Theory of Predictibility of Evolution

Hmm . . .

quote:

---

Big bang is nothing more than man finding a way to explain life,this arrogance is by far no diferent, and all this crap about big bang, and three legs and two heads , I Live one day at a time and not a minute more.

---

"Terrorist or tyrant, few may come to the Truth that both are poor choice."

No, it says that the force of the big bang may have played a role, as it would have affected which atoms go where, at what speed, and combine with which other partcles.

"people who put faith in science fail to realize thatt life is not protons and neutrons"
I don't think anybody even went close to that topic.

"Big bang is nothing more than man finding a way to explain
life,"
Well, common sense say that if matter is expanding, then logic says that there must have been a time when all matter was pretty close, a place of infinite density, the big bang.

"I'll heal ur woundz I'll set u free, I m jesus christ on xtacy"

Well, I guess the Big Bang has it alternative theories as well.
My understanding was that due to (dopler shift) in frequency of emitted radiation (light), scientist theoriezed that the universe (ie. the galaxies composing it) were moving away from each other. So the Big Bang came to the fromost view as an explanation.Shortly afterward, several observations surfaced in contradiction to it. One being that the force of gravity would slow the expansion to a point where the principle would reverse, in effect producing alternations of contraction & expansion. Some doubts were expressed to the validity that all the universe was expanding, as theories of birth of stars (binary stars, supernovas, dwarfs & black holes) developed & extended to the universe as a whole.

"Terrorist or tyrant, few may come to the Truth that both are poor choice."

Well, I guess the Big Bang has it alternative theories as well.
My understanding was that due to (dopler shift) in frequency of emitted radiation (light), scientist theoriezed that the universe (ie. the galaxies composing it) were moving away from each other. So the Big Bang came to the fromost view as an explanation.Shortly afterward, several observations surfaced in contradiction to it. One being that the force of gravity would slow the expansion to a point where the principle would reverse, in effect producing alternations of contraction & expansion. Some doubts were expressed to the validity that all the universe was expanding, as theories of birth of stars (binary stars, supernovas, dwarfs & black holes) developed & extended to the universe as a whole.
(Black holes would compress to the point of the Big Bang?)

quote:

---

making mysterious statement 'what would happen if an unmoveable object was to collide with an irresistable force' . . .

---

"Terrorist or tyrant, few may come to the Truth that both are poor choice."

If man had started with 6 legs? Would the legs really be the weight and size of modern man's legs?

Since each would not be supporting nearly as much?

The only "Big Bang" therory I support, was when man banged their head on the perplexing question of their existance.

The "missing link" has not been found. Applying Occum to the problem? There was never a "missing link" to be found.

Opposed thumb? Evolution? Apes? Man? Why are there still apes? Shouldn't we all look like cockroaches or crocodiles?

To say that Evolution doesnt exist would imply that dogs doesnt exist. Since dogs are the result of breeding wolfs that where tame. And each other race of dog is the result of a sertin aspect of a dog was incurage while breeding.

To answer why there are still monkeys if we evolved from them is to also point out that there are still wolfs.

Humans and todays monkeys where created in difrent enviroments. Also just cuz one evolution of a "monkey" worked doesnt mean another could work somewhere else where the conditions where diferent.

Also I dont enyone ever said that todays "monkeys" are the same as the monkeys ones where.

Just the fact that we have 99% of the same genes could also be somwhat of a hint.