Everyone noticed how you two retards, shamman and you "#Grubered", freelance faggot, Odumbo Minion from Arkansas, didn't and cannot substantively defend your belief in the infallibility of science with incontrovertible proof that the "Big Bang" is anything more than a "theory" that has not been demonstratively proved.
Originally Posted by I B Hankering
Science doesn't claim infallibility. Religion, on the other, hand, does.
Your use of quotations around theory also displays an utter lack of understanding of even basic science. Evolution is both a theory AND a fact. Theory, as the word is used in science, does not mean the same as it does in everyday usage.
The heliocentric THEORY says the earth orbits around the sun. It is both a theory AND a fact.
Cell theory says living things are made of cells. It's a theory AND a fact.
In science, a theory is something that is backed up with so much research and experimentation, that scientists are confident it will not be overturned by new research. Science gives us the ability to predict things that we have not necessarily observed yet. Transitional species are a good example of this. Biologists predicted what age the sediment would be in which we would find these fossils. And there they were. Roughly 375 million years ago, as they had predicted.
Newton's laws of motion don't apply when working with small things or very fast things. That doesn't mean that Newton was wrong. His laws still apply perfectly to baseballs and cannon balls. They're not useful at small scale or at high speeds, which is why we have quantum mechanics and general relativity.
As of right now, the Big Bang theory is the best possible educated guess on how the universe formed. The Large Hadron Collider has just been fired up again after a few years taken off in order to upgrade it, and it should be yielding some very interesting results pertaining to the big bang, dark matter, etc.