Replies

Ahh, but you see Alamo Girl, there is a difference in how you see things and how these creationists view them.

Your view takes the scientific evidence, then uses science again to try and get the proper answer.

Their view IGNORES the science altogether and says it's wrong.

The space time thing I find fascinating, I don't necassarily believe it, but it makes sense, in a scientific way.

Also, your view of the flood is ALSO based on scientific evidence, and does NOT ignore it.

You have come up with a beautifully consistent and scientific view, that backs up your faith that the creation and flood stories are consistent and true.

That is the difference, you have taken science, brought it into your belief structure and have come up with something that is consistent, whereas these other creationists want to throw the science away because it just doesn't compute for them.

This is another reason why I respect you so much. You learn as much as you can and come up with consistent answers to answer your questions, taking the 2 and creating 1 very credible whole.

I have NO argument with your views at all, I find them beautifully consistent with both your religion and the scientific evidence.

You seem to presume that other creationists here do not look at the scientific evidence as alamo girl does. I wish to comment that I myself always view the evidence and I am a creationist. I suspect others if not all in the creation camp also view the evidence. From what I have viewed of the evidence, it all points to a special creation and a much younger earth than generally believed. I just wanted to clear that up. Thank you for listening.