“I have little hesitation in saying that a sickly pall now hangs over the big bang theory.”  (Sir Fred Hoyle, astronomer, cosmologist, and mathematician, Cambridge University)

According to the Theory of Evolution, 18 to 20 billion years ago all the matter in the universe was compressed into a tiny little dot. As the dot began to spin faster and faster, it finally exploded, releasing all of the matter and energy into the universe, producing everything we see today. That explosion of matter and energy is known as The Big Bang.

As you can see below, the size of what supposedly exploded has undergone some revision in recent years:

1931 – 12 trillion miles across (minimum)

1965 – 275 million miles across

1972 – 71 million miles across

1974 – 54 thousand miles across

1983 – “a trillionth of the diameter of a proton”

Today – Nothing exploded. A “singularity”.

But did the universe really get started by a Big Bang 18 to 20 billion years ago?

If so, I have a few questions:

  1. What exploded?
  2. Where did the space come from?
  3. Where did the matter come from?
  4. How did the matter get so perfectly organized?
  5. Where did the energy come from?
  6. How was the energy harnessed?
  7. Where did the laws come from?
  8. How did Time, Space & Matter enter existence at the same moment?
  9. How did all the elements evolve from Hydrogen and Helium?
  10. How did life begin?

The more certain a person is that the Big Bang and Evolution are true, the less information they seem to have in answering the logical and naturally arising questions above.

One of my favorite things to do is point out scientifically how the claims of this belief system are completely inconsistent with the observable universe as well as established scientific law and testable truth.

The Conservation of Angular Momentum Disproves the Big Bang

One such example can be made by considering the Conservation of Angular Momentum which states, that when a spinning object breaks apart in a frictionless environment, the fragments will be spinning in the same direction as the original object. That’s easy to understand since the outside is moving faster than the inside.

Therefore, if the Big Bang occurred as the Evolutionists would have us believe, how come Uranus, Venus and possibly Pluto are spinning backwards?

How come 8 of the 91 known moons are spinning backwards?

Why are there entire galaxies spinning backwards?

In the words of Kent Hovind, “I think because ‘in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth’ and he did it that way just to make the Big Bang Theory look stupid.”

The First Law of Thermodynamics Disproves the Big Bang

The 1st law of Thermodynamics states that “matter and or energy cannot be created or destroyed.”  So where did everything come from in the Big Bang and what made it start spinning?  Who bought the gas to run this machine?

The Second Law of Thermodynamics Disproves the Big Bang


The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is Entropy and says “everything is tending towards disorder.”  This is completely incongruent with and the very opposite of Evolution which believes that everything is getting better, stronger, faster, smarter and more complex in time. However, as we can clearly observe, left alone, things get worse over time, not better.

Energy’s Destructive Properties Disprove the Big Bang

Evolutionists assume that adding energy (open system) will overcome the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. However:

1. The universe is a closed system by definition.

2. Adding energy is destructive without a complex mechanism to harness the energy.

Adding energy creates disorder, not order. We no more ordered Hiroshima and Nagasaki than the Japanese ordered Pearl Harbor.  Unharnessed energy is destructive.  Consider the sun.  The energy from the sun itself also destroys all in its wake: rooftops, paint jobs, skin cells, etc.  Energy does not create order, only disorder and destruction. Only a complex molecule called chlorophyll can harness the sun’s energy.  And remember, smaller does not mean simpler.  Smaller means more complex.  For instance, one plant cell has greater complexity than an entire space shuttle.

The Lumpiness of the Universe Disproves the Big Bang

If the Big Bang were true and a spinning object exploded in a frictionless environment, the matter would be distributed evenly across the universe.  But it isn’t. The universe is filled with lumpy places called galaxies and miles upon miles of nothing called voids.

The Lack of Antimatter in the Universe Disproves the Big Bang

As I read from the original pioneers on this, CSE,(www.drdino.com/the-big-bang-theory/), I found the following worth adding regarding the conundrum of antimatter:

There is not enough antimatter in the universe. This is a big problem for the theorists. The original Big Bang would have produced equal amounts of positive matter (matter) and negative matter (antimatter). But only small amounts of antimatter exist. There should be as much antimatter as matter—if the Big Bang was true.

“Since matter and antimatter are equivalent in all respects but that of electromagnetic charge oppositeness, any force [the Big Bang] that would create one should have to create the other, and the universe should be made of equal quantities of each. This is a dilemma. Theory tells us there should be antimatter out there, and observation refuses to back it up.” Isaac Asimov, Asimov’s New Guide to Science, p. 343

“The fact that a theory so vague, so insufficiently verifiable, and so far from the criteria otherwise applied in ‘hard’ science has become a dogma can only be explained on sociological grounds.”
(Ludwig von Bertalanffy, biologist)

About these ads