Quote
Sigh... rocks dont transform overnight into trees like a liquid terminator T-1000
Ok, and? Where did I claim they do? Are you again trying to put words into my mouth, like you did before?
This is a process that can take thousands, millions and even billions of years. If you split a rock and look under a microscope it is composed of basic elements like carbon, oxygen, iron, aluminum, silica, magnesium etc. Those elements detach and form molecular bonds with other atoms that become other things like sand, iron, charcoal and minerals. We have mineral dust that you can buy and fertilize the ground with. The plants absorb some of those minerals into the roots and form branches, those trees will die and may become compost again, or sometimes they turn into fossils, some will turn into crude oil some into other chemicals. Things constantly change their state of being a rock will not be a rock forever it will be something else. This is basic chemistry you learn in high-school.
You must of graduated from somalian "lering center" to write what you wrote.
What's the purpose of you writing all that stuff? I know all that. I simply stated that it is more correct to say that a seed turns into a tree, not the rock. Rock simply breaks down into what roots use as 'food'.
Again, quote the exact thing I said that is in contrast to what you wrote about rocks here? You can't. Yet you can sound condescending for no reason at all.
Quote
You say "we've never ever seen the universe contracting, we've only seen it expanding" yet have we ever seen real magic like a guy walking on water, talking snake, what this god being looks like or any magic that isnt an ilusionist trick that isnt from a video game or some movie?
I was merely pointing out the possibility of universe contracting its called the Big Crunch and is based on Einstein theory of relativity. If the universe can expand why couldn't it contract? Like a beating heart or the tide of the ocean in which the universe breathes.
Yet you find one more plausible than the other. Strange
Even if you can somehow accept the 'infinite past' of the so called cyclic universe, and the fact that the universe will start contracting after a certain point, you would still run into a problem of entropy. Stars cannot form without star dust. According to science, universe will after a long period of time run out of stars due to lack of star dust (stars have their own life). It will be a dark universe. If we are to somehow assume that the universe will start contracting at that point (which isn't supported by science that it will, but let's play it out), it wouldn't magically 'get back' all the star dust that it had in its low entropy state (early universe), but it would remain stardustless. So, if it contracted, and started expanding again, it would expand into the same 'boring' universe without stars. And it wouldn't even take infinite cycles to reach that point, but only one cycle. That is what physicists struggle with regarding this model. The only way it could somehow get star dust / its low entropy state is if you assume God creates it =)
What I myself simply wrote is that it is easier to believe in a powerful God existing outside of time (which we like to refer to as 'forever' but that word choice probably isn't the best) before the creation of the universe, than to believe in a physical realm having an infinite past.
Quote
[/QUOTE]
Is this meme aimed at me? Cuz if so, that would be yet another time you accuse me of saying things I never said.
When did I write anything about Christianity or the Bible (other than simply mentioning the word in my initial question)?