[lasereye]

She cited the evidence that these fossils were 50 some million years old.

Tell me where she did that.

Contorting evidence on fossilization to fit some preconceived notion of a biblical flood is what you contorted.

Give me the quote where I contorted evidence.

How do you reconcile your belief in massive evolutionary change in a short time, far exceeding a 2% genetic DNA change

As I said, THEY DON'T HAVE THE DNA from those elephant fossils (that I know of) ago to compare current elephants to. You make some assumption about what the DNA difference is. You keep making unwarranted assertions that are based on an assumption of evolution, i.e. circular reasoning.

[allmendream]

They do have the DNA of many of the animals extant upon the Earth, and if all of those different species descended over a few thousand years from those few species that could fit on a boat of known dimensions, then the change in genetic DNA over that time span is far greater than 2%.

So how do you reconcile your belief in massive evolutionary change in a short time, far exceeding a 2% genetic DNA change (while somehow limited to staying within a “kind”), while simultaneously deny that slow incremental evolutionary change over millions of years can derive a 2% genetic difference?