More Questions for Christians

[Esquilax]

Your Claim: The flood was not worldwide. You've provided no evidence.
Then you asked for evidence that there was a worldwide flood. I did. Take it or leave it.

Oh yes I have provided evidence, have you not read the rest of the thread? The stratigraphic column not only shows no indication of a worldwide flood, but includes plenty of evidence directly contradicting it (continuous seasonal deposits that would take weeks to form, layers that could only form through windblown periods, etc) there are whole civilizations that apparently didn't notice getting destroyed by the flood at all, the genetic bottleneck that would result from the flood would be impossible to resolve, the actual logistics of the ark itself would be impossible to execute, etc etc. It's not my fault you didn't bother to do any reading before deciding what I've done here.

if one has a value system by which he lives, he is "religious." All men are religious in that sense. Whether or not you agree with the definition is immaterial.

So, let me ask you this: you don't know what a basic word, like theory means, so why should any of us believe your other definitions?

And even if we did, your claim that everyone is religious doesn't drag us down to your level, it just creates a two-tiered system where now we have rational religions which are well grounded, and... well, your kind of religion, which isn't. What you can't do is equivocate between definitions. That's dishonest.