[metmom]

So we start with singularity. All the matter that composes the universe compressed into the size of a walnut (or so scientists speculate). And there is sat for some undetermined amount of time until it let go and expanded to the the size of the universe in a trillion trillionth of a second, moving faster than the speed of light (which is impossible but we won’t let details get in the way).

But if time and space didn’t exist yet, how do we know how big it was since there was no space to fill?

And how do we know how long it sat there unexpanded if time didn’t exist yet?

And why did it remain unexpanded for as long as it did?

Then why did it expand?

And where did it come from to begin with?

If a simple black hole has enough gravitational pull that no light can escape it, then how did the gravitational pull of all the matter in the universe manage to let go and expand?

So this universe then assembled itself into an orderly law abiding system, in direct violation of the 2nd law of thermodynamics. So what caused the laws that operate it to be set up? And how can it violate those laws?

Then life allegedly arose from non-living material, all on its own, then evolving into a complex self-reproducing entities. Consciousness and thought, emotions and will, all had their origin from randomness and chaos.

This isn’t science either. Looking at the universe and rewinding backwards like a video tape is a pretty poor excuse. Not to mention that it’s not testable, not reproducible, not observable, can’t be run as an experiment in a lab.

And scientists mock creationists?

[gcruse]

” moving faster than the speed of light (which is impossible but we won’t let details get in the way).’

There’s no limit on the expansion speed of space.
But, don’t let that get in the way.

[GodGunsGuts]

Very good points. BTW, did you check out Editor_Surveyor’s link re: Dr. Humphreys’ book on Creationist cosmology? He posits that light may have at one time traveled much faster than today. I haven’t read the book yet (it’s now on order), but I have been looking into it on the Net, and it would seem that ToE/Big Bang/OEC proponents have been unable to refute it yet. I’ll let you know my thoughts on the subject once I read it. All the best—GGG

In case you’re interested, here’s a couple of links to the book and the controversy:

http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=446

http://www.icr.org/news/44/

[RightWhale]

All the matter that composes the universe compressed into the size of a walnut

Everything was smaller then. There was about twenty pounds of mass, but we shouldn't call it matter since we don't have a clue what matter is aside from something substance is made of and that is philosophy not physics.