The TRVE history of the Flood...

To prove the Flood you would actually have to answer the huge mass of evidence against it. Instead you choose to dishonestly ignore it. That doesn't prove anything you want proved.

quote:

---

Nothing dishonest about anything I said.

---

You don't have a real case so instead of dealing with the evidence you just falsely claim victory. I can't see how that is anything less than an outright lie.

quote:

---

I've made the case so there is no need to address all the other stuff. That's perfectly legitimate.

---

The "other stuff" shows that you grossly misrepresented the evidence. That the strata and fossils do not support your claims - and in fact refute them. And that is on top of the other contradictory evidence that you have no viable answer to.It is NOT legitimate to ignore evidence that refutes your case. Not among people who have any regard for the truth. And that is what you are doing.