Nope. I was afraid of that, you operate on 'faith' so you assume everyone else does.
As I said -- I have analyzed the evidence myself, using the basic scientific method, and have found the most likely answer to be an old earth with macroevolution.
I don't say, "This is certainly true and I have faith that it is true". I say, "this evidence I analyze seems to suggest this, I don't know all the details and I could be wrong, but that is the most likely answer given the facts at hand."
No 'faith'. No absolute statements that must be true. Pure, simple analysis. There are absolutely holes in the theories. There are holes in gravitational theory, also.
Doesn't mean there is no gravity, tho. Just that our understanding of the mechanism is still growing.
You're not even on the same page as I am. You don't even understand how I think, or what I'm saying. Perhaps that's why you're so wrong in your assessment?
If you don't even hear me, then you can't really disagree with me.
1. OBSERVATION
2. EXPERIMENTATION
3. REPRODUCTION
4. FALSIFICATION
You look at the data and assume that your theory is correct. Though you admit that it cannot be proven, that is faith - Believing something that cannot be seen or proven.
You are the one not hearing, you are blinded by your faith. You chose to ignore the very data and theories that may prove you correct because you fear that it may prove you wrong.
faith Pronunciation Key (fth) n.
1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.
2. Belief that does not rest on proof.