One needn't be eyewitness to an event or a phenomenon to understand it. The example I frequently use is the interior of a star. Obviously, no human being has ever - EVER - see the inside of dear old Sol, but we have a pretty good idea how it operates.
Similarly to understanding how something works or how something happened without being in situ, we can suss out what is more or less likely to have happened. Science doesn't operate 'in the moment' - large gobs of it are historical in practice. By observing processes currently at work, as well and their causes and effects, we can examine Biblical claims of - for example - the Flood. We know how floods work, and the damage they often leave behind. It isn't a great or unjustified leap to extrapolate this to understanding what a global flood would have done. Since there is no evidence, either direct or extrapolative, for a world wide flood as describe in Genesis, we can be reasonable in the conclusion that it simply didn't happen.
So no, I wasn't there. Isn't it lucky I didn't need to be?
Boru
Similarly to understanding how something works or how something happened without being in situ, we can suss out what is more or less likely to have happened. Science doesn't operate 'in the moment' - large gobs of it are historical in practice. By observing processes currently at work, as well and their causes and effects, we can examine Biblical claims of - for example - the Flood. We know how floods work, and the damage they often leave behind. It isn't a great or unjustified leap to extrapolate this to understanding what a global flood would have done. Since there is no evidence, either direct or extrapolative, for a world wide flood as describe in Genesis, we can be reasonable in the conclusion that it simply didn't happen.
So no, I wasn't there. Isn't it lucky I didn't need to be?
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
