[Physicist]

I don't have to address it because I'm not proving that the Bible is 100% right.

But you've put yourself in the position of either insisting that there's a naturalistic means by which the island could have been uniquely repopulated in the last few thousand years, or repudiating the Word of God. When God sits in judgment before you, He won't accept the dodge that you weren't talking about that at the time. You're really safer if you accept the naturalistic explanation.

I'm proving the title of this thread ....

There are still two things you haven't shown: A) that the island was necessarily devoid of both coral and palms during the last ice age, and B) that 10,000 years is insufficient for these to repopulate the island and diversify. (Furthermore, such diversification is not integral to the explanation, as the "distinctive" species could have arrived from elsewhere in essentially their modern form, with the parent stocks dying out in the interim.)

[Truth666]

you haven't shown: A) that the island was necessarily devoid of both coral and palms during the last ice age
Good to have mentioned that - let's just concentrate in the coral for that and forget about the palms, since the palms exampple is 5°Celsius less obvious.
To answer you, nothing better than continue with the subject of my post #92, which started explainig "How to sell big lie based constructs".

Technique #2 - make sure that key evidence is never presented.
Fact : current yearly average water temperature of Lord Howe is 21.3°C. Nobody would contend that during the last ice age that temperature at 32° S didn't drop at least 2°. Coral reefs can't survive unless yearly average water temperature is warmer than 20° C.

Implementing technique #1
- whenever you see an article about Lord Howe Island make sure that there are no references to Ice Age.

[Truth666]

at the end of my previous post I meant "Implementing technique #2".