Things evolutionists can't (or can???) explain?

Hopefully someone who knows more will post, but I *do* know that physicists are searching for evidence of a small asymmetry in the laws of physics that would give preference to matter. My recollection is that they've found evidence consistent with this possibility, but nothing so certain as to confirm it.--Percy

All matter and energy in the universe was once part of the Big Bang. This means that everything on the earth was once part of the Big Bang. If you're going to insist on your point of view, then this means that everything, not just evolution, "relies on the Big Bang to explain how things started." If you want to claim this for evolution, then you must also claim it for geology, chemistry, physics and astronomy and all the other sciences.Because evolution (biology, actually) is no different from all the other branches of science, it makes no sense for you to single out evolution alone as relying on the Big Bang. All the other sciences rely upon it to an equal extent. The Big Bang is not, has never been and never will be an object of study for biologists and evolutionists. The Big Bang is a topic of cosmology, not biology.--Percy