Re: Ken Ham's response / and a note on this thread
Evidence for the Flood doesn't need to be searched for, it's plain as day in the entire geological column, best demonstrated at the GC. The idea that you've all "looked and haven't found" is just absurd. But what you "see" -- by your data -- is those millions upon millions of years instead, like a veil over the canyon really. But that's the way it is, that's what you "see" and nobody is going to get you to see it any other way.
This is true for both sides in this debate. We see what we believe. Some believe in science--logic, reason, and reality. Others believe that it all starts with the Bible and must conform as such.
Even within that group there are disagreements...between people who have studied scriptures, no less.
Correct me if I am wrong, but you believe in Young Earth Creationism...am I right? And yes, I have studied Ken Ham, but I am not fully convinced of his credibility---he is at odds with mainstream science. It seems that I either have to believe that mainstream science is somehow supernaturally deluded...seeing only what they believe in(Logic, reason, reality, empiricism) or that somehow the religious folks are deluded and/or discredited by trying to tie every premise in to fit with their prior conclusion.
Personally, I consider myself an honest believer/truth seeker who sees a God big enough to bridge these gaps...wherever that may take the fact.