Verified answer

The reason it has remained a theory is because it can not be proven... one thing that can be proven is that everything was created... cause everything is here....

Uh, no, those ARE straw man questions.

1: We don't know yet. This is not an evolution question, but a Big Bang question. Here's a hint kid; 'don't know yet' does not mean 'godidit'.

2: It doesn't. If you think it does, go on and explain the mathematics. I dare you.

3: Abiogenesis. It happens when self-replicating chemical structures get more and more complex. Simple.

4: It absorbed other non-living matter to use as raw materials.

5: It didn't. Cells don't mate. They split. This is basic biology. Clearly you don't actually understand it whatsoever.

6: It doesn't. Thermodynamics only prevents increasing complexity in a CLOSED SYSTEM. Earth is not a closed system; it has a constant influx of energy from that big glowing thing you see in the sky on cloudless days. We call it the sun.

7: That's false. There are plenty of areas of star formation which have been observed.

So what you have posted here is a farcical list of strawman nonsense, most of which don't even involve evolution. Are you going to admit you don't have the vaguest clue what you're talking about, or are you going to ignore the answers and keep on posting lies to support your position?

The big bang theory is completely unrelated to Evolution Theory.

Amino acids are non living material, and form chains when found in proximity to other amino acids. Enough of them in a line, and you get proteins.

A single protein can generally form a single function, like selecting for a specific nutrient.

Single celled organisms self replicate, just like bacteria today.

Please explain how evolution violates the law of thermodynamics, because I don't think it does.

Stars blowing up has nothing to do with evolution, but cosmology, like the big bang theory. Please don't lump them together.

Wow, such a collection of ignorant and misinformed questions gathered altogether in one place.

Just because you claim they aren't straw man questions, doesn't change the fact that most of them are.

There was no "stuff". The big bang was an expansion of time and space.

It doesn't. A celestial object's inclination will determine whether the object's orbit is direct or retrograde. The inclination of a celestial object is the angle between its orbital plane and another reference frame, in our solar system it is measured from the ecliptic plane, which is the plane of Earth's orbit around the sun. A planet with an inclination up to 90 degrees will have a direct orbit. A planet with an inclination between 90 degrees and 270 degrees will have a retrograde orbit.

Abiogenisis. And how are you alive when you are made up of non-living components?

Why do you think that a unicellular being needed to eat?

Why do you think that a unicellular being needed to mate?

It doesn't.

We do.

They are straw man arguments.

Nope, you rely on faith, I rely on facts.

Your assumption is false, so your question is misleading and redundant.

Say genius? Evolution has nothing to do with the big bang. Check out this site which will answer all of your questions. That is, if you can stop being narrow minded for a second.

http://www.talkorigins.org/

I am continually amazed at the drivel represented in this post. None of the questions are new or original, and the answers have been put forth time and again. Middle school science classes are a good source to start learning.

CITATIONS since you put these out as fact.

1) Big Bang has nothing to do with Evolution.

2) Big Bang has nothing to do with Evolution.

3) Abiogenesis has nothing to do with Evolution.

etc...

Yes, Jimmy, they are all straw man questions.

evolution religion?

How rude....I'm not a scientist so all I can tell you is that it is more plausible than "the creation".

Your an idiot. Why don't you ask this in the biology section? I'm sure they have answers for all your questions.