can enlighten me as to how Evolution Theory explains gravity.
It doesn't, why should it? Does the bible tell me temperature at 1.325 atmospheric pressure at which water boils? Does it tell me how to search through an ordered set in log(n) steps? Why is it you think evolutionary theory should have an answer for everything, when it makes no claims to do so? Quit fighting a strawman.
Perhaps it's time for you to give your definition of ET.
Actually, I think it's contrary to the truth to think the earth could have formed on its own over a long period of time.
Since there is no proof that it happened, it takes faith to believe it.
Actually, it runs contrary to your thousands year old book. There is no proof yesterday happened by your reasoning.
Here is a scenario:
You go away on vacation for a week, leaving your car at the airport. When you return, you find the end of your car facing the parking lot smashed in. Do you think:
A) a supernatural being came in and smacked it,
another vehicle hit it while you were gone?
One ET formula for making the universe
There is no evolutionary theory for making the universe
What I meant by the above is that Evolution Theory is an atheistic idea that attempts to explain [...] without God involved.
Like I say about atheism not being disbelief in god(s) but rather a lack of belief in them, evolutionary theory (like ALL sciences I might add) merely explains things without the need for god(s). It (again like ALL sciences) says nothing about the existence or non-existence of such beings, because by their "(super)nature" they are outside the realm of science.
What has happened is science is under the bond of atheism...
Science is inherently atheistic (or at very least agnostic), it is not "under the bond of atheism".
It's tendency is attempt to replace religious truth with an outlook on a universe where God no longer has any place.
I would substitute the word "truth" with "teachings" myself. The outlook does not leave "no place" for God, it just removes the necessity of him being there. Even then, one could claim it doesn't even go that far. While we know gravity holds things together, and dark energy might hold some things apart, we still can't say why either does what it does. It is possible, though completely unprovable, that gravity is nothing more (nor less) than the will of some god(s).
Again, still haven't shot it down, just disputed it; and in case no one has told you before, an argument from incredulity is not a valid one.
...I'm delighted to have you describe in detail exactly how humans evolved from apes....
Did I claim I could? No. Any explanation/evidence I could give would be feeble compared to what others like Zoo have already detailed to you. I was merely pointing out that you have not debunked anything as you claimed you had. I don't claim to have all the answers, nor does science. That is the domain of religion. Besides, for me to prove it to you, you would have to tell me what you would consider proof, and since you are unwilling/unable to do that, then that is
a moot point.
Science has developed radiodating ... radioactive evidence is useless
I think the majority of the scientific community (not just evolutionary biologists), who I am sure understand such methods better that you, would disagree.
Planets/moons dual rotation and their simultaneous opposite direction rotation suggests intentional Design rather than the results of explosions.
Janus & Epimetheus (satellites of Saturn on 30 miles apart) these two swap places every four years instead of colliding. I'd say they were programmed to behave this way by Creator GOd...
I'd say if they were orbiting in a manner that caused a collision that we wouldn't be seeing them do this to have this discussion. If you put a shot glass outside when it is raining and some water gets in it, do think that is a miracle too?
The so called Shepherd satellites accompanying rings of giant gas planets has such precise functioning is evidence of intentional Design
What function would that be?
Explain how Pluto and it moon Charon spiral around a center of gravity which lies between them
All objects with such interactions orbit around a center of gravity. As some post I read before somewhere tried to salvage an argument against a heliocentric solar system put it, heavily paraphrased, "technically the Earth doesn't orbit around the Sun, they both orbit a point at the middle of their combined center of gravity". The thing is, when items are staggeringly different sizes, the center of gravity is usually still inside (and near the center of) the larger of the two. In the Pluto-Charon case, if I am not mistaken, their masses aren't all that different.
Earth's finely balanced distance from the sun is so delicately and precisely located to allow life on earth...
Yes, and if it weren't, we wouldn't be having this discussion...or we'd be completely different beings thinking that life couldn't possibly evolve on planets that are the distance ours actually is from the sun.
Galaxies rotating in various localized directions would not result from a big bang explosion point
And you know this how?
Entropy in the universe---time's arrow...pointing downward to disorder and eventual total loss of energy...the universe surely had a beginning.
Again, your point?
Speed of light and vast distances in the universe....were stars and light waves created in nanoseconds throughout the universe? Is there a time warp in the universe, making possible vast distances within a "young" universe?
That's something required by young earth creationists to explain our ability to see stars/light sources that are more that 6000 light years from earth.
It's called having the gift of supernatural faith. That's why theology is the highest science.
Faith is not knowledge, it is at best belief. Theology is not the highest science, it is not even science. Do you even understand the ideas behind science?