[uncertaindrumer]

Quote:

to by in to Christianity you must ignore all logic.

Funny. Your entire post was lacking in logic, evidence, tact, and any sort of presentable argument whatsoever...

And yet Christians renounce their logic? He presented you with evidence, and you ignored it. The burden of proof is on you to show why this evidence does not at least give a hint that at sometime many areas that are currently not underwater were at one point. Why is that hard to believe? It doesn't necessarily prove that a Biblical-size flood happened but it isn't meant to. It is easy to imagine that the flood did not cover the ENTIRE Earth but obviously many parts of the earth currently above water were not at one period in time.

A second alternative would be to show that his evidence is somehow faulty. I am not an expert on the subject, but his evidence seems credible. If it isn't, surely it would be easy to show it's faultiness? I would be intrigued in that debate, despite my lack of vested interest in either side.

Instead of shouting scurrilous diatribes at people and trying to be a big jerk, how about just deal with the argument? A few times you probably do have good arguments but people just ignore them, because no one likes to be attacked. I mean, do you seriously think you are going to get anyone to listen to you by claiming that they have all abandoned logic? Instead of claiming it, show it--preferably charitably but that is not necessary. Politely would be good enough. Or, if you insist on vituperations, at least show evidence with it. Might make the argument more interesting.