What and be shot down time and time again, but not read any of the posts properly and claim it as some kind of victory. Then ignore all requests to prove god?

Hell yeah

I know that this is about Evolution, which starts with a single cell, and can not explain how life began in the first place...

but how can all these scientists who are so sure evolution is true still have absolutely no clue about how life actually began? No evolutionist has even come close to being able to explain it. it is simple not possible for life to create itself. Richard Dawkins himself acknowledges this, and even he says there is evidence in the details of molecular biology you can find evidence of some sort of designer.

Out of interest, who of you who believe in evolution also believe life created itself? and for that matter, who believe in the big bang? because im interested to know why you actually believe that

We do say that.

We say it for things we generally don't know about such as 'what shape is the universe', where no observable data really exists yet. The thing is, when we get some data we have to make assumptions so that we can further analyse it and better understnd it. Half the impossible stuff you hear about is really a case of knowing 10% but looking at what direction it is pointing in so you know which way to look in the observations.

Evolution, however, has a endless facts backing it up, observed evolutions and the like. If it does in fact turn out to be incorrect then whatever theory replaces it will be similar due to having to support all the evolution evidence already gathered. I think it is a 95% sure bet evolution is on the correct lines.

I understand evolution, that is correct in my view. No creator though, life formed by itself (because who created the creator, it's a logical paradox, one which discounts one). As for Big bang, the theory is far from complete, why every week I seem to read something new about it, such as big bounce and so on. The big bang happened but we are from from understanding what really happened. But at least we are exploring it and I'm sure instituions like CERN feel as though they are on the right tracks due to the course of their research.

I believe evolution is true and has been proven.

I'm an atheist, but I really don't care how life began, and think they're unrelated issues.

I don't believe any higher power would have any motivation whatsoever to create anything, because I would assume that power would be above petty human things like loneliness or boredom or making a cosmic ant farm for the lulz.



And evolution and religion are definitely not mutually exclusive. Just ask Devo:

"God made man
But he used the monkey to do it
Ape's in the plan
We're all here to prove it
I can walk like an ape, talk like an ape
Do what a monkey can do
God made man
But a monkey supplied the glue"

Haha, DEVO, my dad would love you for quoting that song RubangB

They're his favorite band.

Theres such a huge difference though, between evolution and big bag/ how life began. Evolution has evidence for it, which is why many people believe in it.

The other two... It is a pretty well known law of physics that energy cannot be created or destroyed, and yet you believe that everything came from nothing?   apart from that, it is scientifically impossible for life to create itself. Darwin believed that life started from a single cell, right. At the time it was believed that a single cell was fairly simple... It is known now, though, that one single cell is infinitely complex. The idea that it just came together by chance is no more believable then the idea of someone making it. Believing in the big bang/ random creation of life is essentially a religion.

(sorry if i sounded like i was 'attacking' you, just questioning)

 I believe in evolution and I believe life created itself. Energy and matter are transferable, this could be key to life creating itself. Although I am no Biologist.

There is a lot of evidence for the Big Bang. The red shift of galaxies, microwave radiation, etc.

No need to appologise, after all it wouldn't be a debate without two sides.

To be honest I don't know how life started, I am in no way qualified to answer that question. But I have weighed up the ideas I find more likely and a creator is pretty low on my scale of chance simply because it starts and endless paradox (the creator had to be created, then he creates us and then t is likely that way into the future will create, that just means for infinity creators have been creating).

A single cell is infinitely complex, but it wasn't always like that, I imagine the original proto-cells were extremely simple by comparison, literally just a blob of protein. It then became more complex gradually through random mutations. It would be far more likely that blob could form through natural chemistry. That's my idea anyway.

As for big bang theory. It's hard to explain where the energy came from (we know) Read about it, I can't explain, I'm not to good with explainations lol.

http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~yukimoon/BigBang/BigBang.htm

That said, A LOT of evidence exists for the big bang, heck, their are tests you could probably do yourself to prove it happened. But it's the details like, how many times has it happened etc... that we don't know much about.

Bolded: Thats not true. Energy can be created out of nothing for a certain amount of time as long as it obeys this eqaution, Energy * time = hbar, where hbar=1*10^-34.

Underlined: Thats pretty insulting to physicists. The Big Bang has plenty of evidence. Scientists don't just believe in anything, for example, it took about 40 years for General Relativity to get fully accepted by the scientific community. If the Big Bang had no evidence, scientists wouldn't believe in it (just like ID).