The big bang is a theory and not proven scientific fact so your response is retarded.
When will you morons grow up and realize that they can't prove it is correct yet you tout it around as if it is fact
(thats why it is called a theory kids just a fyi)

I'm not sure you understand just how science works. You realize gravity's still just a theory, right? And so is evolution? It's still incredibly clear that both of those are true based on all available evidence.

If that were actually the case they wouldn't be a theory but fact as stated in my previous post.
What part of burden of proof do you not understand?
I think it is you who does not understand scientific fact and the criteria required for it to be such.
I find it amusing that you try to use more unproven theories to try and back up another unproven theory.
Is that supposed to prove something aside from you obviously not understanding my post you quoted?
Your response is indiciative of a beleiver of these theories which I do not have a problem with.
You are entitled to beleive whatever you choose to.
However I also find your behavior of trying to defend them as if they are proven fact rediculous.
The reason they are considered theory is due to the lack of any actuall proof.
(which was what I said the first time, you should read slowly next time maybe that will help)

This post was edited by corpselooter1 on Jan 16 2011 05:34pm

Gravity, the big bang, and evolution all have an abundant amount of evidence to back them up. They're not mere conjectures as you would like people to believe.

I seen a documentary on this awhile ago, interesting

This post was edited by Capital00 on Jan 16 2011 06:33pm

putting the word gravity next to the word big bang, does not make it more credible, just to let u know, lolol, and our understanding of gravity sucks at the moment, considering most scientists believe in the existance of black holes

Had to make sure I didn't stumble into PaRD or the Christian Fellowship forum for a minute. They're there. There's evidence of them. They're super-massive, and we know exactly how they form. There's a possibility that the Big Bang isn't 100% right (I doubt it'll ever be scrapped completely, but I wouldn't be TOO surprised if parts of it were changed in the future), but the existence of black holes is absolutely not up for debate. You might as well try to argue that Jupiter's not really there.

This post was edited by bentherdonethat on Jan 16 2011 07:23pm

black holes, in theory, can be any size (zero or infinitely small number close to zero in volume) and about any mass from miniscule to supermassive. i agree. they are there but cannot be proven. big bang however is able to be disproven or completely discredited. wait a year for more LHC data, its completely pwning big bang theory at the moment, the thing was created to tell us what happened immediately after big bang and it might just disprove it completely.

time, matter and space are infinite ftw.

This post absolutely reeks of science 101 fail.

All you've managed to demonstrate is that you don't know or understand the meaning of a scientific theory.

A theory is an explanation of observable facts. They are mutually exclusive. A theory can never become a fact, and this is why you fail.

When we let go of an apple, it falls to the earth 100% of the time. This observation is a fact. The Theory of Gravity is the best supported / tested explanation for this fact.

Our universe is expanding. This observation is a fact. Big Bang Theory is the best supported / tested explanation for this fact.

So begins the countdown to backpedaling.

This post was edited by Black487 on Jan 16 2011 09:12pm

i heard they shut that thing down for econ reasons but maybe i was wrong, and i also heard it was having a lot of problems getting it up and running