The TRVE history of the Flood...

... which you have not presented ... ... for which you supply no reference ... Who is Viekosky and in what field is he eminent?

So, eminent in the field of being wrong.

Well, you could research antibiotic resistance, realize that antibiotic resistance is an example of evolution, and start trusting the mentality that says true things about biology; or at least regard it as more trustworthy than the mentality of ignorant creationist idiots maundering on about subjects of which they know nothing.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

But in framing these objections you manage to be wrong about pretty much everything else from the second law of thermodynamics to the behavior of comets to the deposition of sediment to the appearance of the fossil record to information theory to nuclear decay to the nature of the scientific method itself. What aspect of science have creationists not been wrong about in pursuit of their chosen errors? Ooh, I know! Then we ask if it is consistent with the evidence, realize that it isn't, and consign it to the dustbin of history.

If it was true then that would not be necessary.If there really is an elephant in the room, then we wouldn't have to first assume that there is an elephant in the room, and then fudge and reinterpret and deny all the evidence in the light of that assumption. We could just look in the room without prejudice or preconceptions and see the elephant.(And if by some chance there was not an elephant in the room, then the same method would tell us that too.)

How do you "KNOW" this? Not from the evidence, obviously, since you feel it is imperative to make up your mind on the subject before looking at the evidence. But what other way is there of acquiring knowledge? If it really was true, then you'd get the same results either way so long as it's a point on which we have evidence. For example, the Bible says that the Sun exists, but since it does exist we don't need to assume the truth of the Bible in order to come to that conclusion.

Sure, it was heralded by signs and portents. Michael Tyson bit that guy's ear, the first Harry Potter book came out, and the musical adaptation of The Lion King began what is now a record-breaking 20 year run on Broadway. These are exactly the sort of miracles we expect to attend the second coming of Christ.

So, Davidjay found no evidence for the Flood?OK, how will he make a fool of himself next?

Is this repulsive mess of halfwitted gibberish meant to distract us from the fact that you have produced no evidence for the Flood?It failed.

Yes, you all read the same fatuous creationist propaganda and came to the conclusion that it was correct, that's got to mean something.Of course, your conclusions are at complete variance with those of people who studied the rocks instead, and that too means something.

You don't think the river at the bottom of it is a clue? Nah, course you don't.

Once again could I remind you that I have demonstrated that this claim of yours is complete bollocks. Please make a note of it this time.

And the stars we see through telescopes are opinion too, because the telescopes cannot be verified for the distances over which they purport to see?And now let us turn to your opinion that there were once living dinosaurs. How did you verify that, remind me?

Faith. Do you know what a river is? Seriously, do you even know what a river is? And yet people who unlike you have studied erosion think that this "little" river could easily have cut the canyon, and laugh at the thought of your magic flood.Let's think about how "little" this river is, shall we? According to figures from the USGS, over the last century or so the flow through the Grand Canyon has averaged about 15000 cubic feet per second, let's convert that to 140 cubic meters per second, so 4.4 billion cubic meters per year. It may have fluctuated a bit over longer periods of time, but let's use that as our ballpark figure. Now the minimum age given by geologists for the Grand Canyon is about 6 million years, so in that time that would be 26 quadrillion cubic meters of water, or, to put it another way, seven times the volume of the Mediterranean Sea.

So not by getting in your time machine and seeing any living dinosaurs?Fine. And how do we verify the ages of the rocks? Isotopes, dear, isotopes. I specified stars. We haven't visited a single star.