You're reading too much into this passage, Glenn. You are, in essence,
saying that God should have shown himself in the RESULTS of a geological
TRAUMA. That's not what the passage refers to, as you'll note from the
context (creation) and the very word "things" which means, literally,
"workmanship."
You only see two options:
>>1. God didn't want us to see it. (which is not a satisfying answer)
>>2. We weren't correct in our interpretation that the Bible required a
global
>>flood.
There is also 3. God considers it irrelevant what you demand as a
satisfying answer.
Jim