If biology had nothing but assumptions, then some of them would have proved wrong by now, after 150 years.
I’m sure the world is dying to hear the opinions of someone that had to be reminded that every living thing not on the ark died, according to your story. And the opinions of someone that doesn’t know fauna from flora.
I know the difference spanky- I made a mental error whjen reading quickly and responding quickly- but thanks for the petty little insult- speaks mucho about your arguing ‘skills’
[[If biology had nothing but assumptions, then some of them would have proved wrong by now, after 150 years]]
Here’s the great hting (for the evo side) most of the assumptions about past unkowns can’t be proven, but they sure can be shoved down our kids throats despite a complete lakcof evidence and biological support- infact- it’s worse than that- it’s shoved down our kids throats despite overwhelming evidences that show the impossibiltities of it and it’s called science? If the evidence backs them into a corner? Heck, no problem- just adjust the assumptions to suit your needs with hypothesis that also rests entirely on assumptions.
[[I’m sure the world is dying to hear the opinions of someone that had to be reminded that every living thing not on the ark died, according to your story.]]
Bzzzt Wrong- every living thing didn’t die- stil lwant to throw aroudn the petty insults JS? Cuz you’re looking a bit foolish with that statement if you do.
[[[[2) Fauna and flora are continuous across this date worldwide. For example, pollen cores that show no discontinuity attributable to a global flood 4350 years ago. Neither do glacial varves, tree ring sequences, or several other methods of tracking time]]]]
This was CM’s original statement- I responded thinking Flora but typing fauna- but again- I guess everyone isn’t quite as perfect as you (nor as apparently petty, jumping on someone for making a mental mistake)