Summations Only

If you mean "no reason" yet established in this thread, then you are right. Dr. Adequate has not yet provided his argument that flood geology is a farce. But it will be quite easy to demonstrate the farce when all of the things that the flood is purported to have produced are considered.So far, the only thing you have argued is that a sedimentary layer can be formed by a flood. There is far more to explain.

I believe you've given a peep of your hole card. I was kinda hoping the rough stuff wouldn't start until after Portillio posted.

Where did you do this?I've reviewed your responses in this thread and I see a lot of questions that cannot be answered by compressing all of human history into only 5000 years. But I don't see much of an attempt to provide evidence for anything. Just a bunch of "I believes".Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Pictures of dinosaurs? That's your evidence?Dinosaurs also show up in the Flintstones and I used to play with plastic models of dinosaurs. And yet nobody I know has ever seen a Pterodactyl or a Brachiosaurus.I'm sorry for dragging the discussion any further off topic. I see that this thread is supposed to be about geography.

Define "accurate". Name the dinosaur can you recognize from a statue, and give me a way to confirm that the dinosaur is an accurate recreation of a formerly living creature.For example, I would need considerable convincing before I would consider a T-Rex looking dinosaur with stegosaurus plates on her back to be an accurate rendition of anything. Godzilla isn't real.

What about all those humans that lived well before the flood? Weren't they living concurrently with dinosaurs according to you? You seem to be suggesting here that fossils only come from dinosaurs that died during an extension event. But what about fossils below the P-T boundary? Below the K-T boundary? Or, the mineralization process is actually very slow and fossils are quite rare. That seems to match what we actually see.

But you need to claim a bottleneck in humans, and ALL large land animals. The bottleneck would have to appear in essentially all alleles.While there is some flexibility among some of he animals, we know exactly how many humans are alleged to have been on the ark, and for three of the eight, we know their parentage. There should be a bottle neck in the human genome.

Well once magic is invoked, there is no point in asking for evidence.

Lol. Wouldn't some of those birds have to have been ducks and other waterfowl? Hilarious.

What is the essential characteristic of mammals? Do ichthyosaurs have that characterisitic? Is that lack influenced by currently accepted thinking, or is it real?

I would suggest that once magic gets invoked, that the discussion has reached a dead end. But there is simply no way that selectiong only a couple of pigs would allow for much diversity. The pigs would have to have super genomes, or magical ones.

Does the redating described in the article invalidate any dates found through index fossils, radioactive decay dating, or other age data? Not as far as I can see. Instead the article seems to describe discovering that the complex is really part of the Appalachians.

You are avoiding the question. Where those 'invalidated dates' based on radiometry, previously found fossils, or other dating technique which is now shown to have been invalid? Apparently not.

Uh, "shaken to their respective cores"??? Isn't that after all what he is trying to suggest?

And I'm suggesting that exactly such a shaking is required if the universe is to be only 6000 years old with a global flood about 4500 years ago.