Did the Flood really happen?

quote:

---

In the same way things die in the world today

---

That depends on when something died and what it was. In the case of Adam, we are told he went back to dust. No fossil possible.Edited by dad, : No reason given.

I try to agree with reality.

You will need to give up your old ages fable.

Creation was presumably responsible for some of the ratios of isotopes we see that are now in a process of decay. There was also the former nature that was responsible for some of the ratios, as there had to have been some processes in effect in that nature also. Then there is our present nature that is responsible for a bit of the ratios. You have assumed that our nature dunnit all! Prove it.

You are the one saying the present nature represents the future and far past on earth. Prove it. You have the science claim.

False. Beliefs are not evidence, they are just beliefs painted onto evidences. You must defend the premise, the basis for the claims. Not spam more claims based on the same faulty premise that you cannot support.

So you want to call them science threads when they are religious nonsense and not be challenged in the fraud. I see. Edited by dad, : No reason given.

Tree rings. If threes grew in weeks obviously rings did not represent a yearly pattern as they now do. You believe nature was the same. You can't prove it.

There is no science in so called sciences that deal in origins. The name is falsely applied.

Ha

Do you assert that the stories of science about origins are true?

Satanic blather aside, science has nothing to say about it either way.

No one gets to define science, what, you though you did?

The issue is whether orin sciences use beliefs in models not whether they are wrong or right.

Who cares what anyone believes about how fast trees used to grow? Try using some science.