Y.E.C. Model: Was there rapid evolution and speciation post flood?

Why stop there, every faith belief system has some version of creation -- what makes one special and the others mundane mythology? Ask any believer and it is the specific faith they believe, because they believe it.Enjoy

Well most religions are smart enough to just have one myth, not two mutually exclusive and contradictory myths.Maybe that is what makes the Judaic religions special.

Blather. Your one and only option here is to prove a same state past on earth or you may not use it in models. Period.

You can't and do not have to any more than you can deny it. Ha. How sweet it is.

Anyone can spam links. You can't even post the gist of the matter regarding the issues here in a short concise way. If you could I would beat it to chaff in a New York minute anyhow. So I get why you beat around the bush pretending you could do wonders here. I know better.As for the tree ring business I hope you get the point by now that everything in a dead or living tree depends on what nature it grew. Period.

The issue was addressed face the music. No decay dates are of any value unless the nature was always the same. Prove it or lose the claims! Hoo ha.

Your same state past based godless models of the past are fake news so called science.

We have human DNA from before the Garden of Eden existed, tzi existed at the time Adam supposedly lived, the Jomon culture existed before during and after the imaginary Biblical flood stories were supposed to have happened, Egypt existed before, during and after the imaginary flood and no one even noticed any unusual flood or Exodus.There is no such thing as any "former nature" and no one has ever presented any evidence of any "former nature" and once again reality shows that creationism and young earth are simply the province of the deluded and the dishonest.

The creation order is only in chapter one. Chapter two starts after it was all finished already as the very first verse clearly states. Gong!

Wrong. I doubt there was any DNA as we now see it then even! In any case all DNA we do have is very post nature change. Sorry you get another GONG!

Been done. You're the one who loses.And you're not even amusing any longer. Sure you're not a Poe?

Nope, because the option I choose is to ignore your assertions as vapid imagination until such time as you provide evidence to substantiate it.Fail #21Science will happily proceed to investigate the universe based on tested theory and objective evidence, and not willow-the-wisp fantasies.Enjoy

You've never read the Bible have you or have any idea of how it was created.Reality once again shows you are ignorant. The beginning of Genesis 2 is part of the much newer Genesis 1 story. Genesis 2 itself was written long before Genesis 1 and under a different religious tradition.

Says the black knight ... Fail #22.There is a difference between spamming links and referencing existing posts on threads within this forum, especially when you easily hop between several threads already -- not that you read them (no evidence of that in your posts) -- you're just scared you can't handle it. Indeed, and what we have established on Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1 so far is that we have not found the end of the present nature period, and we are over 36,000 years into the past at this point. We also established that 14C dating is valid.It seems you are backing into a corner again.Enjoy

And still no evidence to substantiate a claim of a different nature in the past, just denial of the evidence for an old earth. You have an argument based on fantasy and ignorance and will-o-the-whisp imagination.You have so little evidence that you can't even prop up an argument that your fantasy should be considered as having any purpose to consider.Fail #23,EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : .