Question to Creationists (and IDers..)

[USincognito]

My native language is Swedish.

O.k. I saw your nationality flag, but wanted to make sure.

You do realize that the Big Bang theory not only has nothing to do with whether evolutuion has occured or not, and actually points more towards creationism than philisophical materialism? You do also realize that the Miller-Urey experiments actually produced animo acids? If the experiment were the failure that Creaitonists claim it to be, it should have produced nothing?

 

[MartinM]

the Big Bang theory...actually points more towards creationism than philisophical materialism?

 

[USincognito]

I forgot I need to qualify this. An "atheist" Cosmology would be equally in line with Steady State and Big Bang, but creationist Cosmology (i.e. there being a "creation") skews more towards Big Bang and weights it towards being more of a non-materialist position than it does a materialist. Yes, I realize that it all comes down to metaphysical interpretations, but I just get tired of Creationists decrying Big Bang theory when they don't realize the metaphysical implications of it.

 

[Ron21647]

I forgot I need to qualify this. An "atheist" Cosmology would be equally in line with Steady State and Big Bang, but creationist Cosmology (i.e. there being a "creation") skews more towards Big Bang and weights it towards being more of a non-materialist position than it does a materialist. Yes, I realize that it all comes down to metaphysical interpretations, but I just get tired of Creationists decrying Big Bang theory when they don't realize the metaphysical implications of it.

Fred Hoyle named it the "big bang" as a derisive joke. He was the major proponent of the steady state theory, and he felt the big bang implied the existence of God.

Ron

 

[MartinM]

I forgot I need to qualify this. An "atheist" Cosmology would be equally in line with Steady State and Big Bang, but creationist Cosmology (i.e. there being a "creation") skews more towards Big Bang and weights it towards being more of a non-materialist position than it does a materialist.

But creationism isn't a rival to philosophical materialism as such. Rather, it's a specific example of a model based on a rival philosophy. I don't think supernaturalism or theism in and of themselves favour Big Bang over steady state.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

I don't think supernaturalism or theism in and of themselves favour Big Bang over steady state.

But BB does offer a scientific explination for Creationist claims. Not creation ex nihilo, I'll grant you, but a single, scientifically-accepted, overwhelmingly evidence backed explination to thier beliefs.