whats a non religious reason on why the big bang happened and how humans came to be on this planet?

Question

i am 13 (a ain't anti religious either) i just want a long detailed answer ok thanx bu bye no good bye

Answer 1

You will be hard pressed to find a non - intelligent cause, that created all that we see today. Most people, when they ponder an intelligent cause, can't help but come back to the fact that it has to be something or someone bigger and outside of ourselves. Something amazing, because even we cannot create life, when we apply our intelligence to it, and we have all the "ingredients" at our disposal. So, this is why it often comes to it having to be a God of some kind. Just some thoughts to ponder.
Update, don't mind the rude answers, I already see you receiving above and below this one. Notice, people that aren't religious, are already feeling a bit threatened by the question. I will probably get low marks for that, but since I am being honest, I do not care. I wish you the best in your search for the truth. Don't listen to the jerks out there. They are just trying to get your "goat".

Answer 2

The Big Bang, in and of itself does not describe the beginning of the universe. It states that the universe expanded from a primeval atom. Where did the atom come from?

The reason why the Big Bang is a theory is because in relevance to Earth, all the other galaxies are redshifted in accordance of distance. This does not say anything about the universe other than there may be a large mass of anti-matter lying in the center of the universe.

It's absolutely impossible for humanity to pinpoint any type of start or end, God or no God, time or no time. God is justified by faith. Evolution is justified by theoretical pseudo-sciences. Choose what you want to believe; as for me, I'm an Evangelical Christian, and I know my stuff, I don't live on that so called blind faith.

But, let me clarify the 'impossibility' to pinpoint origin, if there is one. Aristotelian logic disables us to think of entities without a beginning and an end. Generally this is why we all think the Universe had a starting point. The universe either a.) had a starting point, in which a higher force MUST have acted to create the matter and energy in the first place b.) has always been c.) both. That'll get you thinking. ;)

Answer 3

According to the "big bang"....

The universe was the result of an explosion.... which contained Over time, slightly denser regions of a nearly uniformed distributed matter which gravitationally attracted nearby matter and thus grew even denser, forming gas clouds, stars, galaxies, and the other astronomical structures observable today. The details of this process depend on the amount and type of matter in the universe. The three possible types are known as cold dark matter, hot dark matter, and baryonic matter.

Then, they say........

we evolved from what is termed "primordial ooze"......

There was, as they tell it, a star which exploded billions of years ago..... at which the planets found their place in the heavens..... One of those, being ours.....

Our earth, having the correct "ingredients" to contain and sustain life, began multiplying species from the ooze which amounted from the moisture in the air.... that which came from the water and the heat of the new found destructive rip from the star......

From that "ooze", all living species were found.....

Me?.... I don't buy it!!!

Just remember.... a theory is an educated guess......


Your sister,
Ginger

Answer 4

It is too complex to discuss here. You really need to find a couple of reputable books on the subjects.

Don't take any notice of David, he has just cut and paste from some religious site. He probably hasn't even read what he posted. He just saw that it had some long words in it and thought it would look good

Answer 5

Humans (all species) got here through Evolution which is not linked to the Big Bang theory. I do not know about the latter (the B.B. theory)... perhaps put this question in a science forum.


Sorry I wasn't much help. Most people are not informative about the B.B. theory though in general.

Answer 6

Creation Evidence - The Great Debate of Origins
Creation Evidence is sought by Creationists to discredit Evolution, not to validate Special Creation…

It is agreed on all sides that there are only two possible solutions to the riddle of origins. Either Someone made the world, or the world made itself. A third option, the world is eternal and without origin, contradicts Natural Laws such as Thermodynamics and has been disproved with mathematical certainty in the 20th century. As the universe is obviously complex and seemingly well-designed, a Designer should be the scientific default. In everything we observe today, concept and design are the result of a Mind. Furthermore, Natural Laws such as Gravity, Inverse Squares, Cause and Effect, and Thermodynamics imply a Law-giver.

Unless a natural mechanism constrained by Natural Law, by which the entire universe could come into existence and further develop through random process, is found, a Creator must be the theoretical default. It doesn't matter whether an individual scientist has difficulty accepting it or not. As Sir Arthur Conan Doyle so eloquently stated in his Sherlock Holmes series, "Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth."

Creation Evidence - A Few Brief Examples:

* Lack of Transitional Fossils. Charles Darwin wrote, "Lastly, looking not to any one time, but to all time, if my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties, linking closely together all the species of the same group, must assuredly have existed. But, as by this theory, innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?" (Origin of Species, 1859). Since Darwin put forth his theory, scientists have sought fossil evidence indicating past organic transitions. Nearly 150 years later, there has been no evidence of transition found thus far in the fossil record.
* Lack of a Natural Mechanism. Charles Darwin, in his Origin of Species, proposed Natural Selection to be the mechanism by which an original simple-celled organism could have evolved gradually into all species observed today, both plant and animal. Darwin defines evolution as "descent with modification." However, Natural Selection is known to be a conservative process, not a means of developing complexity from simplicity. Later, with our increased understanding of genetics, it was thought perhaps Natural Selection in conjunction with genetic mutation allowed for the development of all species from a common ancestor. However, this is theoretical and controversial, since "beneficial" mutations have yet to be observed. In fact, scientists have only observed harmful, "downward" mutations thus far.
* Time Constraints. Both Creationists and Evolutionists agree that if evolution is at all possible, there needs to be an excessive (if not infinite) amount of time. For much of the 20th century, it was thought evolutionists had all the time they needed. If the earth ever looked too young for certain evolutionary developments to have occurred, the age was pushed back in the textbooks. In 1905, the earth was declared to be two billion years old. By 1970, the earth was determined to be 3.5 billion years old, and by the 1990's, the earth had become 4.6 billion years old. However, Young Earth advocates have identified quite a few Young Earth chronometers in recent years. Currently, there are approximately five times more natural chronometers indicating a "Young Earth" than an "Old Earth." Each discovery is a separate "Limiting Factor" that places a constraint on the possible age of the earth. For example, moon drift, earth rotation speed, magnetic field decay, erosion rates, chemical influx into the oceans, ocean salinity, etc, all constrain the possible age of the earth. Each Limiting Factor is distinct. If one were successfully challenged, there is still the problem of all the rest. Furthermore, there are Limiting Factors constraining the possible age of the universe, such as spiral galaxies where they're maintaining their spiral shapes despite their centers spinning faster than their extremities.
* Unacceptable Model of Origins. The Big Bang Theory is the accepted source of Origins among the majority of Evolutionists, and is taught in our public schools. However, the Big Bang does not explain many things, including the uneven distribution of matter that results in "voids" and "clumps," or the retrograde motion that must violate the Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum. Furthermore, the Big Bang does not address the primary question at hand, "where did everything come from?" Did nothing explode? How did this explosion cause order, while every explosion observed in recorded history causes disorder and disarray?

Answer 7

there's no way to answer your question about the big bang because no human was there to witness it. God created the earth and all that is in it. Read Genesis about the creation of man.

Answer 8

do you also wanna know the non-religious reason why God is going to come down to earth and beat the livin deal out of all of you muslims and non-beleivers?

Answer 9

please go ask this in a science or astronomy section, we talk about this one too much in R&S already, and you won't get many respectful answers from the jesus-heads....................or rational scientific ones, either.

Answer 10

I don't know they keep adjusting it.