No, I attacked your argument of god being a species.
"pho logic"
You formed no argument of your own.
Since you *proved everyone wrong* what are you still doing here mr. spammy? D:
Waiting for you to provide a meaningful young-earth argument. Seems to be somewhat of a pipe dream by now, though.
No. I don't need proof. I suddenly need proof for everything for it to be true? lolz.
You don't *need* proof to believe in whatever myth you want.
I don't understand why God couldn't have made different languages, and they suddenly evolved to modern day ones.
Which languages, when and where?
Just killing would be punishment given by god or authority god has appointed, that involves death.
But yeah, I reaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaallly have to go. I'm truly sorry, I have a life.
You still haven't defined justice.
PS: If you keep replying, you're doing just as much damage as me
.... so you believe you're doing damage, and you still do it? Yup, you've truly shown a peak onto your personality.
Against Flood evidence:
1. Layering of the floodwaters contradicts the Flood model, which proposes that the Flood was turbulent enough to stir up sediments on an incredible scale. The model proposes that the floodwaters became the present oceans, so all the water flowing into the oceans would have ensured that they were well mixed. The freshwater fish would have had no place to find fresh water.
2. The fact that many fish can tolerate wide ranges in salinity does not mean that all can. Furthermore, the problem applies to more than fish. Freshwater invertebrates are commonly used as indicators of the health of streams. Even a tiny amount of pollution can cause many species to disappear from the stream.
3. Aquatic organisms would have more than salinity to worry about, such as the following:
* Heat. All mechanisms proposed to cause the Flood would have released enough heat to boil the oceans. The deposition of limestone would release enough heat to boil them again. Meteors and volcanoes that occurred during the Flood, as implied by their presence in layers attributed to the Flood by flood geologists, would probably have boiled them again (Isaak 1998). Woodmorappe (1996, 140) dismissed the problem of volcanoes but ignored all the other sources of heat.
* Acid. The volcanoes that erupted during the Flood would also have produced sulfuric acid, enough to lower the pH of the ocean to 2.2, which would be fatal to almost all marine life (Morton 1998b).
* Substrate. Many freshwater and marine invertebrates rely on a substrate. They anchor themselves on the substrate and rely on currents to carry their food to them. During the Flood, substrates would have been uninhabitable at least part of the time, especially on land. Woodmorappe (1996, 141) suggested floating pumice as a substrate, but it would float with the currents, so currents would not bring nutrients to animals on them.
* Pressure. The Flood would have caused great fluctuation in sea pressures. Many deep-sea creatures invariably die from the decompression when brought to the surface. Other surface animals would die from too much pressure if forced deep underwater.
4. Woodmorappe predicted a sudden extinction of fish caused by the Flood. "[P]resent-day marine life is but an impoverished remnant of that which had originally been created and had existed before the Flood" (1996, 142). However, the actual pattern of extinction we see shows convincing disproof of the Flood. Living genera become decreasingly represented in fossils as one goes deeper in the geological column, until there are no recent genera in the Triassic, and only about 12 percent of recent genera have any fossil record. Extinct genera continue back to the Cambrian (Morton 1998a). This pattern exactly matches what one would expect from evolution. It contradicts a global flood, which should include modern fish more-or-less uniformly throughout the flood-deposited sediments.
