[quote=Captain Jordan]
The counter argument is "you didn't personally observe it, thus you can't expertly speak to this point."I'd charge Ken Ham to plant a tree in his backyard. Ten years later, he should cut it down and count the rings. There should be enough rings to account for ten years. Then it doesn't matter if you personally observed it or not, you can extrapolate based on the fact that all trees make rings in a similar fashion. I want Bill to destroy this observation argument like this. Please, please, please!
[/quote]

That's what I mean. The fact that tree rings currently grow at a rate of 1light/1dark per year, is not disputed. The notion that [i]they always must have[/i] is an act of willful belief -- supported, yes, by modern observation, and also not necessarily true throughout history as a persistent fact. More significantly I'd bring this up with regards to the rate of species development -- we know that rate is changing because of human impact on the environment, we've observed that the rate isn't constant, so isn't it logical to deduce that the body of data is influenced by more factors than a simple mathematical average or counting based on years?