Summations Only

This is where dating comes into the picture.The evidence clearly shows large amounts of time, and disproves your all-at-once belief.And this is why you have to ignore or deny scientific dating--dating alone shows your beliefs are wrong.

Don't forget relative dating, and all the other methods RAZD has presented in his several long threads. So you're wrong here. But we have and they have no better arguments against the various dating methods than you do. Sure there is! You've been shown the evidence, but just reject or ignore it. There is not just "ONE kind" of evidence. That's creationist wishful thinking. There are dozens of different methods of dating beyond radiometric dating. There is a huge agreement among all of those methods. Ever hear of thermoluminescence dating? That's just one!

No, its a religious problem.As you've stated many times, you can't accept any evidence not supported by your interpretation of the bible.You are pushing a very narrow brand of religious apologetics, and it would be best if you remembered that. You're certainly not doing science--more the opposite.Perhaps if you ended each post with, "Amen!" it would help you remember this.

That is false. Look at the different items which go way beyond 10,000 years, and look at the agreement among the different materials.

All you are showing is that religious belief can be, and often is, disproved by science and that believers will refuse to accept the evidence, no matter how strong it isl

Or, because the dating contradicts everything else you "know," perhaps you should examine what you "know" for errors.Works both ways!

No, you avoid evidence like vampires avoid garlic.You "know" they are wrong because your religious belief is a filter--any shred of "evidence" supporting your beliefs is accepted uncritically, while any evidence disproving your beliefs is ignored, obfuscated, or misrepresented.You are doing the exact opposite of science--religious apologetics.

1) No one other than adherents of a particular narrow brand of religion advocates the things you do.2) The real world evidence is all against the claims you make.3) You tell us the bible is the highest and only form of evidence you'll accept.Conclusion--you are doing religious apologetics, the exact opposite of science.

Not if you want to learn about geology...

Except for the whole dating issue. You avoid that totally. Probably because it disproves the whole YEC position and you have no rebuttal.

But it has! Read those several threads RAZD dedicated to dating. They show you are wrong and conclusively show the YEC model is false. You may cry, "Assumptions" and "Uncertainty" all you want, but that's just wishful thinking on your part.The evidence is in and it shows we live on an old earth.

None of that matters as the dating issue completely disproves YEC.You keep ignoring it, or hand-waving it away but it won't go away!Facts are pesky little things and must be dealt with, much as you may be inconvenienced by them.

I have evidence from my own archaeological investigations linking mdDNA at 5300 years ago to modern descendants in the same area. That alone disproves a global flood in the past 5300 years. My colleagues have a lot of samples that are older that do the same thing. And, I have two samples being analyzed that date to 7600 years ago--we'll see what they produce.In other words, there is data disproving the flood all over the place, and even my research in one limited area of the US can find it.

Actually we do know the difference. We certainly have no trouble recognizing "imaginative conjurings" in what you post, as we see them on a daily basis. A theory is the single best explanation for a given set of facts. It needs to explain all of the facts and be contradicted by no relevant facts. That is what we have, and what you are lacking. You have belief in ancient tribal myths and dogma which does not explain all the facts and is contradicted by a huge number of relevant facts. But because what you have is a belief you are not free to change--you must instead try to deny, ignore, or otherwise obfuscate the facts. Unfortunately for you your opinions do not change the facts--they remain the pesky little things they always were.As for different interpretations, certain facts require specific interpretations and can't support alternative interpretations. That is a real problem for YECs as the facts they use don't support their interpretations and the facts they deny, ignore and obfuscate support the standard scientific interpretation.All of this leads to the kinds of debate we are seeing in this thread and elsewhere.

So you believe.