[warri0r45]

It doesn't claim matter came from nothing, no.

[Zierro]

I can't remember who said it, but they nailed it on the head - your argument, and any other like it, is an argument from incredulity. "I can't understand how this happened, so God must have done it!"

 

The argument here is that the universe seems to be so fine-tuned to suit our fragile existence that it's mathematically improbable for it to be a bunch of coincidences. We can even use Occam's razor here. Is it more logical to assume that we're living in a super-universe that accidentally has all of the required laws in order for life to exist (even though it doesn't give a damn if we live or die), or is it more logical to assume a designer (someone who probably does care if we live or die) purposely made all these laws in order to let our species thrive? Of course, as always, this just boils down to opinion.

 

What pisses me off is that they think that God could always have existed, but the Universe can't have always existed

 

Because Stephen Hawking proved that the universe had a beginning. EDIT: Here's a source.

 

As for a god, if he did create everything then that includes the concept of time, making cause and effect irrelevant to him.

[Zamorakshadow]

As for the Universe being fine-tuned, there are Scientists ( mostly String-Theorists, i think) that believe there are other Universes with different laws, so it isn't impossible to imagine universes with laws that allow life to exist.

Even heard around of String Theorists telling that the Big Bang ( and the beggining of other Universes of this "Multiverse") might have been caused by the shock of two P-Branes ( don't ask me whats that though, String Theory is confuse >.<).

Ugh, physics...

 

 

I know Big Bang Theory says the Universe expanded from a singularity, but when did Stephen Hawking discover the Universe had a beggining? Source pl0x?

[Jes]

I'm tired of explaining myself. If science is so accurate than why is everthing a theory? Because there's no real significant evidence or proof. It's basically how the law throws around the word "allegidly". You can say the president was raped and murdered as long as you put allegidly in front of it. Or when people make movies "based off a true story". As long as there's one or two true facts in it, they're not technically lying. The theory of evolution. The big bang theory. I don't know how you can turn it into a fact when the word theory is in the title! But I really don't care, if you want to go around saying that theories are facts and that this thread isn't about opinion, even though it says it is, its on you. I do believe that people have changed over time, but do I believe that it was as drastic as us going from monkeys to humans? No. I think we were pretty much always the same. I know you people say it takes a long time for humans to change, but I've seen pictures of people from the 1600's and there's no noticeable difference. You'd think that there would be some. And I don't believe that the world is billions of years old, and until you can time travel and take me back that far, than I never will either.

[Grim_]

I'm tired of explaining myself. If science is so accurate than why is everthing a theory? Because there's no real significant evidence or proof. It's basically how the law throws around the word "allegidly". You can say the president was raped and murdered as long as you put allegidly in front of it. Or when people make movies "based off a true story". As long as there's one or two true facts in it, they're not technically lying. The theory of evolution. The big bang theory. I don't know how you can turn it into a fact when the word theory is in the title! But I really don't care, if you want to go around saying that theories are facts and that this thread isn't about opinion, even though it says it is, its on you. I do believe that people have changed over time, but do I believe that it was as drastic as us going from monkeys to humans? No. I think we were pretty much always the same. I know you people say it takes a long time for humans to change, but I've seen pictures of people from the 1600's and there's no noticeable difference. You'd think that there would be some. And I don't believe that the world is billions of years old, and until you can time travel and take me back that far, than I never will either.

A~ I will tell you why almost everything is called a theory! It is because even though there may be insurmountable proof for it could theoretically be disproven no matter how unlikely (its the name of a well proven statement )

B~ Fine if you want to mud sling then the bible was most likely written by some drunk who had syphilis and needed to make a quick buck.

C~ So if I said the big bang law then would you believe me?

D~ You choose to deny 20 different methods which all agree with eachother because you cant see it with your own eyes?

E~ Again you have no proof that we did not change and you have no proof against the big bang theory. Show me proof against it aside from some ancient religious text that promotes genocide.

[Jes]

I'm tired of explaining myself. If science is so accurate than why is everthing a theory? Because there's no real significant evidence or proof. It's basically how the law throws around the word "allegidly". You can say the president was raped and murdered as long as you put allegidly in front of it. Or when people make movies "based off a true story". As long as there's one or two true facts in it, they're not technically lying. The theory of evolution. The big bang theory. I don't know how you can turn it into a fact when the word theory is in the title! But I really don't care, if you want to go around saying that theories are facts and that this thread isn't about opinion, even though it says it is, its on you. I do believe that people have changed over time, but do I believe that it was as drastic as us going from monkeys to humans? No. I think we were pretty much always the same. I know you people say it takes a long time for humans to change, but I've seen pictures of people from the 1600's and there's no noticeable difference. You'd think that there would be some. And I don't believe that the world is billions of years old, and until you can time travel and take me back that far, than I never will either.

A~ I will tell you why almost everything is called a theory! It is because even though there may be insurmountable proof for it could theoretically be disproven no matter how unlikely (its the name of a well proven statement )

B~ Fine if you want to mud sling then the bible was most likely written by some drunk who had syphilis and needed to make a quick buck.

C~ So if I said the big bang law then would you believe me?

D~ You choose to deny 20 different methods which all agree with eachother because you cant see it with your own eyes?

E~ Again you have no proof that we did not change and you have no proof against the big bang theory. Show me proof against it aside from some ancient religious text that promotes genocide.

If you read earlier rather than just jumping to a conversation you knew nothing about, than you would have seen that I said I know the Bible is strange. I already said i have no proof either. That's what's pissing me off the most, is that people have no idea what I said earlier, but people are still acting like they know what's going on. And were you alive 34563478564875 years ago when all this supposedly happened? No. So why should you believe the idiots that passed it down? Oh, because you are the close-minded idiots that will believe anyone that is a scientist or doctor. You have no proof that we did change. It's a damn theory.

[Grim_]

I'm tired of explaining myself. If science is so accurate than why is everthing a theory? Because there's no real significant evidence or proof. It's basically how the law throws around the word "allegidly". You can say the president was raped and murdered as long as you put allegidly in front of it. Or when people make movies "based off a true story". As long as there's one or two true facts in it, they're not technically lying. The theory of evolution. The big bang theory. I don't know how you can turn it into a fact when the word theory is in the title! But I really don't care, if you want to go around saying that theories are facts and that this thread isn't about opinion, even though it says it is, its on you. I do believe that people have changed over time, but do I believe that it was as drastic as us going from monkeys to humans? No. I think we were pretty much always the same. I know you people say it takes a long time for humans to change, but I've seen pictures of people from the 1600's and there's no noticeable difference. You'd think that there would be some. And I don't believe that the world is billions of years old, and until you can time travel and take me back that far, than I never will either.

A~ I will tell you why almost everything is called a theory! It is because even though there may be insurmountable proof for it could theoretically be disproven no matter how unlikely (its the name of a well proven statement )

B~ Fine if you want to mud sling then the bible was most likely written by some drunk who had syphilis and needed to make a quick buck.

C~ So if I said the big bang law then would you believe me?

D~ You choose to deny 20 different methods which all agree with eachother because you cant see it with your own eyes?

E~ Again you have no proof that we did not change and you have no proof against the big bang theory. Show me proof against it aside from some ancient religious text that promotes genocide.

If you read earlier rather than just jumping to a conversation you knew nothing about, than you would have seen that I said I know the Bible is strange. I already said i have no proof either. That's what's pissing me off the most, is that people have no idea what I said earlier, but people are still acting like they know what's going on. And were you alive 34563478564875 years ago when all this supposedly happened? No. So why should you believe the idiots that passed it down? Oh, because you are the close-minded idiots that will believe anyone that is a scientist or doctor. You have no proof that we did change. It's a damn theory.

Yes its a theory but theories can have many many facts going with them and in the case of the big bang theory we actually have proof for it (see background radiation) but i guess it is just a theory... (like the "theory" of gravity) and yes there is some rather incontrovertible proof that we did change as we continue to find links in between species (not every species that would be impossible)

[ElkNight]

 

If you read earlier rather than just jumping to a conversation you knew nothing about, than you would have seen that I said I know the Bible is strange. I already said i have no proof either. That's what's pissing me off the most, is that people have no idea what I said earlier, but people are still acting like they know what's going on. And were you alive 34563478564875 years ago when all this supposedly happened? No. So why should you believe the idiots that passed it down? Oh, because you are the close-minded idiots that will believe anyone that is a scientist or doctor. You have no proof that we did change. It's a damn theory.

 

Then by your logic you are a closed minded idiot that believe what some old book tells you.

 

You have no proof that we did change.

There is proof for evolution. You just seem to plug your ears and go NO NO NO NO.

 

 

And about the beginning of the universe/big bang/genesis/whatever. At least scientists are actually trying to find out what happened instead of just accepting what "God" did.

[1230abcz]

Because my religion doesn't believe in Genesis... Just because some random minority of the world's population believes in something it doesn't mean it's the only competing theory. The Big Bang theory has proof, and Genesis has, as someone has already said, a book that's been known to have been revised tons of times, and if people want to preach from the Bible or any other type of holy scriptures, they have to read the entire thing as actually know what else it says. Most of the things in the Bible are all symbolic and not meant to be taken literally (Genesis isn't one of them, I'm just laying down some fact).

 

Of course the Big Bang isn't THE final answer. It's shrouded in obscurity as well. Here's a little map I like to make to argue against both ideas:

 

Nothing --> God --> Everything

 

or

 

Nothing --> Everything

 

 

 

You'd have to ask yourself, where did God come from? Well, where did everything else come from for that matter? If humans can't wrap their brain around the idea of infinity (think of a world in 4 dimension; if you can't, you fail like everyone else in the world), we can't lay down the law. We can, however, try and understand the universe better, but nothing is ever final. To me, that map up there just says that both ideas are completely valid when compared to each other. I view God as an all powerful being, but, to me, that's no different from a powerful "force" in the nth dimension that can control what occurs in all other dimensions of the uni/multiverse(s).

[Jes]

I'm tired of explaining myself. If science is so accurate than why is everthing a theory? Because there's no real significant evidence or proof. It's basically how the law throws around the word "allegidly". You can say the president was raped and murdered as long as you put allegidly in front of it. Or when people make movies "based off a true story". As long as there's one or two true facts in it, they're not technically lying. The theory of evolution. The big bang theory. I don't know how you can turn it into a fact when the word theory is in the title! But I really don't care, if you want to go around saying that theories are facts and that this thread isn't about opinion, even though it says it is, its on you. I do believe that people have changed over time, but do I believe that it was as drastic as us going from monkeys to humans? No. I think we were pretty much always the same. I know you people say it takes a long time for humans to change, but I've seen pictures of people from the 1600's and there's no noticeable difference. You'd think that there would be some. And I don't believe that the world is billions of years old, and until you can time travel and take me back that far, than I never will either.

A~ I will tell you why almost everything is called a theory! It is because even though there may be insurmountable proof for it could theoretically be disproven no matter how unlikely (its the name of a well proven statement )

B~ Fine if you want to mud sling then the bible was most likely written by some drunk who had syphilis and needed to make a quick buck.

C~ So if I said the big bang law then would you believe me?

D~ You choose to deny 20 different methods which all agree with eachother because you cant see it with your own eyes?

E~ Again you have no proof that we did not change and you have no proof against the big bang theory. Show me proof against it aside from some ancient religious text that promotes genocide.

If you read earlier rather than just jumping to a conversation you knew nothing about, than you would have seen that I said I know the Bible is strange. I already said i have no proof either. That's what's pissing me off the most, is that people have no idea what I said earlier, but people are still acting like they know what's going on. And were you alive 34563478564875 years ago when all this supposedly happened? No. So why should you believe the idiots that passed it down? Oh, because you are the close-minded idiots that will believe anyone that is a scientist or doctor. You have no proof that we did change. It's a damn theory.

Yes its a theory but theories can have many many facts going with them and in the case of the big bang theory we actually have proof for it (see background radiation) but i guess it is just a theory... (like the "theory" of gravity) and yes there is some rather incontrovertible proof that we did change as we continue to find links in between species (not every species that would be impossible)

You're so adamant that the scientists that say this is true, which is the only reason why you believe. Because people will believe anything that comes out of a scientists mouth, or should I say [wagon]. You wouldn't believe a word they said if they didn't have a PhD just like how you ask "Would you believe is it was the the big bang law?" but trust me, if it was I would believe even less. That's sounds ridiculous. But you say that you don't believe what the people from the Bible say is true, so why should I believe the scientists? Until you find something out for sure, you shouldn't go around shoving it in everyone's faces. Keep in mind I don't sit here and say everything in the Bible is true. I don't really fight for what's in it. I just fight against Evolution.

[Wisp]

I'm tired of explaining myself. If science is so accurate than why is everthing a theory? Because there's no real significant evidence or proof. It's basically how the law throws around the word "allegidly". You can say the president was raped and murdered as long as you put allegidly in front of it. Or when people make movies "based off a true story". As long as there's one or two true facts in it, they're not technically lying. The theory of evolution. The big bang theory. I don't know how you can turn it into a fact when the word theory is in the title! But I really don't care, if you want to go around saying that theories are facts and that this thread isn't about opinion, even though it says it is, its on you. I do believe that people have changed over time, but do I believe that it was as drastic as us going from monkeys to humans? No. I think we were pretty much always the same. I know you people say it takes a long time for humans to change, but I've seen pictures of people from the 1600's and there's no noticeable difference. You'd think that there would be some. And I don't believe that the world is billions of years old, and until you can time travel and take me back that far, than I never will either.

A~ I will tell you why almost everything is called a theory! It is because even though there may be insurmountable proof for it could theoretically be disproven no matter how unlikely (its the name of a well proven statement )

B~ Fine if you want to mud sling then the bible was most likely written by some drunk who had syphilis and needed to make a quick buck.

C~ So if I said the big bang law then would you believe me?

D~ You choose to deny 20 different methods which all agree with eachother because you cant see it with your own eyes?

E~ Again you have no proof that we did not change and you have no proof against the big bang theory. Show me proof against it aside from some ancient religious text that promotes genocide.

If you read earlier rather than just jumping to a conversation you knew nothing about, than you would have seen that I said I know the Bible is strange. I already said i have no proof either. That's what's pissing me off the most, is that people have no idea what I said earlier, but people are still acting like they know what's going on. And were you alive 34563478564875 years ago when all this supposedly happened? No. So why should you believe the idiots that passed it down? Oh, because you are the close-minded idiots that will believe anyone that is a scientist or doctor. You have no proof that we did change. It's a damn theory.

Yes its a theory but theories can have many many facts going with them and in the case of the big bang theory we actually have proof for it (see background radiation) but i guess it is just a theory... (like the "theory" of gravity) and yes there is some rather incontrovertible proof that we did change as we continue to find links in between species (not every species that would be impossible)

You're so adamant that the scientists that say this is true, which is the only reason why you believe. Because people will believe anything that comes out of a scientists mouth, or should I say [wagon]. You wouldn't believe a word they said if they didn't have a PhD just like how you ask "Would you believe is it was the the big bang law?" but trust me, if it was I would believe even less. That's sounds ridiculous. But you say that you don't believe what the people from the Bible say is true, so why should I believe the scientists? Until you find something out for sure, you shouldn't go around shoving it in everyone's faces. Keep in mind I don't sit here and say everything in the Bible is true. I don't really fight for what's in it. I just fight against Evolution.

Yeah! Why should we take what people who've spent their lives studying and researching things based in fact, logic and reason anymore seriously then some book written 2000 years ago!

[Skull]

You have a terrible sense of how long evolution takes. Nothing major will happen in 400 years. Besides you're lying or just wrong about seeing photographs from then since the first permanent ones didn't exist until the 1800's.

[Wisp]

Also, humans have artificially stopped or delayed our evolution anyways. People with "defects" are a lot less likely to mate. And, we can solve most problems artificially too. Is it too cold? We can wear sweaters. We don't need to outrun prey, and technology can also help with many of our shortcomings. But, we are still evolving, just probably slower.

[meol]

Let's just clear up some things right now. My last question was actually rhetorical, as I wanted the Creationists to answer it, but thanks to warrior for answering it. :-P

 

I'm tired of explaining myself. If science is so accurate than why is everthing a theory? Because there's no real significant evidence or proof. It's basically how the law throws around the word "allegidly". You can say the president was raped and murdered as long as you put allegidly in front of it. Or when people make movies "based off a true story". As long as there's one or two true facts in it, they're not technically lying. The theory of evolution. The big bang theory. I don't know how you can turn it into a fact when the word theory is in the title! But I really don't care, if you want to go around saying that theories are facts and that this thread isn't about opinion, even though it says it is, its on you. I do believe that people have changed over time, but do I believe that it was as drastic as us going from monkeys to humans? No. I think we were pretty much always the same. I know you people say it takes a long time for humans to change, but I've seen pictures of people from the 1600's and there's no noticeable difference. You'd think that there would be some. And I don't believe that the world is billions of years old, and until you can time travel and take me back that far, than I never will either.

 

To Jes: A theory is not the same as an hypothesis. In the scientific vocabulary, a theory is a set of statements that try to explain (and make predictions) about specific events and facts. Wikipedia's article explains it pretty well with the example of Evolution.

 

Another example: It's a fact that masses are attracted to each other. Both the theory of general relativity and Newton's theory of gravity try to explain that fact, and try to make predictions about it. But that doesn't mean that the attraction was made up.

 

For instance, the Big Bang Theory can be tested (even if it's "an historical event") because it makes predictions about our universe that we can measure. It's not blind faith as you try to say.

The Bible, instead, makes no predictions, but instead changes its interpretation as new facts arise up. It's easy to make prophecies on hindsight, and it certainly isn't the same as making and testing scientific predictions.

 

Also, Evolution doesn't claim humans came from monkeys, nor does it claim that there would be a substantial change in a species in merely 400 years. Evolution says that both humans and monkeys evolved from a common ancestor millions of years ago, and noticeable changes in humans have taken up hundreds of thousands of years. Don't go around building strawmen. (There, I said it).

 

Theories become accepted because their predictions match experimental observations. There is proof to them, but you just don't want to accept it.

 

 

To 1230: Again, the Big Bang doesn't claim the universe came from nothing. In fact, it makes no statements about what happened or what the conditions were before the Big Bang. The link Zierro posted explains it excellently. It just happens that some people fill this gap with God, just as God has served to fill the gaps many times before in the past.

[1230abcz]

No, we're still evolving. Women/Men with obesity or other conditions wont produce as many children as healthy couples, so there is still natural selection going on. It's definitely slower, but not entirely gone.

 

 

Edit to Meol: I know the Big Bang just explains the creation of our Universe as it is today (not from nothing, obviously, just from a dense collection of matter), and not other universes (if you believe in the Multiverse) or the "actual" start of our universe. I was just referring to the creation of everything.

 

 

Edit to my profile: WTF is a Spider Egg? lol.

[warri0r45]

I can't remember who said it, but they nailed it on the head - your argument, and any other like it, is an argument from incredulity. "I can't understand how this happened, so God must have done it!"

 

The argument here is that the universe seems to be so fine-tuned to suit our fragile existence that it's mathematically improbable for it to be a bunch of coincidences. We can even use Occam's razor here. Is it more logical to assume that we're living in a super-universe that accidentally has all of the required laws in order for life to exist (even though it doesn't give a damn if we live or die), or is it more logical to assume a designer (someone who probably does care if we live or die) purposely made all these laws in order to let our species thrive? Of course, as always, this just boils down to opinion.

 

If you think about it, though, it's not mathematically improbable, at least it's never been justified as such and there have always been counter arguments such as the mutli-universe theory and the "lottery principle" that I brough up. If you need a refresher, I'm basically arguing that given enough trials (e.g. enough planets), it's not surprising that one should "strike it rich" (e.g. be the habitable zone), even considering how rare striking it rich may be. This can be applied to processes like abiogenesis as well - however rare it may be to develop a protocell from inorganic molecules, considering the number of molecules on different planets all "trying" to become life, it shouldn't be surprising that we're here.

 

I'm tired of explaining myself. If science is so accurate than why is everthing a theory? Because there's no real significant evidence or proof. It's basically how the law throws around the word "allegidly". You can say the president was raped and murdered as long as you put allegidly in front of it. Or when people make movies "based off a true story". As long as there's one or two true facts in it, they're not technically lying. The theory of evolution. The big bang theory. I don't know how you can turn it into a fact when the word theory is in the title! But I really don't care, if you want to go around saying that theories are facts and that this thread isn't about opinion, even though it says it is, its on you. I do believe that people have changed over time, but do I believe that it was as drastic as us going from monkeys to humans? No. I think we were pretty much always the same. I know you people say it takes a long time for humans to change, but I've seen pictures of people from the 1600's and there's no noticeable difference. You'd think that there would be some. And I don't believe that the world is billions of years old, and until you can time travel and take me back that far, than I never will either.

 

As this has been gone over before, I'll keep it short and to the point.

 

1) The germ theory of disease is a theory.

2) We know that germs cause disease.

3) Hmm... Let's stop and think about that for a second (see Meol's post above - he explains it rather well).

 

As for proof that we're related to chimpanzees, post #253, page 13. There is a reference to page 8 in that post as well. I'd rather not turn this argument into a street directory if that's ok, i.e. lets deal with it here.