Oi.. Wall of Text Incoming...
I spent a couple years of my life essentially sitting around and doing nothing more than thinking about the subject of God vs. Science. Eventually I got to the point where I asked, "Is it too much to ask for both?" Believe it or not, there is evidence out there to support the Young Earth Theory, but there is also evidence for evolution and the Big Bang Theory. I try to be just and as such tend to not be partial, but I will admit when there is evidence going the other way. I hate being wrong, but there is so much on the subject, it is almost impossible to learn everything from both sides. I watch the Discovery, National Geographic, and History Channels almost constantly, trying to gain more knowledge of either. Because they tend to be biased towards the BBT, I also subscribe to the magazine Answers which is the other side of the coin. I don't denounce science, in fact I know that there is scientific evidence that points either way (what annoys me is when people say they have proof... They don't have proof, they have evidence...)
For the sake of neutrality, I will use both sides of an argument...
Young Earth: In recent studies, it was discovered that there is a large tectonic plate floating on the outer core of the Earth. If it had been down there for millions of years, it would have melted by now. It also matches up with the current model of the way in which the flood occured. (Severe tectonic shift caused the crust to move in extremely dramatic ways which would do unkind things to water like make it go "up" mountains).
BB: While it does seem to suggest that the earth did have a major tectonic and possibly even a flood, it does not directly support the concept of a YE...
Next, we'll talk about everyone's favorite, evolution...
BB: We are finding large amounts of fossils which seem to progress in a general manner towards the complex nature we find today. (I won't go into detail because everyone knows this already...)
YE: While that does suggest that macro evolution has occurred, it proves nothing. The animals that stepped off Noah's ark were defined in the Bible as "kinds." While it has traditionally been interpreted as species, it looks more like they were exactly what was said. Quite possibly, these animals could have been genetically redundant and as such carried the DNA for other species within its cells which when exposed to a certain number of outside factors, chemicals would be released that would make that the dominant DNA and would eject the remaining DNA, thus "creating" a new species. (I wish I could put more, but I am relatively unfamiliar with this theory...)
Lets try background radiation...
BB: There is background radiation that is flying through the universe from every possible direction which is exactly what we would expect if the BB had occurred. As the massive amounts of energy from the BB detonated and the universe exploded into being, much energy was released. After the formation of X,Y, and Z Bosons, Axioms, and other primordial particles, there was still much electromagnetic radiation left over that over time, cooled and created the radio waves we see today.
YE: Umm... God made it like that? There is no response that comes from the religious sect that directly deals with this. Perhaps it is given off by "Dark Energy." Flip that around and the concept becomes the fact that energy gives off Anti-Gravity. This would help to explain why you can't go faster than light. (The light won't let you and will bend space until it is faster...) The thing is, that idea does not directly deal with what was asked, but is somewhat related (as is the next response...)
Now for the bane of Darwinism, Irreducible Complexity
YE: "If something was ever found which could not have been developed over a period of small, incremental steps, my theory would positively break down." ~Darwin~ On the Origin of Species Recently, there have been many discoveries on the cellular level that suggest that the development of those by evolution would be impossible. Of course there is the cell and how the DNA is operated which is itself IC, but I want to talk about another thing for now, the flagellar motor. This is what is on the capsule of many different types of bacteria. By spinning at a few tens of thousands of RPM's it is one of the fastest motors in existence. It requires sixteen different proteins to be built (including the one is to mount it to the cell wall and one that makes up the tail itself). Six of these proteins are used elsewhere in the cell, but the rest are not. Their sole purpose is to make the motor work. Remove any one piece and it won't work, in fact, unless you assemble each piece in an exact order, you get stuck and it won't work. That would mean that you would either have to get everything at once (won't ever happen. I don't care if you give it billions of years. Its not going to happen. EVER!!!!) or it would come pre-assembled by something along the lines of an omniscient creator... It can't be explained with evolution, but God's existence would explain it.
BB: Umm... Hrm... OH!! You said nothing about DNA in there. By having DNA write the code, it explains it. <insert note here: Except for the fact that the method used to read and write DNA, plus the molecule itself are also IC, but hey. If someone asks, I'll respond to this, but I think this is going to be my longest post ever so I'll wrap things up...>
In short, people need to look at both sides. Don't be ignorant and arrogant. The religious world has a tendency to be so because they feel the Bible is the only argument necessary (which it ought to be, given that it is a collection of individual writings, or "books". On any other argument, it would be. So many eye witness accounts and letters would easily be enough but what ever. BB people want scientific data, so go find it! I have plenty more where all that came from, but I don't feel like making a page take five minutes to load due to text... This lack of factual knowledge worsens your side of the argument. Without facts in a world that lives off them, you won't go long before being called an idiot.
As for BB people, you do realize that the Bible is a collection of dozens of different writings, correct? Yes it's old, but that changes nothing. It is still thousands of eye witness accounts of such. Oh and as you surely noticed from my post, there is evidence for this too.
I speak not because I feel like ministering to the world of AG, but because my three pet peaves are the following: foul language, ignorance, and arrogance. Throw any too together and I become infuriated. Throw in the third, and I will create a wall of text with the sole purpose of shutting people up...
There is no proof (unless you count the Bible which is only halfway to being proof), but there is evidence. That evidence can point either way. Now everyone get off your stupid high-horse and grow a brain. I am sick and tired of both sides arguing immaturely about this topic. I am religious yes, but I understand the theories of the Big Bang and understand the concept of evolution among many other things. I ask that others do nothing more than that, but if everyone carried knowledge of the evidence of both, there would not be idiots arguing over stupid things, but rather intellectuals discussing a controversial topic.
I hate stupidity and this thread shows a whole lot of it. People think that they have proof when they have little more than evidence. Unfortunately, people present things as facts and won't concede the things they don't I gave examples of evidence that could send something either way and one example of each that the other cannot explain. Simply put, shut up and gain a little wisdom before arguing needlessly.
That is all.
