Global Flood Evidence: A Place For Faith to Present Some

So your objection has to do with how long you believe it would take to deposit what? I'm not clear if you are referring to a single layer or to a group of layers. It does seem that you want to make an argument that the layers would have been deposited in times scales of hundreds or thousands of years, maybe even of a year?Can you clarify your claim. I think then the discussing could proceed with everyone talking about, hopefully, the same thing.lfen

The referent is missing from the sentence fragment. To who is it a better explanation? Not to most educated and trained working geologist. They have looked at the theory and abandoned it on many grounds.To a group of religionist who want the world to conform to a pre scienctific world view and don't want to understand science that flood hypothesis seems on the face of it more reliable and certainly it's much simpler. No measurements or mathmatics are required, nor chemical analysis etc.Science is an interlocking locking set of disciplines. Physics uses math and chemistry can't conflict with physics, nor can biology conflict with physics and chemistry and thus they inter support one another.A group of religionists is fighting science in order to hold to their emotional beliefs. But so far you've offerred no science just rationalizations that allow you to dismiss scientifically observed and verified findings.You and your co religionists have faith in your view of the Bible as do Mormons, Muslims, etc have faith in their religions. None of that is science and none of those religion's beliefs can overturn science.There is no factual basis for your religion, any more than there is a factual basis for Islam, or Mormonism.lfen

You might as well put your fingers in your ears, or hands over you eyes and yell, " I can't hear you" or "I can't read you".Geology and Astronomy to pick two fields of science that depend on field studies. There are laboratory experiments but much of what they study are unique events out there. You don't understand science and you don't want to because you want to be able to imagine that science is just like your religion, a matter of picking plausible imaginative stories based on your personal comfort. I do suspect that you know your beliefs are insupportable and that is why you come up with these elaborate rationalizations that science is just another religion that contradicts yours, but it's really a very different set of activities and does require and use evidence that is scrutinized.Emperor's new clothes hmmmm? Sounds like a projection to me. You have put your faith in religionists who didn't know what they are talking about. They aren't God they only have taken the authority to claim to speak for the divinity and they have convinced a lot of people to follow them. They are unwilling to subject their thinking to rational scientific scrutiny because it's easier to base everything on pre scientific thinking, beliefs, and literature.lfen

This is hilarious but please, when you quote material would you please cite it. Is this from a web link, a book, magazine etc.?lfen

I can only read this as you indicting thousands of geologists of making unreasonable explanations for decades. These tens of thousands geologist with all their training and their access to physics and astrophysics and chemistry are unable to arrive at a reasonable explanation. Is this your claim? What alternative explanation might you have for your statement?lfen