I have yet another theory. It is that the entire universe is a construct of my over-wrought imagination. Someone asked what my theory predicts, and I said, "That organized matter behaving according to predicatable [sic] laws will be found."
Ah, so it is. Obviously, my theory is correct.
Of course, what's missing from all this is an explanation of how and why that particular prediction is a necessary consequence of my cat-creation theory being correct. In the case of the Big Bang, the theory was that the universe expanded in such-and-such a way. Well, the prediction from that specific event was that there should be some leftover radiation as a consequence of the specific mechanism by which the universe expanded. Notice that there is some sort of logical connection between the theory and the prediction - the prediction is not a complete non sequitur in relation to the theory. Asserting that Big Bang theory predicts that my dryer will have lint in it doesn't work, because there's no reason to accept that dryer lint is a necessary consequence of the Big Bang.
Or if you think it is a necessary consequence, it's incumbent upon you to explain how and why that consequence necessarily results from your theory - simply asserting that it does is meaningless. Ya gotta put some chips on the table if you want to play the game.
I thought you held to the theory of evolution.