Summations Only

You failed to comprehend. Act accordingly.

I haven't yet run across creationists who DON'T impute the strata to the Flood, the only difference between them and me being that most of them don't impute ALL the strata to the Flood. I have no idea where you get your opinion about the Flood but you don't get it from any of the known creationists.

Of course there was not millions of years. It is not a statement of faith but rather a conclusion that can only be avoided by willful ignorance.

Show us a little of this evidence you claim there was no flood!!!!? Hilarious.

The layers probably have the fossils in them NOT because the creatures that died and fossilized represent life on earth, but that they were the only ones in that day that could fossilize. I have no reason to assume that Adam would have fossilized or could have. We cannot judge the past by the present. I think science is wrong in having assumed they could do that.

Edited by starlite, : No reason given.

You dun ran across one now.

Show us a little of this evidence you claim there was no flood!

Show us evidence that there's no tiny invisible elephants in your frigo.

Here's a hint, you can't prove a negative.

You say there was a flood, you have to show the evidence.

Show us a little of this evidence you claim there was no flood!!!!? Hilarious.

Gladly, but not in this thread.

As I may have mentioned this thread is a place for those who think one of the Biblical floods happened to try to present the model, method, process, procedure or mechanism that produced that specific layer.

Understand though that nonsense like young earth will result in nothing except chuckles.

One cannot wave away the flood by making bellicose statements of faith.

True. But we can dispose of it by analysis of evidence. We have done that. It didn't happen.

There's a thing called a Point Refuted A Thousand Times or PRATT. Your posts are pure PRATTS. You don't understand the mainstream science and you don't understand common YEC claims. I suspect you are less than 14 years old.

All the signs do point to a chuunibyou.

Hello, starlight. Welcome to EvC. For the record, I usually do not post in Science Forums since Faith & Belief is my passion, but I thought I would respond here with a brief comment.

starlite writes: I have no reason to assume that Adam would have fossilized or could have. We cannot judge the past by the present. I think science is wrong in having assumed they could do that.

It is my understanding that science never responds based on assumptions. Science responds strictly on verifiable evidence.

The steps of the scientific method are to: Ask a Question. Do Background Research. Construct a Hypothesis. Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment. Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion. Communicate Your Results.

Since it is apparently OK to take a little pause and insult believers here, I guess I should join in and insult old age believers and God neutered science?

You are free to say anything you want within the forum guidelines. If you step far outside those guidelines the mods will let you know.

One of those rules is "Points should be supported with evidence and reasoned argumentation. Address rebuttals through the introduction of additional evidence or by enlarging upon the argument. Do not repeat previous points without further elaboration. Avoid bare assertions.". All your posts to date have been bare assertions. You have not addressed any of the rebuttals other than more unsupported assertions. A mod may bring that to your attention.

I put you squarely in the ignorant camp because you have made it painfully and obviously clear that you have no clue about radiometric dating, geology, astrophysics, astronomy, chemistry, physics, or any other subject that has come up. I wasn't complimenting you but your ignorance is an established fact. Here we follow the evidence.

Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

quote:

---

The steps of the scientific method are to:
Ask a Question.
Do Background Research.
Construct a Hypothesis.
Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment.
Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion.
Communicate Your Results.

---

So let's see them do that to show Adam would have fossilized!

You need to understand that many of us are not just believers but Christians, some cradle Creedal Christians with a Christian Education.

No one is insulting believers only really silly and long refuted beliefs.

Radiometric dating assumes that the decay we now see happened in the past with no limits. The ratios of parent and daughter isotopes are used to determine how much time it took to produce the daughter by that decay. Anything else? I question your grasp of the sciences you cited. So there.

You try. Jigs up though. Won't work with me.

Adam is a character in a fable and folk tale.

Fictional characters don't fossilize.

Topic.

Is there any chance you might be able to even try to address the topic?