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

Yet despite your doubts and utter ignorance, we do have many. many DNA samples and not just humans but animals and plants and fungi as well from before the Garden of Eden fantasy, before the Biblical Flood myths, and the DNA show things were pretty much the same as now.I mentioned tzi and if you were not so utterly willfully ignorant you would know that with tzi we have not just DNA samples of him but also from the clothes he wore, the food he ate, the things in his Dopp bag.Once again, all you have is ignorance, we have truth and reality and ALL the evidence and so we win.Edited by jar, : yet ---> YetEdited by jar, : No reason given.

Read the thread. Read the hundreds of other threads on this forum. The goods are there if you're not wilfully ignorant. I didn't say anything of the kind. Why are you trying to change the subject?

Not true. All DNA we have is very post flood era.

Maybe cite a post that shows evolution was the same as now? I wasn't born yesterday.

You have not shown that there was a present nature along with it's decay. Forget rates. How about starting off showing us with support that there was ANY decay on earth?

Gen 2 is after the fact. After it was all done, the events it revisits are not an order. Period.

As I mentioned in another thread, you have it backwards. If you want to claim that something has changed, YOU have to show evidence that it did. If France was there yesterday, we don't have to show that it's still there today. YOU have to show that it isn't.

You did not know what to look for in finding tree rings or anything else that might pre date our nature. Don't pretend you found nothing, you looked for nothing. Tree rings still formed whatever nature they grew in. It just happens that in the present state rings take a certain time to grow.As for pretending there is some great point buried in other threads that you could not have summarized here, let's be honest.

Sorry but your denial of reality and facts does not change the fact that we do have DNA from before the Garden of Eden even. I even provided you with one example, tzi who died over 5000 years ago and so would have been a contemporary of Adam if Adam had been a real person. There is also the DNA from the Anzick child that died over 12,000 years ago.Your utter ignorance has no effect on either reality or truth.

It is crystal clear that you are as ignorant of the Bible and Bible history as you are or reality. Genesis 2&3 is a much older story that the fable found in Genesis 1 and was written hundreds or even thousands of years before Genesis 1.

As predicted in Message 1 starman failed to provide any evidence to substantiate his position ... fail #31Let's look at what he says: Whiffff ....This statement has no meaning without first establishing that (a) there was a flood of world wide proportions and (b) that anything was different before such a fantasy event. This has not even been attempted by starman to say nothing of not providing evidence.Total failure.This, children, is why creationists like starman have nothing to say of any value. Another whiff ... no evidence provided to establish or even question whether or not it hasn't been the same as now. Thus everything is evidence that it is the same. Really? Going for Last-Thursdayism now in a desperate attempt to deny reality?Of course there is always the information in this post that starman has ignored.Missed again. Another claim without evidence. Have you, starman, demostrated the Gen 1 is not after the fact as well? Have you done anything to establish that there was ever a before the fact (ie that it was a fact in the first place)?Things that haven't happened aren't fact.Not a single post of any value. Children are laughing. Adults are laughing. Christians are laughing.Thanks again for these teachable moments that show how devoid of rational thought and evidence starman in particular and creationism in general are worthless beliefs that clash with reality and with beliefs of other christians.Enjoy

Curiously, nothing was "looked for" other than annual rings, which are characteristically different from false or intermediate rings and can be easily distinguished one from the other. Again, scientists look for what the evidence shows so that they can document it. Anything out of the ordinary is noted, documented and then questioned to find out the cause. Finding something out of the ordinary is a dream of scientists, as that is how new information is discovered.So no, nothing out of the ordinary was found because there was nothing out of the ordinary.If you have evidence otherwise, present it. Oh wait, you can't do that because you have squat. Fail #32. And a certain climate, with a characteristic pattern because of the climate, and that the observed rings all fit that pattern with nothing out of the ordinary.These are things you would know if you looked into how dendrochronology was done, but obviously you have not done that. Curiously, I'm not sure you can be honest. I believe I posted an answer to this somewhere ... Looking forward to failure #33 as you continue to display the evidence of creationism being a useless belief.Enjoy

Whifff ...Again you fail to provide evidence to make your fantasy worth considering. Fail #33Enjoy

No. You sure don;t, unless you claim to have DNA from 70,000,000 years ago. Which is about probably 5000 years actual real time)Edited by starman, : No reason given.

Nope. I do not have to believe the bible is wrong just because you posit some unproven claims of nature in the past. Sorry. If you knew, then we could talk.