And you need to learn logic.
Logic can be and are useful, SavedByTheLord, and they appeared in HOW you present things in a model, especially when they used inference, like deduction or induction or abduction…but only if the person use deduction, induction or abduction, properly.
There are pros and cons for each of these inferences. But they have to be used properly, otherwise the logic will fail.
When a person uses one of these inferences, it should have one or more premises (assumptions) that can lead to a certain conclusion…it is how you reach the conclusion will determine what logic (eg abduction, deduction or induction) the person is using.
And there lies the problem with logic, they can often be exploited or be used improperly. I have seen many creationists misused and abused any type of logic, like yourself.
You have frequently mangled logic, by making flawed assumptions (claims) that are your premises, then you give a conclusion that often have nothing to do with your premise, by making ridiculously ignorant claims.
You haven’t been using logic at all, because your conclusion have nothing to do with your premises. Your arguments are often illogical, when your premise & conclusion don’t have anything to do with each other. Your abuse of logic is known as false equivalence.
You haven’t been using deduction, and you certainly haven’t been using induction. Your reasonings are often unsound.
Setting aside logic by reasoning. There is another form of logic, that scientists used quite frequently, particularly used by theoretical physicists or theoretical scientists - MATHEMATICS - eg mathematical equations or formulas.
Mathematics are useful tools, but that’s all they are to science, tools. In sciences, equations are only true & useful only if they are falsifiable and have been rigorously tested, and the only way to properly test an equation or explanation in science, are with empirical evidence or experiments.
if the evidence or experiment supported the equation, then the equation is true. Otherwise the equation is wrong.
This thread should be about the Big Bang theory, hence it should be about the universe, particularly how matters (eg atoms and subatomic particles like quarks, electrons, etc), stars or galaxies for…but frequently you keep moving the goalposts, by changing the subject, and start talking about how life form (Abiogenesis vs creation) or about Evolution.
The origin of universe and origin of life are two completely different & separate subjects.
The Big Bang theory is cosmological theory of the universe…which relied on understanding astronomy & astrophysics.
Whereas life is about biology, such as molecular biology or genetics.
you jump from big bang to life, and then in reverse, making a complete fool of yourself, because you neither understand astrophysics/cosmology, nor do you understand biology. You have failed on both subjects, because of your incompetence with science and with logic.
If there are anyone who doesn’t understand logic, it is you.
