So the fact that water can be created now by oxidation of Hydrogen means that there was no prehistoric water, by your logic.
Right. Sure. Uh-huh.
If you want to assert there was no prehistoric water, then you have to come up with a reason why carbon 14 dating works and doesn’t work. It works on historic artifacts, but you must come up with a reason why it wouldn’t work on prehistoric artifacts.
And then you have to come up with a reason why it aligns so well with other dating methods.
Well donmeaker you are in for a treat then with the site I provided you. Ever heard of the 4th state of water - supercritical - this undergraound water and the temp/pressure it was under is the crux of the hydroplate theory. Also Dr. Brown supplies a chart showing the major problem with carbon-dating - namely what happens to the c12 vs c14 ratios when all the land-dwelling lifeforms are drowned and buried in a sea of sediments.
Also since carbon-dating only allows ages upto 50,000 years or so I hardly see how it lines up with [assumed] radio-isotope dating as well as starlight. But then if you spend a little more time reading instead of criticizing then just maybe you’ll begin to see creation has much more of the proven science rather than evolution. Evolution simply has the over-bearing beaurocratic weight of the government, msm and major universities - kinda like the same way so many have accepted global warming as science when nothing could be farther from the truth.