Yes El once again you post a contention without actually explaining it except to say it is wrong. In what way though would further advance this topic? But then that is not going to happen is it, you're to busy shouting YOU'RE ALL JUST FUCKING WRONG, SHUT UP I AM NOT LISTENING!!!34jskaf
God you really are wasting your time Grey you can't just post god of the gaps arguments in lieu of actual arguments, it makes you look like a person who never went to school.
Why Big Bang theory failed to predict dark energy.
It didn't set out to do that so that is just a straw man. When the Big Bang theory was first posited, the idea that there was more to the universe than actually was known had never been posited, hence it could not tackle a subject it had no means to know about.
Why Big Bang theory failed to predict the Higgs field.
Again these are related but not entirely related fields, the Big Bang only set out to explain the origins of the universe, not the standard model or anything else, as I said it was around a long time before such concerns as Higgs. Recent models have of course tried to explain them consistently, but since the origins of the universal particle model are mostly if not entirely hypothetical it is hard to go into great detail because one can only deduce from what there is now, rather than do experiments at t>0. That's not to say they are not scientifically theoretical, obviously one can simulate the large energy concerns and explore matter formation from highly energetic states of matter and it's resultant creation of particles, so there is at least some tentative evidence.
This is the usual argument where they say well you don't know exactly this hence my "theory" slides in because you don't. It's lazy pointless and a waste of anyones' time. If you want to actually disprove anything you have to prove how it could not have happened, not state because we don't have an entire picture it could not hence of happened. That's science El, what you do is just sophistry. See your so called ideas have way bigger gaps they don't even have a single experiment, or any tangible evidence, but somehow by magic, theories that have more than just arm waving bollocks are superseded by this magical, evidence free, thinking.
Why they think that a physical singularity is real.
A singularity may or may not be real it's not a particularly strong theory, or even a hypothesis precisely per se, but most physicists think that enormous gravitational events can create them even if they do not involve infinities per se.
How the first self-reproducing cell came into existence.
Gah these irreducible complexity arguments are so boring. Prove how it could not happen, don't claim after a billion years it can not. Use your science.
Why humans and animals are telepathic.
Oh they are are they, prove it.
The extraordinarily horrid odds against a single small human gene coming into existence because of random changes.
You've been debunked on this before, your lack of genetic understanding is not going to play well if you refuse to tackle the fact that the mutation of cells could easilly produce life like like elements that could lead to life, let alone mammalian life, let alone human life.
Honestly Grey, as I have said before go to school, learn about the subjects you are trying to debunk and then come back. If you don't people are just going to mock you for the fraudulent arguments you clearly use without regards for any explanation other than, I am right and you are wrong. It's a circus of clown shoe argument El, you really do not have a thing that has anything to do with science, all it is, is opinion.
And you wonder why no one has ever been convinced by your word salad? Do you really have to wonder that much, or is it just that it's just a priori assertions based on nothing? See people are convinced by evidence not speculation. It's the way science works, although I somehow suspect you have never really indulged the whole idea of what science actually is. You lost interest in science at some point, which is sad, because had you been a half decent scientist in the first place, you would of set out to to prove why the field you were in was wrong instead of running from it, arms flailing like an intellectual coward. You did not get the learning because you could not be assed to complete a degree, and now you just muddle around the various subjects absorbing by bias everything that agrees with you, and ignoring anyone and anyone who kicks your sad little argument into touch.
You make me sad El, not because you are not even wrong, just because you wont even make the simple effort to be proven wrong, anywhere in any field that is not your own personal "Jesus". People who are so lazy as you are in your arguments, and so self involved genuinely disgust me. You are a place holder for a better argument and hence a better person who doesn't spend his entire time shouting I am not listening at the void like some broken record pointed at space. It's not the science that will die and be replaced, it does so every year anyway by the means of actual scientists taking a beating stick to it with the proper tools involved; it's just you who will die, and all your arguments fade into the pointless obscurity such meaningless nonsense deserves. Which is sad really as you could do something, but you chose to do nothing more than sit on the sidelines and hurl abuse in lieu of reason and experiment.