One of the things that bugs me is when some creationists try to talk about biological evolution and the Big Bang theory in the same breath. They're two different and completely unrelated theories.

Actually my experience has been that this is untrue. Most creationists I talk to affirm the Big Bang and yet deny biological evolution. Certainly there are those out there who deny the Big Bang as well, but I've seen clear delineation between the two theories.

Evolution doesn't try to answer the question "where did the universe come from?" It only answers the biological question of how life on this planet became so intricate and complex. Heck, even the Big Bang theory doesn't answer the "where did the universe come from" question, it only theorizes about the first moment of the universe's existence.

Completely accurate statement, and I wish everyone would realize it.

Creationists like to argue that the first spark of life on this planet, the first time molecules assembled into self-replicating strands, had astronomical odds against it. Scientists counter with: "Yeah, but we had oceans of molecules working on the problem for eons". I counter with: "You're both forgetting that we had an entire universe full of planets, many of them with oceans of molecules working on the problem."

From what I understand, it's not just a matter of odds here. No matter how much time or energy was spent "working" (in the metaphorical sense ) on it, it's still difficult to see how molecules could come together without outside intervention to make un-life into life. It's not just a simple matter of unlikely combinations being formed; it takes an implausible series of events. From a scientific point of view, does this prove that there was an intelligent designer? No, since that would be an argument from absence, which I don't like to do. Does it allow for and intelligent designer? I'd at least think that's a reasonable theory.

Of course I have evidence outside of science that gives me a very solid answer to this question, but I know your thoughts on testamoniels so I'll leave it off the table. Whatever my experiences may mean to you however, it is reasonable for me to draw my own conclusions from them.

We're sitting on a winning lottery ticket, and we've got the evidence to show it. Those who say the game was rigged are missing out on the true wonder and appreciation for the situation.

I have much more "wonder and appreciation" for people who make massive amounts of money by talent and intellect rather than those who win out of pure chance. To use another analogy, while neat moments in computer games caused by (pseudo)random algorithms are always fun, seeing the vast worlds the designers create is much more reason for awe and appreciation, at least in my book.