RE: A question about the flood myth, baraminology, and Pangaea
February 22, 2016 at 5:50 pm
(This post was last modified: February 22, 2016 at 5:54 pm by FebruaryOfReason.)
There is evidence for solar winds, so we accept the idea that they are plausible.
There is no evidence for a 30,000 ft increase in the height of the oceans, then all that water vanishing.
That is the difference between scientific principle and speculation.
If you accept NASA's word on scientific principle, why don't you ask them if what you think is plausible?
![[Image: znan5.jpg]](https://i.imgflip.com/znan5.jpg)
There is no evidence for a 30,000 ft increase in the height of the oceans, then all that water vanishing.
That is the difference between scientific principle and speculation.
If you accept NASA's word on scientific principle, why don't you ask them if what you think is plausible?
I must not be nasty. I must not be nasty. I must not be nasty. I must not be nasty. I must not be nasty. I must not be nasty. I must not be nasty. I must not be nasty.
