Debate: Should mankind invest in the exploration of space?
Side: No

They are theories, which means that they passed the rigors of scientific reasoning, which means they are based on evidence, logic, and laws.Theories have not fully passed the scientific method. That is why they are not laws. What I have told you about origins is they are built upon assumptions. The theory (as it is not a law) is built upon assumptions to what had occurred at the beginning of the universe. The original primordial energy/matter is not there for us to test and observe. And your theorists can't even come up with its original creation. "The mechanisms that god used to create matter, space, and time were _____ "He spoke them into existence. God created our physical laws. Prove it. I follow parsimony, you do not.Well that explains your lunacy. But the burden to prove is on you. We know the complexities and unique functions of our planet. Its up to you to find another planet equally as complex. If you can't then you just assume one such planet exists. we are colliding with Andromeda, which means that its massive gravitational objects may affect our planet in the distant future.That isn't necessarily so. When galaxies collide (according to secular theories) the gravitational effects of individual bodies will be very minimal. More of the 'action' will take place in the nucleus. Not in the spiral arms or disk. Especially in the barred spiral galaxies like the two in question here. I didn't even touch upon natural disasters which occur on Earth itself. Ice ages, climate change, supervolcanoes, not to mention worldwide epidemics and atomic wars.Your getting closer to actual science here. There is no reason that our species couldn't exist for billions of years given certain requirements like an imposed evolutionary stasis. If we can't do that, we will continue to father child races for all those eons.If you really believe in evolution then you know that a stasis is impossible. That sounds like a contradiction. You keep saying that but I am not convinced you even know what constitutes theory and science.Let's look shall we:Definition of SCIENCE1: the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding 2a : a department of systematized knowledge as an object of study b : something (as a sport or technique) that may be studied or learned like systematized knowledge 3a : knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method b : such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena : natural science 4: a system or method reconciling practical ends with scientific laws 5capitalized : Christian sciencehttp://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/science Now let's look at theory and law: Definition of SCIENTIFIC METHOD: principles and procedures for the systematic pursuit of knowledge involving the recognition and formulation of a problem, the collection of data through observation and experiment, and the formulation and testing of hypotheseshttp://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/scientific%20method For a theory to be an actual theory in science it has to be testable and observable. If not then it is just an assumption. You can't test or observe the origin of the universe. What you actually said was:Do not change my words to negate them. I believe in God the creator of all things. You believe in alien civilizations to which none have ever been recorded. At least in the Bible we have observed interactions with God on a massive scale. You have the resurrection, parting of the Red Sea, and the worldwide Flood. All of these events have been witnessed and observed by the people who lived through it. On a personal note: Stop watching Syfy and start researching real astronomy.