What about the Big Bang "Theory" and the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) ?
The Cosmic Microwave Background, CMB radiation theory that "testifies" to this Big Bang theory is being constantly questioned by new findings.
Dr. Mae-Wan Ho, said:
“Though it
purports to explain observed phenomena, the big bang requires one to
rationalize an immense field of accumulating anomalies, forcing
cosmologists to devote most of their time to inventing ways around
the contradictions by introducing purely theoretical constructs like
dark matter, dark energy, black holes and much more.” (Ho, 2015).
Thus, the Cosmic Microwave Background, CMB radiation theory that "testifies" to the 13.5 billion years of our universe is being constantly challenged by many credible scientists (apparent anomalies, if found to be of cosmological origin, will pose a big challenge to the standard model of cosmology).
"More work has to be done to find a proper approach to modify the effects of imbalanced differential observations and recover a corrected temperature map.
Further study of the errors in WMAP temperature and noise fluctuation maps caused by the observation inhomogeneity and imbalance is obviously required".
https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/398/1/47/1092479/Observation-number-correlation-in-WMAP-data
Another paper on "STATISTICAL CHALLENGES IN THE ANALYSIS OF COSMIC MICROWAVE BACKGROUND RADIATION" said,
"According to the standard cosmological model, the Universe that we currently observe originated approximately 13.7 billion years ago in a very hot and dense state, in what of course is universally known as the Big Bang. Neglecting fundamental physics in the first fractions of seconds, we can naively imagine a fluid state where matter was completely ionized..".For a more detailed discussion on the CMB please go to this link: https://creationhomeschooler.blogspot.com/p/what-about-cmb-has-it-proven-big-bang.html
"These datasets are a goldmine of information for Cosmology and Theoretical Physics; their efficient exploitation posits several intriguing challenges from the statistical point of view. ..In this paper we review a number of open problems in CMB data analysis and we present applications to observations from the WMAP mission"
https://ia800900.us.archive.org/7/items/arxiv-0807.1816/0807.1816.pdf
When everything else fails, just throw in the "Millions" if not a few Billions of Years
Thus, evolution theories leave that part up to you to figure out with your imagination via the millions of years of time line.
Evolution theories always add the "magic mix" of millions of years idea to the explanation of un-intelligent creation. The most reliable textbook ever written doesn't waiver, it unequivocally states: In the Sixth Day, [Someone]-God created humans.
(Then God said, “And now we will make human beings ; they will be like us and resemble us. They will have power over the fish, the birds, and all animals, obdomestic and wild,[d] large and small.” 27 So God created human beings, making them to be like himself. He created them male and female, .. Evening passed and morning came—that was the sixth day".) Gen 1:26
No ! this Creator did NOT create a single cell to find its way through "millions of years of mutations".
Would you start to design and implement any thing, a computer, a TV, a car, a bridge, a sumptuous meal for your neighbor to finish it , or start anything, and then leave it for "luck" to get it done?
That's NOT what the Bible says. God is not lazy. God, the Creator, like you and us intelligent persons likes to get things done, and finish what He starts !. So will My word be which goes forth from My mouth; It will not return to Me empty, Without accomplishing what I desire, And without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it. Isa 55:11
The motivation to leave God out of the picture.
If everything came about by natural processes—without a Creator, or a God in the picture—then, we don't owe anything to this Creator. He does not own us and has no right to tell us how to live.
In fact, it has been said: “God does not really exist in this way of thinking, so there is no absolute basis for morality.” https://answersingenesis.org/dinosaurs/when-did-dinosaurs-live/what-really-happened-to-the-dinosaurs/
Single cell "evolution" could have never assured success in the matter of life as it exists today.
http://gootoyou.com/
Ho, M.-W., Dr. (2015). Electric Plasma Universe Arrives. Science
in Society Archive. Retrieved from
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Electric_Plasma_Universe_Arrives.php
Other thoughts in the CMB theory.
As written by AiG.
https://answersingenesis.org/big-bang/big-bang-the-evolution-of-a-theory/
Big Bang—The Evolution of a Theory
by Dr. Danny R. Faulkner on October 1, 2013; last featured April 1, 2014
New observations and ideas have come along that have challenged the big bang. Rather than abandoning the theory, however, cosmologists and astronomers have met each challenge with modifications.In the process, the big bang has morphed into something that little resembles its first incarnation.
One difficulty is the horizon problem. No one expects that a big bang universe would have started with exactly the same temperature everywhere. If you look out into the universe in one direction, for example, due east, you will receive radiation from a distant region (call it region A) that secular astronomers say is just now reaching earth after traveling for more than 13 billion years, the supposed age of the universe. If you look in the opposite direction, for example, due west, you will see radiation that is just arriving from another location (call it region B). We find that the radiation from points A and B reveals that these regions have almost precisely the same temperature. But that shouldn’t be if the two regions haven’t yet had time to exchange energy and equalize their temperatures.
These points couldn’t yet have been in “thermal contact” with one another since they are 26 billion light years apart, so why do they have the same temperature? This question arises regardless of which direction we look.
Inflation also was invoked to explain another difficulty, the flatness problem. As the universe expands, the ratio of gravitational potential energy to kinetic energy (denoted by the Greek letter omega) changes. After billions of years of expansion, the ratio ought to be either almost exactly zero or a very large number. However, measurements have shown that the ratio is only slightly below 1. In the big bang cosmology this suggests that the value of omega initially was almost exactly 1, as opposed to an infinite number of other possibilities.
So inflation is their rescuing device. If they assume inflation occurred in the early universe, it would have driven the value up to almost exactly 1, where it needed to be, and from that point it could have decreased only slightly, even after billions of years. There is no independent evidence that inflation indeed happened—outside of their need for it to happen. But astronomers almost universally accept that it did because otherwise they have no other way to solve the horizon and flatness problems.
These required inhomogeneities would also have left their imprint upon the cosmic radiation background as slight temperature differences. Cosmologists predicted what the temperature differences ought to be, about 1 part in 10,000. More than two decades ago they designed the COBE (Cosmic Background Explorer) spacecraft to measure these temperature differences, but the finding was perfectly smooth cosmic background.
Only after very meticulous data manipulation did scientists find evidence of temperature differences in the background radiation, but on a much smaller level than predicted and beyond the detection ability of the probe (one part in 100,000). This was later confirmed by more sensitive studies, such as the WMAP (Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe) mission a decade ago and the Planck mission just this year.
The big bang model of today bears almost no resemblance to the model of thirty years ago.
Many scientists today think that the big bang model is very successful in that it can explain all sorts of new observations and problems. But it does this by the endless addition of rescuing devices.
A theory that can explain anything and everything, no matter how contradictory, really isn’t science.
https://answersingenesis.org/big-bang/big-bang-the-evolution-of-a-theory/. Accessed Oct 4th, 2017.
Comments on the Cosmic MicrowaveBackground
Faulkner (2014)
These considerations present the possibility that no one yet knows the true origin of the CMB theory.
The CMB remains the sole evidence for the big
Bang Theory. However, there are several problems with the CMB that call into question its cosmic origin. If the CMB does not have a cosmic origin, then it may be locally generated. If this is the case, then the big bang model is in
serious trouble. Naturally, cosmologists will resist this possibility. ...The proposals to date, emission from dust and an appeal to Eddington’s calculation, are inadequate.
https://legacy-cdn-assets.answersingenesis.org/contents/379/arj/v7/cosmic_microwave_background.pdf
Answers Research Journal
7 (2014):83–90.
www.answersingenesis.org/contents/379/arj/v7/cosmic_microwave_background.pdf
ISSN: 1937-9056 Copyright © 2014 Answers in Genesis. All rights reserved. Consent is given to unlimited copying, downloading, quoting from, and distribution of this article for
What about the Big Bang ?
https://answersingenesis.org/kids/science/what-about-big-bang/
Big bang cosmology is probably as widely believed as has been any theory of the universe in the history of Western civilization. It rests, however, on many untested, and in some cases untestable, assumptions. Indeed, big bang cosmology has become a bandwagon of thought that reflects faith as much as objective truth. (G. Burbidge, “Why only one big bang?” Scientific American 266:2, 1992, p. 96)
Evolution: Not Even a Theory
https://answersingenesis.org/theory-of-evolution/evolution-not-even-theory/
Although some Christians have attacked evolution as “just a theory,” that would be raising Darwin’s idea to a level it doesn’t deserve”.
Where Evolution Falls Short
Two problems prevent anyone from legitimately calling evolution a theory. First, there’s no direct, observable experiment that can ever be performed. Scientists can measure bones, study mutations, decode DNA, and notice similarities in morphology (the form and structure of animals and plants), but they can never test evolutionary events in the past.
Some point to natural selection as a form of “evolution in action,” but natural selection can only act upon the genetic potential that already exists. What we do observe from natural selection fits perfectly with a recent creation and does not point to common descent.
So What Is It?
Evolution, at its core, is a necessary requirement of naturalism. Since naturalists cannot allow a higher power, they must rely on a form of spontaneous generation and the unguided development of life. Either someone or something created, or nature created itself.
Because naturalism depends on this assumption, evolution artificially carries the weight of a theory for naturalists—without meeting the requirements. Evolution has been grafted in simply out of the desire to deny the Creator or to deny His power and authority.
Evolutionary ideas are simply one way in which humans seek to deny God’s authority
Evolution: Not Even a Theory https://answersingenesis.org/theory-of-evolution/evolution-not-even-theory/. Accessed Oct 4th, 2017.
Light travel-time problem:
The big bang requires that opposite regions of the visible universe must have exchanged energy by radiation, since these regions of space look the same in Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) maps. But there has not been enough time for light to travel this distance. This remains a serious difficulty for big bang supporters, as evidenced by their many competing conjectures that attempt to solve it.
End of quotes. See AnswerInGenesis.com for details articles.
