Evolution/Big Bang Atheism vs Creation by God

Almost all of this evidence supports both the Big Bang theory AND my Scriptural Creation story. I understand and belief 100% in the expansion of the Universe. Isaiah 40:22; "It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; That stretcheth out the heavens like a curtain, and spreadeth them out like a tent to dwell in." Yes the Universe is expanding, but this can not be your only proof for the Big Bang? The same is my proof that the Scriptures are correct about the heavens being stretched out. Now if science found that the universe was NOT expanding, than we would have a problem. But you did not answer my question about the Conservation of Angular Momentum which contradicts the idea of the universe "blowing up" (in a spinning manner) as a means for expansion. We mentioned that we would not get into evolution upon your request, but then you mention stellar evolution: In reading the links that you posted, I noticed that their way of determining the age of the universe is all on the "theoretical" level. And touching on the white dwarfs: They claim that they know how old one is by how long it has been cooling. But in order to know how long it has been cooling you have to know both rate of cool, and how hot it was to begin with. While there is a possibility to know the rate of cool, it is impossible to know how hot it was to begin with. It is the same concept as carbon dating. So allow me to also explain the problem with carbon dating: Carbon dating does not work and can not be used to date anything. Carbon dating is done by measuring the remaining C14 in a decaying fossil in which the animal possessed that ate plants that absorb C14 from the atmosphere. This C14 is very radioactive and decays quickly. Half of it decays every 5,750 years. You can measure rate of decay and how much is left, but without knowing exactly how much it had in the first place you can not know how long it has been decaying. This being said, I'll give a couple of examples of carbon dating failures: In 1949, the lower leg of a mammoth was carbon dated 15,380 RCY (radio carbon years) while its skin and flesh were 21,300 RCY. In 1963, living mollusc's shells carbon dated as being 2,300 years old. 1971, a freshly killed seal was carbon dated as having died 1,300 years ago. Shells from living snails were carbon dated 27,000 years old in 1984. Just a couple of examples. It is proved many times not to work. Here is something recent that happened (18 years ago) In 1996 up at Berkeley University, using two advanced and different dating methods, the bones of "Erectus" were found to be between 53,000 to 27,000 years old. That a 26,000 year difference; a 96% error. It's not getting better with time. I couldn't find the original documents to post as links to these claims, but here is a Kent Hovind video that mentions them with their cites. Carbon dating 1:47:50 into the video. If they can not properly determine the age of something here on hearth, how much less something in the heavens. In the youtube video, they mentioned that the Hubble Space telescope has been able to see 12 billion years into the past. How would this be possible? Do they got a star gate in their bedroom? Can they travel through time? The idea that the most distant galaxies are the oldest galaxies is all based on the assumption that the Big Bang/Evolution theories are true, and therefore, this is circular reasoning. One of my arguments for the age of the earth: The earth's atmosphere makes carbon 14 when nitrogen gets blasted with fast moving neutrinos in the atmosphere, turning it into C14. As I mentioned earlier, it is also decaying at the same time (1/2 every 5,750 years assumed). At some point, increase and decay will reach equilibrium. Scientists wandered, back in 1950, how long it would take for the earth to reach equilibrium. The consensus was that it would probably take about 30,000 years for the earth to reach equilibrium. The problem is is that we know that radiocarbon is still forming 28-37% faster than it is decaying, which proves that the earth is less than 30,000 years old or else it would all be stabilized by now. I would Like an answer to my question I asked you about the Conservation of Angular Momentum. And since the Logic I explained in round 2 demands the Existence of a Living, Animate God, I also need an answer that rebuts my logic and scientific explanation. You have failed to answer ANYTHING said in my previous argument. Remember the rule: A rebuttal for every argument. All you have done is given evidence that supports both Big Bang and Creation by God, and a couple theories relating to the age of the universe. I asked for no theories please. Only facts, evidence, laws of science, and explained logic. As soon As you either answer my previous argument in some way or admit you have no good answer, I will give archaeological evidence for some of the stories in the Scriptures.