Buzsaw writes:
That sort of thing is disallowed in flood and Exodus threads where solid empirical evidence is an absolute requirement.
If you've read the thread, you've no doubt noticed that the thread is primarily discussion rather than debate. While some evidence has been cited, there is understandably less citing than would be expected in a debate thread. Speculation is entirely appropriate here.
It would be perfectly acceptable for you start a debate by challenging one of the posters to put up some evidence on something said here. But you won't bother. You are merely objecting to the fact that others are even having this discussion. I'd enjoy being proven wrong about that.
Buzsaw writes:
Due to lack of empirical evidence, the anti-floodists claim that it has been absolutely falsified.
I think that's a mischaracterization of the past discussions. Evidence has been presented that a global flood did not occur. It has not been a simple matter of pointing out that your own claims are unsupported by evidence.