Thanks for your response. I was curious because part of my interest in people is what they believe and why. I find people's philosophy to be intriguing. How individuals assess information, come up with ideas and defend those ideas from criticism is fascinating.Transdude1996 said:Well, so far, there hasn't been anything that really contradicts or disproves what I believe. So, I'd take it as one of those things where I'll cross that bridge when I, if ever, come to it.Gorrath said:I am hesitant to engage you on these thoughts as this thread might not really be the place for the type of discussion I'd like to have, but, without trying to stir a hornets nest, I do want to ask you a question if you'll indulge me a moment. If all the scientific data we've collected fails to support, or directly contradicts your hypothesis about the flood, how do you make sense of that? I am just genuinely curious about what you think.
Also, there really isn't an absolutely agreed upon theory as to the origins of the Earth since the farthest back we can go in universally recorded history is Egypt (As far as I know), and for anything farther back, we're just start purely guessing as to what happened. So, you never really know. After all, we still haven't explored 100% of the Earth, so there's always something out that will make us question what is believed to have happened. So, if anything comes out contradicting or disproving what I believe, I'll do my best to keep an open mind about it.
My understanding of the science is that world-wide flood ideas were debunked by the geological record and the way speciation has occurred across the globe is not supportive of creatures having been concentrated in a single area at one point and then spreading back out. If I may be so bold, you might find some interesting information on these subjects at Talk Origins dot Org. With respect to you.