Bain Dramage!

Gravity is a PROVEN scientific LAW, not theory. The others are THEORY because you scientists, who have FAITH in your own ability have not YET PROVEN them to be LAW. You have FAITH in the THEORY(s) that are yet to be made scientific LAW. Yet, you belittle people for having FAITH in a higher power than YOUR brain, saying we who believe are braindamaged for OUR beliefs? That makes is just stupid on your part. A person of knowledge can only go so far before they MUST make a leap of faith.

Because the Scientific Community hath spoken it! Amen.

Most Creationists don't have a clue how the word Theory and Hunch or Wild-ass Guess differ from one another within the context of the scientific method. To them, Theory means any explanation I can come up with. Law means I find a few people with PhD. after their name who will, for sufficient financial reward, claim my idea is correct.

+4 Obviously there is the most basic reason that 99.9% of creationists are religious and evolution/big bang contradicts the creation accounts/beliefs in their religions whereas gravity,electrodynamics etc., do not. . But I think it may run a little deeper than this. There are two factors key factors in this; 1/ the fear that when we die we cease to exist completely 2/ the fear that we are not 'special' and have no ultimate purpose or meaning to our existence. . These are perhaps the main reasons why religion still exists today in the modern world, despite all the evidence pointing against it. Interestingly the big bang and evolution are the only ones out of the theories that you cited that directly play to the two fear factors that I mentioned above. . Most people (even the religious) can accept gravity because it doesn't render their existence meaningless. They can accept electrodynamics because it doesn't reduce them to simply the product of some very fortunate evolutionary twists in biological game of life millions of years ago.

theory of gravity electrodynamics etc. take a rock and drop it. pick it up and drop it again,and again and again and again...no no. drop it again. im getting to a point. the "law or theory of gravity" is observable proveable and reobserveable. you can do it anywhere and the calculation still comes out correct. or electrodynamics. stick a 9volt battery to your tongue for a sec. it minor shocks you. do it again and again and again and again..i know you get it. now take another 9 volt and do it. yep still works. as long as their is more electrons on one side of the annode vs the cathode then the electrons will flow and you can see it observe it and feel it but most importantly you can reobserve it with someone else. it is testable and proveable,repeatable and observable in a labratory. however the theory of evolution (over millions of years a single celled organism has mutated via splitting or offspring and everything that is "living" is from that one or few begginings). this has never been repeated because no one has had enough time to test the millions of years in a labratory where the theory is only a few hundred years old. this does not make it wrong or right. this also does not say that they dont have testable evidence and good theories. it means that if their are other "theories" that are available that we must also test them and weed through the biasis(that both sides have) to get the truth fact and right answer. I am a creationist and even though I do not agree with species changing (dinosaurs into birds) that does not make their science "bad" it makes their science a different conclussion then mine. it is just as irritating that when I take something that I would like to research and that I come to a different conclussion than someone else mine is "bad" it would be nice to have the other party assist no matter how much they disagree. I had a evolutionist who helped me on a exponential decay light theory that I was working on and he showed that if this was true that at x time that it would be going x fast and I knew that that seemed not to be true so I had to go back to the drawing board and re question my prior knowns and reexamine my outcome and if wrong then to throw out that theory and work again...thats what science does. it does not care what your preargument was it cares what the outcome is, and even if it disagrees with you you must be willing to drop your preemptive thought. well ive rambled enough +2

Because the big imaginary man who lives in a chair in the clouds said so?

Depends upon whom you ask.

Not a creationIST but I'll answer anyway. Biological evolution is the only one that's controversial because it's the only one that we can't see conclusive evidence for today.    By contrast, gravity and electromagnetism are presently used by all of us daily. With quantum mechanics, we've developed the technology to be able to observe the behavior of subatomic particles. So, we see and/or experience those.   Even with the BB, we can literally see the past (via light) and can detect radiation which is the remnant of the BB. By observation, we can (have) determine(d) how long the universe has been around and what size it was at a given time. ~13.7 billion years ago, the universe didn't exist.   By contrast, evolutionists use support data that not everyone agrees on the interpretation of.