I have a question Faith. How can you not know that what you say is a reversal of the truth ? You know perfectly well that you want the evidence ignored and suppressed. You even "pitied" William Smith for reporting his discovery of the order in the fossil record.
Obviously you know that the evidence does not support you.
In reality it is Flood geology that is ridiculous.
quote: What I pitied him for was believing in the Old Earth, not for the order of the fossils.
Did he ? His beliefs on the age of the Earth don't seem to be discussed much, so I can't say. But I do know that in the context of the discussion he was specifically cited for discovering and reporting the order in the fossil record.
quote: And the rest of your post is the usual "reversal of the truth."
quote: Oh nonsense. A working model for a worldwide FLOOD doesn't need to explain the order of the fossils. Why on earth would that be required of a FLOOD for pete's sake?
It would be required if the person providing the model were to claim that the fossil record was "terrific" evidence of the flood. If the flood cannot even account for the evidence that supposedly supports it then it is obviously false.
I know that you'll claim that you don't cite the order of the fossil record as evidence - but that order is so pervasive a feature of the fossil record that any model that cannot account for it cannot account for the fossil record at all.
quote: The point is you can never have the SCIENTIFIC CERTAINTY about the past that you have in the hard sciences.
In any science there is a variation in the degrees of certainty. In experimental science it is usually expressed in statistical terms. And so it is with geology and palaeontology. We may be certain that the Earth is very old - even if we cannot work it out exactly we may be sure that it is far, far older than YEC views allow.. We mat be certain that the strata and the fossils were not produced by a catastrophic flood - as these discussions should be making very, very obvious.