"Please explain what the Big Bang theory has to do with the TOE?"
- Both try to explain reality by perceiving only the eventuality and ignoring the fundamental questions related to causality.
We know the Big Bang happened, science has shown the evidence, but nobody can explain rationally how it happened. An explosion of such monumental proportions as to form the entire universe and all the quadrillions of tons of matter in it had to consist of something to explode. Where did that something come from if there was nothing there before? Nobody can answer that question scientifically.
The same can be said of Evolution. We know that species can change into different species over time, it has be shown to happen in birds isolated by geographic constraints, but what evolution hasn't shown is that same bird evolving into an animal of some different Order. Evo breaks down completely at the Order level. It can't show how a dog evolved into an ape for instance.
The bottom line is that as we do and become increasingly more able to do ourselves as a species, like expand into space, modify genetics, create new materials with science that have never existed naturally and to mold our surroundings to better suit ourselves, we must also take into consideration the possibility that some being (corporeal or ethereal) before us was able to do the same as well as the currently unexplainable. In fact, spreading life is the modus operendi for life and its sole fundamental purpose. And while Evo can be incorporated into Design theory, it cannot be said the other way around.
You know, this post is a good reason why I really like this forum ... being confronted w/ folks who write expressively, cogently, and at the same time are pithy regarding the point. I try to imitate ... but it just doesn't have the same ring. What a great post, and thanks.
Frenetic, If you are talking about the bird beak thing, I believe we are only seeing an example of natural selection in that situation. These birds did not gain additional DNA/information, they simply selected for a certain beak or feathe type. I believe if you brought these "evolved" birds back into a larger (mainland) community, you would find that they would breed with the "old" type and that the offspring would be just like their ancestors. That is not the same as evolution (evolution says that new information is added by random mutations), although TOE advocates frequently use these types of things as examples of such.
A similar example: Canis lupus familiaris (domestic dog). While the many type of dogs look like examples of evolution, they are not. They are all dogs. No additional information (traits) were genetically added to get a Chiwawa or a Great Dane. Simply certain trains were selected for over and over and over. And if that male Chiwawa somehow impregnated the Great Dane female, you still have a Canis lupus familiaris dog.
I would argue that TOE truly breaks down at every level when evaluated objectively.
Regards.