Empirical observation. How about that? You know, the foundation for all physical laws.
What you're asserting is absent a supernatural force - biblical creation in your example - the known physical laws of the universe don't exist. That's beyond ridiculous.
"And if you say “they always have”, you’re making a circular argument, assuming that which is to be proven."
This sentence is gibberish - absent any logical meaning. You think that concluding physical laws of nature behave today the exact same way they've behaved since the beginning of time is "circular logic", then you don't understand the definition of fallacious argument known as circular reasoning.
Empirical observation?
So you’ve personally seen that these laws are uniform throughout time, since the beginning?
And empiricism is based on observable, sensual input - so how do you know you can trust what you see, even of those things you have seen?
I’m not asserting anything, I’m asking you to tell me what your assumptions are based on, because being arbitrary is not an option.
And, by the way, I’m not going to back down from the standard “I’m smarter than you, you don’t understand, and you have no right to argue this with me” typical (leftist) arguments.
So, prove uniformity to me based on your empirical worldview.