The TRVE history of the Flood...

Yeah, that's evolution. Animals obviously evolve - they are not unchanging.And there is no magic arbitrary limit to how much micro-evolutionary change can accumulate that would prevent it from being macroevolution. I dunno, I don't know off the top of my head - and I'm not exactly sure what you're referring to.But, given your track record - it is fair to assume that you are wrong. Plus, a lone delusional True Christian versus countless scientists? Yeah, no contest. Nonsense. It's confirmed every day and has never been falsified. It's here to stay.

That has always struck me as the funniest of the gymnastics in the creationist clown show. "Evolution is impossible because it happens much faster than you think."

No, evolution is impossible because it uses up genetic diversity.

You keep making really stupid claims like that but as always, reality shows you are simply wrong, massively wrong.Evolution on the Earth has been going on for billions of years and so is certainly not impossible, or unlikely, or unexpected.Evolution over billions of years is a fact just as it is a fact that there has never been a world-wide flood during the time humans have existed.And remember faith, even the Bible supports the fact that the Flood stories are simply myths. That is also supported by the fact that there are two mutually exclusive flood myths just as there are two mutually exclusive creation myths in the Bible stories.You of course are free to ignore facts and reality but your fantasies will not change either.

It's really amazing how you get away with nothing but smearing the debater and asserting the contrary point of view. It's really just about all you ever do. You hardly ever address the argument itself. Amazing.

quote:

---

No, evolution is impossible because it uses up genetic diversity.

---

Your argument has been defeated every time you've tried it. So stop wasting time making assertions you can't adequately support.

I was addressing what I quoted - i.e. your claim that the only evolution is microevolution. The irony is that in order to "disprove" macroevolution you have to pretend that microevolution happened impossibly fast after the flood.Maybe you're too young to remember but creationists used to deny microevolution too. Creation is a slippery slope.

I am not "smearing the debater". I said nothing about the debater. I simply pointed out that what you post is factually wrong.It is your argument that is silly and inane, utterly false, unreasonable, ridiculous, sophomoric and it was only your asserted "argument" that I or anyone else has been addressing.The truth is still that there has never been a world-wide flood during the period of time that humans existed and that even the Bible itself shows evidence that the flood tales are meant as myth not fact just as the creation myths are simply plot devices to address import subjects to the humans that wrote the stories.

You assert that I'm wrong, you do not try to prove anything, and you do smear the debater.My argument is excellent, too bad you haven't the brain to see it.

Actually, we tell you why you are wrong. The fact that you ignore contrary evidence is a failure on your part. For so many reasons stated on this thread, no. Your arguments, as you readily admit, ignore certain evidences and rely on faith alone.

How could an argument about the strata or biological facts be from faith?

The same way you hand-wave away all of the evidence on dating: If it disproves your beliefs you don't accept it.

I've never "hand-waved" away your dating stuff. I've said I can't answer it and I have better evidence anyway which makes the dating false. That is NOT "hand-waving."

To me it is.You reject the dating evidence for reasons of faith and belief, so you just ignore all the evidence RAZD and I have posted.That's hand-waving it all away, not refuting it or researching it or anything else.

I reject it for better evidence, that is not the same thing.