You're doing it again. I have defined my position numerous times.No. It shows the rocks to be old, not necessarily the mountains.
Some of the high-altitude ranges we have today, probably existed before the Flood (the Bible doesn’t say), but were not as high (which the Scriptures do indicate, at Psalm 104.)
How can I ‘misrepresent your position,’ when you’ve never defined what your position is? By your own statements, apparently you think God is not really powerful; you keep trying to apply natural methodology, to an obvious divine event. In so doing, you are ignoring the evidences that
resulted from it. Like the cultural legends it inspired, both about the Flood & the myths with the common thread of the ‘gods sleeping with women’; like the lack of the 1000-sq-miles of debris from the Grand Canyon (which the Flood washed away) and from other areas; the mammals’ remains within the Permafrost (some of which have been discovered extremely well-preserved); the Festival celebrations of the dead from various cultures, held around their respective dates that coincide with the same time of year as the Flood. Etc.
That’s a lot of coincidences!
I’m just not that naïve to accept them as such.
When you grasp what 1 John5:19 & Revelation 12:9 is telling us, then you’ll have a better understanding of my skepticism about what is “accepted.”
SZ goes on about “testable hypotheses” and how there’s no evidence without it, but I bet you have no qualms “accepting” the explanation of how the Earth was formed & how it established an orbit ‘by natural forces’.
Science posits a scenario that has no support from “testable hypotheses.”
But it doesn’t stop them, though.
Lol.
I have made no such statements. That is you trying to impugn my position with attacks on my beliefs.
The ice is getting thin where you are skating.
I am not ignoring the evidence. You haven't presented evidence. You have presented claims that you declare are evidence. It is not me that is handwaving and attacking the beliefs of others.