Yes, the past left evidence, unique evidence such as the bazillions of fossils in the miles deep stack of sediments that has not occurred on such a scale since and never will. It is open to interpretation in a way evidence formed in the present is not because in the present you have similar events for comparison. That is not the case with the prehistoric past. The evidence remains open to interpretation. The same evidence you take to prove evolution I take to prove the Flood and I think the interpretation of a stack of neatly horizontal sediments as eras in time is stupid in the extreme.
Why is it that those deep stacks of sediments always have the oldest dated rocks on the bottom and the youngest dated rocks on top? How did the flood manage to do that? Why is it that the least complex fossils are always found on the bottoms layers of sediment and the most complex fossils are always found on the top? How did the flood manage to do that? Lets just take fish for example. Why are there no modern fish found in the bottom layers? Why are the fish found in the top layers never found in the bottom layers? This is even true for fish of approximately the same weight. Why and how would a flood sort fish out in this manner?
™ Version 4.2
