How did the universe begin?

I believe in both creation and evolution. There are many facts that support evolution however when the question of where it all came from comes up, there dont seem to be any answers. I personally believe the smallest life forms were created by a supreme being, and as time went on they evolved. I mean, evolution is already proven.

same here. i can't remember which one it is called whether it be "creation-evolutionist" or "evolution-creationist" but im pretty sure it's the former. to restate, i think that God(or supreme being, which ever you want to call it/him/her) started the matter and the process, and guided the evolution ever since.. see, science doesn't lie(provided we have the scientific process right), and i believe God doesn't either, even though us humans can lie.
my opinion is that evolution isnt complete without a supreme being, after all you can stick a dissasembled watch in the ground leave it there forever and no matter when you dig it up, it will still stay dissasembled until a "higher being" than that watch puts it together. also a few pieces of the evolutionary theory are comepletely off base.. i will have to look them up again to remember which ones they are....
anyway, as for the multiverse, i think a supreme being "built"(or created, take your pick of the words) the multiverse from nothing... he probably did produced matter by somehow incuring background radiaton and splitting the matter and anti-matter pairs far apart from eachother to create substance. but as for the actual bubble of space... no idea lol......
but the big bang has been proven somewhat because the galaxies are moving farther and farther apart from eachother which mean that somthing set them in motion a long time ago. and since nothing has hit the walls yet, that probably means that the multiverse is expanding as well

We are all just tiny bacteria on peanuts in this giant turd of a universe.


But really...I never really went by the whole supreme being creating everthing idea.

Heh, well the Genisis is amusing, but I don't put any stock into it. Especially because of the fact that it reminds me of "See spot run."

I don't have much of a theory on this subject, I don't really question why we're here or how we got here, we just kind of are. Theres not much of an explanation for anything. Why do we have opposable thumbs? Well because they're usefull. Yeah, so? Doesn't mean we were supposed to have them. There's really too many possibilities for how the universe was created.

We evolved, I think most likely the universe did too.

god made the world says so in this book i have

Frogla, while I appreciate any religion-bashing you can offer, this is meant to be a serious discussion.

Another topic you could make from this:

Do you believe in Micro and/or Macro evolution?

Evolution was proven wrong when they found out the blood line of the human race whent back to two people.So the only thing that stands firm is creation in the fact that GOD did actually creat ALL.The big bang theory was also proven wrong.You see,in the big bang theory,it is said that a ball of some gravity,mass,whatever was spinning on an extreme level,then spun so fast that it exploaded thus making the universe.This was proven wrong by this fact,not all planets ar spinning in the same direction on their axis.If an object full of stuff is spinning right(for example)and it spins so fast that it throws everything out,the when everything flies out,it should all be spinning in the same direction.And the question about who created the supreme being (GOD),nobody.No one has ever proven the true Bible wrong.And in the Bible God says There is no other Gods but Him.Thus he is the Creator,not the creation.Sure there are gods but not Gods.'gods' are man made idols(Like buddah),But GOD is the only true one.No one has proven that wrong thus the reason I believe completely in creation.

We are all just tiny bacteria on peanuts in this giant turd of a universe. But really...I never really went by the whole supreme being creating everthing idea.

Tiny bacteria? simple even?

Take a look at this picture of the eubacterial flagellum. The flagellum is an ion-powered rotary motor, anchored in the membranes surrounding the bacterial cell. This schematic diagram highlights the assembly process of the bacterial flagellar filament and the cap-filament complex.



An irreducibly complex structure is defined as ". . . a single system composed of several well-matched, interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning." (Behe 1996a, 39) Why would such systems present difficulties for Darwinism? Because they could not possibly have been produced by the process of evolution:

"An irreducibly complex system cannot be produced directly by numerous, successive, slight modifications of a precursor system, because any precursor to an irreducibly complex system that is missing a part is by definition nonfunctional. .... Since natural selection can only choose systems that are already working, then if a biological system cannot be produced gradually it would have to arise as an integrated unit, in one fell swoop, for natural selection to have anything to act on." (Behe 1996b)

The phrase "numerous, successive, slight modifications" is not accidental. The very same words were used by Charles Darwin in The Origin of Species in describing the conditions that had to be met for his theory to be true. As Darwin wrote, if one could find an organ or structure that could not have been formed by "numerous, successive, slight modifications," his "theory would absolutely break down" (Darwin 1859, 191). To anti-evolutionists, the bacterial flagellum is now regarded as exactly such a case – an "irreducibly complex system" which "cannot be produced directly by numerous successive, slight modifications." A system that could not have evolved!

It is the simpleist life yet it is very complex. A motor that if one part did not work, the whole operation falls apart!

Shur and I'm Aberham Lincon.