Huh? They were creationists, and they were very surprised to not find evidence of the global flood.
"Predicting" a find of marsupial life at the poles could be just as valid with a gloabal deulge in mind as a billion-year history that was unobserved and unrecorded.
How so? Specifically what in YEC would lead to a prediction of marsupial fossils in antarctica?
I am given to believe the polar regions are a result of the global flood and were not present as such prior to the flood.
You can be given to believe any moonbat thing you like. The polar regions receive a fraction of the solar energy that the equatorial regions get, hence they are extremely cold. The continent known as antarctica wasn't always at the poles, hence it harbours fossil forms consistent with its past positions. Those forms are remarkably similar to the fossils on the continents it used to adjoin. Hence the prediction, which came *before* the fossils were found. Predictions are what science is about. Its lifeblood and affirmation of the truth of theory. YEC has never made any successful predictions (they tried for a while, in the 60's and 70's, but embarrassingly none of the predictions of YEC that ran counter to mainstream theory ever came true).
That is to say the overall climate on this planet was more mild, and consequently allowed for longer life spans.
How exactly does a mild climate allow for longer lifespans? Be specific, and provide evidence with reference to the survival prospects of modern adult humans in mild climates and harsh climates. Bear in mind in your answer that the long lifespans described in the Bible appear to have persisted for a while *after* the flood.
You are given to believe yourself and those who are likeminded to yourself. That's okay. I won't press the legislature to keep your belief out of school.
Well, I won't press to have your ideas excluded from bible class, or comparative religion studies. But I will press to keep the data and logic-free nonsense that is YEC out of science class.
One does need even need a biblical text to reasonably surmise that mammals could be dispersed on a wide basis provided there were mild climates in all places where land was present.
The polar regions receive a fraction of the solar energy that the equatorial regions get, hence they are extremely cold.
Today this is true. There may have been a time when the earth's axis was orientated in such a way as to provide milder climates. I do not assume all geologic processes taking place today are the same either in rate, magnitude, or direction as they always have been. You do, and if I made the same assumptions as you, I would come to the same conclusions. A global flood would produce a general continuity of the fossil record, which there is.
I won't press to have your ideas excluded from bible class, or comparative religion studies.
We have simply been discussing the geologic record, and how it might support the biblical account of a worldwide deluge. There's nothing about "comparative religion" involved. The fossils are present worldwide, and there happens to be a widely accepted, ancient text that attests matter-of-factly to a global deluge.
Your protest goes beyond credibility. I don't think your concern is really science, but that your ideas enjoy an exclusive protected status by law when ideas that challenge yours are brought into a public, academic context. Sorry. This is the United States of America.