Convert me

@pinchpinpong said in #69:
> That dude is wrong. deep dive in Physics please. The origin of the grain to make that burrito and the flame and the components to put it on are all same matter.

The point of the story is not about the composition of the burrito, but where it came from. You wouldn’t call the grain a burrito, because you would be wrong. The point is that people look at the burrito and think it came from nothing (when that obviously doesn’t make sense) but then you look at the much more complex universe and say the same exact thing. You can’t be that ignorant.

For everyone saying that "science" clearly states evolution/atheism is 100% true, that just isn't accurate. First of all, you have no way to verify if carbon dating or similar methods are accurate, only that it's consistent. And second, "science" also states that life has to come from life (which is a statement we CAN verify), and that is a huge problem with the idea of the Big Bang coming from nothing.

@dstne said in #71:
>
I agree and not all matter is same elsewhere due to it's position toward the sun, now what I text here I did not sucked out my thumb but is academic.

@dstne said in #71:
> The point of the story is not about the composition of the burrito, but where it came from. You wouldn’t call the grain a burrito, because you would be wrong. The point is that people look at the burrito and think it came from nothing (when that obviously doesn’t make sense) but then you look at the much more complex universe and say the same exact thing. You can’t be that ignorant.

Me: I agree and not all matter is same elsewhere due to it's position toward the sun, now what I text here I did not sucked out my thumb but is academic.

@pinchpinpong said in #73:
> I agree and not all matter is same elsewhere due to it's position toward the sun, now what I text here I did not sucked out my thumb but is academic.

I’m sorry but I’m not quite understanding you. It’s really hard to understand exactly what you are saying. Perhaps you should use proper grammar and multiple sentences?

@dstne said in #75:
> I’m sorry but I’m not quite understanding you. It’s really hard to understand exactly what you are saying. Perhaps you should use proper grammar and multiple sentences?

Perhaps you should just read and understand? At least try harder.
You clearly aim me for ya buddy that is banned now...

@pinchpinpong said in #76:
> Perhaps you should just read and understand?

Sorry, my comment wasn’t trying to be offensive, I’m just having a hard time understanding exactly what you are saying.

@dstne said in #77:
> Sorry, my comment wasn’t trying to be offensive, I’m just having a hard time understanding exactly what you are saying.

No offence taken beside aim me with the least of nonsense arguments to be real. If all materials are the same as we find on the moon or Mars are also on earth mean we have a common matter within this solar system. This includes Asteroids BUT not Comets as they go Interstellar. I hope I cleared carbon back trace age method.
Thank you for your kind reply.

The components on an asteroid or on the moon or on Mars we find it on earth as well, many not as they have other conditions I guess? but to get back to topic. What if God said in his 7 day making of the solar system and the rest was not seen by them beforehand and thus concluded> this is a potent planet to extend our specie? Because sacking a potent planet is the least they want, they want us to be them and expand.

You know how the moon is created? An accident with another planet called Thea (Greek meaning day) it made the day, what if all was an occurrence by chance and they were there to see it and take advantage? Or is there really a divinity that made this impossible hazard a destiny?\Also for my bad English, it's not that England and it's language is centre of the world...
Literally every religion that existed and still exist refer to the sky and resurrection and heaven, explain me heaven please? For me that is outer space.
Look, My gran parents that raised me at early age were religious and never ever obliged me to do something just because they said it, I had a choice.
According to the search results, the leading theory for the Moon's formation is the "giant impact hypothesis":
The Moon is thought to have formed from a massive collision between the early Earth and a Mars-sized object called Theia around 4.5 billion years ago
science.nasa.gov/moon/formation/
www.britannica.com/list/where-did-the-moon-come-from/

I have to laugh at every pathetic creationist in the US.

Cave paintings. Lucy.
Dinosaur bones. You can see them in museums.
Evolution. It's all there, seen and documented by scientists.

Telescopes. They allow you to see stars so far away that their light couldnt reach us within 6000 years.

We maybe cannot see a clear starting point of the universe. But we have undeniable findings of things way older than 6000 years. The creation story is pure nonsense from a truth-based point of view.