Nope. A writer claimed they both attested to it. There is a difference, though you refuse to see it.
I'm going to believe the evidence. Period.
You, you're not! You, also, are believeing "writers who says it's true".
At least I can double check the findings of biologists. We don't even have that option with the Bible.
900
There is a big difference, Elsie. I can understand and corroborate the modern physical evidence personally. For example I know from my own personal experience and graduate training in geology, hydrology, and soil-mechanics, that young earth hypotheses about how the Grand Canyon formed after the flood are just ignorant nonsense that flies in the face of ample data that I can personally verify. For example Coyoteman understands the archeological evidence that says "no global flood in the history of mankind" personally as well as understanding the multiple cross-confirming lines of data that support C14 dating. By and large it is the creationists who just get all their thinking from other experts.
If you think that mainstream science just consists of accepting "writer's who say it's true" then your disconnect with reality is bigger than I thought. People who show, using physical evidence, that widely accepted scientific theories are wide of the mark have a name, and that name is "Rich and Famous Nobel Prize Winner". Everyone is on the lookout for data that will make their name. To say that scientists are somehow ignoring evidence that shows YEC to be true is moonbat conspiracy theory territory. You don't want to go there, do you?