|
Oops, I seem to have missed the big-bang part of the discussion altogether.
The big bang is a theory, but it is also known to be not-entirely true.
Scientists use it because it provides a very good explanation for why the universe is the way it is, but that doesn't mean that it actually formed in exactly the way the big bang predicts....
In fact, the uniformity of the universe pretty much invalidates the big bang theory, but that doesn't remove it's usefullness as an explanation and a scientific tool. Just because it is not technically 100% true doesn't mean that it isn't 'almost right'.
However, the modern competing theories to the big-bang are no more creationist-friendly. They are even wierder. They also serve to indirectly support evolution because they lay a natural framework for our eventuall existence on this particular planet.
When I say that there are several competing theories, I should note that they are all very similar as far as end-results, i.e. a big-bang like phenomena resulting in the formation of the universe.
We can draw many parallels betweent he big bang theory and the theory of relativity. For instance, we know that the theory of relativity is not 100% accurate (it breaks down at really small scales), but it is very good at explaining macro-scale observable phenomena, and nobody has been able to suggest a better theory, so it is still used extensively by the scientific community.
The big bang is the same way. We know that it is not the ultimate explanation, but it comes pretty close.
__________________
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." - Winston Churchill
"All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act out their dream with open eyes, to make it possible." Seven Pillars of Wisdom, T.E. Lawrence
|