[Stop Legal Plunder]

"...many would argue [beauty] is a cultural construct.

No doubt. Many do so argue -- or at least assert. But the beauty of a rose is no cultural construct; it's objectively true in all times, places, and cultures. And any "culture" that claims otherwise is barbaric.

[Dimensio]

But the beauty of a rose is no cultural construct; it's objectively true in all times, places, and cultures. And any "culture" that claims otherwise is barbaric.

Interesting claim. It's unsupported, but assuming that it is true, then why isn't it possible that the disposition for finding a rose "beautiful" came about in humans long before recorded history?

Of course, this is still based upon your false dichotomy that either Biblical Creationism is true or that there are no gods and that purely naturalistic evolution is responsible for all life on earth. As an atheist, I have no 'alternative' explanation that I believe, but you've been told before that not everyone who accepts evolution as a viable theory is an atheist, so why do you stick to this false dilemma?