Ok, fair enough.
Then my answer stands. If millions of people and animals lived in the desert for decades, they'd leave behind massive amounts of evidence. In the absence of such evidence, we can only conclude that it did not happen, RAZD's amusing ideas notwithstanding.
However, if there were evidence of such a massive population living there for so long and no evidence whatsoever showing how they might have fed and watered themselves, it would beg for an explanation. In such an event, I'd be willing to consider a supernatural explanation.
But of course, as you have pointed out, given the fact that the various books of the bible were written by different people of many years, even if one part of it has evidentiary support, that doesn't mean one has to accept the rest of it.
Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
...creationists have a great way to detect fraud and it doesn't take 8 or 40 years or even a scientific degree to spot the fraud--'if it disagrees with the bible then it is wrong'.... -- archaeologist
™ Version 4.2
