The Post-Noah's Flood Period is Explained by Evolution

I can't speak for Coyote, but my answer is yes. More specifically, all "these other scientist who present evidence of a global flood", as you put it, are not motivated by an interest in science, but by superstition. They have a fixation that Jewish mythology must be true, then they try to shoehorn what they see around them into that bizarre delusion.There is no scientific evidence for a global flood within the last ten thousand years, there never has been, and there never will be.But evidence for the capacity of hillbilly Christian America to delude itself? Oh, yes, there's plenty of that.

I know about the flood myths. Massive floods happen all over the world, and many a primitive tribe would have found their known "world" flooded. They could also have observed fossils of shellfish on high ground and, not knowing about uplift, a super flood would be the only apparent possible explanation. It's also possible that our ancestral group were all in one very large flood event in eastern Africa tens of thousands of years ago.There are also conflicting creation myths from all over the world, and conflicting Gods that have been invented by many different cultures. There's no reason to believe in any of the stories of these ancient myth making cultures. Learn some history of science. The old earth view started to be established by (Christian) scientists (mainly geologists) in the late 18th century, and this view became the predominant one amongst educated Christians in the 19th century.One of the many reasons that we know there was no worldwide flood is that there are uninterrupted records of annual events that go back through the entire period. I've read the superstitious mumbo-jumbo on sites like Answers in Genesis. Let me explain something. The rate of serious mental illness runs at about 1% of the population. If 200 geologists say "ancient earth" for every one who says "6300" year old earth, I am ignoring religious nutters, not experts. If people are still presenting easily explainable stuff like polystrate tree fossils as flood evidence, then they must be deliberately trying to fool a gullible public, or are seriously deluded themselves.Not one sane, thinking scientist thinks this planet is less than 10,000 years old. If you are a thinker, and you've looked at the evidence, you certainly would not be arguing for a world wide flood. Edited by bluegenes, : missing word