When you believe nature on earth was the same in the past you use a preset belief.
It's a default. When we observe that horses in the present have four legs, we can reasonably conclude (not "assume" or "believe") that Napoleon's horse had four legs. If you claim that Marengo was a spider-horse, the onus is on you to provide evidence.
Funny thing is that if creation started the ball rolling, we would have seen a certain percentage of ratios from the getgo. I guess that is a matter of belief, not knowing. Then, if some processes in a different nature also worked on that original ratio that would have affected it also. Then, we know our nature affected things also. Your belief is that only our nature and nothing else is the cause of all ratios we see. I hope you can see why some people view that as belief based and not really science.
Well, OK then you want us to state a belief. My belief is that the dates science uses are belief based and must be rejected out of hand and whole of cloth for all dates involving billions or millions or hundreds of thousands of years. I would side with the belief that all the universe and the world is only several thousand years old.
I would side with the belief that all the universe and the world is only several thousand years old.
Why do you think that the earth and the universe it sits in then looks like it's many billions of years old? There are multiple different ways that we can show you that it's a lot older than 7,000 years; they are all different, relying on different mechanisms but all agree.
There is no reasonable argument that can be used to dismiss all those observations. So if you are right and all those different sciences are wrong, the only explanation is that your god has made it appear very old even though it's very young. Why would he do that?
Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed. Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
When a question is asked about the unknown the real default is 'I don't know'. You can call your beliefs a conclusion all you like. The conclusion based on beliefs is not knowledge, fact or real science.