How did the Universe come to be?

[The Scientific States]

2000 views anniversary!!!!
Well, it was NOT sarcasm!

Why do you believe the universe was created by God, if there is no evidence?

[The Solar System Scope]

Why do you believe Big Bang happened, there is no evidence.
Why do you believe evolution happened, there is no evidence.

[Hindenburgia]

so you think the world is flat too?

That's a lie created from the fake religion. The Bible says "above the circle of Earth" and "hangs Earth on nothing". How true are these statements?

They're somewhat nonsensical, as they don't appear to be referencing anything in particular that actually exists, and they don't actually claim anything, but if one were to interpret them literally and look at whether or not they could refer to something, then the answer would be that the first is outright false, as Earth is not a circle, and the second is at best awkwardly phrased, the Earth doesn't hang at all, and doesn't need to, and at worst implies that the Earth needs to hang on something, which it does not, making the statement a nonstarter.

[The Scientific States]

Why do you believe Big Bang happened, there is no evidence.
Why do you believe evolution happened, there is no evidence.

You're kidding. There is a shitload of evidence that both evolution and the Big Bang happened. In fact, we can prove that evolution is happening.

If that's your argument, that's pretty pathetic.

[Grave_n_idle]

Why do you believe Big Bang happened, there is no evidence.
Why do you believe evolution happened, there is no evidence.

On the contrary, both those ideas are supported by observation.

Creationism, unfortunately, is not. Quite the contrary, in fact - where observation and theology conflict, creationism demands that we ignore the evidence we can see.

[Hindenburgia]

Why do you believe Big Bang happened, there is no evidence.
Why do you believe evolution happened, there is no evidence.

See, the difference is that there is evidence. Just take a look at the concepts of background radiation and spacial expansion (which itself is concluded based significantly on observation of red- and blue-shift effects), just to name two, and those are just for the Big Bang. For evolution you have even more evidence, ranging from genetic relation to fossil patterns to actually having observed evolution in progress.

[The Solar System Scope]

Why do you believe Big Bang happened, there is no evidence.
Why do you believe evolution happened, there is no evidence.

See, the difference is that there is evidence. Just take a look at the concepts of background radiation and spacial expansion (which itself is concluded based significantly on observation of red- and blue-shift effects), just to name two, and those are just for the Big Bang. For evolution you have even more evidence, ranging from genetic relation to fossil patterns to actually having observed evolution in progress.

You know what, that's just planted evidence, like in CSI, the fossils show that ALL SPECIES JUST POPPED UP ALTOGETHER and no such thing as the one species evolved to another. The evolution happens only on a small scale and we never saw a species turn into another.

[The Scientific States]

See, the difference is that there is evidence. Just take a look at the concepts of background radiation and spacial expansion (which itself is concluded based significantly on observation of red- and blue-shift effects), just to name two, and those are just for the Big Bang. For evolution you have even more evidence, ranging from genetic relation to fossil patterns to actually having observed evolution in progress.

You know what, that's just planted evidence, like in CSI, the fossils show that ALL SPECIES JUST POPPED UP ALTOGETHER and no such thing as the one species evolved to another. The evolution happens only on a small scale and we never saw a species turn into another.

The fossils don't show that.

Try again.

[Hindenburgia]

See, the difference is that there is evidence. Just take a look at the concepts of background radiation and spacial expansion (which itself is concluded based significantly on observation of red- and blue-shift effects), just to name two, and those are just for the Big Bang. For evolution you have even more evidence, ranging from genetic relation to fossil patterns to actually having observed evolution in progress.

You know what, that's just planted evidence, like in CSI, the fossils show that ALL SPECIES JUST POPPED UP ALTOGETHER and no such thing as the one species evolved to another. The evolution happens only on a small scale and we never saw a species turn into another.

Okay, I'll address these in order:
1. Are you seriously suggesting that all evidence for the Big Bang and the theory of evolution is the result of a conspiracy theory?
2. What makes you think this?
3. We have seen "one species turn into another" - look at the case of the Hawthorn fly.

[Imperializt Russia]

See, the difference is that there is evidence. Just take a look at the concepts of background radiation and spacial expansion (which itself is concluded based significantly on observation of red- and blue-shift effects), just to name two, and those are just for the Big Bang. For evolution you have even more evidence, ranging from genetic relation to fossil patterns to actually having observed evolution in progress.

You know what, that's just planted evidence, like in CSI, the fossils show that ALL SPECIES JUST POPPED UP ALTOGETHER and no such thing as the one species evolved to another. The evolution happens only on a small scale and we never saw a species turn into another.

One species doesn't evolve into another, you're right.
There are many, many intermediary steps. Our intermediary step with primates ended at least four million years ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution#Evidence

[Sun Wukong]

See, the difference is that there is evidence. Just take a look at the concepts of background radiation and spacial expansion (which itself is concluded based significantly on observation of red- and blue-shift effects), just to name two, and those are just for the Big Bang. For evolution you have even more evidence, ranging from genetic relation to fossil patterns to actually having observed evolution in progress.

You know what, that's just planted evidence, like in CSI, the fossils show that ALL SPECIES JUST POPPED UP ALTOGETHER and no such thing as the one species evolved to another. The evolution happens only on a small scale and we never saw a species turn into another.

You play Horde, don't you?

And not the Orcs, Tauren, Undead, Belfs, Goblins, or Panda-people?

[Liriena]

See, the difference is that there is evidence. Just take a look at the concepts of background radiation and spacial expansion (which itself is concluded based significantly on observation of red- and blue-shift effects), just to name two, and those are just for the Big Bang. For evolution you have even more evidence, ranging from genetic relation to fossil patterns to actually having observed evolution in progress.

You know what, that's just planted evidence, like in CSI, the fossils show that ALL SPECIES JUST POPPED UP ALTOGETHER and no such thing as the one species evolved to another. The evolution happens only on a small scale and we never saw a species turn into another.

Don't lie.

[Britain and Brittany]

God...Used the Big Bang to create the Universe. There Atheists and Theists are now both happy....

I tend to go with that.

[Farnhamia]

God...Used the Big Bang to create the Universe. There Atheists and Theists are now both happy....

I tend to go with that.

There's no evidence that that's what happened.

[Regnum Dominae]

Why do you believe Big Bang happened, there is no evidence.

Incorrect. There is tons of evidence. We have found over and over that our observations of the universe are compatible with a finite-aged universe that is between 13 and 14 billion years old, that started with a big bang event. Here is one recent example.

Why do you believe evolution happened, there is no evidence.

Because there actually is quite a lot of evidence. Come to think of it, if you accept the existence of mutations at all (which I really, really, really hope you do) then it is impossible to deny the existence of evolution without some seriously egregious special pleading.

[Asasia]

On my beliefs of the created of the Universe:

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.

I respect you for that. I'm an atheist myself, but I admire that you're willing to express your religious views in front of all of these people.

[Farnhamia]

You know what, that's just planted evidence, like in CSI, the fossils show that ALL SPECIES JUST POPPED UP ALTOGETHER and no such thing as the one species evolved to another. The evolution happens only on a small scale and we never saw a species turn into another.

Don't lie.

I've heard it's a sin.

[The Solar System Scope]

Nope I'm not happy.

[Regnum Dominae]

See, the difference is that there is evidence. Just take a look at the concepts of background radiation and spacial expansion (which itself is concluded based significantly on observation of red- and blue-shift effects), just to name two, and those are just for the Big Bang. For evolution you have even more evidence, ranging from genetic relation to fossil patterns to actually having observed evolution in progress.

You know what, that's just planted evidence, like in CSI, the fossils show that ALL SPECIES JUST POPPED UP ALTOGETHER and no such thing as the one species evolved to another. The evolution happens only on a small scale and we never saw a species turn into another.

Species is a continuum, and evolution is not Pokemon. We'll never see a species suddenly, dramatically, and instantaneously transform to a completely different species, because that's not how evolution works. Rather, evolution is the sum total of countless small mutations over hundreds of thousands to billions of years.

[Hindenburgia]

Nope I'm not happy.

About what? That people are presenting counter-arguments?

Also, as a small note, clicking the button labelled "Quote" in the top-right of a post allows you to quote that post in your reply very easily. This in generally considered polite, as it means that other posters don't need to try to deduce who, precisely, you are responding to.

[The Solar System Scope]

The difference between Big Bang/Evolution and Belief in God is that the latter gives you answer to the meaning of life while the other makes you melancholic.

[Hindenburgia]

The difference between Big Bang/Evolution and Belief in God is that the latter gives you answer to the meaning of life while the other makes you melancholic.

Er, no, not really. There's a difference between an existentialist and a nihilist.

Either way, though, what your point with this? "How it makes you feel" is not relevant here.

EDIT:
Also, this:

The difference between Big Bang/Evolution and Belief in God is that the latter gives you answer to the meaning of life while the other makes you melancholic.

No, it doesn't. It doesn't give you any answers, it just stops you from asking questions. "But why di-" "NO! God did it! It's all part of his plan! End of story! No questions!"

[European Socialist Republic]

The difference between Big Bang/Evolution and Belief in God is that the latter gives you answer to the meaning of life while the other makes you melancholic.

No, it doesn't. It doesn't give you any answers, it just stops you from asking questions. "But why di-" "NO! God did it! It's all part of his plan! End of story! No questions!"

[The Solar System Scope]

That's not true. Many religions do that, but not the right one.

[Hindenburgia]

That's not true. Many religions do that, but not the right one.

And how do you know your religion is the "right" one?