These are all legitimate questions. However, especially in your flood
scenario you have to recognize that the events described were remote in
time (therefore more opportunity for evidence to become corrupted), were
local (therefore more opportunity to be looking at the wrong site), and (in
your scenario) occurred in a locality (the Mediterranean) where the
evidence that remains may lie under thousands of feet of water. There is
also the possibility of course that you are correct that the flood was a
real event in history, but that it occurred at a time and location and in a
way you have not considered. I know you've been very thorough about
eliminating quite a number of alternatives, but it's very difficult to know
you've eliminated _all_ possible alternatives. The Lord may also have His
own reasons for withholding the key to looking in the right place until the
time is right. None of this means you shouldn't be looking. And I like
the scenario you've identified better than the alternatives. But it could
be incorrect and the flood account still true.
If it doesn't then either you
>have identified the wrong layer or the Biblical account is
>pure fiction. Which is it?
I'd opt for wrong layer or locality.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William E. Hamilton, Jr., Ph.D.
1346 W. Fairview Lane
Rochester, MI 48306
(810) 652 4148