The Days of Creation in Genesis 1 were not Literal 24-hr days like we have today.

1 - Evening and Morning are in reference to the position of the Earth. Do remember that the sun does nothing to indicate our time but stand still. The Bible says that light was created. We don't know what this means for sure, but there's no reason to assume there's a contradiction here. Yeah, I'm making some assumptions, but I'm assuming the text knows what it's talking about rather than assuming I know more about what is happening here better than the author. There's no reason one needs the sun to make the day.2 - Notice that my opponenet says species are going extinct. God created animals in Kinds. This sometimes, but not always, can be traced to about the family level in Modern Taxonomy. This is two categories more general than species. (20) I tried for about half hour to find a reliable source as to how many animal families we have identified, but we simply don't know. One (unreliable) source sugguested about 5,000 (21) So let's use this number for now. Genesis 2:19 says that Adam only named the Beast of the Field and the Bird of the Air, therefore we don't need to talk about any marine life. Now I don't really know how many of our identified families are water families, but it is sugguested that about 50-80% of all animal life is in the ocean. (22) Now I'm making a lot of assumptions here due to a lack of real data, but this should capture the general idea. When you apply everything together, Adam only had to name a thousand or so animals. There is no record of Adam spending long durations of time investigating these animals, but that he simply named them. There is no reason to assume Adam could not have done this in 24-25 hours.3 - You're the one who said that yom was used differently elsewhere and thus meant more than 24 hours. This isn't necessarily true, so don't act like I'm just inventing this, you brought it up. We don't define days by the sun, we define it as a full rotation of the earth. We don't know anything else, but it is suggested there was a light source of some kind. No contradiction here.4 - I can live in and observe gravity. I cannot live in and observe Pangea. I must therefore reconstruct history. If my opponent read what I had said, or my sources, he would know I never claimed the continents weren't connected in some manner. We agree that the continents were much closer together and touching in some cases, but we don't necessarily agree that it was Pangea. There's no reason is absolutely couldn't have been Pangea. Regardless, my point is that it wouldn't take millions of years to separate these continants biblically.Noah's Flooda - Geological Eras are not consistent worldwide as there are errors, like I've shown before. Water automatically will layer sediment. I have, on my desk here, a jar of dirt. I put water into the jar, shook it up, and over several weeks the water evaporated out leaving layered dirt, which was assorted into different areas. This is similar to what we find in the Geologic Collumn. We would expect there to be some exceptions of this layering such as out of place fossils or something like that. According to evolution, the exceptions simply cannot exist. So when we find these, what do we make of it? (23) This phenomenon is known and documented as Liquefaction. (24; 25) As already stated, radiometric dating doesn't agree unanimously. It only agrees if you presuppose billions of years before you begin the dating.Dating methods indicate that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old. The Helium we have right now only accounts for about 40,000 years. (26) Volcanic Debris should have produced roughly 10 times the sediment we see today in four billion years. (27) Erosion rates, and sediment buildup rates are also not indicative of millions of years. (28; 29) Why do we still have hot planets? They should all be cooled off after so long. (30) It is also worth noting we never see stars form, yet we always see them blow up. Why do we have so many stars? I could list off dozens of other dating methods which are indicative of a young earth, but I believe I've made my point.I believe that if our radiometric dating methods are wrong on several dates we very well know, we can't trust them to be right on dates we don't know. This is especially true because we don't know how the world has been different before these last 200 or so years. We have to make a lot of assumptions to get our radiometric dates.b - Liquefaction explains this. Why do we find such well preserved features, such as soft tissue, on dinosaur bones supposedly millions of years old? (31) Fossil RecordI want to address the Fossil Record as a whole, and I think I can answer the majority of your questions, at least indirectly, this way. If Evolution were true, we would expect to see a couple of things in the fossil record. In reality, however, the record is missing many of the key ingredients expected.For instance, we have yet to identify any transitional fossils. We have fossils we can make some assumptions on, but we do not have any conclusive evidence for transitions in the record. There is a massive gap between forms of life whose cells have nuclei, and those that don't. Links are missing between different plant groups, between insects, (their invertebrates and vertebrates) between fish and amphibians, amphibians and reptiles, reptiles and mammals, as well as between apes and other primates. There are not simple missing links here, but missing chains! (32)Not only are there missing chains in the fossil record, or 'evolutionary tree,' but this 'tree' doesn't even have a trunk. At the very bottom of the fossil record life appears suddenly, complex, and diverse. Evolution postulates small changes led to complexity, but this simply isn't what is found. Fish, Worms, Coral, Jellyfish, and Mollusks among other complex species are found at the bottom. This doesn't make sense from an evolutionary perspective. We can't even figure our where insects come from based on the records. (33)e - Coral Dating requires that coral has always grown at the same rate. This is an assumption. Studies indicate that in these reefs would not take millions, or even more than a couple thousand years, to grow in favorable circumstances. This is not evidence for long ages. (34; 35)f - But we do find human artifacts, and it's quite the dilemma for evolutionists. (35; 36; 37)Just quick I'd like to look at one more evidence of a Young Earth.Mitochondrial Eve can traced back to a single human living somewhere in the Asia, Eurpe, and Africa border area, around 6,500 years ago. This is exactly what the Bible indicates, so this is a very interesting discovery. Studies indicate that Genetic Adam lived at the same time, roughly, as Eve. Some may argue that this 'Eve' was about 200,000 years old, but recent discovery as well as the removal of evolutionary assumptions indicate otherwise. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude both Adam and Eve existed about 6,500 years ago. (39; 40; 41; 42; 43)Finally, I don't mean this as a point but a genuine question that I'm a little confused about, how did we know what dinosaurs were for thousands of years before we discovered archeological evidence for their existence? If they died millions of years before man, we should have no clue who or what they are, right? Hopefully you can help me with this one. Thank You!Anyways, I would like to thank my opponent for participating thus far and being able to respond. I look forward to seeing his rebuttal.(20) - https://en.wikipedia.org...(biology)#Modern_system_of_classification(21) - https://biology.stackexchange.com...(22) - http://www.marinebio.org...(23) - https://answersingenesis.org...(24) - http://www.creationscience.com...(25) - https://en.wikipedia.org...(26) - http://www.icr.org...(27) - http://www.creationscience.com...(28) - http://www.creationscience.com...(29) - http://www.creationscience.com...(30) - http://www.creationscience.com...(31) - http://www.cnn.com...(32) - http://www.creationscience.com...(33) - http://www.creationscience.com...(34) - https://creation.com...(35) - https://answersingenesis.org...(36) - http://www.zmescience.com...(37) - http://www.6000years.org...(38) - http://www.apparentlyapparel.com...(39) - http://www.nature.com...(40) - https://www.sciencedaily.com...(41) - https://en.wikipedia.org...(42) - https://creation.com...(43) - http://www.creationscience.com...